The Man With the Golden Gun has Christopher Lee who has always been one of my favorite actors; he is the best Bond villian. I also enjoy the locations and I do not have a problem with the Solar Energy plot. The problem with the film is the action scenes, which are mostly forgettable.
A View To A Kill is a bit better. Walken and Jones are great villains. Moore is good despite his old age, and I love his scenes with Patrick MacNee. The action scenes are good; how can anyone say a Bond film is bad when it features a chase on the Eiffel Tower and a fight on the Golden Gate bridge. I also do not mind Tanya Roberts; her scenes with Moore are not bad. The plot is not complicated which is nice. Hmmm, maybe I like AVTAK more than I thought.
Chris, you have combined quotes from different people to make it seem like someone is contradicting themselves, and then you chastise them for it. I suggest you go back and re-read the thread.
I find Diamonds are Forever makes me physically sick just watching it. Visually it's disgusting and on the whole a terrible film - easily the worst Blofeld. This is the worst Bond film in my opinion. TMWTGG is saved by Scaramanga and I actually find AVTAK quite entertaining but attmittedly without Zorin it would be one of the poorest Bonds.
I think that for all the hype and anticipation that preceded DAF and the prospect of Connery resurfacing to the role, DAF was a disappointment. The bit I find bothersome is that it has a tendency to not take itself seriously enough. I'm not saying a Bond has should be Timothy Dalton gritty or Pierce Brosnan smug either, but the way DAF was handled I didn't like. The other shortcomings for DAF were its least impressive interpretation of Blofeld.
It irritates me that his death is never made fully apparent at the end of the film, although, on a plus side (depending on your views of things), it did pave way for his reappearance in NSNA.
Tiffany Case. In about the first half of the film she befits a professional diamond smuggler, but then by the end she is relegated to being Exhibit B in the case for Bond girls' bra sizes being bigger than their IQs.
However, I think its worth noting that this was just after OHMSS. Although it's a relief that OHMSS gets more praise today that it ever did before, there was a feeling at the time that the noble experiment to make a more humanistic 007 had resulted in (supposed) poor box office performance. Then, elsewhere in Hollywood, movie anti-heroes such as Shaft (the poster for whom actually proclaimed was better than Bond) had come along. And accordingly, the producers redirected the Bond franchise with this breezy tone. It was the only way, methinks.
Despite the common censensus, Never Say Never Again does NOT rank as the worst Bond is my opinion. I was only watching it last night and to my pleasant surprise found it enjoyable, and actually like it more now than I ever did before. I have probably watched it more times than any other Bond, often which had thought 'hmm' in negative tones. But if you want to enjoy it like I did, you need to abandon any belief that its a Bond film, and just watch the thing, not thinking about anything else. For the first time, you actually start to appreciate the supposed ill-fitting characters like Fatima Blush and Algernon, or even Nigel Small-Fawcett. You also appreciate Irvin Kershner's directing. For a large part, yes, its pretty erratic, but the underwater scenes are rather good. Plus, it looks a million times better on DVD.
Hi, to be honest that was how I found it best to approach OHMSS... forgetting it's a Bond film. No Connery, no funny one-liners, no gadgets... on that basis it sort of works.
For me it's LTK (too dark, too gritty, too violent, no humor, mundane plot, and generally depressing).
In the book James Bond (2)007, about the colloque on Ian Fleming's James Bond 007, in Paris, some sociologists, psychologists, writers have studied the work of Ian Fleming. They 're agree this film is the only one representative of who and what is 007 despite the rejection of the public who doesn't appreciate the real James Bond, but prefers a watered-down version of the others 007 films. http://www.amazon.fr/James-Bond-007-Anatomie-populaire/dp/2701146569/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197473751&sr=8-1
Neither of these films are the worst 007 film in my opinion. However, they are nowhere near the best. TMWTGG is my #10 and AVTAK is my #13.
