Rank all the Bond Films!

Eclectic ranking. QOS in the top 4 and FRWL in the bottom half is curious. And my heart breaks to see TND so low, but c'est la vie.

Yeah, thinking about it again, I might put FRWL a little higher. I could probably be persuaded to switch it with You Only Live Twice actually. It's a great adaptation and the Red Grant stuff is fantastic, but I find myself just kind of waiting for the train sequence and Klebb's poison shoe when I watch it. And the song is really dry.

TND, I LOVE Michelle Yeoh and Jonathan Pryce, but coming off the hype I felt for GoldenEye, it just took every wrong turn for me. Too much focus on Terri Hatcher, who I found kinda bland, too much goofiness (the helicopter chopping up the market, the guy's head going through the bottom of the jet), and I really felt Vincent Schiavelli was a more interesting henchman than the blonde guy.

I'll defend Quantum all day long. Love it.

DrNo wrote:

Yeah, thinking about it again, I might put FRWL a little higher. I could probably be persuaded to switch it with You Only Live Twice actually. It's a great adaptation and the Red Grant stuff is fantastic, but I find myself just kind of waiting for the train sequence and Klebb's poison shoe when I watch it. And the song is really dry.

TND, I LOVE Michelle Yeoh and Jonathan Pryce, but coming off the hype I felt for GoldenEye, it just took every wrong turn for me. Too much focus on Terri Hatcher, who I found kinda bland, too much goofiness (the helicopter chopping up the market, the guy's head going through the bottom of the jet), and I really felt Vincent Schiavelli was a more interesting henchman than the blonde guy.

I'll defend Quantum all day long. Love it.

Swapping FRWL with YOLT would make a lot more sense. Or Casino Royale. Or Quantum of Solace. 

Which song do you find "dry" in FRWL? The opening titles song is brilliant. 

Good to see love for Yeoh and Pryce. I was happy to read that the helicopter chopping during the bike chase is actually possible at a faster pace. I can buy it, since it's chopping up a lot which would slow it down, akin to the body going through the fan in AVTAK. I, too, prefer Kaufman, but I've grown to like Stamper a lot more in the current climate of weaker, useless henchmen (save Hinx, of course).

[quote="FieldsMan"]

DrNo wrote:

Which song do you find "dry" in FRWL? The opening titles song is brilliant. 

That's the one. I just find Matt Munro's loungy crooning dull (and I'm an avowed Rat Pack fan, so I typically don't mind the style). It's among my least favorite themes.

Matt Munro's theme only plays in the background of two scenes: when Bond and Sylvia are picnicking, and the last scene. The opening titles is an instrumental.

Oh yeaaahhhh the instrumental arrangement with the organ. Is it Lionel Bart? That IS good. I guess I have just always associated FRWL with the Munro tune.

Yeah....I think I'm gonna go back and edit that ranking, make the switch with YOLW. I don't know what I was thinking there.

Well, good to see someone who can defend QOS. As someone who spent much of his life seemingly defending OHMSS to friends and foe alike it can be refreshing.

Said it before and I'll say it again ... given that QOS was produced during the writer's strike and MGM falling into receivership, it could've been worse.

Plus it meant they decided to really take their time over the next flick, and we got the magnificent Skyfall as a result.

Indeed QOS could have been a lot worse and is better than its immediate predecessor. Still, doesn't stop it from being bottom three. 

Though I should be kinder. It's where I take my name. And dame.

FieldsMan wrote:

I mean, can there really be a forum without one of these threads? This is your preference. There is no right or wrong answer. Oh and just the official Bond films.

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

I was curious, why is Tomorrow Never Dies your #1 favorite? It's a good one and I have it around #10 to #13, but why is it your #1?

That's an old list. Can't believe I had CR so high. 

TND has everything I want in a Bond film. But it also was my first. Made an impact on my 8 year old little mind. 

My list would look something like this nowadays.

1. Tomorrow Never Dies
2. From Russia With Love
3. Goldeneye
4. Thunderball
5. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
6. Dr. No
7. The World Is Not Enough
8. For Your Eyes Only
9. Goldfinger
10. The Living Daylights
11. Skyfall
12. A View to a Kill

13. Octopussy
14. You Only Live Twice
15. Die Another Day
16. Licence to Kill
17. The Spy Who Loved Me
18. Diamonds Are Forever
19. Moonraker
20. The Man With The Golden Gun
21. Live and Let Die

22. Quantum of Solace
23. SPECTRE
24. Casino Royale

Cool.  Tomorrow Never Dies was my second as a kid after Goldeneye I think, if I remember correctly.

