Good Action film, but everyone agrees with me its just not Bond!!!
Everyone?...hmm...
Not to worry about opening a can of worms, though. If everyone agrees with you, it's not a very controversial position, is it?
By the way...welcome to AJB!
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Tee HeeCBT Headquarters: Chicago, ILPosts: 917MI6 Agent
I think he was referring to his friends and family, those who have seen the film and discussed it with him. I must say, a very astute bunch!
Welcome aboard wollastonblue, but do be careful with your pronouns from now on. )
And Loeffs, you're awfully defensive for a man living in a world that largely backs Craig and enjoys CR. You're a member of the comfortable majority yet still are quite hostile...
Why are you protecting a man and a film that arguably need no protection? Will you not rest until you've eliminated all of Craig's detractors? "I wish you luck my friend, but I must warn you: stopping us will be difficult; you cannot just intimidate us. You will have to find a different way; you may have to kill us... Does this discourage you?"
"My acting range? Left eyebrow raised, right eyebrow raised..."
I think he was referring to his friends and family, those who have seen the film and discussed it with him. I must say, a very astute bunch!
Welcome aboard wollastonblue, but do be careful with your pronouns from now on. )
And Loeffs, you're awfully defensive for a man living in a world that largely backs Craig and enjoys CR. You're a member of the comfortable majority yet still are quite hostile...
Why are you protecting a man and a film that arguably need no protection? Will you not rest until you've eliminated all of Craig's detractors? "I wish you luck my friend, but I must warn you: stopping us will be difficult; you cannot just intimidate us. You will have to find a different way; you may have to kill us... Does this discourage you?"
Just tell me where he is.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Loeffs, you're awfully defensive for a man living in a world that largely backs Craig and enjoys CR. You're a member of the comfortable majority yet still are quite hostile...
Defensive? Hostile?
?:) 8-)
Merely confused...or is it bemused...?
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Tee HeeCBT Headquarters: Chicago, ILPosts: 917MI6 Agent
Good Action film, but everyone agrees with me its just not Bond!!!
Everyone?...hmm...
Exactly. What exactly does "everyone" define Bond as?
I think the term "Good Action film but just not Bond" would be a good way to describe the films of the Brosnan era. However, the last 90 minutes of CR makes for the most faithful-to-Fleming Bond cinema since the Dalton era so I don't quite get how "it's just not Bond".?:)
Referring to Casino Royale not being a Bond Film. We have been led into a world of Gadgets, women (emphasis on the plural), quick witted humour, fast cars, etc. etc. etc.
Casino Royale did not deliver to the true Bond Formula. DCs portrayal of Bond was not the sophisticated, and suave that Fleming wrote.
I don't much care for CR, wollastonblue, but it's got high ratings and excellent reviews on the imdb. What is the Bond formula exactly? I mean FRWL is very different to MR, yet would you say they are both Bond films? CR is not so different to FRWL, and DAD not so different in formula to MR.
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
LazenbyThe upper reaches of the AmazoPosts: 606MI6 Agent
DCs portrayal of Bond was not the sophisticated, and suave that Fleming wrote.
I'm no authority on Fleming by any means, but no less a figure than Raymond Benson has stated that Craig provided the most accurate portrayal of Fleming's Bond to date. What you seem to be objecting to here is that Craig wasn't Connery.
Sorry but it is the worst bond film ever!!
)
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
DCs portrayal of Bond was not the sophisticated, and suave that Fleming wrote.
I'm no authority on Fleming by any means, but no less a figure than Raymond Benson has stated that Craig provided the most accurate portrayal of Fleming's Bond to date. What you seem to be objecting to here is that Craig wasn't Connery.
Sorry but it is the worst bond film ever!!
)
Exactly, Laz {[] This is, yet again, a Craig thing...which is fine. Everyone has a least favourite Bond actor.
craigisnotbond (ohyesheis)
:v
But if one is to say that CR isn't a Bond film, one might as well assert that its sister film, OHMSS, isn't a Bond film either, since in that classic we also have a pronounced departure from the Precious Classic Formula, a different actor wearing the tux, and a more kinetic style of physical action than that which characterizes most of the other entries (in my opinion).
