I also like LTK, as I think that Bond is depicted here in a way that was more Fleming that any of the previous three films.
It seems to be lifted in many ways from the novel TMWTGG, although the possible homosexual overtones of Scaramanga, to Bond, are not seen with Sanchez. I do think though, that he is one of the more Fleming-esque of villains. Consider him in the light of other Fleming villains, the spangled mob in DAF, the hoods in GF, the gangsters in LALD, he seems more real, and truly an update of a Fleming villain. Sure he's not larger than life in the mould of Dr.No, or Goldfinger, but then not all of Bond's villains were.
The lizard is a nice touch as well.
I think that Lope is a much more Fleming like girl as well, a girl "with a wing down", uniquely vulnerable, yet within the organisation that Bond is attempting to destroy. This seems to be very Fleming-esque.
This, in association with the grittier plot, the destruction from within, idea, and the basis of vengenance that runs through the entire film: Felix-Sanchez, Sanchez-Felix, Bond-Sanchez. Very dark, very brutal, very Fleming.
I've read that some people call the first three films the "Golden Trilogy." I agree with that. IMO they're in a class by themselves, although OHMSS might be the next closest one to them.
My question is, how much worse are TB & YOLT compared to the first 3? Also,is either one of these films clearly superior to the other? IMO, TB is a little better than YOLT but not quite good enough to change the "golden trilogy" into the "fantastic four."
Thunderball is my second favorite. I know that many people criticise it, however I would argue that it is superior to Dr.No and at least as good as FRWL. While the underwater sequences in Thunderball were problematic, they were necessary, and while it was overlong (130 min), Connery's performance was among his best in the Bond films (it was actually his favorite), the plot was brilliantly straight foreward, the villain and Bond Bond Girl were both great and the pts remains one of the best in the Bond series. no, I would argue that the four films very much constituted a 'fantastic four.'
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I went ahead and changed the title to what I deem "appropriately balanced" (Since it's been a while that we've done this)
Cinematography, music, style, etc. Well, it's difficult to match the initial films, especially the fab four that kick started them all. We wouldn't even have community fan message boards. Count me as a four time believer as well.
Goldfinger is my favorite, it started the inevitable slide of over the top gadgetry, it has a perfect balance of mature adventure thriller and sophisticated humor. That's what the Bond films need, a perfect blend of each. It's extremely difficult to pull it off. As history has proven.
In a series that spans many eras, filmmaking styles, and popular trends, it becomes difficult for any fan to remove any sort of bias they have to truly say what is "the best" Bond film. That is one element of the series that makes 007 so unique from other series's, they aren't a triology or made in one era with one filmmaking style. There will always be some people gravitate to more than others.
What we usually see amongst casual Bond fans, who don't see the need to be an "expert" on Bond's history, evolution, or the Fleming novels, is a gravitation towards the films that defined Bond's conventions of gadgets, girls and guns. Films like Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, and GoldenEye typically top those lists.
Other fans, who are affectionately known as "purists" don't have much of an interest in Bond's cinematic identity as they do in what defined him as a character initally. Typically they prefer Bond films that are faithful to Ian Flemings conception of the character, and his stories. Films such as Dr.No, From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, Licence To Kill, and The World Is Not Enough are usually favored by this camp.
Like most things in life, however, there are shades of gray. There are Fleming purists who don't like all the films I listed above as "Fleming-like" and there are casual movie goers who appreciate the alleged "turkeys" of the series over the films above.
Most fans, hardcore and casual alike, prefer simialr Bond films. That is because all the films I mentioned above aren't as black and white as "un-Fleming like" or "Fleming-like." They are over the top, cinematic elements I listed to the films as Fleming, and ruthless, gritty moments to the films I said would be favored by casual fans. The most favored Bond films have always had a foothold in both worlds, and that's why the movies I listed above in both categories tend to be among everyone's favorites. Surely, people have what many would call "guilty pleasures" (You Only Live Twice, Moonraker, Die Another Day etc) but for them, they fit this mold of having a foot hold in both the Fleming and cinematic elements of James Bond.
