Your 3 least favourite Bond films?
Bond fan from Oz
Posts: 88MI6 Agent
Which 3 Bond films do you consider the worst?
Mine are AVTAK, DAF and DAD.
Bond fan from Oz
Posts: 88MI6 Agent
Which 3 Bond films do you consider the worst?
Mine are AVTAK, DAF and DAD.
Comments
Mine are:
TMWTGG
LTK
NTTD (As a film it's beautifully made, satisfying and moving - I just can't get on with the ending though).
Mine are:
- DAF
- DAD
- NSNA (if it counts). TB of only EON movies count.
DAF
TMWTGG
SP
"- That is something to be afraid of."
In no particular order
Diamonds are Forever
On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
Spectre
🙊
DAF & TB 🙊
TB is my favourite and DAF is top ten... funny how we all have such different opinions 🍸
First thing to point out is that I'm only including EON produced films here. Secondly, I am still quite fond of at least two of the three. I feel a little sad actually that Guy Hamilton, who I massively respect as a director, has two films in my bottom three. But alas, the early 1970s is probably my least favourite period of Bond films even though there are no films I'd classify as really bad.
So here are my bottom three:
For a long time YOLT was actually at the bottom of my ranking, but over time I've developed a bit more appreciation for that film so it has risen a few places above the bottom 3.
True. But Bond fandom would be pretty boring if everyone had the same Top 25 lists. 😁
DAD
OHMSS
Moonraker
Pretty easy for me given my tastes:
For the classic Bonds - imo the first 25 years - it's slim pickings. Generally,
1) The lacklustre Man With The Golden Gun
2) OHMSS - but only because it had Lazenby, then an oddity, when we all wanted Connery or Moore.
3) Maybe the underwhelming For Your Eyes Only or, if allowed, the wholly disappointing Connery comeback, NSNA. Indeed, these last two began a terrible trend - faux serious Bond movies that were never quite as gripping or credible as they should have been, see The Living Daylights, GoldenEye, Die Another Day and almost all the Craig films. I can never quite suspend my disbelief. Agree with @TonyDP on these.
Sorry to say, post 1985 it's easier to pick the Bond films I really like, that said, tastes change in that I enjoyed License to Kill a lot when I saw it at the cinema over it's predecessor but never feel inclined to rewatch it when it comes round on telly, unlike TLD, likewise I preferred TWINE at the cinema but would be more likely to tune in for GE because it has more 'bumps' - little moments, set piece thrills and so on.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Haha, well written, even though I disagree 😀 does it mean you prefer Spectre, for sure the worst in the Craig era?
"- That is something to be afraid of."
Yeah, sorry only just coming round to how much folk hate Spectre but it's my fave Craig film - like watching a smooth confection - one of the Moore films that are just purely enjoyable. Love the dialogue in it and the look of those scenes in Italy and Austria in particular.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I actually find SPECTRE to be a very watchable movie for the most part. The Bond and Blofeld as foster brothers angle is of course silly, contrived and just hard to swallow; I viewed it as some misguided attempt at making the story feel more adult or relevant by trying to add in some family drama but it fails utterly in that regard. I also think Bond once again shows that idiotic streak he's been prone to during the Craig films when he decides to go to Blofeld's lair without any backup, no escape route, or even a plan for what exactly he's going to do when he gets there.
Beyond that though, I thought the film was beautifully shot, it has what is to me the best PTS of the Craig films and one of the better ones of the entire series. The scenes with Craig and Bellucci are entertaining; Craig actually manages to elicit some chemistry with a woman for a change and even succeeds in delivering a few witty one liners. Overall it comes the closest of all Craig's movies to that more classic Bond formula that I always favored and Sam Mendes managed to make a movie that to me by and large felt like a Bond movie, something I just can't say about most of the other ones.
I would have been perfectly happy if SPECTRE had been Craig's swan song, allowing him to go out on a high note.
I just about buy the idea of Bond going in without back up because the whole thing was compromised by seven eyes or whatever it was, so he couldn't call for help, plus there seemed a depressed feel to it all by then, just go in and see what happens... here the eerie Chilled Ibiza music did help imo, it set a tone and atmosphere. I can't really argue with those who say the train fight is daft with no extras around, not to mention the deserted Rome streets car chase - almost reminiscent of the ice chase in DAD you could argue, no other vehicles, almost a case for CGI insertions of other cars or the like if the Rome authorities wouldn't allow it while shooting - but thing is, I bought into Spectre by that point.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Sorry, TonyP. When I have chosen to quote someone, the new AJB never let's go og it unless you post. 😟
I just wanted to remind you all that Bond walking into situations without a plan is a time-honoured tradition going much further back than Craig.
