Last Bond Movie You Watched? 2.0

Largo's Shark wrote:

trevanian wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Quantum of Solace
And the CIA will apparently hunt down and kill British agents. Ugh.

Didn't we get that impression from Madsen in DAD as well? I doubt it was the CIA that made up the hit team in QoS, probably something like Delta Force placed under a civilian's control for a single op. Then again, he gets away so easily that perhaps it does have to be the CIA with the bad aim.

Wikipedia wrote:

Bond meets with CIA agent Felix Leiter, who discloses Greene and Medrano will meet in the Atacama Desert to finalise the coup. Warned by Leiter, he evades the CIA's Special Activities Division when they attempt to kill him.

Special Activities Division??!!!!
That's just plain S.A.D.

Expect another anti-Yank Bond film in the next four years if Mittens pulls off a win tomorrow.

In any case, I think I'll re-watch CR and *gulp* QOS once exams are over. Skyfall makes landfall here in two weeks and I notice some fellow sceptics have been turned, making me quite eager to see this damned film. :)

CJB wrote:

Expect another anti-Yank Bond film in the next four years if Mittens pulls off a win tomorrow.

In any case, I think I'll re-watch CR and *gulp* QOS once exams are over. Skyfall makes landfall here in two weeks and I notice some fellow sceptics have been turned, making me quite eager to see this damned film. :)

If the main gripe is America, then you've no worries at all with Skyfall as the Yanks don't figure much in the film at all really. They break a bit of news on CNN, but that's about it. Skyfall is the most British Bond film we've had from the current regime which, while hardly a difficult feat given the influence of the US on recent Bond, is at least something to relish about Skyfall. I don't know if your scepticism will be turned immediately upon viewing, because the impact of Skyfall's best elements were a bit more slow-burning on me personally. I'd say it's a film that (the very good opening and middle third aside) plays better in your head afterwards than it does when you're actually watching it, if that makes sense.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

As for GF. I'd never call it the "best".

I do quite often actually, in fact everytime I see it, which is frequently, and then a day later when I come down from the "he loves gold" high, I realize that TB is probably the best Bond film ever. GF thus drops down to #2 all time. While DAF remains my personal favourite (I see it as a glorious homage to the classic era that preceded it),TB and GF, the two Bondmania smasheroos, IMO are the gold standards of Bond. Honorable mention to FRWL, DN, YOLT and OHMSS.

Connery is at his uber-coolest, self-assured, awesome Bond-best, in GF and TB.

Sean, you are so awesome.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Brozza's one of the few weaknesses in GOLDENEYE, whereas with Craig in QUANTUM, he's one of its very few strengths. I can understand Tux's ranking from that perspective. There's too much quality in GE to dump it at the bottom.

Oh, absolutely. Brozza's not the best Bond, but GOLDENEYE is nevertheless one of the best-constructed Bonds. Like ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, the strength of the surrounding material compensates for a weak lead.

QUANTUM OF SOLACE... well, it has Craig, I'll give it that. But I still didn't find myself warming to the film when I revisited it last week. QUANTUM OF SOLACE has plenty of time for violence and brutality, but very little for escapism or adventure. It's a Bond film that's embarrassed to be a Bond film.

Harmsway wrote:

QUANTUM OF SOLACE... well, it has Craig, I'll give it that. But I still didn't find myself warming to the film when I revisited it last week. QUANTUM OF SOLACE has plenty of time for violence and brutality, but very little for escapism or adventure. It's a Bond film that's embarrassed to be a Bond film.

It's much like LICENSE TO KILL in that regard. Very strong lead (and villain in LTK's case), but little else.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

QUANTUM OF SOLACE... well, it has Craig, I'll give it that. But I still didn't find myself warming to the film when I revisited it last week. QUANTUM OF SOLACE has plenty of time for violence and brutality, but very little for escapism or adventure. It's a Bond film that's embarrassed to be a Bond film.

It's much like LICENSE TO KILL in that regard. Very strong lead (and villain in LTK's case), but little else.

Yeah, though I don't think LICENSE TO KILL is quite as embarrassed to be a Bond film. LICENSE TO KILL strives for escapism and adventure, even if it doesn't really achieve it.

Agreed about QOS. Like with LTK, I am conflicted on it And like LTK, I had it in the top 10 (usually the last two), but shot down on my recent blu viewing. Plenty to like in it and I dig the story it's going for (Bond wanting to kick some ass, ala LALD), but the editing and script IS a big mess. Like LTK's lead actor, Craig really seemed to have owned the role a lot more than in CR, but yeah... the rest of it. Oh well. The curse of the 007 #2s (unless it's FRWL).