Ultimately it's all subjective and really comes down to what you expect in a Bond film. It's only movies after all so no sense in getting into a fuss about it.
It would be nice if there was a poll out there somewhere where fans like us can rank all 20 Bond films, from most favorite to least favorite. And then the poll has a tally of the final results so we can see how the Bond films really rank in the eyes of its fans.
Agree that the early Connery films created something unique and very special. But OHMSS brought that to it's zenith, IMO. Amazing that it took all the established facets of a Bond film, then expanded on them. An unprecedented and unrepeated accomplishment.
GE is my opinion of the best Bond film with elements of action, darkness, engaging plot, excitement, thrills, Pierce Brosnan as Bond, wonderful villains in Trevelyan and Xenia and a Classic Bond girl in Natalya Fyordrovna Simonova.
AVTAK comes at a close second with less action sequence but enough to keep your appetite whetted, another fairly dark film and though it has comical moments, this film is quite serious (listen to the score, very dark), Zorin machinegunning his workers (and loving it!), thrilling stunts (Golden Gate Bridge Fight, Jumping May Day), and perhaps the best villain of all time in Zorin with his intriguing Amazonian assassin May Day.
OHMSS easily
so glad they did that one straight,
not only is it a reverent adaptation of flemings masterpiece, its just an elegantly structured spy story with an inevitable tragic logic
ya ever notice: not only does Blofeld not appear til nearly an hour in, he doesnt even do anything either? 007 just talks about him occassioanlly while romancing his new lady, then once committing himself to Tracy must then carry out this mission with no weapons, no help, no contact with the outside world...
then comes the moment where Blofeld locks him in that machine room and he must escape, to save the world AND reunite with his lady, that escape takes up most of the last half of the movie and when he gets to the bottom he must turn round and go back to the top again - the main theme kicks in when he straps on those skis, (which I believe is a minorkey doomladen variant of the classic Monty Norman theme), the stakes never seemed so high and the chances so slim in any other film...
thats some of the reasons i like that one so much...
- the main theme kicks in when he straps on those skis, (which I believe is a minorkey doomladen variant of the classic Monty Norman theme)
I must respectfully disagree- they are BOTH in minor keys, are melodically completely dissimilar, and they are structured in different ways. The main point of comparison is that both "OHMSS" and the Bond Theme rely heavily on a 4 note vamp, and those aren't the same either.
I must respectfully disagree- they are BOTH in minor keys, are melodically completely dissimilar, and they are structured in different ways.
I confess to being tonedeaf and never having got the concept of chordchanges, so Ill take your word for it
I was just going by the conventional wisdom that minor keys are sad, and major keys are happy
and the regular theme is the musical definition of brash swaggering selfconfidence
it just struck me last time I watched the film that they do share that repeated 4note pattern, as you say, but whereas the regular theme moves upward and schwangs about, the OHMSS one is very dirgelike and evokes fatalism
I must say its so nice to have folks to overanalyse this stuff with: in real life, whenever I start talking about how many doublebourbons 007 can slam back while waiting to change planes in Miami, my coworkers are like "why are babbling on about this stuff? wheres that work we assigned you? "
I must say its so nice to have folks to overanalyse this stuff with: in real life, whenever I start talking about how many doublebourbons 007 can slam back while waiting to change planes in Miami, my coworkers are like "why are babbling on about this stuff? wheres that work we assigned you? "
) Oh yes, been there done that! Welcome on board, Mr potts (great name, btw, well chosen) and I hope you enjoy it here. But I have to say, "overanalyse"??? OVERANALYSE?? You ain't seen nothin' yet! Have a look at the "CR Trailer Script" thread where ONE word in a trailer has sparked endless debate. (And yes, I know, I'm not without sin in that department myself...)
