Bond films attract outstanding DP's and they all tend to look very good, especially on a large cinema screen where they were meant to be seen. First let's talk about aspect ratios/film format. Let's look at the "non-scope" Bond films first. DR, FRWL, and GF were all shot 1.66 to 1 (but formatted to be projected up to 1.85 to 1). There was a brief return to non-scope with LALD and TMWTGG (which were both shot 1.85 to 1). IMO, the narrower aspect ratio suites DR and FRWL stories very well and the dye transfer Technicolor looks and "feels" great giving both films a heightened sense of reality. GF, being the template for the "epic" Bond films to follow I always wondered why it wasn't the first Bond shot in 2.35 to 1 Cinemascope/Panavision. That being said, the action in GF is beautifully framed and shot (especially the scenes in Switzerland w/ the DB5) and as usual, the use of Technicolor is beautiful. The only one of the non-scope Bonds I believe would have benefited from wider scope ratio was LALD. While LALD, IMO was well framed and photographed, the wider aspect ratio would have afforded the film a grander and more epic feel more befitting of the story. All the 'scope Bond films except one were beautifully shot IMO. The standouts for me are TB, YOLT, OHMSS (except for the over cranked PTS fight on the beach but it does have a certain charm) CS and Skyfall. The exception is LTK. With LTK it has much to do with the "Miami Vice" style (especially in the PTS/Florida scenes) which give it an old TV movie feel. I actually like LTK, but think if they used TB or even the early non-scope Bonds (especially DN or FRWL) as a style template, it would have been a better film.