TOMORROW NEVER DIES :2*:

A senseless, mindless orgy of wall-to-wall to action. Basically it's DIE HARD ON A STEALTH BOAT.

It does have some decent moments, but the sum of the movie is less than its individual parts. Another classic example of making a movie to fit a pre-ordained release date rather than allowing for a scrip to organically come to life.

Nit picks: why Hamburg? Okay, I know why, even though I don't think EON has ever quite fessed up to it: they chose Hamburg because GOLDENEYE had been a huge hit for the studio in Germany just two years before. GE made $57 million dollars in 1995 currency, which meant Germany was the second biggest market for GE outside of the U.S. that year. They forced Hamburg on us (a nice city in its own right, I'm sure, but it wasn't exotic location material), when the setting of the film could have put the story anywhere in any major international city. Suggestions: Oslo, Stockholm, Australia. There were far better locations they could have used than Hamburg, but anyway....

The script is basically a connect-the-dots storyline. And even for a Bond movie, the motivation for the villain makes little sense: you're telling me Elliot Carver is going to spend over a billion dollars creating a stealth boat just so he can start a war for television ratings and profit? The businessman in him should have told him that such a scheme was cost prohibitive, not to mention that without having any sort of heir to his empire, his 100-year broadcasting rights coup will be of little importance to a man already in his mid-50's. Who gives a crap about broadcasting rights when you won't be around in another 25 years or so to enjoy it? It's not like Carver was going to live until he was 200 years old. It's just an empty plot angle.

Paris Carver is oooookay. I didn't buy the relationship between her and Bond, but there was a moment of genuine angst in Brosnan's voice when he discovers Paris dead that made me think he might have been thinking of Cassie when he did that scene.

The acting is, at times, campy and too far over the top. If only Jonathan Pryce was camping it up it would be tolerable, but then you've got Gotz Otto uttering unbelievably cliched, camp lines like: "I owe you an unpleasant death, Mr. Bond", and Vincent Schiavelli doing a poor German accent. Michelle Yeoh was decent enough, but it's also clear that when she's not in an action scene her ability to act and emote in English doesn't work as well as if she were acting in her native tongue.

The movie had some great action set pieces, but there were also a few that were sort of clunkers: for instance, the freefall off the side of the skyscraper lacked any punch whatsoever. I blame that totally on Spottisewoode. If you look at that scene and then compare it to a similar scene from ENTRAPMENT just two years later (and remember, this scene was originally written to be filmed on The Petronas Towers, but EON changed the location of the movie to Vietnam) it's clear that the scene from ENTRAPMENT is much better. You *feel* like you are up on the 100th floor with Connery and Zeta-Jones, but not with Brosnan/Yeoh. I remember gripping the arm rest in the theater when I saw ENTRAPMENT; you felt the vertigo. Not so with TND.

General Chang is a throw-away character; so integral to the part and yet has no lines and only a walk-on appearance. Brosnan's one-liners seem perfunctory; he was never as good at delivering the knack one-liner as Moore was.

THE BROSNAN ERA:
Goldeneye :4*:
Tomorrow Never Lies: :2*:
The World Is Not Enough :4*:
Die Another Day: :4*:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

TOMORROW NEVER DIES :2*:



Nit picks: why Hamburg? Okay, I know why, even though I don't think EON has ever quite fessed up to it: they chose Hamburg because GOLDENEYE had been a huge hit for the studio in Germany just two years before. GE made $57 million dollars in 1995 currency, which meant Germany was the second biggest market for GE outside of the U.S. that year. They forced Hamburg on us (a nice city in its own right, I'm sure, but it wasn't exotic location material), when the setting of the film could have put the story anywhere in any major international city. Suggestions: Oslo, Stockholm, Australia. There were far better locations they could have used than Hamburg, but anyway....

interesting
they should have picked Dresden then
I went there a few years ago, there's still along way to go, but even so they have the most beautiful old buildings of any major city in Germany
plus some classic ghastly Communist architecture, some interesting modern architecture and a bizarre but impressive psuedo Indian hotel
then there are the still gapping wounds from WW2, enormous empty spaces in the CBD which are used as car parks
a very unique setting
possibly even exotic?