Granted, the PTS is one of the very best. 😃 So is Hinx as a henchman. I just can't get over all the wasted potential... Rome as a location is just an empty darkness, as is London for the most part, Bellucci is seduced on the day of her husband's funeral, then dissapears after two more minutes without anything to do, even Waltz who is a terrific actor couldn't do anything to make us believe (or ignore) the whole foster brother bullshit... A "bond girl" with zero chemistry who constantly screams at Bond for no reason then ends up as his wife...For no reason... Sorry for the rant, I guess this thread is not about Spectre...
"- That is something to be afraid of."
all those empty sets in SPECTRE, I wonder why? like they couldnt decide how the extras should react so they just left them out?
in the Moore era, extras would do double takes and the one guy would check his bottle to see what he's been drinking. Thats the silly option.
In the first two Craigs, crowds would panic and innocent passersby would get hit by stray bullets. Thats the grim-n-gritty option.
SPECTRE its like they chose not to decide.
the choice to go with the empty sets reminds me of the Avengers (Steed n Peel, not Iron Man et al): they would avoid showing Steed in public spaces with passersby, because the contrast just drew attention to how ridiculous Steed was. So long as there were no normal people to compare him to, we could go with the fantasy that someone would really dress and act that way. Maybe EON is worried Bond is also secretly ridiculous?
Probably spent the extras budget on PTS and weren’t allowed any for the rest of the shooting…
1) Die Another Day is the worst - an embarrassing mess and colossal blunder of an "anniversary homage event" marred by heinous missteps at almost every turn. Infuriating dialogue, laughable effects, and the worst Bond Girl of all time.
2) A View to a Kill, a very tired and stale entry undone by a lacklustre Bond Girl, unremarkable set pieces, and a far too old Roger Moore.
3) I usually put Diamonds Are Forever in this spot - however, in my current rewatch, I enjoyed DAF rather a lot more than I normally do. Well, "rather a lot more" could be a little strong. I liked it well enough for its sparkling dialogue and easygoing feel. It still has a terrible third act, rubbish PTS, shoddy, cheap effects, a nincompoop of a Bond Girl, and a convoluted plot. I'm actually struggling to decide whether I should put The Man with the Golden Gun here instead. That one has an awful middle section with tons of head-scratching plot and character blunders, an atrocious reappearance by JW Pepper, a similarly idiotic, terribly characterised Bond Girl, and very poor fight scenes. Then again, it has Scaramanga. My my, what to choose?
As an aside, I recently saw Never Say Never Again for the first time. I've always resisted watching it, but to my great surprise, I liked it a good deal more than I'd ever expected. Fatima Blush was an excellent character, Connery gave a strong performance, and there were a lot of fun, compelling scenes. That said, the last third or so was truly horrible; a dull and dreary slog with among the most anticlimactic final "battle" sequences I've ever seen. It didn't have the prestigious feel or quality production value of the official Bonds, and that was more than evident throughout. Still, I liked it more than DAD (definitely) and maybe AVTAK.
A View to a Kill
Quantum of Solace
Octopussy.
No Bond film is bad, but these are just tedious by comparison to the rest, with Quantum of Solace a dour mess and Octopussy and A View to a Kill tired retreads of Goldfinger.
Well, this retread idea... I mean, you may as well say that Live and Let Die is a retread of Dr No, or YOLT a retread of Thunderball, or ditto Moonraker with The Spy Who Loved Me.
I mean, OP seems to have nothing much in common with GF as far as I can see - the dice crushing/golf ball squelching aside. Oh, alright, now I think of it, Bond blows up a plant in South American country in the pre-credits. He and an ally smoke out the villain early on at auction/Miami Beach Hotel... Octopussy and her Flying Circus used as accomplices.... Damn you GassyMan!
But it's disguised very well, different locations, different looking villains and different star of course. No Aston Martin gadgets and there's a Cold War Russian presence not in Goldfinger. Likewise, AVTAK has roughly the same plot only microchips in place of gold bars, but in both cases the big reveal is far on down the movie, so you have different locations and so on. Again, no Aston, no golf, no Switzerland, no Bassey.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
My bottom three Bond films would be:
The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
Die Another Day (2002)
Ha! Well, there are degrees of retread. JJ Abrams' first Star Trek movie is just a retread of Star Wars: A New Hope, but he stuck to enough of the TV series spirit and aesthetics that most people don't notice. But OP and AVTAK even have the whole superstrong, mute or near-mute non-White henchman/woman, too.
