Controversial opinions about Bond films

1485486488490491683

Comments

  • Posts: 444
    In terms of unpopular opinions I have a few.

    1). I am not positively in love with Sean Connery's Bond the way everyone else is. I was born in 1991 and so when I grew up Brosnan was my Bond and while I have seen every Bond film in the franchise and while I do appreciate Connery as the original Bond, he's just not my favorite. Either way, I've always hated trying to hone in on a single Bond as my favorite I'd rather say that they were each individually perfect for the era in which they played the character.

    I'm a bit similar in that I like Connery as Bond but he's never once come remotely near to being one of my favourite Bonds. As a child when it was only ever a choice between Connery or Moore (given that OHMSS was the film no one ever spoke of back in the 80s) I preferred Roger Moore.

    Dalton went immediately to the top of the pack when he debuted and at times I've really respected Lazenby's contribution. In some respects Lazenby best captures the physical 'silhouette' of Fleming's Bond for me in the film series. I probably prefer Craig too as it's the more serious style of the Lazenby/Dalton/Craig films that I return to the most and rank the best.

    Which means that other than Brosnan who's always been my least favourite Bond by a country mile, Connery probably ranks fifth in my affections. Which seems quite bloody ridiculous really given how great and iconic Connery was! If I'd been introducted to Bond as child via the Fleming novels first perhaps I may have felt differently.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,682
    I really like OP, Moore’s best, well maybe TSWLM is, eh it flip flops for me
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 11,175
    I’ve always liked OP but of late I’ve noticed it suffers from some fairly major issues.

    -Maud Adams, though compatable with Moore, gives a very mannered performance (Moore by contrast gives one of his best).
    -the direction and use of stunt doubling is very clunky at times
    -Many of the interior locations look like sets.
    -the silliness goes a step too far on several occasions (the opening feels like it could have been from a Naked Gun film).

    That said I do like the overall story and there are some highly effective suspenseful moments.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited September 2018 Posts: 3,326
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I’ve always liked OP but of late I’ve noticed it suffers from some fairly major issues.

    -Maud Adams, though compatable with Moore, gives a very mannered performance (Moore by contrast gives one of his best).
    -the direction and use of stunt doubling is very clunky at times
    -Many of the interior locations look like sets.
    -the silliness goes a step too far on several occasions (the opening feels like it could have been from a Naked Gun film).

    That said I do like the overall story and there are some highly effective suspenseful moments.

    Agree with a lot of this. OP was the first Bond film i saw at the cinema since LALD and launched my interest in the world of James Bond, so its kind of special to me.

    -Maud Adams is bloody awful in it
    -The silliness does go too far especially in the Elephant hunt sequence and that bit where Moore zooms into the girls chest with the camera is horribly embarrassing.
    -But the story is a good one and the chasing the bomb scenes are exciting and suspenseful.
    -Moore is excellent in it and his confrontation with Orloff is a highlight.
    -Great action which unfortunately is sometimes marred by the slapstick.
    -Superb score from Barry, which was also the first Bond score i'd ever got.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 2,988
    Having just rewatched TMWTGG, I have to say, this film is often criminally underrated. It’s a fun, crazy ride from start to finish, and has some of MooreBond’s most Flemingesque moments. It’s not what I’d want every Bond film to be, but it’s wonderful for what it is. On my first viewing I actually gave up very early on and fast-forwarded to the end. Today was only my second time watching it and it has skyrocketed in my rankings now.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Having just rewatched TMWTGG, I have to say, this film is often criminally underrated. It’s a fun, crazy ride from start to finish, and has some of MooreBond’s most Flemingesque moments. It’s not what I’d want every Bond film to be, but it’s wonderful for what it is. On my first viewing I actually gave up very early on and fast-forwarded to the end. Today was only my second time watching it and it has skyrocketed in my rankings now.

    Where was it in your rankings and where is it now ?
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 6,838
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I’ve always liked OP but of late I’ve noticed it suffers from some fairly major issues.

    -Maud Adams, though compatable with Moore, gives a very mannered performance (Moore by contrast gives one of his best).
    -the direction and use of stunt doubling is very clunky at times
    -Many of the interior locations look like sets.
    -the silliness goes a step too far on several occasions (the opening feels like it could have been from a Naked Gun film).

    That said I do like the overall story and there are some highly effective suspenseful moments.

