The World is Not Enough in Review

The World Is Not Enough stars Pierce Brosnan as 007, Sophie Marceau as troubled heiress Elektra King, Robert Carlyle as the international terrorist Renard, and Denise Richards as Christmas Jones, a boob-thrusting nuclear physicist. It takes us from London to the Caspian Sea in an oil-supply struggle.

But let's not get too excited. As an action film, The World is Not Enough is mundanely choreographed, and as a continuation of the myth it is the usual biannual disappointment. The Bond myth comprised a set of very particular elements. The films were exotic in a time when that word still meant something - before we all went on package holidays to Magaluf. Bond's cruelty was the incarnation of the loneliness of the sophisticated world traveller, and it was secretly terribly sad. Death and despair were the hidden meanings behind the cocktails and first-class air travel. It was all there in one bar of John Barry's theme-tune, all there in Sean Connery's face. Nobody since Connery has been 'right for the part' because Connery was the part. All that bitter muscle under the tux, a man isolated by his own charisma, a determined smoker. Bond's interest in civilised things was not a cultivation but a death wish, like the man who's been given a year to live and is just wretchedly bingeing.

Take a look at Brosnan. It's obvious that he is smart, obvious that he understands the character; but he cannot personify him. It's not his fault. They're determined to warm Bond up. Brosnan's Bond looks like a man who actually has a wife and kids back home. He looks like he owns a juicer. But this man is a contract killer! They even bring MI5 in more, as a kind of family, baby-sitting. And Judi Dench's M is maternal and fretful in her taupe Hobbs jacket.

All that remains is action. It suits the Broccolis for us to honour their tranced repetitiveness as the respecting of 'hallowed conventions'. When the pleasures of surprise are replaced by the lesser pleasures of recognition, it flatters us - our complicity becomes vital to the actual spectacle. It's called playing to the gallery - also known as camp. Camp's virtue is that it is impervious to criticism. It validates the lowering of expectations (it's only escapist fun) and protects against dissension (only killjoys could carp at escapist fun). The Bond cultists, with their cheery applause at 'classic' moments, unconsciously patronise Bond. Worldwide, the giggles and hoots smack of guilty mass denial about the diminishing returns of an exhausted form.

And for two decades the Broccolis have utilised our camp response to legitimise their incredible slovenliness and timidity and hubris. They are too scared (after 19 films!) to play variations on their franchise's staples - on the Q scene, on the countdown scene, on the closing sexual joke - and too unblushingly lazy to tart up their long-outmoded chases. And those same gobsmacked passers-by still punctuate the pursuits, spilling their Chablis on their tablecloths. And still we go back for more.

The film is certainly less definitively feeble than other recent offerings, with an at least two-dimensional female character in the bold and oval Marceau. But my reaction is much the same as to a new Rolling Stones album: I'm just grateful that it's not embarrassing.

(Antonia Quirke)

The 19th installment of the franchise is The World Is Not Enough. Post your reviews here!
_______________________________________________

The World Is Not Enough

Whilst Tomorrow Never Dies was screening in cinemas and was understandably well received by the general public and fans alike in 1997, producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli were already planning the next James Bond epic, The World Is Not Enough (TWINE) – and epic it was.

Pierce Brosnan returns as James Bond in TWINE and really shines. His portrayal closely reflects Ian Fleming’s literary version of the character. He’s suave, yet ruthless. However, there is the cinematic Bond blended in. He’s smooth, he’s witty, he’s James Bond. He redefines the coolness Sean Connery had in the first four movies of his tenure. Pierce Brosnan remarkably mixed these traits together to convincingly portray the most famous spy of all time. And this portrayal was only complimented by the other actors and actresses in the film.

The beautiful Sophie Marceau as the innocent Elektra King worked admirably. She made it her own. The actress played the complex character convincingly and displayed a great amount of class. But what about the other Bond girls? Dr. Christmas Jones, whilst not cast as good as one would expect from a Bond movie, was played by American bombshell Denise Richards. Whilst being recently voted as the worst Bond Girl, I honestly wouldn’t believe so, and I think she did a good job playing the character. It’s not like previous Bond movies had great Bond girls that were poorly acted. Honey Ryder wasn’t the best acted girl in Dr.No (1962), neither was Domino in Thunderball (1965)or Anya Amasova in The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) – and like Dr. Christmas Jones, they are all very easy on the eye. ‘Cigar Girl’ was another minor babe in the film as was the wonderfully named Dr. Molly Warmflash who had one of the best banters with Bond. All in all, TWINE has probably the best array of girls since Thunderball (1965).

The rest of the cast is top notch though. Robbie Coltrane returns as the good humoured Valentin Zukovsky, this time with a welcomed and well deserved expanded role, as does Judi Dench as M, with an elongated part, personally involved in the plot. As for the other allies, Samantha Bond returns as the ever efficient Miss Moneypenny as does Desmond Llewellyn, for the last time. His last scene was touching and rather memorable. He introduced a young fellow Bond jokingly refers to as ‘R’ (played by John Cleese) who Q hopes to take over. However, with plans to return in the next Bond film, Desmond Llewellyn tragically died in a car accident in late 1999. ‘R’ would later return to fill his shoes in Die Another Day (2002).

Renard, played by Robert Carlyle, is convincingly cold, but what’s interesting about this villain is that he cannot be harmed physically. He cannot feel physical contact, which, obviously has a negative impact on both him and Elektra. It hurts him emotionally, and Carlyle portrays this commendably. He had some very memorable scenes including Bond’s first encounter with him and his introductory scene at the Devil’s Breath. His allies are worth mentioning too. The Bull is there with light comic relief in the rather dark film, providing menace and humour. Gabor, whilst being a blueprint for Die Another Day’s Mr Kil, was underused, but was memorable as Elektra’s body guard. Davidov was a well written character - a desperate man, rendering him as a realistic villain – someone who could exist. These characters are all highlights, amongst other things.

The locations proved to be inspired choices. The decision to house the spectacular boat chase in the pre-credits sequence in London was a bold move, particularly being outside the real-life SIS building. The boat chase is one of, if not the best action sequence I have ever seen. But just before this was a small, but suspenseful, tense scene in a banker’s office in Bilbao. A well acted, well directed and well scripted scene, with the cast and crew, as mentioned before, convincingly mixing both the cinematic and literary elements of the James Bond character. Istanbul, my personal favourite in the film looks very exotic and beautiful, having staged the final third of the film largely in that area. Baku and Scotland also feature in this movie, but the exoticness and beauty of all locales is only aided by the wonderful cinematography which I had only fully noticed in my recent viewing.

Overall, The World Is Not Enough is a truly memorable Bond film. Like some of its predecessors, it has memorable scene after memorable scene, Bondian scene after another. It has everything one could want in a Bond film – a convincing amount of fantasy and realism, a truly terrific Bond soundtrack and score, and just fun escapism. The mix of action, sex, espionage and drama blended commendably, letting this film explore different areas of intrigue that really engages the audiences. Like many 007 films, this is an instant classic.

