Biggest Bond Let Downs?
zebond
DolletPosts: 103MI6 Agent
So what were the biggest Bond letdowns? You know, there was so much hype built up, and then it turned out to be a complete downer? ---Die Another Day anyone? Any others?
"Guns make me nervous!"
Comments
I enjoy watching Brosnan movie's,and I don't really blame him because his Bond day's were bad,that has alot to do with the writers.But he was over gageted.
It's like they just made movie's to keep the Bond films going.
The Dalton movie's aren't much better,but there the acting wasn't that good,and the story lines were bad.
You know I think George Clooney would have been a good choice for Bond back in the Dalton or Bronsan era's
Licence to Kill.
Casino Royale.
In fact, when I first saw Die Another Day I wasn't let down, it was only later when it sunk in. But on first viewing, all of these let me down big time.
1) He dressed up as a clown in Octopussy...can't see Craig's Bond doing that.
2) A fight seen in View to a Kill consisted of a gun that fired salt pellets.
3) A pigeon doing a double take at the gondola that turned into a car in Moonraker -I think.
...Man that whole era was just crap.
But I must say the final straw was the (poor cover of the) Beach Boys' 'California Girls' during the snow-surfing sequence. I dragged my best friend, a non-Bond fan, to the opening day of AVTAK, and I'm still apologizing, 21+ years on...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Good film in it's own right, i'll remember it as the time when the cinematic Bond changed from escapism to realism.
As i said it's a good film, yet the beginning of a complete new area, i will miss the larger than life scope of the other Bond installments, there are many other nitty, gritty dirty bleeding sweaty
thrillers out there, yet no more larger than life escapism that made the Bond films different for a long number of years, i for one will miss 'em.
Alas, when I left the theater, all I could say to myself was That was NOT a good movie.
DAF.
That stupid solar energy twist in TMWTGG. And the funhouse, the return of JW Pepper, the kung fu sisters...sigh.
Pretty much everything in and since the 80s. Thank God for Babs and Craig.
You'd have thought Campbell would have learned something, but no...he goes and does it again in CR!
I'm the only one who loves the GE score.
Nah I like the GE score.
The biggest let down for me was DAD. For the first 2 years of my Bond loving days Brosnan was the ONLY Bond. I started with GE (not knowing there were other Bond movies out there, due to age:'( ) and coninued from there. GE rocked, TND wasn't as good but it still hit the spot, and TWINE was just fractions behind GE. Then DAD came along, and I wondered, "what where they thinking!?!?"
As for letdowns, I've never really had one. It even took awhile for the crappiness of DAD to kick in with me. Now everytime I watch DAD it gets worse.
I was also quite thrilled about what Lee Tamahori could bring to Bond. For as much as we love to trash him now, many fans (myself included) thought the Along Came A Spider and Once Were Warriors director was a solid pick, and could give Bond a solid edge that would hit home to those fans who accused Brosnan (incorrectly, in my view) of playing a "pretty boy," rather than ruthless 007. I also liked the idea of using Moonraker as a starting point for the story, and the homages also got me interested. I was never fully sold on the double billing Halle Berry was getting, or Maddonna doing a song, but really those came down to superficial reasons (this is a Bond movie, Bond and Bond alone is the star, and I dislike Maddonna's personality).
Yet as the credits ran, my friends described my face as unsatisfied. I was expecting creme brule and got cheesecake, certainly not awful, but definitley not what I was expecting or hoping for. Die Another Day was turning into the Bond film my hype made it out to be for the first hour or so, and then it felt like I was watching a whole other film. The CGI parasailing sequence was a big let down as I was looking for classic "only Bond can do this" escape, and aside from the car chase and Moneypenny scene, I was left uninspired post-Q's lab.
Now, after a few years since its release, I can put Die Another Day in perspective. My immediate reaction to the film was negative, and I think I was too harsh on it at first because I set the bar so high. I then retracted my sympathy because I like having the bar set high; I did for Casino Royale and it amazed even me. Nevertheless, I now know what I'm getting when I watch DAD and I can accept it, and mostly like it, for what it is.