1.) Skyfall & SPECTRE
2.) Casino Royale
3.) The Living Daylights
4.) Quantum of Solace










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

That is the most unusual ranking I've seen. But probably about time we had a Craig-era lover here. Get ready to fight. 

Loving TLD, FYEO and TND so high, though.

1. DR. NO
2. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
3. THUNDERBALL
4. THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS
5. SKYFALL

6. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY
7. DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER
8. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
9. THE SPY WHO LOVED ME
10. YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE
11. GOLDFINGER
12. LICENCE TO KILL
13. OCTOPUSSY
14. LIVE AND LET DIE
15. MOONRAKER
16. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH
17. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN
18. A VIEW TO A KILL
19. GOLDENEYE
20. TOMORROW NEVER DIES
21. SPECTRE
22. DIE ANOTHER DAY
23. CASINO ROYALE
24. QUANTUM OF SOLACE

I remember when TND was last on your list and TWINE wasn't far behind it. Good to see them climb, if only a little. Great top five! 

YOLT ahead of GF is interesting.

Very sound list, Brown. My top 8 would be about the same.

FieldsMan wrote:

That is the most unusual ranking I've seen. But probably about time we had a Craig-era lover here. Get ready to fight. 

Loving TLD, FYEO and TND so high, though.

I was really surprised that I was the only one when I went through your rankings. XD I was just contemplating SPECTRE yesterday night and this morning and I am totally amazed how you could ever hate this movie. It is totally beyond me.
I'm totally ready to fight, no worries.

I have read an article that Bond research went through a big revival after the release of CR.

Kinane, I. (2017). James Bond Studies: Evolutions of a Critical Field. International Journal of James Bond Studies, 1(1), 1. DOI: http://doi.org/10.24877/jbs.3

I mean, that does of course not have anything to do with a ranking, but for some reason I would have expected more lovers of the Craig cycle. In my eyes, the Craig cycle comes closest to Fleming. And I know that Timothy Dalton agrees with that.

So, everything Dalton-approved cannot be THAT bad. Is there a better label than "Dalton-approved"?
Even if I think that Craig is probably the most authentic Bond, just because he was given the better scripts, I say that Timothy Dalton is the BEST Bond, so sure, TLD goes up to the top. LTK is just so very cruel that I have to put it to a lower rank. It's just too cruel for my taste.
I love the critical air of TND and the contemplation of the power of the media.
And, well, I just like FYEO.

Kath wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

That is the most unusual ranking I've seen. But probably about time we had a Craig-era lover here. Get ready to fight. 

Loving TLD, FYEO and TND so high, though.

I was really surprised that I was the only one when I went through your rankings. XD I was just contemplating SPECTRE yesterday night and this morning and I am totally amazed how you could ever hate this movie. It is totally beyond me.
I'm totally ready to fight, no worries.

I have read an article that Bond research went through a big revival after the release of CR.

Kinane, I. (2017). James Bond Studies: Evolutions of a Critical Field. International Journal of James Bond Studies, 1(1), 1. DOI: http://doi.org/10.24877/jbs.3

I mean, that does of course not have anything to do with a ranking, but for some reason I would have expected more lovers of the Craig cycle. In my eyes, the Craig cycle comes closest to Fleming. And I know that Timothy Dalton agrees with that.

So, everything Dalton-approved cannot be THAT bad. Is there a better label than "Dalton-approved"?
Even if I think that Craig is probably the most authentic Bond, just because he was given the better scripts, I say that Timothy Dalton is the BEST Bond, so sure, TLD goes up to the top. LTK is just so very cruel that I have to put it to a lower rank. It's just too cruel for my taste.
I love the critical air of TND and the contemplation of the power of the media.
And, well, I just like FYEO.

The problem with CraigBond (beyond the mumbling and lack of chemistry with his female leads) is the petulance, recklessness and attempt to root his Bond in faux-gritty "realism" that plagues his films. Skyfall had veered away from this, but unfortunately his limited range as an actor, and lack of charm holds him back amongst the supreme cast. At least in my opinion.

Is he close to Fleming? Absolutely not in terms of looks. In terms of character, the writing of Skyfall supports this, and the final product ends up feeling like a latter Fleming novel. But the writing of Bond in CR particularly, and to slightly lesser extents, QOS and SP, forces him to become very far removed from the character Fleming created. In the attempt to ground him in reality, he oddly becomes superhuman and impenetrable when the opposite should have occurred. Then suddenly he becomes a sentimental git who talks about fingering Vesper in transparently obscured soppiness (or alternatively, opaquely flirtatious in the search for stationery) that he becomes a far cry from Fleming's cynical, grounded Bond. 

