and so I'll just say that IMO the Brosnan films were only 25% dreck.
But Dan, given that Pierce made twice as many Bond films as Dalton, shouldn't we double the percentage of dreck as well. So that's 50% then.
You could. ) But then we will have to begin a discussion on the types of dreck; Brosnan dreck verses Dalton dreck. :v
(Plus if I believe that both of Dalton's films were dreck, that would be 100% which would balance out neatly against Brosnan's 50%. )
"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 have a lot of time for Rogs' last film and get annoyed about those who bash it and him.
Secret agents arent meant to be sparkling young things. They eventually become cunning old men who know their way around the espionage world. I rather like the fact that an oldie is moving his way aruond the Zorin case. He has got thirty years experience to call on and Moore has an old pros grace about him.
Also AVTAK has that touch of epic about it (something TWINE and DAD try but dont succeed) with sweeping views of French chateaus and the Golden Gate Bridge - it just says what it is - a Roger Moore Bond film where everything is implausible and larger then life. And the villains are fab..
Compare this with the Brosnan where the implausible is not carried off with panache but remains implausible - I was about to say crap but I caught myself.
True, although to be fair, there seems lately to be only so much one can talk about on this site. When the next Bond film is released, those who are passionately anti/pro-Dalton will find something else to argue about.
Other then repeating, ad nauseum, how poor Dalton's films are, You can't find anything to discuss?
Other then repeating, ad nauseum, how poor Dalton's films are, You can't find anything to discuss?
8-) (whatever, man)
Alex, I was only kidding. You don't have to take it so seriously.
Plus, it's not as if only JFF and I talk about the same thing over and over. The last few people on this thread have produced the same opinions on Brosnan and Dalton many times before.
"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
Naming Bond 20 Die Another Day and inserting the title into the film the way they did. That IMO was incredibly daft.
"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
Surely the daftest decision involves Roger Moore baking a quiche in AVTAK. At least they didn't have him following it up with a creme brulee for dessert.
) ) ... That was an appalling decision like so many during the Moore era. Double take pigeons, Jaws becoming a comic character and falling in love in MR and my all time worst, Sheriff JW Pepper. It was bad enough he was in one film but to bring him back for a second !!!!!
I'm also going to add putting Christopher Walken in such a dire film as AVTAK. What a waste of such a terrific actor. He did quite well with Zorin, but in the right film Walken could have been a truly memorable and sinister villain.
I'm also going to add putting Christopher Walken in such a dire film as AVTAK. What a waste of such a terrific actor. He did quite well with Zorin, but in the right film Walken could have been a truly memorable and sinister villain.
Walken was good in AVTAK, but I agree. In a more serious Bond film he could have been terrifying.
or "Effective immediately, your Licence to Kill has been revoked!"
You didn't like them? ?:)
"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
or "Effective immediately, your Licence to Kill has been revoked!"
You didn't like them? ?:)
I was joking about the last two, as they obviously werent just thrown into the movies like "That's my little Octopussy" and "What a view... to a kill!"
In the Empire magazine special on Bond they did last year or the year before it might have been, they listed five of the worst moves they ever made in the 007 film franchise. Jaws' girlfriend, the invisible car from DAD and Bond going rogue in LTK were all in there. I acknowledge that the latter was a brave move by the producers. It just didn't bode well for the cinematic 007.
In the Empire magazine special on Bond they did last year or the year before it might have been, they listed five of the worst moves they ever made in the 007 film franchise. Jaws' girlfriend, the invisible car from DAD and Bond going rogue in LTK were all in there. I acknowledge that the latter was a brave move by the producers. It just didn't bode well for the cinematic 007.
I kinda like the invisible car, I have to say...especially in light of the fact that an issue of Wired about 12 months ago had an 'invisible coat' that used a similar ideal...but didn't work as well!!
I always thought the 'Other guy' line that Lazenby spouted belittled his opportunity to be the new Bond, and it still irks me.. but someone earlier mentioned the fact that Lazenby wasn't in DAF...now THAT was a stupid decision!! Thinking about it now it seems as though the script would have fitted him better than Connery!!
Surely the daftest decision involves Roger Moore baking a quiche in AVTAK. At least they didn't have him following it up with a creme brulee for dessert.
That's why Blofeld offered to buy him a delicatessen - in stainless steel!
The
or "That must have scared the Living Daylights out of her."
That was straight out of the book.
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
There's atleast one flaw per bond film because none are perfect (Except GE) but in my opinion it was the CR Re-boot. I may have said that I recently had a change of heart but I'd still rather it be part of the same bond series we know and love.
LazenbyThe upper reaches of the AmazoPosts: 606MI6 Agent
There's atleast one flaw per bond film because none are perfect (Except GE) but in my opinion it was the CR Re-boot.