Fast cars---check, although (as in Fleming's book!) Bond doesn't do much more than crash it spectacularly---one of the coolest scenes in the series, IMRO. Women (as in plural)---check. I counted two, Solange and Vesper :x Humour---check, with a welcome grounding in character and situation rather than simply tossed-off one-liners. Gadgets---well, you've got me there, but the ubiquitous nature of gadgets in our everyday lives mitigates this deficiency, as far as I'm concerned.
Act 2 of the film is astoundingly close to Fleming's book, when compared to Eon's usual standard of 'adaptation,' post-1970... |)
The suaveness and sophistication argument has been previously flogged with all of the gleeful abandon usually afforded dead horses, but I'll say (again) that this likely figures into the character arc through which Craig's Bond will move...and even if it doesn't, his toughness mirrors that of his literary counterpart to the extent that, personally, I won't mind at all B-)
Wollastonblue, I'm not attempting to change your mind, as nearly two years among the best Bond minds on the internet has shown me that such minds don't generally 'change'---and, regardless of what my deluded colleague, Tee Hee, would have you believe, I'm not being 'defensive' or hostile---I respect your opinion, and I've encountered many variations of it since Craig's casting was announced. We just have different ideas of how the best Bond films come off, that's all.
You'll have a lot of fun on AJB, and we're glad to have you -{
Long Live James Bond! :007)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Harry Palmer Somewhere in the past ...Posts: 325MI6 Agent
edited May 2007
Without wanting to turn this into an "Apology for Casino Royale" topic, I just want to say that I couldnt disagree more with wollastonblue. For starters I defy anyone to take FRWL, YOLT, TMWTGG, MR, OP, LTK and TWINE (to choose a random 1/3 of the films) throw them into a food processor and distil a homogeneous formula from the lot.
In addition, I thought the strength of the movie was that it actually contributed something to the Bond character and the Bond mythology.
Moreover, it was frankly funnier (or, if you like, wittier) than anything Brosnan did. The cut to Craig's impressed face after Mathis first introduced himself was priceless. The famous "Do I look like I give a damn" and "Does it look like we need the money" were a lot more humorous, if you ask me, than Bond fighting with a midget or Jinx saying the painfully predictable "she got the point"; I wouldn't hesitate to put those lines in the same league as Connery's "No, I'm just looking"
Bond girls: this is hardly Bond at his most monogamous (cf. The Living Daylights).
Gadgets: frankly, better off without them.
As for giving my two-cents on the worst Bond film ever, I'd have to go for LLD. Just a mess of an action movie, and way too period-specific.
Moreover, it was frankly funnier (or, if you like, wittier) than anything Brosnan did. The cut to Craig's impressed face after Mathis first introduced himself was priceless. The famous "Do I look like I give a damn" and "Does it look like we need the money" were a lot more humorous, if you ask me, than Bond fighting with a midget or Jinx saying the painfully predictable "she got the point"; I wouldn't hesitate to put those lines in the same league as Connery's "No, I'm just looking"
I disagree. That is, while I hated the dialogue in DAD, I think the dialogue in GE and TWINE were vastly superior to the dialogue in CR. I think that the lines in TWINE's PTS ('If you can't trust a Swiss banker, then what's the world come to?') were wittier than the dialogue in CR, and while I wouldn't describe it as wittier, I do think that lines such as the 'I thought Christmas comes only once a year' line in TWINE were funnier. I do agree with you that the 'Do I look like I give a damn' line (as well as the 'that last hand nearly killed me') were pretty good. However, while there are several Brosnan lines which I loved and which IMO were among the greatest Bond lines of all time, I can not say the same about CR.
Don't get me wrong. I think that CR is much funnier than the gloomy TLD or LTK (and DAD as well), however much to my disappointment, I found CR to be noticably and (it seemed to me) deliberately unfunny.
Some people feel that gadgets are no longer needed, however I disagree. I think there is no reason why a clever or creative gadget can't be used. I hated the invisible car in DAD, however I loved the X-ray gadgets in TWINE. I personally was disappointed with the low number and quality of gadgets in CR.