I find the screenplays of CR, QOS and SP to be the worst in the series, so I can't agree that his Bond is more authentic because of "better scripts".

This is funny, because if you put your emphasis on the fact that Bond was meant to be a "blunt instrument", which some people do, these character traits you just mentioned are pretty perfect (well, except for the mumbling). I actually do not think that there is a lack of chemistry with his Bond girls, simply because he never WAS paired with a Bond girl. He was given a fiancée (well, more of a girlfriend in the film) who turns out to be a double, probably erasing the last bit he thought might have been left of him and filling him with hatred. Then he meets a girl who wants to kill his target in revenge for her dead family (harking back to "For Your Eyes Only") with whom he does not have a relationship because he still seems to think about Vesper. At least this is what the end suggests. Then he meets a very slight acquaintance who dies during the first third of the film. And Madelaine Swann is the one whom he apparently gives up his career for. What Bond girls are there? None. There is no "chemistry" because he seems to fall in love with two of them and is not really interested in the others.

And this is exactly what puts him close to Fleming, the bitterness about Vesper's betrayal. The first thing we learn in OHMSS is that he visits Vesper's grave every year. This beginning of Bond's journey is vital to understand his character and this is the first time someone bothered to put it on screen AND to make it the starting point.
Craig's Bond is closer to Fleming because he is NOT perfect. When Moore jumps with his skiers and does a somersault I always think "That is the point when Fleming's Bond would have fallen and crushed down". That is actually the very first thing we see in CR: Bond misses the crane he tries to jump on. Then he lands on a flat roof and crashes into the dustbin during the attempt to roll. That is Bond to me, at least it is the Bond I see when I think of Fleming's novels. He's not perfect. And that's why I am struggling with a supposedly superhuman Craig-Bond. In what ways is he superhuman? Only because Blofeld has missed the crucial brain area? He's not superhuman, he is LUCKY in capital letters and that is Fleming's character, too. I mean, it takes a lot of luck to survive skiing down a slope during the night while being chased by other skiers with guns and the cable car coming down. And THEN to run into Tracy. Just like that. In a crowd. In the very village he just entered. And although people are wearing masks.
I do not see too much realism in the movies, simply because he is so extremely lucky.
Bond says to Solitaire in the novel if she repeats to appear naked in his bed she would find herself pinned down like a butterfly. Is that so different?

I funnily enough consider those scripts better scripts because Bond does NOT appear like a perfect hero to me. I mean, he deeply annoys M by attacking in an embassy at the beginning of CR. He blows up half of Mexico. He's rash, he's prone to mistakes...very much like the Bond admiring the underwater landscape to be grabbed by an octopus (LALD). The hereby produced bubbles tell Mr. BIG his exact position. That's the kind of mistakes Bond does. So, if the Craig Bond is reckless...I like it.^^

I enjoy very much that so many elements of Fleming's text were incorporated without revealing them. The whole M / Silva business is the idea of "A Quantum Solace" as it is described in the short story. M misses her opportunity to give Silva this quantum of solace when he reveals his injuries. That's when she signs her death sentence.
I also love that all four movies are in fact ONE movie. The skulls Silva uses on his homepage are a foreboding for the day of the Dead parade in SP. All films are linked and simply very cleverly composed. The old Bond films were never linked to each except for the occasional recurring character. But linking all films together, just like Fleming did with his novels gives them a new range of story-telling. You can tell much more complex stories if you stretch them over several episodes, films, novels, whatever.

This all goes down to "What makes 'Bond' 'Bond'?" for us. Which character traits must he have that we consider him a worthy adaption of Fleming?. I have a feeling that we will disagree here, too.  

Haven't done this in some time. Of course it's impossible to choose so this is very, very loosely done. I tried to balance favorites with overall strength. Personally DN through LTK are impeccable. The Brosnan era is problematic due to the productions, scripts etc. but none of the four are truly bad or anything, although there are far too many wince inducing moments throughout DAD.

1. FRWL
2. OHMSS
3. DN
4. GF
5. LALD
6. TLD
7. TB
8. DAF
9. YOLT
10. TMWTGG
11. TSWLM
12. MR
13. FYEO
14. AVTAK
15. LTK
16. OP
17. GE
18. TWINE
19. TND
20. DAD

CR '67 is unofficial, insane, genius, whimsical, hysterical and amazing. NSNA is none of those-yet I still watch it yearly out of obligation.