I must say its so nice to have folks to overanalyse this stuff with: in real life, whenever I start talking about how many doublebourbons 007 can slam back while waiting to change planes in Miami, my coworkers are like "why are babbling on about this stuff? wheres that work we assigned you? "
For sure, that's why I'm here! My wife tends to glaze over when I rank the greatest Bond film fight scenes or complain about Dalton's Dracula hair in LTK. )
...Welcome on board, Mr potts (great name, btw, well chosen)...
Yes, welcome indeed. Gotta say, between Caractacus Potts and A Stupid Policeman, we have some Canadians who have come up with the best new monikers this board has seen in quite some time. {[]
IMO, there's no better film than Dr. No for getting a glimpse into Bond's psyche; and what a dark psyche it is. Case in point: as his would-be assassin is kneeling there in front of him, helpless and unarmed, Bond coolly and coldly pumps three bullets into him, with the line (as per Clum's sing off):
"That's a Smith & Wesson, and you've had your six."
I don't promote or condone violence, of course, but man that's a cool/cold bit of business; and as an insight into Bond's character -- the REAL Bond, that is, not some watered down, aristocractic version -- it seems to me unmatched.
IMO, there's no better film than Dr. No for getting a glimpse into Bond's psyche...
Couldn't agree more, ASP. And not just his psyche, but the whole day-to-day-life of being a spy -- much of which was mundane as hell. The switching of the liquor bottles, the hair across the closet doors, the powder on the briefcase -- all the simple elements of practical spy tradecraft. Not sexy or glamorous, just logical. I also love the fact that he pukes in the bathroom after the spider episode, just like most normal humans beings would. DN is unque in this regard.
That's excellent, Sir Hillary; I'd forgotten about all those great details you mentioned (e.g. hair across the door, powder on the briefcase). In short, Bond's LIFE, inside and out. It's exactly this kind of insight/material that separates the Bond series from every other action film/series. It's amazing isn't - such a grounded, real moment like Bond puking after a tense encounter works so well, and yet you can watch a dozen more Bond films and never see another moment quite like it. That's a shame, I think.
My favorite, and I have cretainly been taken to task for this, would have to be THUNDERBALL.
For me, this film had everything perfect, as did GOLDFINGER but this film edges that one in my opinion. A very cool Bond-esque theme by Tom Jones, brilliant locales, excellent screenplay, super sexy Bond girls, almost non-stop action, a sly villain, S.P.E.C.T.R.E. was in full force, great gadgets, superior underwater fight scenes, and my personal favorite John Barry theme for a Bond film.
A lot of people think this is a weak entry in the series, but I emplore anyone who doesn't think highly of this film to rewatch it. I am not saying it will be your favorite one, but I can almost assure you that it will rise on your Bond list.
A lot of people think this is a weak entry in the series, but I emplore anyone who doesn't think highly of this film to rewatch it. I am not saying it will be your favorite one, but I can almost assure you that it will rise on your Bond list.
Actually, many people regard TB as a classic. While most people might prefer FRWL and GF among the Connery films, I think you'll find that many if not most Bond fans have a great admiration for TB.
And before someone posts to declare that they don't like TB (yes JFF I am fully aware of your feelings about it ), I am not speaking on behalf of all Bond fans. I am simply pointing out that the first four Bond films are generally regarded as classics.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
That's excellent, Sir Hillary; I'd forgotten about all those great details you mentioned (e.g. hair across the door, powder on the briefcase). In short, Bond's LIFE, inside and out. It's exactly this kind of insight/material that separates the Bond series from every other action film/series. It's amazing isn't - such a grounded, real moment like Bond puking after a tense encounter works so well, and yet you can watch a dozen more Bond films and never see another moment quite like it. That's a shame, I think.
