Goldeneye into Tomorrow Never Dies

Few films can surely be so tonally different as GE and TND. TND was famously hurried or rushed along after GE (long after the days where DN, FRWL, GF and TB came along in rapid succession) into production. Ordinarily two years (or almost two years) would not see such a difference.

I.E YOLT to OHMSS, different as they might be they still were films of the 60s. Ditto TSWLM and MR i.e 70s. Even VTAK to TLD.

Yet, in 1995 we have this dark, (or whatever) Goldeneye with a certain soundtrack and then two years alter TND. To me, they feel quite different films as if they happened more than years apart. The way they look, they way they were done and of course, almost above all, the soundtracks, set them miles apart. Not in a bad way mind but are these the two most different Bond films to follow one another? I'm not thinking of the Craig era owing to the years between but harking to the days when films came out 1-2 years apart.

I agree with you about YOLT to OHMSS. They're different but 60s Bond is what it is.

I do think OHMSS to DAF is even larger a tonal gap, and it feels different, maybe because Hunt's entirely absent for the first time. But the way you framed this, I think, would mean that gap sort of gets mitigated by the actor change?

What about TMWTGG to TSWLM? This one also -- like GE to TND -- has the same lead actor offering two different performances. Rog and Broz are more gruff in the formers, lighter in the latters. Both those transitions also had the budget dramatically increase on the following film, which shows up on the screen. But there is a shared light hearted ness between them, and you are right there is a darkness hanging over GE that isn't there for TND.

MR to FYEO might be a candidate but the same sort of goofy moments crop up in both films. Again, there's a budget component going on here (in reverse).

LTK to GE...but those were years apart.

I don't think so. I think both GoldenEye and Tomorrow Never Dies occupy the same world but the atmosphere changes, largely due to the locations. There's a similarity/familiarity between the two films when Bond is in St Petersburg and in Hamburg. Where they differ is when Bond heads to Cuba and Saigon respectively, and I think that contributes to a sense of difference. The music would indeed play a part - again the industrial sounds of GoldenEye really aren't that different to Arnold's more high tech sound during Carver's party and the electronica used during Hamburg Break In, Helicopter Ride and Backseat Driver. However, the sweeping Oriental flavour Bike Shop Fight, Kowloon Bay and indeed the first half of Helicopter Ride do lend a lighter touch.

I'd also argue Bond is slightly darker in TND than he is in GE. There's a greater cynicism to his performance in TND (his scenes with Paris, Kaufman's assassination, the stand-off with Carver, Gupta and Wai Lin on the stealth ship, Carver's death, etc. GE does indeed feature that glorious M scene, the scene on the beach, Alec's death and the statue graveyard... but his lighter moments overall feel lighter.

In all, I don't see this as a huge shift, just different days and missions. I think a great shift occurs, as you suggest Somerset, with MR-FYEO.

That said, I do find that TWINE makes a good follow up to GE while DAD does for TND... due to travelogue. TWINE amplifies that post-Cold War tension while DAD's high tech, Asia-set story sings to that of TND's. But collectively they don't feel worlds apart (maybe DAD since it veers so stubbornly into sci-fi territory. SF, curiously enough, feels a perfect sequel to the Brosnan era, especially GE, TND and DAD.

I always found GE and TND quite different visually. GE has a sort of grainy look to it, almost TV-ish (though that might be uncharitable given all the big stunts and action sequences etc) while TND is a bit bolder with its colours and feels grander in scope.

Stylistically, whether it's Brosnan's big hair and other things, GE feels like it's of the early 90's while TND is decidedly late 90's. Think... I dunno, GE is Twin Peaks to TND's Sopranos. Even as a young'un when I watched GE & TND and they were both more recent then than SPECTRE is to today (!) TND felt very slick and contemporary while GE felt "older."

I guess as CJB says, my sense of a shift is how it looks, tonally probably wrong word(!) but the two feel quite different for succeeding films. GE has that vintage look, whereas TND looks fresher.

I guess, Somerset, it could be the actor change as well when looking at YOLT to OHMSS to DAF. They have that element of being bracketed by Connery who has changed himself of course.

Had Hunt and Lazenby returned for DAF, or at least Lazenby and a similar feel to OHMSS, DAF would've been something else. As it is, the two films initially feel worlds apart, not even the same franchise initially.

I'm not sure. Both GE and at least the European-set scenes in TND have a Euro-thriller feel to them. True, when Bond and Natalya reach Cuba that visual style lingers. GE certainly looks and feels moodier than TND does, but then those scenes in Bond's hotel room, the soundproof room and those dusk London vignettes certainly echo that.

And because TND so confidently embraces what James Bond is about, like GE, they both feel like contemporary updates while honouring the legacy. As successful modern James Bond films should. Like Skyfall too.

To me, they're just different episodes of Bond's life and it's the circumstances (plot and location) which dictate a perceived shift. I suppose FRWL and GF might be a good example to look to.