    Agree with a lot of this. OP was the first Bond film i saw at the cinema since LALD and launched my interest in the world of James Bond, so its kind of special to me.

    -Maud Adams is bloody awful in it
    -The silliness does go too far especially in the Elephant hunt sequence and that bit where Moore zooms into the girls chest with the camera is horribly embarrassing.
    -But the story is a good one and the chasing the bomb scenes are exciting and suspenseful.
    -Moore is excellent in it and his confrontation with Orloff is a highlight.
    -Great action which unfortunately is sometimes marred by the slapstick.
    -Superb score from Barry, which was also the first Bond score i'd ever got.

    Completely agree with all these points. Never understood why Agda isn't Octopussy instead of Maud. She's so much more interesting and misterious.
  • Posts: 19,339
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I’ve always liked OP but of late I’ve noticed it suffers from some fairly major issues.

    -Maud Adams, though compatable with Moore, gives a very mannered performance (Moore by contrast gives one of his best).
    -the direction and use of stunt doubling is very clunky at times
    -Many of the interior locations look like sets.
    -the silliness goes a step too far on several occasions (the opening feels like it could have been from a Naked Gun film).

    That said I do like the overall story and there are some highly effective suspenseful moments.

    Agree with a lot of this. OP was the first Bond film i saw at the cinema since LALD and launched my interest in the world of James Bond, so its kind of special to me.

    -Maud Adams is bloody awful in it
    -The silliness does go too far especially in the Elephant hunt sequence and that bit where Moore zooms into the girls chest with the camera is horribly embarrassing.
    -But the story is a good one and the chasing the bomb scenes are exciting and suspenseful.
    -Moore is excellent in it and his confrontation with Orloff is a highlight.
    -Great action which unfortunately is sometimes marred by the slapstick.
    -Superb score from Barry, which was also the first Bond score i'd ever got.

    Completely agree with all these points. Never understood why Agda isn't Octopussy instead of Maud. She's so much more interesting and misterious.

    Magda,Rossy ;)

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Having just rewatched TMWTGG, I have to say, this film is often criminally underrated. It’s a fun, crazy ride from start to finish, and has some of MooreBond’s most Flemingesque moments. It’s not what I’d want every Bond film to be, but it’s wonderful for what it is. On my first viewing I actually gave up very early on and fast-forwarded to the end. Today was only my second time watching it and it has skyrocketed in my rankings now.
    One of my sentimental favourites. I'm glad you like it mo'o're. Roger is quite sublime in it and I find it such fun.
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I’ve always liked OP but of late I’ve noticed it suffers from some fairly major issues.

    -Maud Adams, though compatable with Moore, gives a very mannered performance (Moore by contrast gives one of his best).
    -the direction and use of stunt doubling is very clunky at times
    -Many of the interior locations look like sets.
    -the silliness goes a step too far on several occasions (the opening feels like it could have been from a Naked Gun film).

    That said I do like the overall story and there are some highly effective suspenseful moments.

    Agree with a lot of this. OP was the first Bond film i saw at the cinema since LALD and launched my interest in the world of James Bond, so its kind of special to me.

    -Maud Adams is bloody awful in it
    -The silliness does go too far especially in the Elephant hunt sequence and that bit where Moore zooms into the girls chest with the camera is horribly embarrassing.
    -But the story is a good one and the chasing the bomb scenes are exciting and suspenseful.
    -Moore is excellent in it and his confrontation with Orloff is a highlight.
    -Great action which unfortunately is sometimes marred by the slapstick.
    -Superb score from Barry, which was also the first Bond score i'd ever got.
    I'm a huge OP fan and always have been. The only problem I have with it is the juvenile humour which goes too far, and the ending at the Monsoon Palace which is very anticlimactic and silly with all those circus girls jumping around and Q being a buffoon. If that were stripped out, this would easily be a top 10 flick for me.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 950
    I have to agree on OP. Never been a huge fan. Moore is my favourite Bond, and incidentally (not that this means much) was the first Bond film released after my birth. It's probably the Moore film I am least likely to re-watch.
  • Sorry to jump on the bandwagon again lol but I've thought of two more.

    1). I actually have a soft spot for George Lazenby's film and what it attempted to do. There's not a lot to go on there but On Her Majesty's Secret Service has moments where I feel as though I'm watching an actor actually breathe life into James Bond for the first time.