As for giving my two-cents on the worst Bond film ever, I'd have to go for LLD. Just a mess of an action movie, and way too period-specific.
How come? I love this film, however while I understand that some people don't, I don't see why one would hate it.
"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
Tee HeeCBT Headquarters: Chicago, ILPosts: 917MI6 Agent
All right, I'll let you get away with that, considering I called you hostile. )
You're right, everyone does have a least favorite Bond actor. And although Craig was indeed a huge factor in my disappointment with CR, I can't blame him entirely. The film itself simply didn't allow him to be "Bond." And perhaps that was intentional, as you've said, as part of the reboot. But if you are going to use that argument, wouldn't you have to agree that Craig was "unBondian" in CR? ?:)
I've never been a fan of the reboot. I don't need to see Bond's first days on the job. I don't need to see how, presumably, he became the man that he is today. I already know that he's an orphan and a womanizer, with a taste for vodka martinis. How he got there is inconsequential. Unfortunately these "beginning" films are popular today, and I guess I can't blame EON for cashing in. That's how the market works. But it saddens me that we can put a price on principle and tradition. The franchise wasn't in a lot of trouble after DAD, despite its many flaws. CR could have taken another direction other than the reboot. Why change a winning formula?
Despite my disappointments, the closing scene in CR has given me hope for the future.. I am confident that Daniel Craig will better capture the essence of Bond in his next two outings. Presuming that Bond starts wearing suits rather than camp shirts and leather jackets; presuming that greater emphasis is put on charisma and sophistication rather than six-pack abs and brute strength; and presuming that Bond starts acting rational rather than as a loose canon, I will be a happier camper.
In sum, reboot or not, Daniel Craig was not James Bond to me in CR. Hopefully, I’ll feel his presence more in Bond 22.
"My acting range? Left eyebrow raised, right eyebrow raised..."
-Roger Moore
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
You're right, everyone does have a least favorite Bond actor. And although Craig was indeed a huge factor in my disappointment with CR, I can't blame him entirely. The film itself simply didn't allow him to be "Bond." And perhaps that was intentional, as you've said, as part of the reboot. But if you are going to use that argument, wouldn't you have to agree that Craig was "unBondian" in CR? ?:)
I wouldn't...only because my notion of Bond is as much informed (if not moreso) by the literary as by the cinematic. Fleming's Bond wasn't nearly as dandified---in fact, he wasn't dandified at all. He was a tough guy who occasionally found himself in elegant/glamourous circumstances---and, even more often, found himself captured (and brutally mistreated) at the hands of the villain du jour. Based upon what I saw in CR, Craig seems ably poised to bring more of this particular Bondian aspect to light :007)
I've never been a fan of the reboot. I don't need to see Bond's first days on the job. I don't need to see how, presumably, he became the man that he is today. I already know that he's an orphan and a womanizer, with a taste for vodka martinis. How he got there is inconsequential. Unfortunately these "beginning" films are popular today, and I guess I can't blame EON for cashing in. That's how the market works. But it saddens me that we can put a price on principle and tradition. The franchise wasn't in a lot of trouble after DAD, despite its many flaws. CR could have taken another direction other than the reboot. Why change a winning formula?
A fair question...but IMRO it's a sound strategic move which provides an opportunity to see an aspect of the character which has remained---amazingly and frustratingly---unexplored on the big screen until the 21st Century. I actually don't see any principles being violated here; in fact, I see more important principles and traditions being upheld.
Despite my disappointments, the closing scene in CR has given me hope for the future.. I am confident that Daniel Craig will better capture the essence of Bond in his next two outings. Presuming that Bond starts wearing suits rather than camp shirts and leather jackets; presuming that greater emphasis is put on charisma and sophistication rather than six-pack abs and brute strength; and presuming that Bond starts acting rational rather than as a loose canon, I will be a happier camper.
In sum, reboot or not, Daniel Craig was not James Bond to me in CR. Hopefully, I’ll feel his presence more in Bond 22.