Abomination round:
23. QoS
24. SF
25. CR '06
26. Spectre which I felt was criminally awful. If I could have I would have crawled up the theater walls. "How do I breathe?" is right as I felt the oxygen had been sucked from the room by the sheer horrendous lumbering mens lifestyle commercial onscreen parodying Bond badly. CR '06 may have my honorific "worst movie ever seen" title, but this is even worse.

Kath wrote:

This is funny, because if you put your emphasis on the fact that Bond was meant to be a "blunt instrument", which some people do, these character traits you just mentioned are pretty perfect (well, except for the mumbling). I actually do not think that there is a lack of chemistry with his Bond girls, simply because he never WAS paired with a Bond girl. He was given a fiancée (well, more of a girlfriend in the film) who turns out to be a double, probably erasing the last bit he thought might have been left of him and filling him with hatred. Then he meets a girl who wants to kill his target in revenge for her dead family (harking back to "For Your Eyes Only") with whom he does not have a relationship because he still seems to think about Vesper. At least this is what the end suggests. Then he meets a very slight acquaintance who dies during the first third of the film. And Madelaine Swann is the one whom he apparently gives up his career for. What Bond girls are there? None. There is no "chemistry" because he seems to fall in love with two of them and is not really interested in the others.

And this is exactly what puts him close to Fleming, the bitterness about Vesper's betrayal. The first thing we learn in OHMSS is that he visits Vesper's grave every year. This beginning of Bond's journey is vital to understand his character and this is the first time someone bothered to put it on screen AND to make it the starting point.
Craig's Bond is closer to Fleming because he is NOT perfect. When Moore jumps with his skiers and does a somersault I always think "That is the point when Fleming's Bond would have fallen and crushed down". That is actually the very first thing we see in CR: Bond misses the crane he tries to jump on. Then he lands on a flat roof and crashes into the dustbin during the attempt to roll. That is Bond to me, at least it is the Bond I see when I think of Fleming's novels. He's not perfect. And that's why I am struggling with a supposedly superhuman Craig-Bond. In what ways is he superhuman? Only because Blofeld has missed the crucial brain area? He's not superhuman, he is LUCKY in capital letters and that is Fleming's character, too. I mean, it takes a lot of luck to survive skiing down a slope during the night while being chased by other skiers with guns and the cable car coming down. And THEN to run into Tracy. Just like that. In a crowd. In the very village he just entered. And although people are wearing masks.
I do not see too much realism in the movies, simply because he is so extremely lucky.
Bond says to Solitaire in the novel if she repeats to appear naked in his bed she would find herself pinned down like a butterfly. Is that so different?

I funnily enough consider those scripts better scripts because Bond does NOT appear like a perfect hero to me. I mean, he deeply annoys M by attacking in an embassy at the beginning of CR. He blows up half of Mexico. He's rash, he's prone to mistakes...very much like the Bond admiring the underwater landscape to be grabbed by an octopus (LALD). The hereby produced bubbles tell Mr. BIG his exact position. That's the kind of mistakes Bond does. So, if the Craig Bond is reckless...I like it.^^

I enjoy very much that so many elements of Fleming's text were incorporated without revealing them. The whole M / Silva business is the idea of "A Quantum Solace" as it is described in the short story. M misses her opportunity to give Silva this quantum of solace when he reveals his injuries. That's when she signs her death sentence.
I also love that all four movies are in fact ONE movie. The skulls Silva uses on his homepage are a foreboding for the day of the Dead parade in SP. All films are linked and simply very cleverly composed. The old Bond films were never linked to each except for the occasional recurring character. But linking all films together, just like Fleming did with his novels gives them a new range of story-telling. You can tell much more complex stories if you stretch them over several episodes, films, novels, whatever.

This all goes down to "What makes 'Bond' 'Bond'?" for us. Which character traits must he have that we consider him a worthy adaption of Fleming?. I have a feeling that we will disagree here, too.  