    2). I adore Timothy Dalton's films. I love how dark and gritty they are and I've always kind of preferred darker and more realistic versions of stories (which is why I prefer Nolan's Batman) but Dalton's managed not only this, but they also felt like really fun 1980's adventures, similar at least in my mind to the Indiana Jones films where from beginning to end, they took you on these sprawling globe trotting adventures. I really feel that Dalton captured the adventure fantasy aspect of the 007 films better than any actor before him.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Sorry to jump on the bandwagon again lol but I've thought of two more.

    1). I actually have a soft spot for George Lazenby's film and what it attempted to do. There's not a lot to go on there but On Her Majesty's Secret Service has moments where I feel as though I'm watching an actor actually breathe life into James Bond for the first time.

    2). I adore Timothy Dalton's films. I love how dark and gritty they are and I've always kind of preferred darker and more realistic versions of stories (which is why I prefer Nolan's Batman) but Dalton's managed not only this, but they also felt like really fun 1980's adventures, similar at least in my mind to the Indiana Jones films where from beginning to end, they took you on these sprawling globe trotting adventures. I really feel that Dalton captured the adventure fantasy aspect of the 007 films better than any actor before him.
    I used to dislike both the Dalton and Lazenby entries when I was younger. Now I am big fans of two out of three films, which reside in my top 10.

    I agree with you that Lazenby does a truly fantastic job in OHMSS. The film itself is one of the best, and for whatever reason, he just works in it (I've sometimes wondered if his lack of acting experience actually helps because he has a vulnerability which suits the narrative. What's great is he doesn't project a lack of confidence, but rather a sincerity and earnestness).

    I've really grown to appreciate Dalton's work in LTK. What used to be a firm bottom of the barrel Bond film for me when I was younger is now a top 10 entry. The central conflict between Sanchez and Bond is very well handled, and I love how Bond slowly sows the seeds of doubt from within. This is also a reason why I truly enjoyed The Night Manager adaptation, which does something similar.

    It is TLD which I personally continue to have trouble with. I find the film overall better suited to Roger Moore than Dalton, and feel it's somewhat unbalanced, despite having a memorable Barry score and fantastic first two thirds. Like many, I think the entire Afghanistan section is a terrible bore (and more than a bit overtly Indy'esque), and also feel that Kara Milovy lacks a little essential sexiness while being a bit whiny.

    In terms of globe trotting adventure/fantasy, I've always felt that Moore captured that best personally. I think Dalton's films work better when they are in dark thriller mode, and that's another reason why I prefer the earlier bits in TLD and most of LTK.

    I can appreciate your opinion of Dalton though. He has moved up to #3 in my ranking of Bond actors lately. He deserves a lot of credit for what he tried to do with the character and also brought a certain honesty to it.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 2,988
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Having just rewatched TMWTGG, I have to say, this film is often criminally underrated. It’s a fun, crazy ride from start to finish, and has some of MooreBond’s most Flemingesque moments. It’s not what I’d want every Bond film to be, but it’s wonderful for what it is. On my first viewing I actually gave up very early on and fast-forwarded to the end. Today was only my second time watching it and it has skyrocketed in my rankings now.

    Where was it in your rankings and where is it now ?

    It was probably bottom 5 before and now I’d say top 10.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 64
    bondjames wrote: »
    Sorry to jump on the bandwagon again lol but I've thought of two more.

    1). I actually have a soft spot for George Lazenby's film and what it attempted to do. There's not a lot to go on there but On Her Majesty's Secret Service has moments where I feel as though I'm watching an actor actually breathe life into James Bond for the first time.

    2). I adore Timothy Dalton's films. I love how dark and gritty they are and I've always kind of preferred darker and more realistic versions of stories (which is why I prefer Nolan's Batman) but Dalton's managed not only this, but they also felt like really fun 1980's adventures, similar at least in my mind to the Indiana Jones films where from beginning to end, they took you on these sprawling globe trotting adventures. I really feel that Dalton captured the adventure fantasy aspect of the 007 films better than any actor before him.
    I used to dislike both the Dalton and Lazenby entries when I was younger. Now I am big fans of two out of three films, which reside in my top 10.

    I agree with you that Lazenby does a truly fantastic job in OHMSS. The film itself is one of the best, and for whatever reason, he just works in it (I've sometimes wondered if his lack of acting experience actually helps because he has a vulnerability which suits the narrative. What's great is he doesn't project a lack of confidence, but rather a sincerity and earnestness).

