Siskel and Ebert's review of LTK
sambwoy
Berkshire, EnglandPosts: 90MI6 Agent
There was some split decision about their opinions of LTK. I think even back then they held the same arguments against the film that one anti-LTK person might today.
What do you think?
I think Siskel made a good point about the cinematography- that given the money that was spent on this and all the EON-produced Bonds of the (supposedly) 80s, the film looks a little drab.
What do you think?
I think Siskel made a good point about the cinematography- that given the money that was spent on this and all the EON-produced Bonds of the (supposedly) 80s, the film looks a little drab.
Comments
Dalton is the best part of the film-he needed a third film without a lousy script. TLD had the spark of originality without compromising what the series stood for.
www.007jamesbond.dk
http://thedangermen.com/
At least when Martin Campbell was brought in for GoldenEye you wouldn't have thought its predecessors existed at all. At least GoldenEye looks crisp and is by no means dreary.
Pausing through The Living Daylights did you ever notice the laughably bad back projection when Bond and Kara speed away from the KGB? Also, in the milk bottle assault at Blayden Safe House i noticed some really bad camera angles.
I am going to have to diasgree with you sambwoy. I would say most of John Glen's directorial efforts look pretty good; Specfically the three that the recently deceased Alan Hume was on board for. Greece in For Your Eyes Only and India in Octopussy looked great to me; Though the latter suffers from one too many obvious sound stages at Pinewood. Goldeneye on the other hand looked exceptionally dreary and it has dated far worse than most Bonds. The locations are bland, most of the film is spent in some dank computer room, and the shots are better than the Glen's work but not much of an improvement. Phil Meheux made everything look far too moody and un-natural.
Now getting to TLD, that back projection is really no worse than other 1980's films I have seen. Can't fault Glen for that. Also I am not sure what's so bad about the camera angles during the assault on the safe house, perhaps you could explain.
Now I am not saying this because I like Glen, I thought he was a pretty mediocre director for Bond movies and his post-Bond work is atrocious. I am just saying not everything was bad about the films he directed.
On the point of TLD's direction- the safe house sequence has a frame where MI6 men enter the hallway but the way it is shot there is a chair in the foreground. I'm not sure why this is.
With the point on back projection- I have seen bad back projection in more recent films- usually direct-to-DVD titles.