Well, as you seem to like your James Bond to be pushing sixty, forever in formal wear and mostly unaffected by anything that happens to him, I've a feeling you're more likely to be disappointed by #22 than I am The 1970s-80s were your Golden Era...Mine might be just beginning... B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Tee HeeCBT Headquarters: Chicago, ILPosts: 917MI6 Agent
Moreover, it was frankly funnier (or, if you like, wittier) than anything Brosnan did. The cut to Craig's impressed face after Mathis first introduced himself was priceless. The famous "Do I look like I give a damn" and "Does it look like we need the money" were a lot more humorous, if you ask me, than Bond fighting with a midget or Jinx saying the painfully predictable "she got the point"; I wouldn't hesitate to put those lines in the same league as Connery's "No, I'm just looking"
Like Dan, I have to disagree, except for the torture scene which I thought had some very funny lines, I found CR to be rather unfunny. That doesn't make it bad, I just believe the writers and producers were not looking for a funny Bond. The intent was for a more serious Bond, which they delivered.
I can usually find something to praise in every one of the James Bond films, but even so,there are a certain number that I consider to be incredible misfires--not particularly good examples of the series.I tend to value a movie's storyline over any action or explosions,so when a Bond film turns out to be just a loosely connected series of stunts--no matter how well arranged and impressive they might be--I'll still find those films wanting.Eon's never set out to make a disappointing motion picture, and they've all done well at the boxoffice, but I don't find all of them as entertaining as they should be.
With that,here's my list:
1)A View to a Kill-Terrible screenplay that even the man who wrote it(Eon veteran Richard Maibaum) said was a mistake-a failure.Ridiculously predictable and surprisingly familiar TV movie plot(opening the San Andreas fault),with cardboard characters performed by an unfortunate cast.There's a gorgeous leading lady who's allegedly a scientist, but who is so dense she doesn't notice when an airship is just above her...And Christopher Walken phones in his performance in a one-dimensional role.That said,this thing would make a great Dean Martin Matt Helm movie-just insert Dino in place of Roger,throw in some songs and Roger C.Carmel as the bad guy.The only really redeeming moments in this for me are those with Sir Roger and Fiona Fullerton--because they have a terrific chemistry, and these scenes look and play like excepts from a much more entertaining 007 motion picture.
2)The Man With the Golden Gun-I like Christopher Lee as much as anyone, but I found the storyline to be an enormous disappointment.This one actually telegraphs it's climax in the PTS.The whole SOLEX agitator subplot is inept and entirely unnecessary(it was a last minute addition to the film in a misguided effort to be topical).Scaramanga should've put a bullet between the insufferable Nick Nack's eyes in their first scene together.And then done the same to J.W.Pepper.There's no sense of danger whatsoever, no suspense,and it seems to be a much longer movie than it really is.
3)You Only Live Twice-The first James Bond film to actually look like something from one of the series' competitors.Plotted and played more like a Flint movie(in fact,this plotline mirrors that of Our Man Flint in a few places), or one of the many spy films made in Italy and Germany at the height of Bondmania.Could even be a Dean Martin Matt Helm movie-with only a few minor alterations.TVs are everywhere,rocketships swallow space capsules,and there's an incompetent and remarkably silly villain with a hideout in a volcano that's "dormant"...until the climax.Well made technically and good looking, but ultimately empty and disappointing.Bears little resemblance to the Fleming novel,which I think has a superior storyline,although it--like the film--suggests that 007 can somehow pass himself off as Japanese.
4)Live and Let Die-Eon's answer to the Blaxploitation films of the 70s.Good-looking but with an unfortunate storyline only vaguely resembling the novel's.In fairness at the time it was made, that was probably the only way it could ever reach the screen.Primarily a chase movie with a few sequences inspired by some of the earlier films along with one or two from the novel.At the climax, the villain is inflated like a balloon and explodes like one.Hilarious.Then there's J.W.Pepper...
5)Diamonds Are Forever-A fairly cynical movie based upon the theory that the only element needed to make a Bond film a success is the presence of Sean Connery.Connery's my favorite Bond, but this isn't one of his better films.Not the best storyline of the series,although pretty much everything conceivable is thrown at the screen, and the excellent Charles Gray is reduced to playing Blofeld(who,along with SPECTRE, never appears in the novel) in drag.Everybody in the movie seems to be having a good time, but I'm not sure all audience members did.
