Right and Wrong
3rbrown
MI6 Top Secret - Scotland, GlaPosts: 100MI6 Agent
What was right with: Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me, Casino Royale
What was wrong with: Diamonds Are Forever, The Man With The Golden Gun, A View To A Kill, Licence To kill, Die Another Day
Any opinions?
What was wrong with: Diamonds Are Forever, The Man With The Golden Gun, A View To A Kill, Licence To kill, Die Another Day
Any opinions?
Comments
Your right in saying less people like those films in comparasion, but some do like them. For what it's worth, movies in the "right" column (which I would include Licence To Kill in) are authentic to Fleming, take a unique take on the series established formula (or in the case of Goldfinger defining it), and are based on an excellent script. Those that aren't are sloppy in terms of both story and execution, showered with inept actors in various roles, and poor looking action scenes.
Again, you can apply those descriptions to what films you wish (though its clearly harder to do on some than others), movies are one of the few area's of life where relativism is the preferred morality
RIGHT:
Goldfinger: I think it set the template for most of the Bond films that followed. The plot is somewhat less reality based than previous films, the villain is considerably more larger than life than previously seen, there's more humour too, but it all works wonderfully for me and remains one of the most entertaining Bond films in the series. Has some very memorable dialogue, characters and sequences. Sean Connery seems to be having a lot of fun here too- certainly compared to YOLT. I don't personally think it's THE best Bond film by any stretch, but it's up there.
The Spy Who Loved Me- IMHO, the best Bond film of the 70s by a country mile; not a great decade for true classics other than this. The humour is relatively toned down and well judged, Roger Moore gives one of his most focussed performances, the action set-pieces are superb and there's more depth than there was in YOLT which this is seen as a rewrite of. Certainly, the relationship between Bond and Agent Triple X/Amya Amasova is one of the best of the series for me.
Casino Royale- a reaction against the soulless bombast of the lion's share of the Brosnan era. Shows it simply was not necessary for big action setpieces every few minutes, and this relies heavily on plot and tension- the card game and the scene where Bond is poisoned has more tension than most action scenes in the Brosnan era, IMHO. Yet for all that, the action scenes featured are the best I've seen in the series for years. And Daniel Craig has brought back a real sense of danger to the role.
WRONG:
Diamonds Are Forever; this is entertaining for me, but it IS daft and perhaps the daftest Bond film up to that point, maybe it still is the campiest as well. The villains are total figures of fun, the dialogue is endlessly jokey and by and large, the opening PTS and the lift fight aside, there's little one can take seriously here. Sean shows his age here too. For me, the worst thing about it is that it probably did better than OHMSS, despite being not a patch on that, for me at least. It seemed to set the tone for the next few films, reaching a nadir with...
The Man With The Golden Gun- Well now we come to the film I consider to be the worst of the whole series. Struggling to say positives, only Christopher Lee and Roger Moore in the first half stand out. Otherwise, this seems rushed and poorly done in every respect. The humour is often pure slapstick and also often painfully unfunny, the action scenes are utterly mechanical (sorry to say, I think the end showdown is pathetic), Mary Goodnight is a fairly weak Bond girl and the Kung Fu scene I find rather cringeworthy. The positive about this was that Guy Hamilton was never called back, as his lighter touch was going way overboard for my taste.
A View To A Kill- well really, there are no two ways about it, Roger IS too old for the role by now. After the two previous excellent films, he could have gone out on a high, but there's something that feels second hand about this film. There are some good performances, but it's all a bit 'been there done that'. Some unfortunate comedy creeps its way in again- the 'California Girls' scene being my least favourite scene in any Bond film ever- and really, although I have a curious affection for some of the film, there's no question that a change was badly needed.
Licence To Kill- I do feel this is a brave attempt to update the series myself, but it's not quite as successful as it could have been, to be honest. I would definitely agree with the film's detractors that it has a dated feel now- a la Miami Vice/Scarface- and the fact that Bond is gone rogue doesn't endear it to some fans. The middle of the film for me sags very badly, the casino sequence being a particularly bad offender where the blistering pace of the previous hour or so just stops dead.
Die Another Day- this is in the 'time for a change' category, and probably that change was needed more than any other time in Bond history. There's a surfeit of truly cringeworthy innuendos, continuity references, poor performances, CGI, bombastic action setpieces that all try to paper over the cracks and fail badly. And IMHO, Madonna's theme tune was quite easily THE poorest Bond theme ever.
That's my take on it anyway...;)
Wrong: bad script/director.
Interesting that some of the same people wrote/directed "right" and "wrong" Bonds. So what else is in the mix then? Timing: the first three had all personnel involved with the productions in perfect form, and produced films that were perfectly matched to their respective eras--audiences went for them bigtime. I'd also argue each paved new Bond ground, so the excitement--for the fimmakers (just guessing) as well as the audience (that's pretty clear, lol)--of capturing Bond lightning in a bottle as it were elevated the work that went into them (guessing again), and the enjoyment gotten from them (unless folks were lining up to flagellate themselves with these 3 films, lol, safe bet here IMO). And they've lasted, the first two at least, both GF and TSWLM are regularly regarded as "classics," which IMHO is correct. Likely CR will be viewed that way as well, but that's projection on my part, and we'll have to wait many years for posterity's vote.
The "wrong" Bonds listed can perhaps be best summed up with, not every idea you have is a good one...oh well.
Sigh. DAD Ive always liked the first half of, very well paced and treated very seriously. It was also extremely well directed. Also, you'll find most of the people on the board like the first half. Then it goes to Iceland, and turns to crap. Just had to stick a defense of the movie in there.