    I've really grown to appreciate Dalton's work in LTK. What used to be a firm bottom of the barrel Bond film for me when I was younger is now a top 10 entry. The central conflict between Sanchez and Bond is very well handled, and I love how Bond slowly sows the seeds of doubt from within. This is also a reason why I truly enjoyed The Night Manager adaptation, which does something similar.

    It is TLD which I personally continue to have trouble with. I find the film overall better suited to Roger Moore than Dalton, and feel it's somewhat unbalanced, despite having a memorable Barry score and fantastic first two thirds. Like many, I think the entire Afghanistan section is a terrible bore (and more than a bit overtly Indy'esque), and also feel that Kara Milovy lacks a little essential sexiness while being a bit whiny.

    In terms of globe trotting adventure/fantasy, I've always felt that Moore captured that best personally. I think Dalton's films work better when they are in dark thriller mode, and that's another reason why I prefer the earlier bits in TLD and most of LTK.

    I can appreciate your opinion of Dalton though. He has moved up to #3 in my ranking of Bond actors lately. He deserves a lot of credit for what he tried to do with the character and also bring a certain honesty to it.

    I really liked Kara! I felt like she had a very ordinary look to her, like rather than the supermodel looking ladies of Moore's era, Kara just looked like an ordinary person. And yeah I agree about Moore's Bond being kinda globe trotting/adventure etc but I think since they were so campy I just had a problem taking them seriously, like I felt like if I was watching a Moore movie it was with the understanding that like 'yeah we're gonna suspend reality a bit for this one'. Dalton's just felt organic and natural imo. But I definitely, definitely agree with you on the Afghanistan segment of TLD. Whenever it comes on, every single time I watch it without fail, there's a moment where the thought crosses my mind that 'oh yeah. this part is in this.'
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Sorry to jump on the bandwagon again lol but I've thought of two more.

    1). I actually have a soft spot for George Lazenby's film and what it attempted to do. There's not a lot to go on there but On Her Majesty's Secret Service has moments where I feel as though I'm watching an actor actually breathe life into James Bond for the first time.

    2). I adore Timothy Dalton's films. I love how dark and gritty they are and I've always kind of preferred darker and more realistic versions of stories (which is why I prefer Nolan's Batman) but Dalton's managed not only this, but they also felt like really fun 1980's adventures, similar at least in my mind to the Indiana Jones films where from beginning to end, they took you on these sprawling globe trotting adventures. I really feel that Dalton captured the adventure fantasy aspect of the 007 films better than any actor before him.
    I used to dislike both the Dalton and Lazenby entries when I was younger. Now I am big fans of two out of three films, which reside in my top 10.

    I agree with you that Lazenby does a truly fantastic job in OHMSS. The film itself is one of the best, and for whatever reason, he just works in it (I've sometimes wondered if his lack of acting experience actually helps because he has a vulnerability which suits the narrative. What's great is he doesn't project a lack of confidence, but rather a sincerity and earnestness).

    I've really grown to appreciate Dalton's work in LTK. What used to be a firm bottom of the barrel Bond film for me when I was younger is now a top 10 entry. The central conflict between Sanchez and Bond is very well handled, and I love how Bond slowly sows the seeds of doubt from within. This is also a reason why I truly enjoyed The Night Manager adaptation, which does something similar.

    It is TLD which I personally continue to have trouble with. I find the film overall better suited to Roger Moore than Dalton, and feel it's somewhat unbalanced, despite having a memorable Barry score and fantastic first two thirds. Like many, I think the entire Afghanistan section is a terrible bore (and more than a bit overtly Indy'esque), and also feel that Kara Milovy lacks a little essential sexiness while being a bit whiny.

    In terms of globe trotting adventure/fantasy, I've always felt that Moore captured that best personally. I think Dalton's films work better when they are in dark thriller mode, and that's another reason why I prefer the earlier bits in TLD and most of LTK.

    I can appreciate your opinion of Dalton though. He has moved up to #3 in my ranking of Bond actors lately. He deserves a lot of credit for what he tried to do with the character and also bring a certain honesty to it.