I don't think 007 should ever visit a city on the ocean floor or go into outer space, but somehow I've still managed to enjoy The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker(but I'm not a Jaws fan).Maybe it's their wonderfully colorful locales, or perhaps it's the sense that in these two films, everyone takes their outrageousness a bit more seriously than in the other movies I've named--and that redeems them for me.
Great post, WG. Excellent points about these alsoran Bonds, although I do like LALD a lot, like TND (and TSWLM) it's just a fun one to watch. FYEO, OP and MR would go on that list for me, Bond fending off a bobby soxer, in an alligator/as a clown, and in space just didn't work for me; also the first two seem over-plotted while the third hardly has any. The 70s and 80s were pretty hit-and-miss IMO, with more misses (8) than hits (2), and even the two hits were more fun movies with Bond in them than good solid Bond films. Then again, the rearscreen projection in the car chase in DN drives some folks batty, different strokes.
SB_DiamondNorth Miami Beach, FLPosts: 126MI6 Agent
I think that DAD was definitely the worst Bond film of all time. It was so over the top and the acting was a bit too cheesy for my taste. It was on the borderline of being campy. And Halle Berry as a Bond girl? Just because she is pretty doesn't mean she should be a Bond girl, anyone who does Catwoman after winning an Oscar should have there career highlights spoon fed to them.
Die Another Day by a country mile. This film is so bad that, upon first watching, I had to shut the DVD off and pick it up another day. The CG was disgusting, the villains boring, the one liners deplorable, and the story was daft. Jinx was a completely worthless character done very poorly. The theme song was by far the worst of the series- I'd rather listen to someone scratching a rake on a tin shed endlessly. I refuse to ever watch this one again.
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
edited February 2009
Die Another Day
01. Poor song by Madonna
02. Presence of Jinx
03. Bad jokes/one-liners (Big bang theory, that's a mouthul etc)
04. 'Michael Bay'-style action scenes
05. Plot steales of DAF
06. Poor homages to previous Bond films
07. Invisible car
08. Jinx's "Yo mama" line
09. Poor direction (Camera zooming in-and-out all the time)
10. Bad CGI (tidal wave, plane etc)
DAF or DAD are the worst (I like AVTAK a lot more than most others on this site).
I propose that this QOS crap is currently my third worst ever and if I ever watch it again I might change my mind and rank it below the other two!
It's not bond..... no gadgets, no charisma from the Bond character, no memorable stunts, boring PTS the women don't really do it for me and the storyline is absolute drab. On top of all that the villain is just a bore. Now I've said all that, yes, i think QOS is going to go down as the worst ever Bond!
(P.s. It's not just a Craig rant because I loved CR)
Well some of us do like AVTAK! Moonraker 5 has QoS down as his worst. For me it just doesn't work but has elements I'd like to revisit, but other dealbreakers prevent me from paying to see it.
Otherwise DAD; it crashed the franchise. But I probably said that on this thread last year.
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Well some of us do like AVTAK! Moonraker 5 has QoS down as his worst.
It's not everyone's cup of tea, to be sure {[] Though I enjoyed the film quite a bit myself, I can completely empathize with anyone who didn't.
The very fact that AVTAK has so many fans proves just how diverse the Bondiverse has become: if you're on board with Bond driving the front half of a car through the streets of Paris, it seems anything can be embraced. If Glen had edited that scene with a buzzsaw, like Forster did with the opening car chase of QoS, who knows how it would have played? )
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Had the pleasure of purging DAD form my Bond collection at a garage sale. I sold it for $2.00 and feel like a thief for doing so. Thank goodness that film will no longer pollute my DVD player again.
Thankfully in a franchise which has lasted 47 years and 22 movies there have been only a few duds. I suppose this is why the franchise has lasted so long.
For me the weak ones are:
DAF - more like Flint than Bond.
AVTAK - tired movie tired actor.
DAD - one gadget to many with the invisible car.