As for movies being good or bad - thats always a matter of opinion. Personally, I hate Thunderball and the Spy who loved me; both are deemed classics. I also think that LTK and TLD were classics, yet many others out there dont. I also believe that any of the Brosnans will look good after a couple of years, despite him being a great Bond.
Every movie has it's flaws, however what one person may deem an unforgivable flaw another may decree that it makes the movie special.
Right with: GF and TSWLM are big-budget, shiny, wonderful, somewhat over-the-top w/o being nauseous about it and endear close to home because of how BIG and SPECTACULAR they are. AVTAK fits into this category too, but it's a bit more watered down, dark and serious than the previous two.
Wrong with: DAF is the most campiest Bond films ever, the only one topping it is the unofficial 1967 CR, TMWTGG is so subpar in everything, Lee is the only beacon of light in this fiasco, LTK is a boring, cheap and poorly-acted mess and DAD is a bad film with numerous OTT moments that become so tedious after awhile that you start saying "What are they going to rip off next?", and IMO CR now is bad.
That is all.
As for Casino Royale - best out of all 21.
(also - being all grammar, DAF was not the "most campiest - it was either the campiest, or the most camp. But thats just me looking to be difficult)
Goldfinger: The single greatest Bond film of all time IMO. Every element of it (the acting, the script, the music, the plot, the villains, the Bond girls etc...) were each brilliant and came together in a spectacular way to create IMO the best of the Bonds. Although FRWL was also IMO a perfect Bond films, I would argue that the series really reached perfection with GF.
The Spy Who Loved Me: The best non-Connery Bond film of all time IMO, this is IMO the last truly great Bond film. Moore delivered arguably his best ever performance, the script was superb, the villains were great, the Bond girls wee terrific, while the film itself is IMO one of only six Bond films (along with DN-TB and OHMSS) which surpass the Bond series. I think it is an absolute Bondian masterpiece.
Wrong-
The Man With The Golden Gun: It has a fantastic concept (master spy goes up against master asassin) but the execution is shocking. There are some good elements (Lee's performance, the treatment of the women which demonstrated Bond's ruthlessness, some of the dialogue) but all-in-all the film is completely disappointing.
A View To A Kill: The worst Bond film of all time, there is really nothing about this film that I like. I especially dislike that this horror is basically a remake of GF.
Licence To Kill: It could have been great, if the script had been improved and if Dalton (who IMO delivered the worst ever Bond performance) had been replaced. As it is, there are only three Bond films (AVTAK, TLD and DAD) which I dislike more.
Die Another Day: I hate everything about this film. This includes the first half, which IMO was almost as bad as the horrific second half. The only three things I like about this film are the fencing fight, the 'say goodbye to him for us' line and Brosnan's performance.
Other-
Diamonds Are Forever: This isn't a great film (or even a particularly good film) but nor is it IMO a terrible film. I think, that while its faults are well known, it has some great things going for it; the elevator fight, some of the dialogue, the final scene involving Wint + Kidd, Wint + Kidd themselves, Bambi + Thumper, and above all Connery's performance which I consider to be his best performance since TB and among the very greatest Bond performances of all time.
Casino Royale: I like this film, but I don't love it. Although I think it's vastly superior to DAD, I don't consider it to be a masterpiece and, when I do finally rank it, it'll be in my top 15, but not in my top 10. What I do like about it however, are Dench's performance, the final scene, the poker sequences, some of the action scenes and the concept. What I dislike about it are the script, the reboot, the casting of Dench, Eva Green (one of the all-time worst ever Bond girls IMO) and Craig himself. I like it, having seen it twice, but I consider it to be vastly overrated.
Goldfinger: Sean Connery in his prime, the first complete score by Barry, lots of memorable scenes, a great villain, humour without going over the top, beautiful Shirley Eaton in her underwear, a good pace, tight direction etc. etc.
The Spy Who Loved Me: A perfect vehicle for Roger Moore. That's really about it-- if you can tolerate his Bond, then this movie's a masterpiece.
Casino Royale: Daniel Craig is easily the best Bond since Connery and is the only fellow other than Connery and Lazenby who (to me) was believable in the role. As for the film itself, it was the perfect kick back to reality for a series that, as evidenced by DAD, needed to be put out of its misery and reincarnated. I really can't say enough about how awesome Craig was in this movie-- for the first time since I saw those old 60s films as a teen the 12-year old in me got excited and wanted to be that guy on the screen. The man possesses the right amount of toughness, screen magnetism and sex appeal to make the part and it's the first time since Connery that we've had someone who excelled equally in those three categories. I went to see the film a second time with a group of people-- men and women-- and they were all in awe of Daniel Craig (for different reasons)-- and that's just how it should be in a Bond movie. Even my mother, who has been a faithful Connery fan for 45 years, gave the nod to Craig. The script and score were also wonderful.
Diamonds Are Forever: I liked DAF-- not lots, but I wouldn't put it in the bad category.
The Man With The Golden Gun: It was half-assed, way too light, had a terrible Bond girl, lacked in its leading man someone who could effectively exploit the martial arts possibilities of the far-eastern setting. Also: While I found JW Pepper tolerable in LALD his reappearance in TMWTGG was idiotic. And that stupid slide whistle ruining what is easily one of the top 5 stunts of the series (apparently Barry has stated that that was one of the biggest regrets of his career).
A View To A Kill: Roger was waaaay too old.
Licence To kill: Dalton, to me, didn't have what it took (physical toughness, sex appeal, "coolness", screen magnetism etc.) to be Bond.
Die Another Day: Everything was wrong with DAD.
That's so exactiness of you.
I agree Fish1941, and also don't understand why so many people think TSWLM was so great. I certainly don't. But I hate disco, so that figures. The soundtrack is abysmal, and I don't like the stupid comic book villains (you can apply that to Goldfinger as well as TSWLM).