- FieldsMan.

The World Is Not Enough (1999) - 7/10
I often find that The World Is Not Enough gets much criticism, and one that seems to be a constant complaint is something along the lines that Brosnan’s acting is “soap opera worthy”. But in all honesty, I never could see it. While Brosnan isn’t part of my top 3 Bonds, he is far better than his wooden interpretation of Bond a la GoldenEye. What The World Is Not Enough really suffers from the most are two things: Denise Richards and and the formulaic nature of the whole picture. The film starts off more than promising, with one of the best pre-title sequences in the series. The action scenes that follow, however, cannot match the excitement of that boat chase. It’s not only the action scenes that feel formulaic, though, the plot does as well. It all ultimately ends up featuring the villains attempting to nuke Istanbul to increase their profits. If that sounds kind of familiar, it should (See: Goldfinger, A View to a Kill). The World Is Not Enough does have its perks, though. I’ve always enjoyed something about the actual “look” to the picture itself, it is something I can’t really explain, though. Valentin is one of Bond’s greatest allies, and the idea to bring him back was great. Added to that, his death scene ends up being a powerful one. I don’t mind Elektra King; she’s not the greatest femme fetal or Bond girl for that matter, but she doesn’t come near Denise Richards, who is as unconvincing as she is busty. She is for sure one of my least favorite Bond girls. The World Is Not Enough is pure formula, and while I can enjoy that formula (being that it comes from my favorite film series), the film is a little too safe for its own good.

Old review I recovered from another forum. It's actually a much longer version of the review I posted in KTBEU but for some reason I just never got around to posting the full version there. Anyway, here it is. Python on TWINE circa 2010.





The World is Not Enough is probably the worst example of a Bond film aiming to do something different, but copping out so horribly by the end. This is a trait of EVERY Bond film that has been made since post-OHMSS. TWINE is basically one gigantic cop-out itself. Every single punch is pulled back.

In the film, Bond delivers a suitcase full of money at MI6 for oil tycoon Sir Robert King, not knowing it was rigged to explode when King (wearing a lapel pin that’s actually a detonator) comes at close proximity. King goes into MI6’s vault, the money explodes thus he’s dead, just as planned by Renard and Elektra.

The explosion created a large hole in a wall at MI6 facing the Thames River. The first thing Bond does is pull out his gun and look out of the hole. Why is he doing this? So that Cigar Girl can shoot at him (???). How does he even suspect that someone is out there that might have been behind the explosion? What is Cigar Girl even doing there? Confirming a kill? How the hell did MI6 not notice that a woman in a red jumpsuit driving a boat right outside had weapons that included a machine gun, sniper rifle, grenade launcher? Why is she shooting at Bond? What’s the point? She might as well hold out a big sign that says “hey, I’m behind the explosion, chase me so we can have a big boat chase!”

Bond takes the cue and nods to her, running straight to Q Branch so that he can steal Q’s fishing boat, which is really a mini-jet boat loaded with torpedoes. Just as Bond is taking off with the boat, Q screams at Bond, “Stop, it isn’t finished! D’oh!” Oh hey, that sounds interesting. Are we gonna have a scenario with a gadget that malfunctions during the chase? This should be a nice little twist and add tension. It’s a Pierce Bronsan Bond film, who are we kidding?

The chase is really a retread of the Amazon boat chases in LALD & MR, the only novelty is that it’s at the Thames. To evade Bond, the Cigar Girl decides to run right over another boat conveniently standing next to drums of oil, immediately exploding and blocking Bond’s way (despite earlier showing the ability to submerge his fishing boat while doing his tie gag). Bond decides to take another route: Straight through the streets of London, crashing into everything in his way, getting chased by local authorities and ruining a nice luncheon that everyone was enjoying at a restaurant.

As authorities catch up with the action, Brosnan is dangling on a rope attached to the hot air balloon that she stole. He assures Cigar Girl that he can protect her, she replies “not from him”. Cigar Girl blows up the gas tank, Bond drops right on the millennium dome and dislocates his collarbone.So what was the whole point of the boat chase sequence? The easy answer is “to entertain” but again I’m not a fan of Vic Armstrong’s work, most of his sequences are unremarkably dull with little edge and flair. It’s always amazing to go back to GoldenEye and see moments of brutality in a Brosnan film like a man getting horribly hit by a motorbike. So what does the sequence serve other than to entertain? Give Bond an injured collarbone, which is actually one of the biggest issues that this film has going for it. Cigar Girl’s suicide is also an attempt demonstrating how dangerous Renard is supposed to be but it makes a critical error. DN features a goon who kills himself for his boss; I believe it because Dr. No lives up to that. When watching Cigar Girl kill herself, I never believe it because Renard really turns out to be nothing more than a pussy whipped emo kid willing to commit suicide for his bitchy girlfriend. Renard even gets jealous of Bond as a lover!

Bond has his collarbone dislocated, according to the Dr. Molly Warmflash this any more pressure to it will put him out of action for weeks. Bond has sex with her to get a clean bill of health and pursue the people responsible for King’s death. Now the whole concept of Bond having a dislocated shoulder on a mission is actually brilliant. This is an element that could provide nice tension throughout film; showing his injury getting in the way of certain tasks. But after the briefing the dislocated shoulder is never an issue for Bond. It only serves as a plot device for Bond to figure out that Elektra was behind it all. Then again Elektra points out that anyone could have figured out his injury given that he wore a sling at her father’s funeral, so that makes the inclusion of his injury even more pointless.

While looking up computer files to investigate the whole case with Sir Robert King, Bond clicks on a video of a crying Elektra. Bond immediately becomes emotional over seeing it, even touching the computer screen as if he’s trying to wipe her tear off with deep affection. Pierce Brosnan then realizes he’s in a James Bond film and gets his shit together, doing further investigating by looking up records. After comparing the money he retrieved to the ransom demands made by Renard years earlier during Elektra’s kidnapping, Bond realizes that he’s behind the explosion and reports. M then assigns Bond as her body guard for Elektra, should Renard ever attempt to kill her. Great, Bond is reduced to that fucking Kevin Costner character.

There are a lot of intentional allusions to Tracy when Bond meets Elektra. She once asks him if he ever lost a loved one (Bond ignores this question). They even go skiing together with composer David Arnold attempting to recapture that romantic tone Barry achieved in the OHMSS soundtrack. They ski together to a location where the oil pipeline reaches completion. Immediately a group of thugs in parahawks appear with machine guns. Bond immediately suspects that they are there to kill Elektra. So the first thing Bond does is tell Elektra ski AWAY from him so that Bond can lead the thugs into the trees. Why would Bond assume that all the thugs would follow only him and not one of them would break away to get to Elektra? None of them ever try perusing Elektra during the whole sequence so wouldn’t that make him curious? “Gee, there about six parahawks chasing me and not one of them is breaking off to go after Elektra, who I believe is their target. In fact, why does Elektra never go to shelter like I told her to but instead stands right in the middle of the open while I’m dealing with the thugs?”