But the all time gold plated olympic standard stinker has got to be Moonraker. Makes Austin Powers look gritty.
Comments
Everyone?...hmm...
Not to worry about opening a can of worms, though. If everyone agrees with you, it's not a very controversial position, is it?
By the way...welcome to AJB!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I think he was referring to his friends and family, those who have seen the film and discussed it with him. I must say, a very astute bunch!
Welcome aboard wollastonblue, but do be careful with your pronouns from now on.
And Loeffs, you're awfully defensive for a man living in a world that largely backs Craig and enjoys CR. You're a member of the comfortable majority yet still are quite hostile...
Why are you protecting a man and a film that arguably need no protection? Will you not rest until you've eliminated all of Craig's detractors? "I wish you luck my friend, but I must warn you: stopping us will be difficult; you cannot just intimidate us. You will have to find a different way; you may have to kill us... Does this discourage you?"
-Roger Moore
And as others have already said,welcome to AJB!
Just tell me where he is.
Defensive? Hostile?
?:) 8-)
Merely confused...or is it bemused...?
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Been watching OP and AVTAK again?
Strikes in the head right?
-Roger Moore
Exactly. What exactly does "everyone" define Bond as?
I think the term "Good Action film but just not Bond" would be a good way to describe the films of the Brosnan era. However, the last 90 minutes of CR makes for the most faithful-to-Fleming Bond cinema since the Dalton era so I don't quite get how "it's just not Bond".?:)
Casino Royale did not deliver to the true Bond Formula. DCs portrayal of Bond was not the sophisticated, and suave that Fleming wrote.
Sorry but it is the worst bond film ever!!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I'm no authority on Fleming by any means, but no less a figure than Raymond Benson has stated that Craig provided the most accurate portrayal of Fleming's Bond to date. What you seem to be objecting to here is that Craig wasn't Connery.
Exactly, Laz {[] This is, yet again, a Craig thing...which is fine. Everyone has a least favourite Bond actor.
:v
But if one is to say that CR isn't a Bond film, one might as well assert that its sister film, OHMSS, isn't a Bond film either, since in that classic we also have a pronounced departure from the Precious Classic Formula, a different actor wearing the tux, and a more kinetic style of physical action than that which characterizes most of the other entries (in my opinion).
Fast cars---check, although (as in Fleming's book!) Bond doesn't do much more than crash it spectacularly---one of the coolest scenes in the series, IMRO. Women (as in plural)---check. I counted two, Solange and Vesper :x Humour---check, with a welcome grounding in character and situation rather than simply tossed-off one-liners. Gadgets---well, you've got me there,
Act 2 of the film is astoundingly close to Fleming's book, when compared to Eon's usual standard of 'adaptation,' post-1970...
The suaveness and sophistication argument has been previously flogged with all of the gleeful abandon usually afforded dead horses, but I'll say (again) that this likely figures into the character arc through which Craig's Bond will move...and even if it doesn't, his toughness mirrors that of his literary counterpart to the extent that, personally, I won't mind at all B-)
Wollastonblue, I'm not attempting to change your mind, as nearly two years among the best Bond minds on the internet has shown me that such minds don't generally 'change'---and, regardless of what my deluded colleague, Tee Hee, would have you believe, I'm not being 'defensive' or hostile---I respect your opinion, and I've encountered many variations of it since Craig's casting was announced. We just have different ideas of how the best Bond films come off, that's all.
You'll have a lot of fun on AJB, and we're glad to have you -{
Long Live James Bond! :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
In addition, I thought the strength of the movie was that it actually contributed something to the Bond character and the Bond mythology.
Moreover, it was frankly funnier (or, if you like, wittier) than anything Brosnan did. The cut to Craig's impressed face after Mathis first introduced himself was priceless. The famous "Do I look like I give a damn" and "Does it look like we need the money" were a lot more humorous, if you ask me, than Bond fighting with a midget or Jinx saying the painfully predictable "she got the point"; I wouldn't hesitate to put those lines in the same league as Connery's "No, I'm just looking"
Bond girls: this is hardly Bond at his most monogamous (cf. The Living Daylights).
Gadgets: frankly, better off without them.