    I really liked Kara! I felt like she had a very ordinary look to her, like rather than the supermodel looking ladies of Moore's era, Kara just looked like an ordinary person. And yeah I agree about Moore's Bond being kinda globe trotting/adventure etc but I think since they were so campy I just had a problem taking them seriously, like I felt like if I was watching a Moore movie it was with the understanding that like 'yeah we're gonna suspend reality a bit for this one'. Dalton's just felt organic and natural imo. But I definitely, definitely agree with you on the Afghanistan segment of TLD. Whenever it comes on, every single time I watch it without fail, there's a moment where the thought crosses my mind that 'oh yeah. this part is in this.'
    I agree that Kara certainly gives off an 'ordinary person' vibe. I believe it was deliberate on the part of the film makers to go for a more toned down female lead. It worked for Dalton's Bond and also made the relationship more believable. I personally prefer Natalya Simonova in GE, who also was given a similar Plane Jane look, but with a slightly 'bossier' temperament.

    Somewhat controversially perhaps, and despite my recent appreciation for Dalton, I've always felt he came across a little awkward with the ladies. The dialogue didn't help either, because some of it could sound a bit cheesy ("horse's backside", "don't think, just let it happen", "tough business Ms. Bouvier" and what not). It's probably more a function of the late 80s than anything else, but I wish they had been able to find a better balance with him in this department. Again, I'm sure there are members who like the female interactions, but it just wasn't for me.
  • BAIN123 wrote: »
    I’ve always liked OP but of late I’ve noticed it suffers from some fairly major issues.

    -Maud Adams, though compatable with Moore, gives a very mannered performance (Moore by contrast gives one of his best).
    -the direction and use of stunt doubling is very clunky at times
    -Many of the interior locations look like sets.
    -the silliness goes a step too far on several occasions (the opening feels like it could have been from a Naked Gun film).

    That said I do like the overall story and there are some highly effective suspenseful moments.

    This one hits the nail on the head for me. I'd had a hard time articulating why OP doesn't rate as a favourite of mine, even though generally I really love the adventure genre and would love to see Bond return to it. Something about OP (ok, several things) doesn't click, and one is that sense of being on a sound stage instead being in the dusty streets of a faraway place, smelling the smells and seeing the sights.

    In Indiana Jones, we see him sweating, wandering through the markets, etc. OP feels more sterile, despite everything.
  • Posts: 15,199
    I rank OP higher than CR.
  • Posts: 10,274
    Hardly controversial, but I don't know where else to just post that I think the objective Top 5 Bond films are: DN, FRWL, GF, OHMSS, and CR.

    For a controversial opinion, I'll say I think MR has the most overrated (but still overall good) soundtrack in the series.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    octofinger wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I’ve always liked OP but of late I’ve noticed it suffers from some fairly major issues.

    -Maud Adams, though compatable with Moore, gives a very mannered performance (Moore by contrast gives one of his best).
    -the direction and use of stunt doubling is very clunky at times
    -Many of the interior locations look like sets.
    -the silliness goes a step too far on several occasions (the opening feels like it could have been from a Naked Gun film).

    That said I do like the overall story and there are some highly effective suspenseful moments.

    This one hits the nail on the head for me. I'd had a hard time articulating why OP doesn't rate as a favourite of mine, even though generally I really love the adventure genre and would love to see Bond return to it. Something about OP (ok, several things) doesn't click, and one is that sense of being on a sound stage instead being in the dusty streets of a faraway place, smelling the smells and seeing the sights.

    In Indiana Jones, we see him sweating, wandering through the markets, etc. OP feels more sterile, despite everything.
    Is it really the interior, or rather the exterior locations though? I think the interior sets are actually quite well done and from the look of it seem to have been filmed mainly on location. I'm thinking of OP's residence, the hotels, Kamal's residence etc.

    What looks cheap to me are some of the exterior venues, like the festival fight. That bit has always looked awful to me. The other part that comes to mind is when Bond is evading Kamal and his men in the jungle.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 11,175
    There's certainly a feeling to me in a few of the interior scenes that we are in a studio rather than India itself (ok, I know nearly all of the interior scenes in a Bond film are in constructed sets rather than actual locations, but normally its not too noticable),

    Q's workshop felt as if it was on a soundstage to me as did the whole casino sequence. Then again, perhaps its the lighting more than the set that is the issue.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Is it really the interior, or rather the exterior locations though? I think the interior sets are actually quite well done and from the look of it seem to have been filmed mainly on location. I'm thinking of OP's residence, the hotels, Kamal's residence etc.