Having just recently re-watched this the other night, I have to agree. My wife had never seen it, and was used to the 'guns and gadgets and stunt spectaculars' of the Brosnan films. I had to make sure she was prepared for a more low-key Bond adventure. More than anything, I like seeing Bond in a detective-type role...how something as innocuous as a broken signal sends Bond from a plush gambling club to sloshing through a swamp fending off a fire-breathing tank. Layer by layer, the story unfolds and new characters become part of Bond's life. It simply gets better and better the more I watch it!
Thunderball is comparable, to a degree, since Bond is relying more on his wits to unravel the sinister scheme, but I don't feel it's as tersely crafted.
"Best of..." lists are always subject to mixed emotions. I saw FRWL on its inital release and still rank it my favorite as it most closely conjurs up the world of Fleming. But to have seen GF a year later as I did and witnes the "Bondmania" that followed is an experience that just cannot be duplicated. GF was the "Star Wars" of my generation. The following summer UA re-released DN & FRWL on a double bill and it was maybe the best saturday afternnon I've ever spent in a movie theatre. TB came out by Christmas and while a little bit of a letdown we still kept the faith. Two years later YOLT and in NYC the artwork was displayed on the biggest outdoor billboard in the world and it was a mindblower - as was the film. And then OHMSS - for my money the last great bond film. And yes Connery should have done it and walked away for good. It would have perfectly closed out the sixties. But hey, that's just my opinion.
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
:007)
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I thought with now 21 Bond films out I would take the oppurtunity to explain what I look for in a James Bond film and how I determine what I consider to be the best. First and foremost, it's hard to have strict specific standards when it comes to evaluating an ongoing series of nearly 4 decades with several actors and directors. Rather, I have three primary critera for every Bond film that I think it's safe to evaluate every aspect of a Bond movie by:
I. A loyalty to the original four films that are the series standards
II. A sense of authenticity to Ian Flemings 007
III. A new/exciting twist on the typical elements to make the film distinctive.
I would argue several Bond films have fulfilled these categories very well and number highly on my "favorites" list, namely, Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, The Living Daylights, Licence To Kill, GoldenEye, and The World Is Not Enough. I, like most other people, also have "guilty pleasures," films that don't fulfill these critera as well as a "great" Bond film would, but I nevertheless enjoy for sentimental reasons. For me, these would be Tomorrow Never Dies and Die Another Day. There are also other "good" Bond films that I enjoy watching but don't put as "great" namely For Your Eyes Only.
Ultimately however, I have two Bond films that I feel truly go above and beyond these three critera. They, like the films I first mentioned, are true classics in my mind. From Russia With Love is the classic Bond film for me, having all the elements necessary that make the series excellent, and has stood the test of time. Right next to it I place Casino Royale, an innovative, smart Bond thriller not seen since the 1960's, and defied so many popular expectations. I would pit them both as the epitome of James Bond films.
Comments
I also like LTK, as I think that Bond is depicted here in a way that was more Fleming that any of the previous three films.
It seems to be lifted in many ways from the novel TMWTGG, although the possible homosexual overtones of Scaramanga, to Bond, are not seen with Sanchez. I do think though, that he is one of the more Fleming-esque of villains. Consider him in the light of other Fleming villains, the spangled mob in DAF, the hoods in GF, the gangsters in LALD, he seems more real, and truly an update of a Fleming villain. Sure he's not larger than life in the mould of Dr.No, or Goldfinger, but then not all of Bond's villains were.
The lizard is a nice touch as well.
I think that Lope is a much more Fleming like girl as well, a girl "with a wing down", uniquely vulnerable, yet within the organisation that Bond is attempting to destroy. This seems to be very Fleming-esque.
This, in association with the grittier plot, the destruction from within, idea, and the basis of vengenance that runs through the entire film: Felix-Sanchez, Sanchez-Felix, Bond-Sanchez. Very dark, very brutal, very Fleming.