Given that 1) CR was the most commercially and critically successful Bond film since the 60s and that 2) it got a whole new generation who previously didn't care less about Bond suddenly very interested in the franchise...on what ground could you consider the reboot "daft". You might personally regret the decision, but given the result I don't see how you can justifiably knock them for it.
I may have said that I recently had a change of heart but I'd still rather it be part of the same bond series we know and love.
That Bond series was dead in the water with DAD (perhaps sooner)...the reboot was exactly what was needed. Besides, if anything CR was a journey back to the Bond (of the 60s) that some of us know and love above all.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
There's atleast one flaw per bond film because none are perfect (Except GE)
Well, at least that places your opinion in context, Sweepy {[]
I'm with Laz, re: CR. It was a lot of things---bold and successful being merely two of them---but I wouldn't include 'daft' in my list. Most Cinematic Bond Traditionalists will persist in disliking CR because of its deliberate move away from the Bonds of the recent past, but many of us, the Flemingists and the Centrists, feel very good about the current health of 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
Given that 1) CR was the most commercially and critically successful Bond film since the 60s and that 2) it got a whole new generation who previously didn't care less about Bond suddenly very interested in the franchise...on what ground could you consider the reboot "daft". You might personally regret the decision, but given the result I don't see how you can justifiably knock them for it.
I can't speak for Sweepy the Cat, but I would imagine that he was referring to the quality of the film. From a commercial point of view, and in terms of bringing new fans to the series, I agree with you that CR was certainly not daft. However in terms of its quality (which is subjective) I don't think that making CR was among the best decisions the producers ever made. However, as I noted, this is subjective, and so I guess it depends on what one thinks of CR.
That Bond series was dead in the water with DAD (perhaps sooner)...the reboot was exactly what was needed.
I don't agree. DAD was terrible, but why throw the baby out with the bath water? I don't believe that the reboot was needed, bur furthermore, if we had to have a reboot (which is completely debatable) why cast Judy Dench? People say tha she was a familiar face, but I think it just messes up the continuity. Plus, of the $600 million that CR made, how much of it was really due to the casting of Dench?
Besides, if anything CR was a journey back to the Bond (of the 60s) that some of us know and love above all.
Perhaps for some (or many) people, but when I watch CR, I don't see the 60's, as IMO the Brosnan years were closer to the 60's than CR.
"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 don't agree. DAD was terrible, but why throw the baby out with the bath water? I don't believe that the reboot was needed, bur furthermore, if we had to have a reboot (which is completely debatable) why cast Judy Dench? People say tha she was a familiar face, but I think it just messes up the continuity. Plus, of the $600 million that CR made, how much of it was really due to the casting of Dench?
I agree, if it was a reboot, wouldn't M be a male again? I have never liked Judi Dench as M. M was a male in the books and M should be a male in the movies. They just put her in there so there would be more stars in the movie to make money. But like you said Dan, how much could they have possible made by putting Dench in?
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
Here we go again, atleast I've included it in my list of Bond films 'sigh', is there anyone out there that agrees with me?
There's atleast one flaw per bond film because none are perfect (Except GE)
Well, at least that places your opinion in context, Sweepy {[]
I'm with Laz, re: CR. It was a lot of things---bold and successful being merely two of them---but I wouldn't include 'daft' in my list. Most Cinematic Bond Traditionalists will persist in disliking CR because of its deliberate move away from the Bonds of the recent past, but many of us, the Flemingists and the Centrists, feel very good about the current health of James Bond 007.
Loef, I am beginning to think that your entire Bondview, possibly life, is now seen through the eyes of Bonditics. haha )
DanSame, of course you think that GF is perfect.
As for the topic, most daft moment in the Bond series...hmmmmm, I would have to say it's when Jaws finds love on a space station...a lil too much for me.
For me the daftest decision was filming DAD without a script. ) Seriously, I would say it is the casting of Halle Berry as Jinx. I think she's a very good actress but IMO she was a truly horrible Bond girl.
I'm gonna go with the creation of mobile offices for M, Moneypenny and Q that happen to be wherever Bond is, even if Bond didn't know he was going to end up in that particular country.
Although I love OHMSS, the decision to hire an actor to play Bond who then had to be dubbed by Inspector Wexford will always be a bizarre one.
George Baker didn't dub for Lazenby throughout the whole movie . . . just the Piz Gloria part, where Bond was impersonating Sir Hillary Bray. However . . . I saw no reason why Lazenby's voice had to be dubbed in the first place.
Neither did I. It was a bit silly not to just have GL talking for himself.It really wouldn't have made any difference to the viewers and it is for quite a long part of the film.
George Baker didn't dub for Lazenby throughout the whole movie . . . just the Piz Gloria part, where Bond was impersonating Sir Hillary Bray. However . . . I saw no reason why Lazenby's voice had to be dubbed in the first place.
Neither did I. It was a bit silly not to just have GL talking for himself.It really wouldn't have made any difference to the viewers and it is for quite a long part of the film.