I rank these films mostly on entertainment factor. Occasionally I will rank a film lower than it should be even though it is entertaining because of bad dialogue, ounlandish, contrived, or OOT plots, or poor performances. Examples include MR and DAD. Both entertain me more than some above them, but those negative elements I mention bring them down. I will also occasionally rank films higher than they should be because their performances, characters, scores, gadgets, action sequences, and humor make up for them. A film can have slight camp, excessive humor, or mediocre writing, but these positive elements I just mentioned make up for them. Examples include LALD, Octopussy, and good old TMWTGG.
TMWTGG gets so much hate. It is no masterpiece. I like it because it entertains me. Nothing more and nothing less. I like Sheriff J.W. Pepper and although he may have been in too much of this, he is good comic relief, which I felt was needed in this darker themed film. The girls at the karate school was a bit silly, and Goodnight was dumb, but her body made up for it. Wonderful villain, new and different henchman, and beautiful locations help this film a lot. The boat chase thru Thailand is classic 007. I do not think this film is camped up at all. YOLT? Yes. DAF? Yes. MR? Yes. But, not this one!
AVTAK is also underrated. It has its flaws. Poor old Roger gave it all he had, but the thick layer of make-up and bad hairstyle did not help him look younger. Stacey was good until she started screaming, and the plot was contrived. The good things include the opening. I actually liked the snowboarding part and felt the song did not detract from the suspense at all. It's snowboarding for goodness sake! Have a little fun! Other good things include good allies like Tibbet and Pola Ivonova. Walken playing Zorin was one of the best villains. The half-car was a bit dumb, but the last scene on the Golden Gate Bridge was good. Great song as well. This also was not campy. If anything, it took itself too seriously. I wish Dalton had done this one because he would have fit in more and Octopussy would have been perfect for Moore to retire on.
If you want to put down a 007 film for camp, bad humor, or bad plots, please make sure you mention the specific films and which of these aspects were present in each. I really dislike it when a film is bashed by wrong methods. If you dislike, then dislike it. It won't bother me. Just be more specific because we are here to share a wide variety of views and opinions. Thanks.
By the way, in AVTAK did Roger Moore have that hairstyle cover his neck so much because he was hiding facelift tucks or something? If not, his old hairstyles and less make-up would have helped his look tremendously in the film.
For me it's LTK (too dark, too gritty, too violent, no humor, mundane plot, and generally depressing).
In the book James Bond (2)007, about the colloque on Ian Fleming's James Bond 007, in Paris, some sociologists, psychologists, writers have studied the work of Ian Fleming. They 're agree this film is the only one representative of who and what is 007 despite the rejection of the public who doesn't appreciate the real James Bond, but prefers a watered-down version of the others 007 films. http://www.amazon.fr/James-Bond-007-Anatomie-populaire/dp/2701146569/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197473751&sr=8-1
Then those "sociologists, psychologists and writers" can stick their research right up their tushes.
While not being anywhere near the best, THWTGG is I think a little underated. It is not a terrible film and has a lot of good qualities that I like. I can sit down and watch it and get a lot of enjoyment out of it. AVTAK on the other hand is horrendous, maybe my least favorite. It's hurt by Moore being too old and a poor script and direction. It just seems like a very tired effort, like everyone was just going through the motions. It hardly felt like a Bond film to me. And let's not even get into the silliness with the Dick Tracy comment and the firetrucks or the horrendous May Day.
Harry I don't fancy your chances of retaining your meat and two veg when JFF hears about this!!!
(TMWTGG gets my vote!)
you serious? the man with the golden gun was the best bond ever.... anyways i would say moonraker stupid villian and to cheesey
SB_DiamondNorth Miami Beach, FLPosts: 126MI6 Agent
Well, as having recently viewed all the Bond movies (some for the first time) I must say that of my least favorites, DAF, I felt that Connery half @$$ed in this one, it was painfully slow and what diamonds? We only see them like twice in the whole movie (and the first time the ones in the urn were fake). He was not as his usual sexy Bond best and it was a disappointment for me since I was anticipating seeing him as Bond again since he is my favorite. I actually enjoyed TMWTGG and AVTAK, while I agree Moore is a bit old here and I hated Stacy (she was such a screamer X-( ) Cristopher Walkin really carries the film as the most psychopathic villain yet, and I enjoyed that. Of course DAD for me is the most awful, over-the-top, over gadgetized, poorly written and poorly acted film of the Bond series. I think even EON knows it since they have gone in the completely opposite direction with CR (thank you EON! {[] ). As far as the Dalton films go, I didn't like either bacause I have a strong opinion about Bond never crying and Dalton does in both films he's in. Ugh, please, no more emo Bond thank you!