Class, pure class, in many scenes and many levels
Thunderball is my second favorite. I know that many people criticise it, however I would argue that it is superior to Dr.No and at least as good as FRWL. While the underwater sequences in Thunderball were problematic, they were necessary, and while it was overlong (130 min), Connery's performance was among his best in the Bond films (it was actually his favorite), the plot was brilliantly straight foreward, the villain and Bond Bond Girl were both great and the pts remains one of the best in the Bond series. no, I would argue that the four films very much constituted a 'fantastic four.'
Cinematography, music, style, etc. Well, it's difficult to match the initial films, especially the fab four that kick started them all. We wouldn't even have community fan message boards. Count me as a four time believer as well.
Goldfinger is my favorite, it started the inevitable slide of over the top gadgetry, it has a perfect balance of mature adventure thriller and sophisticated humor. That's what the Bond films need, a perfect blend of each. It's extremely difficult to pull it off. As history has proven.
Good. I was thinking after I podted this topic that it was a bit open-ended to just have a title of BEST BOND FILM.
What we usually see amongst casual Bond fans, who don't see the need to be an "expert" on Bond's history, evolution, or the Fleming novels, is a gravitation towards the films that defined Bond's conventions of gadgets, girls and guns. Films like Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, and GoldenEye typically top those lists.
Other fans, who are affectionately known as "purists" don't have much of an interest in Bond's cinematic identity as they do in what defined him as a character initally. Typically they prefer Bond films that are faithful to Ian Flemings conception of the character, and his stories. Films such as Dr.No, From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, Licence To Kill, and The World Is Not Enough are usually favored by this camp.
Like most things in life, however, there are shades of gray. There are Fleming purists who don't like all the films I listed above as "Fleming-like" and there are casual movie goers who appreciate the alleged "turkeys" of the series over the films above.
Most fans, hardcore and casual alike, prefer simialr Bond films. That is because all the films I mentioned above aren't as black and white as "un-Fleming like" or "Fleming-like." They are over the top, cinematic elements I listed to the films as Fleming, and ruthless, gritty moments to the films I said would be favored by casual fans. The most favored Bond films have always had a foothold in both worlds, and that's why the movies I listed above in both categories tend to be among everyone's favorites. Surely, people have what many would call "guilty pleasures" (You Only Live Twice, Moonraker, Die Another Day etc) but for them, they fit this mold of having a foot hold in both the Fleming and cinematic elements of James Bond.
Ultimately it's all subjective and really comes down to what you expect in a Bond film. It's only movies after all so no sense in getting into a fuss about it.
AVTAK comes at a close second with less action sequence but enough to keep your appetite whetted, another fairly dark film and though it has comical moments, this film is quite serious (listen to the score, very dark), Zorin machinegunning his workers (and loving it!), thrilling stunts (Golden Gate Bridge Fight, Jumping May Day), and perhaps the best villain of all time in Zorin with his intriguing Amazonian assassin May Day.
And of course Jenny Flex. :x
From Russia With Love
Simply put, it is the greatest Bond story ever told, and it will likely never be topped.
After my viewing of the film last night, I would have to agree. Please read my thoughts in the "movie of the week" thread for my reasons.
so glad they did that one straight,
not only is it a reverent adaptation of flemings masterpiece, its just an elegantly structured spy story with an inevitable tragic logic
ya ever notice: not only does Blofeld not appear til nearly an hour in, he doesnt even do anything either? 007 just talks about him occassioanlly while romancing his new lady, then once committing himself to Tracy must then carry out this mission with no weapons, no help, no contact with the outside world...
then comes the moment where Blofeld locks him in that machine room and he must escape, to save the world AND reunite with his lady, that escape takes up most of the last half of the movie and when he gets to the bottom he must turn round and go back to the top again - the main theme kicks in when he straps on those skis, (which I believe is a minorkey doomladen variant of the classic Monty Norman theme), the stakes never seemed so high and the chances so slim in any other film...
thats some of the reasons i like that one so much...