This is something that never occurs to Bond, thus Bond is shown to be a complete moron. He searches for the insider that could have given Renard information on where Elektra would be. I think the easiest way to have handled the sequence without making Bond look retarded was to have a single helicopter after Bond, thus there wouldn’t have been the issue of a group never splitting up. Elektra is just as dumb as well. She decides to ask Bond “who is trying to kill me?” thus paving the way for Bond to look back on that and realize no one ever tried killing her. But lucky for her, Bond is too stupid to figure that out.

When entering Zukovsky’s casino, Bond wears x-ray spectacles and notices everyone in the building carries knives and guns. As he strolls through the casino he’s acting like a giddy schoolboy blushing at the sight of ladies’ underwear. Zukovsky in TWINE is rather different from GE. From “free market economy will be the end of me” to “chill out James!” Zukovsky has been neutered.

Elektra shows up at his casino to play a card game for a million dollars, she loses. The game is so OBVIOUSLY fixed and clearly she is paying him off for something, but naturally for a moron like Bond he’ll never question this until it is too late.

Next we get a scene with Renard to show how ruthless the man can be. It’s pretty standard villain introductory materiall. Villain gets mad at goon for not getting a job right, threatens to kill him but ends up killing someone else instead. He then gives Davidov the opportunity to prove his worth with another job. Now here’s another example of the film not keeping up with consistency. The film wants you to think that Renard is the main bad guy and Elektra is the damsel Bond has to protect. During the scene with Renard it’s quite clear they have no intention of killing Elektra, so that should give you a big hint of what’s going on. Yet after this scene the film continues to play with the notion that she IS innocent and tries to make her turn come off like a shocking twist no one should have expected.

Anyway, on the very next scene we see Bond and Elektra already in bed. So if this were any other Bond film it wouldn’t be so bad because it’s natural for Bond to have one night stands. However the filmmakers want to tell you that Bond has fallen deep for this brat but made absolutely no attempt at building that up, unless you really think that OHMSS-rip-off skiing crap sufficed. So Bond already finds her captivating as if he were a 13 year old boy on his first date. It really serves no purpose other than to establish that bit so that we can see Bond obviously troubled by this throughout the film.

After sleeping with her, Bond decides to do a little investigating in the villa to search for the insider. Davidov is about to take off in the middle of the night, Bond notices a corpse in his car and decides to go along for the ride to see where Davidov ends up. Instead of attempting to ask him questions about what he’s up to, he immediately kills him on the spot and takes his ID. One of the terrorists come up to him and asks him why Davidov didn’t come. Bond’s answer? “He was buried with work”. The goon is obviously satisfied with this answer, and decides to take the risk of letting an impostor come on board possibly sabotage a mission. Bond is even luckier that these goons are about as retarded as he is.

At the nuclear disarming site we meet a 28 year old Denise Richards, top nuclear-physicist named Christmas Jones. Naturally. She’s bland for the most part, but I never found her as fucking grating as Stacey Sutton or Halle Berry. She’s pretty much a nonentity standing around in a Lara Croft costume delivering a line once in awhile. Throughout the film Bond shows mild interest in investigating her panties and she doesn’t seem to be phased by him at the slightest.

Bond meets Renard and immediately loses his cool. Throughout the scene he is pointing his gun at Renard’s head while gritting his teeth. I assume this is all because of his feelings for Elektra, even then it’s a little out of character. He never keeps his distance or cool. It’s just a lot of bad attempts at coming off as intense as Timothy Dalton. As if he watched the confrontation scene with Pushkin in TLD and thought “say, I could do that!” Bond is about to execute Renard but before doing so Renard says “there’s no point in living if you can’t feel alive”, a line that Elektra once said earlier in the film. Cue Brosnan overacting “HUH?!” with a little piano play by David Arnold to indicate a plot twist has occurred. OHHHH, HE SAID A VAGUE EXPRESSION TOO; IT CAN’T BE JUST A FUCKING COINCIDENCE!

Denise Richard arrives with Russian soldiers spouting out “He’s an impostor. Dr. Arkov is sixty-three years old!” and a brief stand off ensue. Bond explains “those men are the impostors, they’re stealing the bomb”, of course that’s exactly what the terrorists are doing right at that moment but the soldiers aren’t even paying attention to it. Fuck it, everyone this film is a dumbass. Bond lets go of Renard as ordered by the soldiers. Renard taunts Bond “you had me, but I know you couldn’t” he pressed Bond’s shoulder “SHOULDER THE RESPONSIBILITY” while Brosnan gives us PAIN FACE. Is that pain coming from the shoulder or the writing? Purvis, Wade and Fierstein are scriptwriting geniuses. Then an action sequence by Vic Armstrong ensues, Bond picks up a locator card taken out of the nuclear device by the villains. Villains get away with the bomb and so Bond is stuck with a vague expression to ponder over and a high school girl.

M at the MI6 headquarters in Scotland gets contacted by Elektra, bitching about Bond leaving her alone and so M demands "get me out there" to her aids. Bill Tanner replies "that's cool and all, but, um, why? What are you going to do when you get over there? Stand around? Why is your presence required?" He doesn't say it, but he thinks it.

Bond gets a plane ride back to Baku after the theft of the nuclear device. On his way he obviously had a lot to think of what he should be doing when he got back. Options: 1) Report to MI6 about the possibility of Elektra being in league with Renard thus do further investigating without alerting Elektra. Alert M of the situation and keep her out of the field. When evidence is found, send a squad of ninja commandos to break into her villa and arrest her. But before they break in, punch her hard in the face and tell her "you should have shtayed in the kitchen you little t***" Or 2) Break into her house, tell her everything you know in the most childish possible manner thus jeopardizing your mission and your boss who is arriving, all because you heard Renard say a single vague remark and that he knew of Bond's magical hurt shoulder despite the fact that he wore a sling in public anyway (which even Elektra had to point out for that retard). Naturally he went with the second option.

With Bond choosing the second option we get some of the worst scenes ever produced by a Bond film. Pierce Brosnan’s delivery and mannerisms are completely out of sync with Bond. Combine that with bad writing and it’s atrocious. “It’s called Stockholm syndrome “, Bond snapping his fingers, ect ect. Just ugh. And Sophie suffers too. “HOW DARE YOU! I’M CALLING YOUR MOM, SHE’S COMING TO TAKE CHARGE”. Actually she called M, but what’s the difference?

