Diminished Returns with QoS?

Colonel Shatner · June 2008

While sequels have the reputation of not living up to the original (like The Temple of Doom, RoboCop 2 or X-Men 3), with Bond movies it seems almost the opposite to me - From Russia With Love, The Spy Who Loved Me, License to Kill and (controversally) Tomorrow Never Dies were all superior sequels in my opinion.

darenhat · June 2008

If you are referring to the second Bond film in a particular actor's tenure as Bond, Colonel, then we need to make a slight correction...Roger Moore's second outing as Bond was The Man With the Golden Gun. Even so (and I know I am in the minority here) I still find TMWTGG to be superior to LALD.

Strangeways · June 2008

Didn't I discuss this topic here:
http://www.ajb007.co.uk/index.php?topic=29839

{[]

Paperbill · June 2008

TND was a decent film, not like TMWTGG

division00 · June 2008

I think it will be good because there's a running theme. No one, especially Bond, is quite sure what is going on (not even the audience). All we know is that the woman that Bond loved in the last film committed suicide for both his and her sake, and now this film would be able to shed a little more light on the matter.

On a side note, I love how Daniel Craig's career takes him on so many levels that it becomes inevitable that actors involved with James Bond films cross paths with him so many times. Mathieu Amalric, the main antagonist, played the French informant Louis in "Munich," where Craig played Steve, a South African driver. Michael Lonsdale, aka Hugo Drax from Moonraker, was the father of Louis. In His Dark Materials "The Golden Compass," we have Christopher Lee as Magisterium's First High Counciler and Craig as Lord Asriel, with Eva Green as Serafina Pekkala, a witch queen.

Gotta love this, guys.

Colonel Shatner · June 2008

Speaking of six degrees of seperation: key actors from Tomorro Never Dies, Colin Salmon and Jonathan Pryce, both turned up in Doctor Who in stories penned by popular writer Steven Moffat (Pryce played the Master in the spoof serial titled "The Curse of the Lingering Death" while Colin Salmon played an mysterious AI called Dr. Moon in the much more serious and in-canon two parter that was broadcasted this fornight).

Colonel Shatner · June 2008

Correction, Steven Moffat's short comedy episode (specially made for Comic Relief) was actually called "The Curse of Fatal".

It can be found on YouTube

Virgil · June 2008

Colonel Shatner wrote:

While sequels have the reputation of not living up to the original (like The Temple of Doom, RoboCop 2 or X-Men 3), with Bond movies it seems almost the opposite to me - From Russia With Love, The Spy Who Loved Me, License to Kill and (controversally) Tomorrow Never Dies were all superior sequels in my opinion.

I agree with FRWL, superior to DN

TMWTGG and LTK are more or less as good as LALD and TLD for me.

TND is the worst Bond film ever made, only second to GE, IMO (so your theory works with bad ones too

)

Hopefully QoS will be as good as CR, and that would be great.

Dan Same · June 2008

This topic title makes me think of QOS's box office results.

Colonel Shatner wrote:

While sequels have the reputation of not living up to the original (like The Temple of Doom, RoboCop 2 or X-Men 3), with Bond movies it seems almost the opposite to me - From Russia With Love, The Spy Who Loved Me, License to Kill and (controversally) Tomorrow Never Dies were all superior sequels in my opinion.

I would hope that at the very least QOS is better than RoboCop 2 which is one of my all-time least favourite films (made worst as it is a sequel to one of my all-time favourite films.)

Anyway, I don't know if I agree with your contention. Yes, I prefer FRWL to DN, although IMO DN is still an absolute masterpiece and the difference between the two films isn't major. However, I prefer LALD to TWMTGG and I also prefer GE to TND. That said, I do prefer LTK to TLD, however TLD is my second least favourite Bond film, and LTK is my fourth least favourite Bond film, so it doesn't really much.

What I find interesting is that the third films are IMO usually the best. Certainly it was in the case of GF and TSWLM, while TWINE might not have been Brosnan's but was still IMO his second best film and one of the best Bond films of all time. Perhaps Craig's third film will be his best?

Loeffelholz · June 2008

Dan Same wrote:

This topic title makes me think of QOS's box office results.

Hope springs eternal! {:)

Dan Same · June 2008

Loeffelholz wrote:

Dan Same wrote:

This topic title makes me think of QOS's box office results.

Hope springs eternal! {:)

) Not quite. I don't want QOS to underperform at the box office. Not only would its underperforming ensure a lesser chance of there being any more Bond films any time soon, but I think it's unfair on those who like Craig. I mean, surely you didn't want OP or AVTAK to underperform? :v

Plus, lets face it, if I did want QOS to underperform, I would not go to see it. However I will be seeing it, and irrespective of whether I think it's a masterpiece or not, I fully expect to see it twice (like CR.)

(The reason, BTW, that the topic makes me think of QOS's box office is due to the use of the word 'returns.' It almost always seems to be used when discussing a film's box office results.)

Loeffelholz · June 2008

Dan Same wrote:

I don't want QOS to underperform at the box office. Not only would its underperforming ensure a lesser chance of there being any more Bond films any time soon, but I think it's unfair on those who like Craig. I mean, surely you didn't want OP or AVTAK to underperform? :v

Well, you have me there {[] I was right there in the queue for each of those Moore classics, and I certainly wanted them to be successful... :007)

I think Craig will get bored with the role before he's driven out by diminished box office---three or four pictures (hopefully five*), and he's out.

* I mean seven... :v

Diminished Returns with QoS?

Comments