Seve wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

TOMORROW NEVER DIES :2*:



Nit picks: why Hamburg? Okay, I know why, even though I don't think EON has ever quite fessed up to it: they chose Hamburg because GOLDENEYE had been a huge hit for the studio in Germany just two years before. GE made $57 million dollars in 1995 currency, which meant Germany was the second biggest market for GE outside of the U.S. that year. They forced Hamburg on us (a nice city in its own right, I'm sure, but it wasn't exotic location material), when the setting of the film could have put the story anywhere in any major international city. Suggestions: Oslo, Stockholm, Australia. There were far better locations they could have used than Hamburg, but anyway....

interesting
they should have picked Dresden then
I went there a few years ago, there's still along way to go, but even so they have the most beautiful old buildings of any major city in Germany
plus some classic ghastly Communist architecture, some interesting modern architecture and a bizarre but impressive psuedo Indian hotel
then there are the still gapping wounds from WW2, enormous empty spaces in the CBD which are used as car parks
a very unique setting
possibly even exotic?

As I said, GOLDENEYE was a huge hit in Germany. I mean, massive. I think it was EON's way of saying "Thanks!".

When you think of all the places that TND could have gone to...there was no particularly compelling reason why the film had to be set in Hamburg. Why not London? That would be the most logical place, seeing as how Carver is British. I found Hamsburg to be the Pittsburgh of Germany.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Seve wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

TOMORROW NEVER DIES :2*:



Nit picks: why Hamburg? Okay, I know why, even though I don't think EON has ever quite fessed up to it: they chose Hamburg because GOLDENEYE had been a huge hit for the studio in Germany just two years before. GE made $57 million dollars in 1995 currency, which meant Germany was the second biggest market for GE outside of the U.S. that year. They forced Hamburg on us (a nice city in its own right, I'm sure, but it wasn't exotic location material), when the setting of the film could have put the story anywhere in any major international city. Suggestions: Oslo, Stockholm, Australia. There were far better locations they could have used than Hamburg, but anyway....

interesting
they should have picked Dresden then
I went there a few years ago, there's still along way to go, but even so they have the most beautiful old buildings of any major city in Germany
plus some classic ghastly Communist architecture, some interesting modern architecture and a bizarre but impressive psuedo Indian hotel
then there are the still gapping wounds from WW2, enormous empty spaces in the CBD which are used as car parks
a very unique setting
possibly even exotic?

As I said, GOLDENEYE was a huge hit in Germany. I mean, massive. I think it was EON's way of saying "Thanks!".

When you think of all the places that TND could have gone to...there was no particularly compelling reason why the film had to be set in Hamburg. Why not London? That would be the most logical place, seeing as how Carver is British. I found Hamsburg to be the Pittsburgh of Germany.

Yes I understood you, and Dresden is also in Germany, and far more astheticly pleasing than Hamburg, thus making it a more suitable location for a Bond movie, if they had their minds set on using Germany

I've not been to Pittsburgh, but from what I've seen in the odd movie, I imagine that Hamburg is better than that
Hamburg has an impressive "Englisher Garden" park for one thing
and a world class night life district, in the form of the Reeperbahn (which has far more to offer than whores)

As you say, Carver certainly had no logical connection to Hamburg, he would probably be in the capital city of whatever country he was in, taking the political pulse

See I saw Germany as another connection to Hitler and Nazism, which I find to be an undercurrent in TND. You've got a villain wanting exclusive power for centuries to come, "so much for German efficiency", the press suggesting the villain committed suicide, etc.

And let's not forget Joseph Goebbels - the Minister of Propaganda. And it's just what Carver is doing - using the press to manipulate. I was actually reading an article whereby Goebbels thought that the bombing of Hamburg in 1943 was the first time he thought that Germany should probably surrender and call peace. And the bombings were by the British (and the Americans). Could it be that Bond's interruptions at CMGN in Hamburg suggest that maybe Carver should give up?

That's got to be the most random interpretation of TND I've ever heard.

Might as well say Bond vs. Russkies in GE is a metaphor for the Crimean War.

Skyfall.

5/10

Disappointed. :roll:

CJB wrote:

That's got to be the most random interpretation of TND I've ever heard.

Might as well say Bond vs. Russkies in GE is a metaphor for the Crimean War.

I've heard nuttier ones. Try explaining how GF and AVTAK are giant metaphors for sexual impotence.

There was nothing metaphoric about it in AVTAK.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

The script is basically a connect-the-dots storyline. And even for a Bond movie, the motivation for the villain makes little sense: you're telling me Elliot Carver is going to spend over a billion dollars creating a stealth boat just so he can start a war for television ratings and profit? The businessman in him should have told him that such a scheme was cost prohibitive, not to mention that without having any sort of heir to his empire, his 100-year broadcasting rights coup will be of little importance to a man already in his mid-50's. Who gives a crap about broadcasting rights when you won't be around in another 25 years or so to enjoy it? It's not like Carver was going to live until he was 200 years old. It's just an empty plot angle.