    What looks cheap to me are some of the exterior venues, like the festival fight. That bit has always looked awful to me. The other part that comes to mind is when Bond is evading Kamal and his men in the jungle.


    Fair enough; the jungle sequence is especially egregious on this front for me. No sense of danger, really, or of place - just Bond running through a greenhouse, and stumbling through some cotton-wool "spider webs." (The less said about the Tarzan incident the better.)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    There's certainly a feeling to me in a few of the interior scenes that we are in a studio rather than India itself (ok, I know nearly all of the interior scenes in a Bond film are in constructed sets rather than actual locations, but normally its not too noticable),

    Q's workshop felt as if it was on a soundstage to me as did the whole casino sequence. Then again, perhaps its the lighting more than the set that is the issue.
    I am due a viewing shortly, and will look out for this. I always thought that the casino looked just fine, but maybe I'm missing something.
    octofinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Is it really the interior, or rather the exterior locations though? I think the interior sets are actually quite well done and from the look of it seem to have been filmed mainly on location. I'm thinking of OP's residence, the hotels, Kamal's residence etc.

    What looks cheap to me are some of the exterior venues, like the festival fight. That bit has always looked awful to me. The other part that comes to mind is when Bond is evading Kamal and his men in the jungle.

    Fair enough; the jungle sequence is especially egregious on this front for me. No sense of danger, really, or of place - just Bond running through a greenhouse, and stumbling through some cotton-wool "spider webs." (The less said about the Tarzan incident the better.)
    Yes, it just doesn't belong in the film and takes the tension out of it. I can't wait for that whole bit to be over and done with because the film picks up nicely after that. Pity, because the part just prior when Bond is snooping around the palace trying to decipher the scheme is very nicely done.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 6,838
    @barryt007 I prefer her not standing on her two legs....:-D

    @BAIN123 I can assure you that none of the India Palace shots were shot inside, and you should be quite happy you can't smell the place, even though Udaipur is a beautiful place (if you look past the garbage).

  • Posts: 11,621
    I rank OP higher than CR.

    I prefer OCTOPUSSY over CASINO ROYALE as well.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,499
    I rate YOLT, tied with TMWTGG, as the second lowest in the series. Controversial?

    I actually love the first half up until the volcano lair is introduced. Once the training school is introduced, it all goes downhill apart from seeing Blofeld for the first time and seeing Kissy in a bikini. Still, a 7 out of 10 isn't bad.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I rank OP higher than CR.

    I prefer OCTOPUSSY over CASINO ROYALE as well.
    On a pure entertainment scale, I'm with you both. Then again, that applies to most of the pre 90's films for me, which are a much easier rewatch than anything that has come afterwards.
    Remington wrote: »
    I rate YOLT, tied with TMWTGG, as the second lowest in the series. Controversial?

    I actually love the first half up until the volcano lair is introduced. Once the training school is introduced, it all goes downhill apart from seeing Blofeld for the first time and seeing Kissy in a bikini. Still, a 7 out of 10 isn't bad.
    I'm with you on YOLT and for the same reasons you mention, but love TMWTGG.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 1,853
    I actually like the Nintendo 64 version of The World is Not Enough over the movie. I may be basis, because I played the game more than watched the movie. However, the story works better in the game, rather than the movie.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,109
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    I actually like the Nintendo 64 version of The World is Not Enough over the movie. I may be basis, because I played the game more than watched the movie. However, the story works better in the game, rather than the movie.

    It's tough for me to pick a favorite of the two given that they're different mediums, but I put so much time into that N64 version of the game. Spent many a late night with a buddy playing that multiplayer.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited September 2018 Posts: 4,278
    Roadphill wrote: »
    I have to agree on OP. Never been a huge fan. Moore is my favourite Bond, and incidentally (not that this means much) was the first Bond film released after my birth. It's probably the Moore film I am least likely to re-watch.

    OP was my first Bond in the theater, at age 13. I think I saw it three or four times that summer. So for that reason, I will always have a soft spot for it. (I vaguely recall seeing LALD on TV before OP.)

    Similarly, by TLD I was 17. And I could tell that Dalton was a breath of fresh air that the series desperately needed. His interpretation felt exciting and fresh, back then.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,682
    MR has the best score/cinematography of the Moore era
Sign In or Register to comment.