You know, I really loved that sequence. Yes, Lazenby was dubbed, but I don't think it affected the quality of that particular sequence at all.
Comments
(Plus if I believe that both of Dalton's films were dreck, that would be 100% which would balance out neatly against Brosnan's 50%.
The quality of AVTAK, for example.
Well, some of us would say its 100% dreck. Goldeneye has all the faults of the Brosnan era its just more polished.
I have a lot of time for Rogs' last film and get annoyed about those who bash it and him.
Secret agents arent meant to be sparkling young things. They eventually become cunning old men who know their way around the espionage world. I rather like the fact that an oldie is moving his way aruond the Zorin case. He has got thirty years experience to call on and Moore has an old pros grace about him.
Also AVTAK has that touch of epic about it (something TWINE and DAD try but dont succeed) with sweeping views of French chateaus and the Golden Gate Bridge - it just says what it is - a Roger Moore Bond film where everything is implausible and larger then life. And the villains are fab..
Compare this with the Brosnan where the implausible is not carried off with panache but remains implausible - I was about to say crap but I caught myself.
Plus, it's not as if only JFF and I talk about the same thing over and over.
I'm also going to add putting Christopher Walken in such a dire film as AVTAK. What a waste of such a terrific actor. He did quite well with Zorin, but in the right film Walken could have been a truly memorable and sinister villain.
Walken was good in AVTAK, but I agree. In a more serious Bond film he could have been terrifying.
What about "Octopushy, Octopushy?"
or "That must have scared the Living Daylights out of her."
or "Codename Thunderball"
or "Effective immediately, your Licence to Kill has been revoked!"
I was joking about the last two, as they obviously werent just thrown into the movies like "That's my little Octopussy" and "What a view... to a kill!"
I kinda like the invisible car, I have to say...especially in light of the fact that an issue of Wired about 12 months ago had an 'invisible coat' that used a similar ideal...but didn't work as well!!
I always thought the 'Other guy' line that Lazenby spouted belittled his opportunity to be the new Bond, and it still irks me.. but someone earlier mentioned the fact that Lazenby wasn't in DAF...now THAT was a stupid decision!! Thinking about it now it seems as though the script would have fitted him better than Connery!!
That's why Blofeld offered to buy him a delicatessen - in stainless steel!
Given that 1) CR was the most commercially and critically successful Bond film since the 60s and that 2) it got a whole new generation who previously didn't care less about Bond suddenly very interested in the franchise...on what ground could you consider the reboot "daft". You might personally regret the decision, but given the result I don't see how you can justifiably knock them for it.
That Bond series was dead in the water with DAD (perhaps sooner)...the reboot was exactly what was needed. Besides, if anything CR was a journey back to the Bond (of the 60s) that some of us know and love above all.
Well, at least that places your opinion in context, Sweepy {[]
I'm with Laz, re: CR. It was a lot of things---bold and successful being merely two of them---but I wouldn't include 'daft' in my list. Most Cinematic Bond Traditionalists will persist in disliking CR because of its deliberate move away from the Bonds of the recent past, but many of us, the Flemingists and the Centrists, feel very good about the current health of James Bond 007.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I can't speak for Sweepy the Cat, but I would imagine that he was referring to the quality of the film. From a commercial point of view, and in terms of bringing new fans to the series, I agree with you that CR was certainly not daft. However in terms of its quality (which is subjective) I don't think that making CR was among the best decisions the producers ever made. However, as I noted, this is subjective, and so I guess it depends on what one thinks of CR.
I don't agree. DAD was terrible, but why throw the baby out with the bath water? I don't believe that the reboot was needed, bur furthermore, if we had to have a reboot (which is completely debatable) why cast Judy Dench? People say tha she was a familiar face, but I think it just messes up the continuity. Plus, of the $600 million that CR made, how much of it was really due to the casting of Dench?
Perhaps for some (or many) people, but when I watch CR, I don't see the 60's, as IMO the Brosnan years were closer to the 60's than CR.
I agree, if it was a reboot, wouldn't M be a male again? I have never liked Judi Dench as M. M was a male in the books and M should be a male in the movies. They just put her in there so there would be more stars in the movie to make money. But like you said Dan, how much could they have possible made by putting Dench in?
Loef, I am beginning to think that your entire Bondview, possibly life, is now seen through the eyes of Bonditics. haha
DanSame, of course you think that GF is perfect.
As for the topic, most daft moment in the Bond series...hmmmmm, I would have to say it's when Jaws finds love on a space station...a lil too much for me.
Octopussy - in the jungle - lion jumps out of the bushes - Bond tells it to sit. Dear Lord!!!
Why do I love these films so much?
Live & Let Die - 1973
Er, it was a Bengal tiger.There are lions in India up near Gujarat at the Gir Forest. But that was definitely a tiger..
Neither did I. It was a bit silly not to just have GL talking for himself.It really wouldn't have made any difference to the viewers and it is for quite a long part of the film.