M arrives and first thing she does is talk with Bond. “I want an update, where do we stand?” It’s basically a conversation that could have been done over the phone and leads nowhere. For absolutely no reason we’re at Elektra’s command center. Actually they’re only there so they can easily be alerted of a bomb in one of King’s pipelines, it’s as if they all showed up knowing what would happen. Bond says he’ll go to the pipeline and defuse the bomb. Dr. Mammaries runs over to him and reminds him that he has no fucking idea how to defuse nuclear bombs and so Bond decides to take her along for help. The pipeline scene for the most part is just Brosnan is just spouting “FAHSTAH” while Richards spouts “SOMEONE’S TAMPERED WITH THE BOMB” in front of a bluescreen. Horribly unexciting. Half the plutonium is missing so it can’t blow nuclear. Bond decides to let the bomb blow so he can fake their deaths and make Elektra think they’re dead, but this gimmick serves no purpose whatsoever given that in about less than 10 minutes the villains find out he’s alive anyway.

At the command center with Elektra thinking Bond is dead she decides to reveal that she’s in league with Renard and take M hostage. The film plays inconsistently again by trying to make Elektra’s reveal come off as a shocking moment, despite the fact that the last hour poorly hid it. David Arnold couldn’t handle himself to play a dramatic shock cue “DUN DUN! DUN DUN!” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2P9mTmpZ7s#t=9m M then literally bitch slaps Elektra, once again we're in a soap opera with such tropes. When you have Judi Dench, don't degrade her with shit like this, have her use her words instead, show some wit. Bond calls M’s aid Charles Robinson and is informed that M is missing. Dr. Mammaries asks what they’re supposed to do now and so Bond remembers the million dollar payoff to Zukovsky “there’s one critical element I might have overlooked: Beluga… Caviar.”

Next we get five minutes worth of crap with bad soap opera between Elektra and Renard. Renard is such an inept pussy that he can’t stand the thought of Bond being a better lover than him. Elektra is clearly bored by him throughout the scene. I feel really bad for Robert Carlyle and Sophie Marceau having to with this terrible script.

At the Caspian Sea, Zukovsky is just hanging around his caviar factory. Bond drops by to demand answers concerning the payoff. Mr. Bullion, Zukovsky’s right hand man secretly working for Elektra and Renard, notices Bond’s BMW and informs his bosses. Elektra then calls her buzzsaw helicopters to kill Bond and Zukovsky. During the middle of Bond interrogating Zukovsky, the buzzsaw helicopters show up and we get one of the worst action sequences in the series. The biggest problem with this piece is that it looks horribly cheap; it’s like one of those stage shows you see in a Universal Studios theme park. When the sequence ends Bond goes back to Zukovsky, adjusts his tie and casually asks “now… where were we?” The film actually acknowledges that the whole sequences served absolutely for nothing and just continues the investigation as if nothing big happened. Zukovsky tells Bond that the deal was to have his nephew in the Russia navy smuggle weapons to the terrorists in Istanbul, they all head there to search for the villains.

Zukovsky takes them to a radio room to figure out where the villains would be residing at. Telling Bond that the submarine is nuclear they figure out that they’re going to use the sub to blow up at a critical area that once blown up would have businesses wanting to work with Elektra’s pipelines and away from her competitors. It’s pretty unexciting stuff, with Denise Richards delivering lines like [“INSTANT…CATOSTROPHIC… METLDOWN”. Eventually they find out where the villains are residing and conveniently Mr. Bullion has a suitcase ready to explode and kill everyone in the radio room. Bond, Mammaries and Zukovsky survive of course (though Zukovsky looks dead at first). Bond chases Bullion but is immediately captured by Elektra’s goons.

The goons take Bond straight to Elektra and she has them put on a torture chair. This is probably the most horribly acted scene in the entire film. Brosnan is basically sitting down five minutes straight delivering his PAIN FACE and grunting and breathing louder than Darth Vader while Elektra is acting like a 16 year old brat from MTV’s MY SUPER SEWEET 16 with lines like “EET EEZ MY OIL! MY!” Just watch the two clips and ask yourself what’s the difference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQvtLCv03l0#t=4m48s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90HhZ-pyC2Y#t=13s

I wouldn’t find it hard to believe that Elektra was just like that at 16. "HUH! THEY WILL BELIEVE, THEY WILL ALL BELIEVE!"

Robbie Coltrane interrupts the torture by breaking in the lair with a machine gun shooting down goons. This is probably the only real joy I find in this film, right before he gets killed off. What a shame, I wouldn't have minded Zukovsky being a recurring ally for the Brosnan era (at least the one from GE), he was one of the better supporting actors in the Brosnan era. If there was a strong aspect of that era, it's supporting players.

Before Zukovsky died, his last action was grabbing his cane, which is actually a rifle. First thing he does is point it at Elektra. She notices the sound of a rifle being cocked, turns around and just looks at him. Despite holding a handgun, she never raises it at him, instead she just keeps looking at him. Zukovsky realizes what a dumb broad she is and decides to turn his gun on Bond and shoot the brace that his holding one of his arms so he can escape. He knows that even if he's free, there's a risk because Elektra still has the upperhand holding a gun and can kill Bond if he attempts to break out of his chair. However, he knows what a dumb bitch Elektra is and bets Bond can take her down easily despite the odds. He died a gambler winning a bet.

What's even better for Zukovsky's shot is that despite Elektra watching the whole thing, somehow she never notices that his shot freed one of Bond's arms and instead quips "Zukovsky really hated you". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQvtLCv03l0#t=7m14s How does she not notice this? There's even a loud clang sound for her to suspect that Bond was freed. Zukovsky won his bet. Dumb bitch.

Elektra then comes up to Bond and says "time to say goodnight". Bond manages to slip his hand out and pushes her to the floor so he can free himself fast. When Elektra fell to the floor it's very clear that she's still holding her walky talky and gun. However at some brief point off screen she decides to drop both her gun and walky talky before running away upstairs to the top of the tower. Bond grabs the gun and walky talky from the floor and chases her. Midway through the tower, a loud mooing sound calls for Bond as he passes by a door. He goes back to the door to find a cell room with M locked up and frees her by shooting the chained lock. Bond continues chasing Elektra upstairs and when finally reaching the top he finds her standing next to a bed. Bond gives her the walky talky back and demands her to call off the sub. At first all she does is smile at him. "I won't ask again, call him off". Elektra keep smiling. Brosnan then screams "CAWWW HIM AWFFF" and Sophie Marceau is suddenly terrified by how horrible his acting was at that moment. She picks up the walky talky and says "you wouldn't shoot me... you'd miss me" and then shouts at the device to warn Renard, Bond then cuts her off by shooting her and then her corpse falls to the bed she stood next to. Bond quips back "I never miss." Okay writers if you really want to convince us at how disturbed Bond feels about shooting someone he fell in love with, do not whitewash it with inappropriate lines like that.