As far as the Dalton films go, I didn't like either bacause I have a strong opinion about Bond never crying and Dalton does in both films he's in. Ugh, please, no more emo Bond thank you!
Dalton cried? When? I have seen these films numerous times, and never recall him crying???
I just watched AVTAK and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Far from the worst (DAD). It has everything. My only complaint is that it we were introduced to Zorin and May Day right away and it made the whole movie seem about an hour longer than it actually was, though I had no problems with the pacing itself. And the bridge fight was awesome. AS for TMWTGG, also an enjoyable movie, but wasn't like the others, it was a bit small in scope, but it certainly wasn't bad.
Hi, to be honest that was how I found it best to approach OHMSS... forgetting it's a Bond film. No Connery, no funny one-liners, no gadgets... on that basis it sort of works.
Do you know of Never Say McClory Again, sambwoy?
Yes, not the whole film but bits I downloaded and watched on Apple QuickTime. It's fantastic. I would say that the music was a low-point of NSNA, not just because there was no Bond theme, but because, rather like GoldenEye, they seemed to have scored the wrong scenes. I have never understood what Michael LeGrand was trying to convey in his music with those jazz and classical pieces.
Out of TMWTGG and AVTAK, I prefer the latter. Both films, plot-wise and in creativity, feel very tired and TMWTGG has many shortcomings like all the ill-tempered characters, Sheriff Pepper, the karate and the forgettable action sequences. Both Britt Ekland and Tanya Roberts are very attractive screen presences, but Ekland's character can't be believed to be a seasoned MI6 agent because she is immature and inept.
I personally I wouldn't go so far to say you have to forget that OHMSS is a Bond film in order to enjoy it because it is a good Bond film. One of my top 5 Bonds in fact.
Comments
Perhaps it is.
Neither!
The worst is................... DAD...
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
The Man With the Golden Gun has Christopher Lee who has always been one of my favorite actors; he is the best Bond villian. I also enjoy the locations and I do not have a problem with the Solar Energy plot. The problem with the film is the action scenes, which are mostly forgettable.
A View To A Kill is a bit better. Walken and Jones are great villains. Moore is good despite his old age, and I love his scenes with Patrick MacNee. The action scenes are good; how can anyone say a Bond film is bad when it features a chase on the Eiffel Tower and a fight on the Golden Gate bridge. I also do not mind Tanya Roberts; her scenes with Moore are not bad. The plot is not complicated which is nice. Hmmm, maybe I like AVTAK more than I thought.
It irritates me that his death is never made fully apparent at the end of the film, although, on a plus side (depending on your views of things), it did pave way for his reappearance in NSNA.
Tiffany Case. In about the first half of the film she befits a professional diamond smuggler, but then by the end she is relegated to being Exhibit B in the case for Bond girls' bra sizes being bigger than their IQs.
However, I think its worth noting that this was just after OHMSS. Although it's a relief that OHMSS gets more praise today that it ever did before, there was a feeling at the time that the noble experiment to make a more humanistic 007 had resulted in (supposed) poor box office performance. Then, elsewhere in Hollywood, movie anti-heroes such as Shaft (the poster for whom actually proclaimed was better than Bond) had come along. And accordingly, the producers redirected the Bond franchise with this breezy tone. It was the only way, methinks.
Despite the common censensus, Never Say Never Again does NOT rank as the worst Bond is my opinion. I was only watching it last night and to my pleasant surprise found it enjoyable, and actually like it more now than I ever did before. I have probably watched it more times than any other Bond, often which had thought 'hmm' in negative tones. But if you want to enjoy it like I did, you need to abandon any belief that its a Bond film, and just watch the thing, not thinking about anything else. For the first time, you actually start to appreciate the supposed ill-fitting characters like Fatima Blush and Algernon, or even Nigel Small-Fawcett. You also appreciate Irvin Kershner's directing. For a large part, yes, its pretty erratic, but the underwater scenes are rather good. Plus, it looks a million times better on DVD.