Connery: TB
Moore: AVTAK
Dalton: LTK
Brosnan: DAD
Fiona: But of course, I forgot your ego, Mr. Bond. James Bond, who only has to make love to a woman and she starts to hear heavenly choirs singing.
I still saw them faithfully, but they never exceeded my low expectations. When you know you are going to see another crappy Roger Moore cartoon, how can you be disappointed when you do?
So bravo to the Roger Moore era for lowering the standards and being consistently lousy.
Now, what do you feel about Roger Moore? Hey, remember the time you called me a twit? That was funny.
Who me?
Anyway, apology accepted RJJB, though looking back on it, it was a fair acop.
Anyway, I don't know why you hate Moore so much, basically he is the one who kept the series alive during the 70s and 80s. Then Dalton murdered it and Brosnan kept Bond alive during the 90s-00s.
Let's see if Craig can do the same!
I assume JFF, that you are considerably younger than I and no doubt have seen the series from a starting point in the 80s or 90s and played catch up. On the other hand, the first movie I saw in the theater was Goldfinger, so when I was catching up, it was only the double bill re-release of the first 2 movies to bring me up to date. So I have seen all the movies on the widescreen as they were meant to be seen. And I have been there from the time when the series had a serious tone. Sidebar: I bet if you had an opportunity to see Thunderball in its original widescreen version and be totally immersed in the movie, your opinion of it would increase dramatically.
No doubt there were missteps made, and the silliness of DAF was the first descent into the maelstrom. Then when Roger Moore was foisted upon the viewing audience, the series became a joke. In the 60s, the basic outlook was that every man wanted to be James Bond and every woman wanted to be with James Bond. In the 70s, viewing the Moore movies was like spending time with a kindly old relative. It may have been enjoyable, but it wasn't very exciting. When people refer to the Moore movies as being "fun adventures," to me it just seems that the series lost everything that made it great. If it was necessary to do the massive overhaul to keep the series alive, it would have been better to let it die.
That's the reason I will never watch the Moore movies again. They were a complete sellout. Unike you, I enjoyed the 2 Dalton movies (they weren't perfect) and had the business issues been ironed out, Dalton would have continued to deliver a strong Bond. Brosnan to me started strong, but he never had a command of the swagger that was necessary for the role. His interpretation always seemed forced, and Pierce Brosnan seemed more important than James Bond, if you catch my meaning. Even Moore put himself into the role as it was written far more convincingly (that's a compliment for RM, by the way). As for Lazenby, he benefitted from being in one of the best movies of the series. So even with his shortcomings, he can still look good.
For Daniel Craig, he benefits by having the slate swept clean. He's a new James Bond and there is no luggage from the previous movies to slow him down. Comparisons, yes, but no real traditions such as obligatory scenes with Moneypenny or Q to slow things done. I sincerely hope we've see the last of those two. It's all been done with them, and their re-introduction into the series would be a step backwards. We've got a much tougher Bond now. Let's keep him that way and jettison the garbage that weighed him down. Traditions are fine until they start detracting from the overall quality.
I completely disagree. While some of the Moore films were less serious in tone than the 60's films (some weren't), I think it's irrelevant as IMO LALD, TSWLM, FYEO and OP were each brilliant, while TMWTGG and MR had terrific things going for them. I personally wanted to be Moore more than I wanted to be Lazenby or Dalton. I do agree with you though that a Moore film led to the series becoming a joke. I'm thinking of AVTAK which led to TLD and LTK. IMO, from 1985 to 1989, the Bond series was an absolute joke.
A live stunt will always be more impressive because you know a human being is actually doing it. It lends more credibility to the action.
Who could forget the Union Jack parachute in TSWLM, the skydiving in MR or the helicopter in FYEO? Not just the stunts but the cinematography to capture those scenes has become something of a lost art. Sure many of the closeups were done in a studio, but I'd rather have the quick studio edit than the "oh come on" moment of seeing CGI Bond parasurfing on a tidal wave.
It looks like we're back on track with CR, and not a moment too soon.
Then doing it four more times...:#
DAD, while I enjoyed it, was too over the top with its invisible car and deadly laser from outer space.
I actually think GE and TND were the best of the Brosnan movies. While Elliot Carver was a weak addition to Bond's rouge gallery, the movie itself (I thought) was really well done.