M arrives upstairs to witness what's happening. Bond goes up to Elektra's corpse and mourns over it while M looks disgusted at Bond's necrophilia activities. Bond then walks out of the room to a balcony and jumps off to chase the sub that's about to submerge. He gains entry and successfully finds Dr. Mammaries. What we get here is quite possibly the most unexciting climax ever for a Bond film. Bond suggests that when he goes to the control rooms he'll bring the sub back up and have naval forces attack. Sounds pretty exciting huh? Nah. Once Bond gets to the control rooms he pulls a lever and shoots the controls so no one can change them. Instead of going up, it's going down. Dr. Mammaries realizes it's not going like he planned and quips "so we're going up huh?" and Bond responds "slight miscalculation". YOU'RE A FUCKING NAVAL COMMANDER, HOW COULD YOU FUCK UP LIKE THAT?

The climax is one subliminal sexual allegory. It's implied that Renard is sexually inept. So he finally gets his big break by hijacking a nuclear submarine for nuclear meltdown. He fills a long large object tube with plutonium and attempts to shove it down a hole that will cause a nuclear chain-reaction. Bond thwarts (cock blocks) his plan by having the plutonium case shoot out of the hole, penetrating Renard. Last thing Renard does before dying is smile at Bond.

After this Bond and Dr. Mammaries swim to the surface. We get an awkward moment with the two noticing a tour boat and call for help. All the tour people do is wave at them "heloooooo". It's as if after the climax Apted thought "fuck this" and left the set, then EON called John Glen to work his magic on the remaining scenes. We then cut to MI6 headquarters in Scotland and watch the staff searching for where Bond currently is. This is like a scene out of a Roger Moore film. We then cut to a To Catch a Thief rip-off with Bond and Dr. Mammaries sitting on a balcony in front of a greenscreen displaying fireworks. Suddenly the two are acting uncharacteristically romantic. We cut back to MI6 and just like a Moore film, they find Bond with a girl and M gasps "007!" We cut to Bond and Mammaries in bed, ending with Bond quipping "I though Christmas only came once a year". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt01QwHp240#t=6s

This is the real cop out here. It seems as if EON felt very uncomfortable with ending a Bond film without the lead getting the girl at the end yet again. Denise Richards really served no other purpose than to be the back up girl after Sophie Marceau got killed. This whole film really only makes me appreciate the Craig Bond films for taking more chances with the films. They may not go all the way (having a shoot out climax in CR instead of the novel's own) but it's thankfully a long way from TWINE and I hope they keep pushing further away from the Bond cliches and just make damn good spy stories while staying true to its roots in a sense.

1 of 5

I just watched TWINE again last night, MP. I will take the time to answer your questions :)

Makeshift Python wrote:

The explosion created a large hole in a wall at MI6 facing the Thames River. The first thing Bond does is pull out his gun and look out of the hole. Why is he doing this? So that Cigar Girl can shoot at him (???). How does he even suspect that someone is out there that might have been behind the explosion? What is Cigar Girl even doing there? Confirming a kill? How the hell did MI6 not notice that a woman in a red jumpsuit driving a boat right outside had weapons that included a machine gun, sniper rifle, grenade launcher? Why is she shooting at Bond? What’s the point? She might as well hold out a big sign that says “hey, I’m behind the explosion, chase me so we can have a big boat chase!”

The first thing that Bond does is, yes, walk to the hole. But he doesn't draw his gun. He already has doubts as to why he was let out alive and so, when he looks out of the hole, it's to make sure that no one is there. He sees the boat, and then he retrieves his gun, and backs away when he sees the red dot and when she starts firing. Why is Cigar Girl there? To confirm and a kill, as you said, and if not, to kill him. It's pretty straight forward, and well, Renard explains to Bond that he used him to deliver the money. It shouldn't have to spell everything out to the audience. And about MI6 not knowing she was out there: We don't know when she turned up. She could have just turned up then when the blast happened.

Quote :

Bond takes the cue and nods to her, running straight to Q Branch so that he can steal Q’s fishing boat, which is really a mini-jet boat loaded with torpedoes. Just as Bond is taking off with the boat, Q screams at Bond, “Stop, it isn’t finished! D’oh!” Oh hey, that sounds interesting. Are we gonna have a scenario with a gadget that malfunctions during the chase? This should be a nice little twist and add tension. It’s a Pierce Bronsan Bond film, who are we kidding?

One of the aspects that I thought about when watching it was that Bond never actually catches up to her. Perhaps that what Q meant? It wasn't fast enough? Maybe the torpedos aren't fast enough? The fact there is no retractable glass for when Bond "dives"?

Quote :

As authorities catch up with the action, Brosnan is dangling on a rope attached to the hot air balloon that she stole. He assures Cigar Girl that he can protect her, she replies “not from him”. Cigar Girl blows up the gas tank, Bond drops right on the millennium dome and dislocates his collarbone.So what was the whole point of the boat chase sequence? The easy answer is “to entertain” but again I’m not a fan of Vic Armstrong’s work, most of his sequences are unremarkably dull with little edge and flair. It’s always amazing to go back to GoldenEye and see moments of brutality in a Brosnan film like a man getting horribly hit by a motorbike. So what does the sequence serve other than to entertain? Give Bond an injured collarbone, which is actually one of the biggest issues that this film has going for it. Cigar Girl’s suicide is also an attempt demonstrating how dangerous Renard is supposed to be but it makes a critical error. DN features a goon who kills himself for his boss; I believe it because Dr. No lives up to that. When watching Cigar Girl kill herself, I never believe it because Renard really turns out to be nothing more than a pussy whipped emo kid willing to commit suicide for his bitchy girlfriend. Renard even gets jealous of Bond as a lover!

Bond has his collarbone dislocated, according to the Dr. Molly Warmflash this any more pressure to it will put him out of action for weeks. Bond has sex with her to get a clean bill of health and pursue the people responsible for King’s death. Now the whole concept of Bond having a dislocated shoulder on a mission is actually brilliant. This is an element that could provide nice tension throughout film; showing his injury getting in the way of certain tasks. But after the briefing the dislocated shoulder is never an issue for Bond. It only serves as a plot device for Bond to figure out that Elektra was behind it all. Then again Elektra points out that anyone could have figured out his injury given that he wore a sling at her father’s funeral, so that makes the inclusion of his injury even more pointless.

The dislocated collarbone features throughout the film. R references, the wat Bond holds his arm as he drives to meet Elektra, when he falls awkardly during the ski and caviar factory sequences, when Renard explains that Bond couldn't "shoulder the opportunity" and when Elektra references it during the love scene.

In regards to Renard's villainy, I believe it. Sure, Dr No is the better villain, but Renard does have a lot of things going for him. I think the reason why he is ready to commit suicide is because really, there isn't a point living if he can't feel alive. He really can't feel pleasure as well as pain. His also a terrorist, for God's sake. Without trying to sound condescending, but terrorists do kill themselves sometimes too. This angle just adds to his character.