As for giving my two-cents on the worst Bond film ever, I'd have to go for LLD. Just a mess of an action movie, and way too period-specific.
Don't get me wrong. I think that CR is much funnier than the gloomy TLD or LTK (and DAD as well), however much to my disappointment, I found CR to be noticably and (it seemed to me) deliberately unfunny.
Some people feel that gadgets are no longer needed, however I disagree. I think there is no reason why a clever or creative gadget can't be used. I hated the invisible car in DAD, however I loved the X-ray gadgets in TWINE. I personally was disappointed with the low number and quality of gadgets in CR.
How come? I love this film, however while I understand that some people don't, I don't see why one would hate it.
All right, I'll let you get away with that, considering I called you hostile.
You're right, everyone does have a least favorite Bond actor. And although Craig was indeed a huge factor in my disappointment with CR, I can't blame him entirely. The film itself simply didn't allow him to be "Bond." And perhaps that was intentional, as you've said, as part of the reboot. But if you are going to use that argument, wouldn't you have to agree that Craig was "unBondian" in CR? ?:)
I've never been a fan of the reboot. I don't need to see Bond's first days on the job. I don't need to see how, presumably, he became the man that he is today. I already know that he's an orphan and a womanizer, with a taste for vodka martinis. How he got there is inconsequential. Unfortunately these "beginning" films are popular today, and I guess I can't blame EON for cashing in. That's how the market works. But it saddens me that we can put a price on principle and tradition. The franchise wasn't in a lot of trouble after DAD, despite its many flaws. CR could have taken another direction other than the reboot. Why change a winning formula?
Despite my disappointments, the closing scene in CR has given me hope for the future.. I am confident that Daniel Craig will better capture the essence of Bond in his next two outings. Presuming that Bond starts wearing suits rather than camp shirts and leather jackets; presuming that greater emphasis is put on charisma and sophistication rather than six-pack abs and brute strength; and presuming that Bond starts acting rational rather than as a loose canon, I will be a happier camper.
In sum, reboot or not, Daniel Craig was not James Bond to me in CR. Hopefully, I’ll feel his presence more in Bond 22.
-Roger Moore
Your indulgence is, as ever, greatly appreciated---if not owed outright :v
I wouldn't...only because my notion of Bond is as much informed (if not moreso) by the literary as by the cinematic. Fleming's Bond wasn't nearly as dandified---in fact, he wasn't dandified at all. He was a tough guy who occasionally found himself in elegant/glamourous circumstances---and, even more often, found himself captured (and brutally mistreated) at the hands of the villain du jour. Based upon what I saw in CR, Craig seems ably poised to bring more of this particular Bondian aspect to light :007)
A fair question...but IMRO it's a sound strategic move which provides an opportunity to see an aspect of the character which has remained---amazingly and frustratingly---unexplored on the big screen until the 21st Century. I actually don't see any principles being violated here; in fact, I see more important principles and traditions being upheld.
Here's to your happiness {[]
Well, as you seem to like your James Bond to be pushing sixty, forever in formal wear and mostly unaffected by anything that happens to him, I've a feeling you're more likely to be disappointed by #22 than I am
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Well I guess you'll find out for sure after we get out of the theater in 2008. {[]
-Roger Moore
Stupid farfetched plot, boring villain, uninteresting bond girl, jaws also got annoying. By far the worst
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
With that,here's my list:
1)A View to a Kill-Terrible screenplay that even the man who wrote it(Eon veteran Richard Maibaum) said was a mistake-a failure.Ridiculously predictable and surprisingly familiar TV movie plot(opening the San Andreas fault),with cardboard characters performed by an unfortunate cast.There's a gorgeous leading lady who's allegedly a scientist, but who is so dense she doesn't notice when an airship is just above her...And Christopher Walken phones in his performance in a one-dimensional role.That said,this thing would make a great Dean Martin Matt Helm movie-just insert Dino in place of Roger,throw in some songs and Roger C.Carmel as the bad guy.The only really redeeming moments in this for me are those with Sir Roger and Fiona Fullerton--because they have a terrific chemistry, and these scenes look and play like excepts from a much more entertaining 007 motion picture.