There's no excuse for recklessness. Bond is a Commander, which for one dictates upmost discipline and patriotism. SF aside, this isn't put into play. Further, he is promoted to an elite section in the service, meaning the reason he's there is because he's very good at his job. Whether he's meant to be a blunt instrument in an extension of his job, not because he can't do it competently. As for not being paired with Bond girls - he absolutely was. Vesper is intended to be his first love - and an important figure/ghost in his life, but you wouldn't know it from watching Casino Royale (at the most, Craig Bond is amused by her, but I don't buy that he fell in love - we are only forced to buy it). I'll give you Camille, but some say he had more chemistry with Kurylenko, merely because he didn't have to sleep with her. There's not much chemistry between Bond and Severine either, and you can see Marlohe working hard to try get something from him, but he's unable to comply. Seydoux's Madeleine is just as laughable as Green's Vesper, so won't get into that again. Not to mention his other Bond girls - Solange (their chat by the DB5 played out like an awkward audition), Fields (the back kissing is strangely anaemic) and the scenes with Lucia feel like they'd both rather be elsewhere. Even with Harris, it looks like he's trying to stay young and hip as opposed to simply flirting with her. Most obvious during their walk to M's underground office, with his head bopping around like a proud dad telling a joke. 

The problem with Craig being lucky is that it feels contrived. He's superhuman because his energiser bunny sensibilities in his action sequences. Bouncing around a concentration site, running through walls, banging his head on everything around him, rolling around on tarmacs, crashing through explosive buses, pulling out nails from his shoulder like it's nobody's business, the aforementioned needles in the head, etc. The difference between Moore's flip in the ski chase and, for example Craig sliding down a mountain in a plane, crashing through a building twice and ramming the car which hosts the very girl he is to protect (why? but that's another story) is that Moore Bond invites you to wink with him. The new Bond films are forcing us to swallow them as serious, "gritty" dramas when the very DNA of Fleming's books highlights that they aren't intended to be a reflection of realism. How can they be, when you have Korean servants throwing killer bowler hats, Gardens of Death, and the extraordinary mission to bankrupt a terrorist banker at the tables?

There are passages in Fleming's books demonstrating Fleming thinking/planning/predicting how things will play out, as seen recently in TMWTGG, and deciding when to seize the opportunity to kill Scaramanga. SF aside, I've yet to see this happen in a Craig Bond film.

And SP's attempt to connect all of Craig's films was a silly idea. Undermines some of SF's good work. 

hegottheboot wrote:

Haven't done this in some time. Of course it's impossible to choose so this is very, very loosely done. I tried to balance favorites with overall strength. Personally DN through LTK are impeccable. The Brosnan era is problematic due to the productions, scripts etc. but none of the four are truly bad or anything, although there are far too many wince inducing moments throughout DAD. 

Shame you feel the Brosnan era is problematic. Your ranking reminds me of tiffanywint's.

FieldsMan wrote:

There's no excuse for recklessness. Bond is a Commander, which for one dictates upmost discipline and patriotism. SF aside, this isn't put into play. Further, he is promoted to an elite section in the service, meaning the reason he's there is because he's very good at his job. Whether he's meant to be a blunt instrument in an extension of his job, not because he can't do it competently.

But the Fleming Bond was reckless, too. In LALD he is strictly advised not to go into Harlem because this is Mr BIG's home turf and he ventures there anyway. What happens? Felix and Bond are abducted. Bond is competent insofar as to clean up his own messes, at least this is the notion I get from Fleming's novels. It is just as you said, I have that feeling that Fleming wrote with a winking eye. I am never so sure if I am reading Bond or a Bond parody...
In the novel TB, it is M who suspects the atomic bombs in the Caribbean and Bond keeps on nagging about his bad luck, that of all agents he must follow M's bidding and suffer from M's crazy idea. Bond is much more competent in the films.

FieldsMan wrote:

As for not being paired with Bond girls - he absolutely was. Vesper is intended to be his first love - and an important figure/ghost in his life, but you wouldn't know it from watching Casino Royale (at the most, Craig Bond is amused by her, but I don't buy that he fell in love - we are only forced to buy it). I'll give you Camille, but some say he had more chemistry with Kurylenko, merely because he didn't have to sleep with her. There's not much chemistry between Bond and Severine either, and you can see Marlohe working hard to try get something from him, but he's unable to comply. Seydoux's Madeleine is just as laughable as Green's Vesper, so won't get into that again. Not to mention his other Bond girls - Solange (their chat by the DB5 played out like an awkward audition), Fields (the back kissing is strangely anaemic) and the scenes with Lucia feel like they'd both rather be elsewhere. Even with Harris, it looks like he's trying to stay young and hip as opposed to simply flirting with her. Most obvious during their walk to M's underground office, with his head bopping around like a proud dad telling a joke.