Quote :

While looking up computer files to investigate the whole case with Sir Robert King, Bond clicks on a video of a crying Elektra. Bond immediately becomes emotional over seeing it, even touching the computer screen as if he’s trying to wipe her tear off with deep affection. Pierce Brosnan then realizes he’s in a James Bond film and gets his shit together, doing further investigating by looking up records. After comparing the money he retrieved to the ransom demands made by Renard years earlier during Elektra’s kidnapping, Bond realizes that he’s behind the explosion and reports. M then assigns Bond as her body guard for Elektra, should Renard ever attempt to kill her. Great, Bond is reduced to that fucking Kevin Costner character.

He doesn't become emotional, he is just captivated by her. Bond is known to have a weakness for beautiful women. There is not a hint in his expressions, body language or gestures that suggests it. And when M assigns Bond to protect Elektra, it's for two reasons: It's a personal favour to M, much like when M asks Bond to expose Drax at cards. Secondly, Bond feels obliged to, given that he was the one who brought in the money. It's now Bond's case.

Quote :

There are a lot of intentional allusions to Tracy when Bond meets Elektra. She once asks him if he ever lost a loved one (Bond ignores this question). They even go skiing together with composer David Arnold attempting to recapture that romantic tone Barry achieved in the OHMSS soundtrack. They ski together to a location where the oil pipeline reaches completion. Immediately a group of thugs in parahawks appear with machine guns. Bond immediately suspects that they are there to kill Elektra. So the first thing Bond does is tell Elektra ski AWAY from him so that Bond can lead the thugs into the trees. Why would Bond assume that all the thugs would follow only him and not one of them would break away to get to Elektra? None of them ever try perusing Elektra during the whole sequence so wouldn’t that make him curious? “Gee, there about six parahawks chasing me and not one of them is breaking off to go after Elektra, who I believe is their target. In fact, why does Elektra never go to shelter like I told her to but instead stands right in the middle of the open while I’m dealing with the thugs?”

This is something that never occurs to Bond, thus Bond is shown to be a complete moron. He searches for the insider that could have given Renard information on where Elektra would be. I think the easiest way to have handled the sequence without making Bond look retarded was to have a single helicopter after Bond, thus there wouldn’t have been the issue of a group never splitting up. Elektra is just as dumb as well. She decides to ask Bond “who is trying to kill me?” thus paving the way for Bond to look back on that and realize no one ever tried killing her. But lucky for her, Bond is too stupid to figure that out.

There are four parahawks. When they approach Bond and Elektra, they are in front of them. By the time they turn around to begin the pursuit, Bond has told Elektra to head for the gully. They are still together however. The last one, however, sees Elektra move off seperately, and that one follows her. Hence why towards the end of the chase, Elektra is able to see the two remaining parahawks collide with each other and catch up to Bond. Why did Elektra catch up to Bond? She couldn't afford to stop, given one of the parahawks were following her.

When Bond went into the trees, he'd need to concentrate on skiing, making sure he doesn't crash into a tree. When the third parahawk flies off the edge and pulls the chute, he sees that the other parahawk, who was chasing Elektra, is there, he knows that someone was following Elektra, which is why she skiies next to him - she hadn't had time to find a gully and hide. She needed to ski and escape too.

Quote :

When entering Zukovsky’s casino, Bond wears x-ray spectacles and notices everyone in the building carries knives and guns. As he strolls through the casino he’s acting like a giddy schoolboy blushing at the sight of ladies’ underwear. Zukovsky in TWINE is rather different from GE. From “free market economy will be the end of me” to “chill out James!” Zukovsky has been neutered.

Elektra shows up at his casino to play a card game for a million dollars, she loses. The game is so OBVIOUSLY fixed and clearly she is paying him off for something, but naturally for a moron like Bond he’ll never question this until it is too late

Anyway, on the very next scene we see Bond and Elektra already in bed. So if this were any other Bond film it wouldn’t be so bad because it’s natural for Bond to have one night stands. However the filmmakers want to tell you that Bond has fallen deep for this brat but made absolutely no attempt at building that up, unless you really think that OHMSS-rip-off skiing crap sufficed. So Bond already finds her captivating as if he were a 13 year old boy on his first date. It really serves no purpose other than to establish that bit so that we can see Bond obviously troubled by this throughout the film.

.

Which is why I don't believe Bond really falls for Elektra, and why I feel there is a more Flemingesque edge to the film. Something about the girl that captures him, much like Tiffany and Tanya in their respective novels. I don't think Bond loves them, he just cares about them. What adds to Bond not entirely suspecting Elektra when she pays off Zukovsky is the fact that she appears to be carefree and live on the edge. But Bond does note it in his mind. When he sleeps with her, it means nothing more than when Bond slept with Fiona, Corrine, etc. As mentioned elsewhere, when the filmmakers said they want it to seem like Bond finds a Tracy, but he actually finds a Blofeld, it's hyperbolic. Of course Elektra's low key scheme doesn't match Blofeld's aspirations for world domination. Likewise, it doesn't mean there is love between Bond and Elektra. It goes both way (no pun intended).

Quote :

After sleeping with her, Bond decides to do a little investigating in the villa to search for the insider. Davidov is about to take off in the middle of the night, Bond notices a corpse in his car and decides to go along for the ride to see where Davidov ends up. Instead of attempting to ask him questions about what he’s up to, he immediately kills him on the spot and takes his ID. One of the terrorists come up to him and asks him why Davidov didn’t come. Bond’s answer? “He was buried with work”. The goon is obviously satisfied with this answer, and decides to take the risk of letting an impostor come on board possibly sabotage a mission. Bond is even luckier that these goons are about as retarded as he is.

Bond kills him because of the haste of the mission. He hasn't got time to question him. There is plane nearby, there are dogs barking, possibly alerting others of Bond's presence. The goon was satisfied because, as Arkov has been already replaced, there could have been a chance that Davidov was replaced too.

Quote :

At the nuclear disarming site we meet a 28 year old Denise Richards, top nuclear-physicist named Christmas Jones. Naturally. She’s bland for the most part, but I never found her as fucking grating as Stacey Sutton or Halle Berry. She’s pretty much a nonentity standing around in a Lara Croft costume delivering a line once in awhile. Throughout the film Bond shows mild interest in investigating her panties and she doesn’t seem to be phased by him at the slightest.

Bond meets Renard and immediately loses his cool. Throughout the scene he is pointing his gun at Renard’s head while gritting his teeth. I assume this is all because of his feelings for Elektra, even then it’s a little out of character. He never keeps his distance or cool. It’s just a lot of bad attempts at coming off as intense as Timothy Dalton. As if he watched the confrontation scene with Pushkin in TLD and thought “say, I could do that!” Bond is about to execute Renard but before doing so Renard says “there’s no point in living if you can’t feel alive”, a line that Elektra once said earlier in the film. Cue Brosnan overacting “HUH?!” with a little piano play by David Arnold to indicate a plot twist has occurred. OHHHH, HE SAID A VAGUE EXPRESSION TOO; IT CAN’T BE JUST A FUCKING COINCIDENCE!