Do you know of Never Say McClory Again, sambwoy?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
In the book James Bond (2)007, about the colloque on Ian Fleming's James Bond 007, in Paris, some sociologists, psychologists, writers have studied the work of Ian Fleming. They 're agree this film is the only one representative of who and what is 007 despite the rejection of the public who doesn't appreciate the real James Bond, but prefers a watered-down version of the others 007 films.
http://www.amazon.fr/James-Bond-007-Anatomie-populaire/dp/2701146569/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197473751&sr=8-1
OHMSS (didn't like Lazenby)
TWINN (didn't like Brosnan)
TND (didn't like Brosnan)
I rank these films mostly on entertainment factor. Occasionally I will rank a film lower than it should be even though it is entertaining because of bad dialogue, ounlandish, contrived, or OOT plots, or poor performances. Examples include MR and DAD. Both entertain me more than some above them, but those negative elements I mention bring them down. I will also occasionally rank films higher than they should be because their performances, characters, scores, gadgets, action sequences, and humor make up for them. A film can have slight camp, excessive humor, or mediocre writing, but these positive elements I just mentioned make up for them. Examples include LALD, Octopussy, and good old TMWTGG.
TMWTGG gets so much hate. It is no masterpiece. I like it because it entertains me. Nothing more and nothing less. I like Sheriff J.W. Pepper and although he may have been in too much of this, he is good comic relief, which I felt was needed in this darker themed film. The girls at the karate school was a bit silly, and Goodnight was dumb, but her body made up for it. Wonderful villain, new and different henchman, and beautiful locations help this film a lot. The boat chase thru Thailand is classic 007. I do not think this film is camped up at all. YOLT? Yes. DAF? Yes. MR? Yes. But, not this one!
AVTAK is also underrated. It has its flaws. Poor old Roger gave it all he had, but the thick layer of make-up and bad hairstyle did not help him look younger. Stacey was good until she started screaming, and the plot was contrived. The good things include the opening. I actually liked the snowboarding part and felt the song did not detract from the suspense at all. It's snowboarding for goodness sake! Have a little fun! Other good things include good allies like Tibbet and Pola Ivonova. Walken playing Zorin was one of the best villains. The half-car was a bit dumb, but the last scene on the Golden Gate Bridge was good. Great song as well. This also was not campy. If anything, it took itself too seriously. I wish Dalton had done this one because he would have fit in more and Octopussy would have been perfect for Moore to retire on.
If you want to put down a 007 film for camp, bad humor, or bad plots, please make sure you mention the specific films and which of these aspects were present in each. I really dislike it when a film is bashed by wrong methods. If you dislike, then dislike it. It won't bother me. Just be more specific because we are here to share a wide variety of views and opinions. Thanks.
By the way, in AVTAK did Roger Moore have that hairstyle cover his neck so much because he was hiding facelift tucks or something? If not, his old hairstyles and less make-up would have helped his look tremendously in the film.
Then those "sociologists, psychologists and writers" can stick their research right up their tushes.
Yes, not the whole film but bits I downloaded and watched on Apple QuickTime. It's fantastic. I would say that the music was a low-point of NSNA, not just because there was no Bond theme, but because, rather like GoldenEye, they seemed to have scored the wrong scenes. I have never understood what Michael LeGrand was trying to convey in his music with those jazz and classical pieces.
Out of TMWTGG and AVTAK, I prefer the latter. Both films, plot-wise and in creativity, feel very tired and TMWTGG has many shortcomings like all the ill-tempered characters, Sheriff Pepper, the karate and the forgettable action sequences. Both Britt Ekland and Tanya Roberts are very attractive screen presences, but Ekland's character can't be believed to be a seasoned MI6 agent because she is immature and inept.
I personally I wouldn't go so far to say you have to forget that OHMSS is a Bond film in order to enjoy it because it is a good Bond film. One of my top 5 Bonds in fact.