Then, again, the best Brosnan Bond for me -- Tomorrow Never Dies -- is also a Goldfinger retread, but it does a little better disguising its similarities. The superstrong henchman is White and talks quite a bit, the PTS is an arms bazaar and not just a plant, the Aston Martin chase uses a BMW in a parking garage, the villain doesn't paint his duplicitous SO gold but just has her killed, the female ally isn't bisexual (that we know of), and, of course, it's not the world's gold supply but information. The formula is there, but it's a bit less obvious.
BTW, not sure why all the hate for Diamonds are Forever. Sure, it's campy, but except for a letdown climactic battle, it has many of the classic Bond elements. I do notice that Bond movies that feature large segments in America often just aren't as good. Goldfinger is an exception, but it's smart enough to limit the America stuff to just the last part -- and then, we see relatively little of the actual country. Something about Bond operating outside of Europe or Asia just feels a letdown, perhaps because our McDonalds/shopping mall/NYC-Las Vegas/T-shirt and blue jeans culture just seems to lack the style and culture.
Honestly, I can't see any similarities between Goldfinger and Tomorrow Never Dies. I mean, okay, so Bond arrives in a hotel room where his lover is offed in revenge by the big villain. That's about it really. 'Bond blows villains' stuff up in the pre-credits...' it's not unique.
Diamonds... Pure enjoyment for me. Now, and only now, I can see that Connery really does look too old or I mean to say, overweight and maybe that shows up more the folk looking at the BluRay rather than some of us who saw it first time round on a 21in telly back in the late 70s. It is one of those Bonds that lack any, I mean any, of that militaristic flavour that some Bonds have, there's slim sense this Bond was ever in the services, he's morel than ever the travelling salesman with a gun and expense account which works for some fans and not others.
Of course, GF didn't actually have Connery in the US, he was kept to Pinewood. Odd, isn't it. The US has done so much to glamourise itself, quite humdrum plots can look great in a US setting while the 'road movie' for instance, I can't see it working in the UK or Europe (any examples of these, other than Sir Cliff's Summer Holiday? Maybe
Radio On) but in the US it's catnip. But set a Bond film in the US for part of it and it sometimes struggles, same with American Bond girls who I don't mind but they get a bad rap.Roger Moore 1927-2017
Megalomaniacal millionaire hopes to corner the market on an international commodity he is obsessed with (gold/computer chips/news and information) by rigging the system. Has a superstrong "foreign" henchman who fights Bond to the death in the climax. Bond teams with a female who at first is a rival and shows no interest, but they end up pooling their resources. China is involved in some way. Asians in some way are "bad guys" -- North Koreans and communist Chinese in Goldfinger; Chinese, Vietnamese, and Henry Gupta (and Asian Indian name) in Tomorrow Never Dies. There's a tricked out car chase in enemy territory where the various gadgets thwart the adversaries in sometimes comical ways. Bond humiliates the villain who retaliates by murdering the female paramour Bond has cuckolded him with, reinforcing the idea that both villains harbor a particular hatred for Bond because they want to be him. CIA friend acts as guardian angel and resource rather than partner. Bond and new girlfriend "hide" from ally forces so they can continue their romance at the end. Like I said, this one does a better job of taking the same formula and reworking it enough the similarities aren't as obvious.
For me it's mostly the silliness I dislike about DAF. Connerys age/fitness, Blofeld, the henchmen, the general 1970s look and feel, the soundtrack..., more so than the U.S. locations. In think Bond in the U.S. can work very well, I enjoy New York in LALD and think they should go back at some point. Perhaps it didn't have to be Las Vegas of all places though.
"- That is something to be afraid of."
the United States looking glamourous in Goldfinger
of course its a big country and theres other possible American locations that do not look like cheap postwar suburban sprawl. The Golden Gate bridge in A View to a Kill , for example, straight out of Hitchcock. But after all those old world Istanbul shots in the previous movie, the American location shots in Goldfinger are a step down in foreign exoticism.
I wonder if postwar sprawl was so new in 1964 that maybe the filmmakers thought that KFC outlet did look futuristic and exciting? this could be my 21st century bias passing judgement on urban planning mistakes of the past, but even then there must have been some other suburban strip malls that looked more visually exciting than that.
I don't think they were trying to be exotic or futuristic at all. The United States, in my opinion, has never been portrayed that way in any Bond film, the closest being, perhaps ironically, Diamonds are Forever, where Las Vegas was portrayed as a kind of adult amusement park that could not be found anywhere else. But with rare exception, the U.S. has been portrayed a violent and rather gaudy, lowbrow country whose charm is perhaps more about its lack of high culture.
As far as Goldfinger goes, I always thought Kentucky Fried Chicken was chosen merely to establish that they were, indeed, in Kentucky and near Fort Knox. One of America's great (or not so great) contributions to the world is the invention of fast food. So, to me, a fast food restaurant with an iconic logo was a goldmine of shorthand that Bond was in America.