I am not sure if Vesper was Bond's first love. He does decide to propose to her, but in a rather unemotional, almost rational way. The decision of the Craig Bond to leave the service renders it even more believable. The Fleming Bond would never have done that. The daily routine of marriage is a reason for nightmares for him, as we learn in OHMSS.
But that is the one big fat downside I give you: Bond leaving the service in favour of Madelaine. That is definitely against everything Fleming wrote. Tracy decides that he should not give up his job and she does not force him to chose. This should be the moment when Bond says goodbye to Madelaine for good.
I think this lack of chemistry is intended because he has not overcome the death of Vesper, but I can hardly tell if it might be intentional or a lucky coincidence caused by Craig's acting.

FieldsMan wrote:

The problem with Craig being lucky is that it feels contrived. He's superhuman because his energiser bunny sensibilities in his action sequences. Bouncing around a concentration site, running through walls, banging his head on everything around him, rolling around on tarmacs, crashing through explosive buses, pulling out nails from his shoulder like it's nobody's business, the aforementioned needles in the head, etc. The difference between Moore's flip in the ski chase and, for example Craig sliding down a mountain in a plane, crashing through a building twice and ramming the car which hosts the very girl he is to protect (why? but that's another story) is that Moore Bond invites you to wink with him. The new Bond films are forcing us to swallow them as serious, "gritty" dramas when the very DNA of Fleming's books highlights that they aren't intended to be a reflection of realism. How can they be, when you have Korean servants throwing killer bowler hats, Gardens of Death, and the extraordinary mission to bankrupt a terrorist banker at the tables?

Well, Bond films are, after all, action films, so I wouldn't expect anything different. Of course the hero never runs out of energy and can take a lot of injuries without being actually constrained in his further adventures. Well, Bond is constrained by his damaged shoulder...we have to give him that.
The fact that he loses his shooting ability makes him even more human.
What do you make of he Brosnan Bond? I never had a feeling that he invited me to wink and, honestly, neither did Connery.

And isn't Blofeld's machine to penetrate a brain absurd enough for you? Or his clothing style?
The fact that Bond has a machine gun mounted in his Aston Martin in SF?
What gives the last films a more serious tone is the focus on parents, parental figures and Bond's emotions. This makes Bond more real, because now he has a story, now we know about his childhood. But this topic originates in OP.

FieldsMan wrote:

There are passages in Fleming's books demonstrating Fleming thinking/planning/predicting how things will play out, as seen recently in TMWTGG, and deciding when to seize the opportunity to kill Scaramanga. SF aside, I've yet to see this happen in a Craig Bond film.

He lures Silva to Skyfall with a wrong digital trail. But you have excluded SF...
I am sure there is more, just give me some time. Which is not a good sign, I know...

FieldsMan wrote:

And SP's attempt to connect all of Craig's films was a silly idea. Undermines some of SF's good work.

I actually think that they have planned this right from the beginning. In CR they start searching for the man behind all this, the one who operates "in the shadows", to quote SF, and it all accumulates in the criminal organisation SPECTRE, which seems a very logical conclusion to me.
Although I do hate the idea that Silva was ever taking orders from the man with sandals and short trousers. Blofeld was never Silva's boss, at least this is not any credible at all. Silva is way too charismatic for that.

You really think Connery never 'tipped the nod' to the audience at times that we were all in on one big absurd joke?

You've seen Diamonds Are Forever, right?

Blunt Instrument wrote:

You really think Connery never 'tipped the nod' to the audience at times that we were all in on one big absurd joke?

You've seen Diamonds Are Forever, right?

Obviously that was lost on me. Actually, DAF is too absurd for me. The Blofeld doppelgängers, two kitties, the diamonds used to built a laser-satellite, the oven in the mortuary...that is too far away from Fleming for me. Fleming's humour is subtler and darker like the mentioned Garden of Death. I really regret that they never put that on screen. This exaggerated absurdity is why DAF has to go to the lower positions in my ranking.

I have to add something, because it has occurred to me that I may have contradicted myself. I totally agree that Vesper is the ghost in Bond's life, but I am not sure if she is his first love in capital letters. Bond lost his virginity in Paris and there surely have been other "acquaintances" in between.
And what sexual tension do you expect of the Craig Bond when he is never moved much by their death. "Shame for the good Scotch". How many Bond girls die within the first half of the movies? And how often do they die because he exposed them to danger? Does it stop him? Does he regret it? Does he show any reaction to M's scolding in CR or QoS? He is really not interested in them. Not at all.

And: Bond finds out that Mathis's message to Vesper is bogus and figures that it is a trap for her. Well, they wanted him to jump to that conclusion, but he has figured it. Very, very true to the text of CR.