2)The Man With the Golden Gun-I like Christopher Lee as much as anyone, but I found the storyline to be an enormous disappointment.This one actually telegraphs it's climax in the PTS.The whole SOLEX agitator subplot is inept and entirely unnecessary(it was a last minute addition to the film in a misguided effort to be topical).Scaramanga should've put a bullet between the insufferable Nick Nack's eyes in their first scene together.And then done the same to J.W.Pepper.There's no sense of danger whatsoever, no suspense,and it seems to be a much longer movie than it really is.
3)You Only Live Twice-The first James Bond film to actually look like something from one of the series' competitors.Plotted and played more like a Flint movie(in fact,this plotline mirrors that of Our Man Flint in a few places), or one of the many spy films made in Italy and Germany at the height of Bondmania.Could even be a Dean Martin Matt Helm movie-with only a few minor alterations.TVs are everywhere,rocketships swallow space capsules,and there's an incompetent and remarkably silly villain with a hideout in a volcano that's "dormant"...until the climax.Well made technically and good looking, but ultimately empty and disappointing.Bears little resemblance to the Fleming novel,which I think has a superior storyline,although it--like the film--suggests that 007 can somehow pass himself off as Japanese.
4)Live and Let Die-Eon's answer to the Blaxploitation films of the 70s.Good-looking but with an unfortunate storyline only vaguely resembling the novel's.In fairness at the time it was made, that was probably the only way it could ever reach the screen.Primarily a chase movie with a few sequences inspired by some of the earlier films along with one or two from the novel.At the climax, the villain is inflated like a balloon and explodes like one.Hilarious.Then there's J.W.Pepper...
5)Diamonds Are Forever-A fairly cynical movie based upon the theory that the only element needed to make a Bond film a success is the presence of Sean Connery.Connery's my favorite Bond, but this isn't one of his better films.Not the best storyline of the series,although pretty much everything conceivable is thrown at the screen, and the excellent Charles Gray is reduced to playing Blofeld(who,along with SPECTRE, never appears in the novel) in drag.Everybody in the movie seems to be having a good time, but I'm not sure all audience members did.
I don't think 007 should ever visit a city on the ocean floor or go into outer space, but somehow I've still managed to enjoy The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker(but I'm not a Jaws fan).Maybe it's their wonderfully colorful locales, or perhaps it's the sense that in these two films, everyone takes their outrageousness a bit more seriously than in the other movies I've named--and that redeems them for me.
01. Poor song by Madonna
02. Presence of Jinx
03. Bad jokes/one-liners (Big bang theory, that's a mouthul etc)
04. 'Michael Bay'-style action scenes
05. Plot steales of DAF
06. Poor homages to previous Bond films
07. Invisible car
08. Jinx's "Yo mama" line
09. Poor direction (Camera zooming in-and-out all the time)
10. Bad CGI (tidal wave, plane etc)
I propose that this QOS crap is currently my third worst ever and if I ever watch it again I might change my mind and rank it below the other two!
It's not bond..... no gadgets, no charisma from the Bond character, no memorable stunts, boring PTS the women don't really do it for me and the storyline is absolute drab. On top of all that the villain is just a bore. Now I've said all that, yes, i think QOS is going to go down as the worst ever Bond!
(P.s. It's not just a Craig rant because I loved CR)
Otherwise DAD; it crashed the franchise. But I probably said that on this thread last year.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
It's not everyone's cup of tea, to be sure {[] Though I enjoyed the film quite a bit myself, I can completely empathize with anyone who didn't.
The very fact that AVTAK has so many fans proves just how diverse the Bondiverse has become: if you're on board with Bond driving the front half of a car through the streets of Paris, it seems anything can be embraced. If Glen had edited that scene with a buzzsaw, like Forster did with the opening car chase of QoS, who knows how it would have played?
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Carry on:)
For me the weak ones are:
DAF - more like Flint than Bond.
AVTAK - tired movie tired actor.
DAD - one gadget to many with the invisible car.
But the all time gold plated olympic standard stinker has got to be Moonraker. Makes Austin Powers look gritty.