I must respectfully disagree- they are BOTH in minor keys, are melodically completely dissimilar, and they are structured in different ways. The main point of comparison is that both "OHMSS" and the Bond Theme rely heavily on a 4 note vamp, and those aren't the same either.
Loved the rest of the post, though!
I was just going by the conventional wisdom that minor keys are sad, and major keys are happy
and the regular theme is the musical definition of brash swaggering selfconfidence
it just struck me last time I watched the film that they do share that repeated 4note pattern, as you say, but whereas the regular theme moves upward and schwangs about, the OHMSS one is very dirgelike and evokes fatalism
I must say its so nice to have folks to overanalyse this stuff with: in real life, whenever I start talking about how many doublebourbons 007 can slam back while waiting to change planes in Miami, my coworkers are like "why are babbling on about this stuff? wheres that work we assigned you? "
Yes, welcome indeed. Gotta say, between Caractacus Potts and A Stupid Policeman, we have some Canadians who have come up with the best new monikers this board has seen in quite some time. {[]
"That's a Smith & Wesson, and you've had your six."
I don't promote or condone violence, of course, but man that's a cool/cold bit of business; and as an insight into Bond's character -- the REAL Bond, that is, not some watered down, aristocractic version -- it seems to me unmatched.
For me, this film had everything perfect, as did GOLDFINGER but this film edges that one in my opinion. A very cool Bond-esque theme by Tom Jones, brilliant locales, excellent screenplay, super sexy Bond girls, almost non-stop action, a sly villain, S.P.E.C.T.R.E. was in full force, great gadgets, superior underwater fight scenes, and my personal favorite John Barry theme for a Bond film.
A lot of people think this is a weak entry in the series, but I emplore anyone who doesn't think highly of this film to rewatch it. I am not saying it will be your favorite one, but I can almost assure you that it will rise on your Bond list.
Actually, many people regard TB as a classic. While most people might prefer FRWL and GF among the Connery films, I think you'll find that many if not most Bond fans have a great admiration for TB.
And before someone posts to declare that they don't like TB (yes JFF I am fully aware of your feelings about it
Having just recently re-watched this the other night, I have to agree. My wife had never seen it, and was used to the 'guns and gadgets and stunt spectaculars' of the Brosnan films. I had to make sure she was prepared for a more low-key Bond adventure. More than anything, I like seeing Bond in a detective-type role...how something as innocuous as a broken signal sends Bond from a plush gambling club to sloshing through a swamp fending off a fire-breathing tank. Layer by layer, the story unfolds and new characters become part of Bond's life. It simply gets better and better the more I watch it!
Thunderball is comparable, to a degree, since Bond is relying more on his wits to unravel the sinister scheme, but I don't feel it's as tersely crafted.
:007)
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I. A loyalty to the original four films that are the series standards
II. A sense of authenticity to Ian Flemings 007
III. A new/exciting twist on the typical elements to make the film distinctive.
I would argue several Bond films have fulfilled these categories very well and number highly on my "favorites" list, namely, Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, The Living Daylights, Licence To Kill, GoldenEye, and The World Is Not Enough. I, like most other people, also have "guilty pleasures," films that don't fulfill these critera as well as a "great" Bond film would, but I nevertheless enjoy for sentimental reasons. For me, these would be Tomorrow Never Dies and Die Another Day. There are also other "good" Bond films that I enjoy watching but don't put as "great" namely For Your Eyes Only.
Ultimately however, I have two Bond films that I feel truly go above and beyond these three critera. They, like the films I first mentioned, are true classics in my mind. From Russia With Love is the classic Bond film for me, having all the elements necessary that make the series excellent, and has stood the test of time. Right next to it I place Casino Royale, an innovative, smart Bond thriller not seen since the 1960's, and defied so many popular expectations. I would pit them both as the epitome of James Bond films.