The scene is particularly well written though, and to be honest, I think it’s well shot. Brosnan’s acting isn’t bad either. I think it’s quite believable.

Quote :

Denise Richard arrives with Russian soldiers spouting out “He’s an impostor. Dr. Arkov is sixty-three years old!” and a brief stand off ensue. Bond explains “those men are the impostors, they’re stealing the bomb”, of course that’s exactly what the terrorists are doing right at that moment but the soldiers aren’t even paying attention to it. Fuck it, everyone this film is a dumbass. Bond lets go of Renard as ordered by the soldiers. Renard taunts Bond “you had me, but I know you couldn’t” he pressed Bond’s shoulder “SHOULDER THE RESPONSIBILITY” while Brosnan gives us PAIN FACE. Is that pain coming from the shoulder or the writing? Purvis, Wade and Fierstein are scriptwriting geniuses.

Why would they soldiers trust Bond, especially given he already fooled them? And Bond also has a gun. If they look away, Bond already has the edge.
Then an action sequence by Vic Armstrong ensues, Bond picks up a locator card taken out of the nuclear device by the villains. Villains get away with the bomb and so Bond is stuck with a vague expression to ponder over and a high school girl.

Quote :

M at the MI6 headquarters in Scotland gets contacted by Elektra, bitching about Bond leaving her alone and so M demands "get me out there" to her aids. Bill Tanner replies "that's cool and all, but, um, why? What are you going to do when you get over there? Stand around? Why is your presence required?" He doesn't say it, but he thinks it.

Because she’s a close family friend. She has no reason to believe that Elektra is tainted. She still thinks that she’s troubled and ventures out to provide solace for her.

Quote :

Bond gets a plane ride back to Baku after the theft of the nuclear device. On his way he obviously had a lot to think of what he should be doing when he got back. Options: 1) Report to MI6 about the possibility of Elektra being in league with Renard thus do further investigating without alerting Elektra. Alert M of the situation and keep her out of the field. When evidence is found, send a squad of ninja commandos to break into her villa and arrest her. But before they break in, punch her hard in the face and tell her "you should have shtayed in the kitchen you little t***" Or 2) Break into her house, tell her everything you know in the most childish possible manner thus jeopardizing your mission and your boss who is arriving, all because you heard Renard say a single vague remark and that he knew of Bond's magical hurt shoulder despite the fact that he wore a sling in public anyway (which even Elektra had to point out for that retard). Naturally he went with the second option.
With Bond choosing the second option we get some of the worst scenes ever produced by a Bond film. Pierce Brosnan’s delivery and mannerisms are completely out of sync with Bond. Combine that with bad writing and it’s atrocious. “It’s called Stockholm syndrome “, Bond snapping his fingers, ect ect. Just ugh. And Sophie suffers too. “HOW DARE YOU! I’M CALLING YOUR MOM, SHE’S COMING TO TAKE CHARGE”. Actually she called M, but what’s the difference?

Maybe slapping her around to get her to admit it would have been good, but it’s the 90s. Bond was that slightly more politically correct. And while I don’t agree with that, it certainly wasn’t detrimental. Besides, if she did develop Stockholm Syndrome, Bond essentially would have hurt someone who is psychologically harmed – something I don’t think Fleming’s Bond would have done either. I just rewatched that scene and you can see that Bond was obviously thinking of something else to say to her, and that he still doesn’t trust her. The phone call interrupted the conversation. If he doesn’t fully expose his thoughts to her, then there is less for her to stress about IF she was working for Renard. Hence why he doesn’t mention the pay off.

Quote :

M arrives and first thing she does is talk with Bond. “I want an update, where do we stand?” It’s basically a conversation that could have been done over the phone and leads nowhere. For absolutely no reason we’re at Elektra’s command center. Actually they’re only there so they can easily be alerted of a bomb in one of King’s pipelines, it’s as if they all showed up knowing what would happen. Bond says he’ll go to the pipeline and defuse the bomb. Dr. Mammaries runs over to him and reminds him that he has no fucking idea how to defuse nuclear bombs and so Bond decides to take her along for help. The pipeline scene for the most part is just Brosnan is just spouting “FAHSTAH” while Richards spouts “SOMEONE’S TAMPERED WITH THE BOMB” in front of a bluescreen. Horribly unexciting. Half the plutonium is missing so it can’t blow nuclear. Bond decides to let the bomb blow so he can fake their deaths and make Elektra think they’re dead, but this gimmick serves no purpose whatsoever given that in about less than 10 minutes the villains find out he’s alive anyway.

They’re at the control centre because, during that scene before when Bond questions Elektra, they get a phone call saying there that Renard’s struck again and 10 men are dead at the pipeline. So, they go there and see where it’s at.

Anyway, you've written so much! I didn't think it would have taken this long. It'd just continue with you saying something, and I disagreeing. I just hope next time you watch it with more of an open mind. With the above stuff I've answered to anyway. If you still believe that there are some goofs, well, you can't let that be decline your enjoyment of it. I mean, there is a lot to like about TWINE.

Oh and you said something about the Caviar Factory action sequence being there for nothing: Elektra orders the buzz saws to kill Bond and Zukovsky.

FieldsMan wrote:

Anyway, you've written so much! I didn't think it would have taken this long. It'd just continue with you saying something, and I disagreeing. I just hope next time you watch it with more of an open mind. With the above stuff I've answered to anyway. If you still believe that there are some goofs, well, you can't let that be decline your enjoyment of it.

"Some goofs"? Bad directing, writing, acting, cinematography, music, ect isn't something I'd throw off as "some goofs" I'll respond to your responses eventually. It's a long review I wrote a year ago afterall but overall the gist of it remains the same for me: It's a turd. I'll throw in a few bits though.

Quote :

Why is Cigar Girl there? To confirm and a kill, as you said, and if not, to kill him. It's pretty straight forward,

So she somehow knew that an explosion would occur at a particular area in MI6 and know that Bond would be popping his head out immediately after that? I think the most logical reasoning for what happened is that she was there to confirm a kill but she's also a shithead so she tried doing something dumb like shooting at MI6 after King had been blown up anyway. Either way shooting at Bond only served for Bond to know who to chase thus give us a lousy action sequence by Vic Armstrong.

Quote :

e]And about MI6 not knowing she was out there: We don't know when she turned up. She could have just turned up then when the blast happened.

You'd have to assume she would be there present the moment Bond arrived at MI6 delivering the money to King so she would could confirm the explosion when it happened.

Quote :

One of the aspects that I thought about when watching it was that Bond never actually catches up to her. Perhaps that what Q meant? It wasn't fast enough? Maybe the torpedos aren't fast enough? The fact there is no retractable glass for when Bond "dives"?

That's just weak. More could be done with the concept of a gadget not working properly.