But is this really so bad? Bond need not be constrained by dreary reality or plausible scenarios? YOLT makes no sense. I'm not sure TSWLM holds up to serious scrutiny either. Neither GF for that matter, nor many of the great Bond opi (plural of opus?)....but they are all awesome Bond adventures. The more far-fetched the better. They need only be tethered to reality by the thinnest of threads. Nevertheless your carping is entertaining. Yes Carver's business dealings don't really pass mustard, but he was also quite mad, much like most respectable Bond villains.

FieldsMan wrote:

See I saw Germany as another connection to Hitler and Nazism, which I find to be an undercurrent in TND. You've got a villain wanting exclusive power for centuries to come, "so much for German efficiency", the press suggesting the villain committed suicide, etc.
And let's not forget Joseph Goebbels - the Minister of Propaganda. And it's just what Carver is doing - using the press to manipulate. I was actually reading an article whereby Goebbels thought that the bombing of Hamburg in 1943 was the first time he thought that Germany should probably surrender and call peace. And the bombings were by the British (and the Americans). Could it be that Bond's interruptions at CMGN in Hamburg suggest that maybe Carver should give up?

Hmmm :study:. That's not bad Fields. I'll have to put that one in my pipe and give it some think. Very good!

Apparently Pryce wanted to play Carver MORE camply, but Spottiswoode told him to rein it in. You can see it, arguably the only scenes where he 'cuts loose' are the 'What havoc can we create in the world today?' one and the one where he mocks Wai Lin's martial arts moves.

And when he's having that electronic conference call at Hamburg. "There no news *beat* like BAD news!"

Love it :)

CASINO ROYALE (2006)

Clunky dialogue aside, pretty enjoyable. Would definitely say it's the best one since TLD. Cregg is a lot more convincing than the Irish-American quasi-mullet man.

QUANTUM OF SOLACE (2008)

Sloppy, lazy, shithouse, clusterfuck of an excuse for a movie. What an embarrassment that this ninety minutes of nothing was released under the 007 banner.

Hope Skyfall will manage to razzle and/or dazzle.

SKYFALL is definitely the best of the three.

"Shove your honour!"...

Diamonds Are Forever

ditching the A-Team movie some hours before a repeat viewing of Skyfall I dive into DAF much like Plenty from that balcony window. For once there's no thought of Lazenby in DAF, revenge etc just merely disengaging all sense of belief and accepting DAF to be somewhat silly. Indeed, several moments could've been bookended by Graham Chapman's army officer appearing and declaring: "This is far too silly! Now for something quite serious."
Connery is likely the best thing about the film, going along for the ride. Jill St. John irritates, befuddles, entrances and excites in quarter measures. Charles Gray, though a fan of other works, is not suited to the role and I'm not saying Savalas' return would've helped but somebody else might have done better or seemed better. Dubya Dubya has his moments, Fat Felix offsetting Older Connery. Still chuckles from various lines and moments but that's about it.
Shane Rimmer's there, yay (and seems, maybe my imagination, to dub the FBI agent who reports to Felix and Bond when they walk into the penthouse) and delight in Bruce Glover.

thus- 6.5/10

The Acne Corporation's Bond-athonpalooza

1. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
2. From Russia With Love
3. Licence to Kill
4. Dr No
5. Skyfall
6. Thunderball
7. Goldfinger
8. You Only Live Twice
9. Diamonds Are Forever (last rating, 6/10, last position 18th)
10. Quantum of Solace

The last Bond I managed to see before Skyfall was Die Another Day. Not much to say - entertaining first half, but overall not good enough to bump the more elegant A View to a Kill. I didn't manage to squeeze in The Spy Who Loved Me, but I think it fits comfortably between Licence to Kill and Quantum. Some may find it unusual that I rank the grounded threesome of FYEO, Licence, and Quantum interchangeably among the three Gilbert Bonds, but I appreciate them all the same. After these six, I think there is a big drop-off in quality.

I urgently need a second Skyfall viewing, but for now I'll place it at #3. I think it improves on Casino Royale in most aspects, including the direction, visuals, the cast, music, pre-title sequence, and overall sense of fun. It's harder to compare Skyfall to the two great 1960s films though.

1. From Russia with Love
2. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
3. Skyfall
4. Casino Royale
5. Thunderball
6. Dr. No
7. Goldfinger
8. GoldenEye
9. The Living Daylights
10. For Your Eyes Only
11. You Only Live Twice
12. Licence to Kill
13. The Spy Who Loved Me
14. Quantum of Solace
15. Moonraker
16. Tomorrow Never Dies
17. Live and Let Die
18. Octopussy
19. The World is Not Enough
20. The Man with the Golden Gun
21. Diamonds Are Forever
22. A View to a Kill
23. Die Another Day