801

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

My lonely hearts advert reads
Looking for lady with a big house, ...... please send photo of the house  ajb007/wink

“God has given you one face, and you make yourself another"

802

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

ajb007/lol  ajb007/lol  ajb007/lol

803

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

Thunderpussy wrote:

My lonely hearts advert reads
Looking for lady with a big house, ...... please send photo of the house  ajb007/wink

ajb007/lol  ajb007/lol

Well, I may have exaggerated a bit erm a lot ajb007/embarrassed

804

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

GoldenEye, or a bit of it.

Now, the odd thing is that in many ways this has the hallmarks of a perfect Bond film esp the pre-credits. That opening shot of the dam that seems to go on forever to emphasise its height, for instance. The editing and the perfect intro of Brosnan (wasn't he young back then?  ajb007/mad  Weren't we all?)
And the cinematography by Phil Meyeux is a joy - the film has a sort of metallic sheen, a glow. The dam walls seem to almost sparkle.

But soon enough the sheer stupidity of the film grabs you, like a big sloppy kiss from President Trump.

It's like a woman on a Tinder date who finds him smart, handsome and all the right moves in bed - but also quite thick and more than a little creepy.

If 006 is a double agent and the mission is set up to fail, why not just shoot Bond as soon as he sees him? Why go through the charade of having him plant the bomb, and why would 006 shoot all those Russian soldiers and put himself at needless risk? I know 006 is a ruthless bad guy anyway, but it's all unnecessary.
Why the charade of him kneeling to lure Bond out? He had Bond all along.

But even watching for the first time when you don't know all this it's dumb. All that 'For England, James?' stuff might work if said in a jokey, lads sending it up way. It's so po-faced even England captain Harry Kane would baulk at it prior a World Cup final.
Why would Bond be lured out because 006 is captured, just so he too can be shot? But having been lured out, why do they then shoot 006? And then be unable to shoot Bond jumping back into hiding?
And after the visually spectacular opening bungee, the freefall into the aeroplane is pure rubbish!

Can't get on with Serena Gordon's turn in the Aston, it's too much broad comedy and not funny enough. I can see what they were trying for but the line delivery of both her and Brosnan is all off. 'Very thorough evaluation...' it's creepy.
Then there's the full-on shooting of innocents, not just Russian soldiers but everyone, put alongside naff jokes just makes the film rather distasteful. Shame really, because otherwise the film punches above its weight or budget as a spectacle. As this was a box office smash, how odd that its follow-up Tomorrow Never Dies didn't look more expensive, save perhaps its its - it looked a bit dull and scrappy.

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

805

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

Napoleon Plural wrote:

GoldenEye, or a bit of it.

Now, the odd thing is that in many ways this has the hallmarks of a perfect Bond film esp the pre-credits. That opening shot of the dam that seems to go on forever to emphasise its height, for instance. The editing and the perfect intro of Brosnan (wasn't he young back then?  ajb007/mad  Weren't we all?)
And the cinematography by Phil Meyeux is a joy - the film has a sort of metallic sheen, a glow. The dam walls seem to almost sparkle.

But soon enough the sheer stupidity of the film grabs you, like a big sloppy kiss from President Trump.

It's like a woman on a Tinder date who finds him smart, handsome and all the right moves in bed - but also quite thick and more than a little creepy.

If 006 is a double agent and the mission is set up to fail, why not just shoot Bond as soon as he sees him? Why go through the charade of having him plant the bomb, and why would 006 shoot all those Russian soldiers and put himself at needless risk? I know 006 is a ruthless bad guy anyway, but it's all unnecessary.
Why the charade of him kneeling to lure Bond out? He had Bond all along.

But even watching for the first time when you don't know all this it's dumb. All that 'For England, James?' stuff might work if said in a jokey, lads sending it up way. It's so po-faced even England captain Harry Kane would baulk at it prior a World Cup final.
Why would Bond be lured out because 006 is captured, just so he too can be shot? But having been lured out, why do they then shoot 006? And then be unable to shoot Bond jumping back into hiding?
And after the visually spectacular opening bungee, the freefall into the aeroplane is pure rubbish!

Can't get on with Serena Gordon's turn in the Aston, it's too much broad comedy and not funny enough. I can see what they were trying for but the line delivery of both her and Brosnan is all off. 'Very thorough evaluation...' it's creepy.
Then there's the full-on shooting of innocents, not just Russian soldiers but everyone, put alongside naff jokes just makes the film rather distasteful. Shame really, because otherwise the film punches above its weight or budget as a spectacle. As this was a box office smash, how odd that its follow-up Tomorrow Never Dies didn't look more expensive, save perhaps its its - it looked a bit dull and scrappy.

The setup of faking 006's death only makes sense if the plan is to let Bond escape. It's difficult to tell if that is the plan.

I always thought GoldenEye's video game adaptation was more successful than the film itself.

806

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

That would make sense if it was a sort of defection for 006, to go over to Ourmov while having the Brits think he's dead. Naturally Bond is allowed to escape - as you say - to report 006's death and the bomb is defused in time.
That way Alec and Ourmov can plot their future shenangans with one of them off the radar.

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

807

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

"As this was a box office smash, how odd that its follow-up Tomorrow Never Dies didn't look more expensive, save perhaps its its - it looked a bit dull and scrappy."


I think most of this can be put down to Martin Campbell, who delivers one of the series' most dynamic directing turns on GoldenEye. Spottiswoode's contributions to TND, on the other hand, tend to come across as slightly more workmanlike, despite that film's higher budget.

808

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

Meant to write, 'except for TND's its which is pea tea ess corrected to its, I meant pre-credits'  ajb007/insane

"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

Roger Moore 1927-2017

809

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

"Meant to write, 'except for TND's its which is pea tea ess corrected to its, I meant pre-credits' ajb007/insane "

Ah, that makes a bit more sense.  ajb007/bond  I get what you mean, TND does have one of the more impressive pre-title sequences of the series. The fighter plane duel is an action highlight of the film for me.

810

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

I've tried to pay tribute to Sean, by watching Goldfinger. Got to the golf scene and i couldn't watch it anymore. Maybe it's too soon to be able to watch one of his films.

I'm still trying to proccess it.i can't believe Sean is gone.

Have you ever heard of the Emancipation Proclamation?"

" I don't listen to hip hop!"

811

Re: Last Bond movie you watched.

I watched Goldfinger last night with Mr Spy, in honour of Sean. Sad, he's gone.  ajb007/frown  90 is a good age to live to.