Quote :

The dislocated collarbone features throughout the film. R references, the wat Bond holds his arm as he drives to meet Elektra, when he falls awkardly during the ski and caviar factory sequences, when Renard explains that Bond couldn't "shoulder the opportunity" and when Elektra references it during the love scene.

The point I was making is that it is never an issue for Bond, acknowledged it might be but it's shrugged off too easily throughout most of the film. It's another wasted concept. It's even worse when Bond uses his injury as a point during his confrontation with Elektra and as she points out he wore a sling in public, something he should have realized himself. It just makes Bond look more foolish.

If he had any sense, Michael Apted should have changed his titled card to 'Directed by Alan Smithee.' I believe that practice was dropped a year after the premier of TWINE.

TWINE doesn't really warrant a review. It just made Bond a spoof of himself. Signs of this started showing in TND, but you still had the sense of a serious film. TWINE was just bad.

I tend to agree with Moore here. It's hard to believe how bad TWINE really is. And that's especially bad because it was so overambitious: Brosnan's third, Brosnan's OHMSS. And then it failed so badly. It's a shame.

TWINE has a good title song though. And then there's the underwater tie straigthening scene. I know people dislike that scene with a passion, but for me it has just that kind of OTT silliness that I actually do like. For me, that simply is the definitive Brosnan Bond moment.

So, like all the Bond films, even the bad ones, TWINE has its good parts. But is is without a doubt a bad film.

w7 wrote:

there's the underwater tie straigthening scene. I know people dislike that scene with a passion, but for me it has just that kind of OTT silliness that I actually do like. For me, that simply is the definitive Brosnan Bond moment.

Doesn't Brosnan pull the same move in GoldenEye in the T-54?

Yeah but in TWINE it's UNDERWATER, man!

ambler wrote:

w7 wrote:

there's the underwater tie straigthening scene. I know people dislike that scene with a passion, but for me it has just that kind of OTT silliness that I actually do like. For me, that simply is the definitive Brosnan Bond moment.

Doesn't Brosnan pull the same move in GoldenEye in the T-54?

Yes, TWINE just makes it even more retarded. Apparently it was just improvised by Brosnan and the filmmakers decided to go along with it.

That's one of the things that hurt this flick, it tries to be this OHMSS-type of Bond film but at the same times tries to ape the Roger Moore era but with less class. One minute it's taking itself all seriously like a bad soap opera but then this shit pops out: ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iR6ixesbaHs#t=2m . And then it gets all serious again in the next scene with M's "against every instinct as a mother" speech. TWINE is like Brosnan's acting, it's a very schizophrenic film.

I feel like I'm repeating myself with this, TWINE was discussed ad naseum at the old place.

In short, the two main issues that prevent this from being a half-decent Bond movie are the ludicrous M subplot and the main Bond girl. Anything other than "A nuclear physicist named Christmas Jones, played by Denise Richards" would have been an upgrade. Even DC in drag. ;)

I really think Denise Richards is the least of the film's problems. She seems to be the Jar Jar Binks of fan criticism for Bond, always being pointed at as the big problem when there's much more damaging work elsewhere. Until the ending she's mostly treated like a secondary Bond girl being less of a conquest for Bond instead more as a partner to work with doing nothing but spouting technobabble, with Elektra being treated as the main Bond girl for the shock effect when it's revealed she was the mastermind the whole time.

For example I'd say Brosnan's acting in this film is more problematic than Richards.

The World Is Not Enough was, at one point, a beautiful seed from which to grow a complete film. The story and the central characters in it are those of a global-scale neo-noir. Elektra King is a true femme fatale—a seductress who keeps her cards very close to the low-cut vest—its Renard is the classic, head-over-heels-in-love schmuck wrapped in the guise of a terrorist. Its unfortunately-named supporting girl Christmas Jones is a character reminiscent of Fleming—a cold woman who's professional circumstances have caused her to swear off those of the male persuasion, only to have her resolve broken down by our experienced, but ultimately suckered detective, James Bond.

In theory, anyway.

In practice, The World Is Not Enough was more a gorgeous duckling that grew up to be a hideous swan that always borrows your money and never pays you back. For every great idea that seems to be buried in the core concepts of this film, there are two gross missteps in its execution. While the story is strong, it's pacing is unpleasantly jerky due to a few action sequences too many (the boat chase and and the caviar factory in particular drag the story to a halt rather than push it forward) and too tonally inconsistent with the character-based drama the film would have its audience swallow, and the script itself is depressingly crude rather than clever.

And for the most part, the performances of the actors don't help (in fact, they often hurt) the final product. Robert Carlyle is the notable exception, and it's through the lens of Renard that a viewer might see the pulpy experience this might have been. Pierce Brosnan is merely serviceable as 007; a jack-of-all-Bond-traits accumulated over the preceding thirty-odd years of cinema and a master of none of them. The female line-up is where the cast really falls apart, though. While Denise Richards—who proves herself utterly ill-equipped to play a generic nuclear physicist, let alone the Pussy Galore Mark X implied by the character's introduction—is an obvious thorn in the film's side, Sophie Marceau is every bit as incapable of playing a three-dimensional character as Richards is of playing a two-dimensional one. As the aforementioned femme fatale, Marceau is tasked with being the story's keystone, supporting not only the actions of Bond and Renard, but for Judi Dench's M as well. Neither Marceau nor writers Neal Purvis and Robert Wade are up to the task, and the film collapses on top of them as the character of Elektra King crumbles. Dench's M is easily the best performed female character, which makes the fact that she's a fifth wheel in the underdeveloped script all the more tragic.

Don't forget the hack Bruce Feirstein.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Don't forget the hack Bruce Feirstein.

Good point.

In fact, while there may or may not be worse Bond films than The World Is Not Enough, is there a Bond film for which blame (as opposed to credit) can be feasibly divided among so many people?

Ultimate blame lies with the producer. Off with her head.

I believe I wrote a review of TWINE right before Old MI6 was exterminated. Basically, to summarise:

HE DEESGUS ME.

YOU DEESGUS ME.

Richard Hannay - Jobe, is that you? Welcome aboard!

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Richard Hannay - Jobe, is that you? Welcome aboard!

It is, and thank you.

On the contrary, I'd say it's quite embarrassing.

What Antonia fails to understand about the Bond series is that the Bondian tropes are not a function of laziness and lowered expectations; they are an expression of human nature, and more specifically, male nature. Many of us exult not from recognition, but from the actuation of an inner impulse. It is the genius of Bond, even distilled through its cinematic incarnation, that it has correctly ascertained many features of human nature and embroidered them into a tapestry that continues to appeal a full half century after their first appearance, and across every continent on the globe.

Amen to that, Khanners - and (back in '99) 37 years and 19 films into the series, what reviewer worth their salt still thought that Bond worked for MI5?

Blunt Instrument wrote:

and (back in '99) 37 years and 19 films into the series, what reviewer worth their salt still thought that Bond worked for MI5?

Well at least she got the first two letters right.