Last Bond Movie You Watched? 1.0

tiffanywint wrote:

Speaking of Bond hopelessly head-over-heels in-love.

I'd agree that this is the most romantic-feeling of the films, but think it is more a matter of Bond gradually coming to love her inadequacies, which is maybe even better than the head-over-heels route. The exasperated gruff thing is really wonderful with Dalton. I saw D'abo in an SF TV thing (SOMETHING IS OUT THERE or SOMEONE IS OUT THERE for NBC) shortly after TLD, and she was playing much more self-assured sexy, and while effective, she didn't have the winning appeal demonstrated in TLD.

I watch TLD a helluva lot, and find the love aspect of the score to be really catchy - both my old girlfriend (the one who was supposed to be on antipsychotic meds, though I didn't know it when I was with her) and my grounded-in-reality wife really love the music and the picture, so it must have some across-boundary appeal that comes out of the film's feel.

I think you get a full range of Bond between TLD and LTK, which may be why I almost always watch them together, or wrap them around yet another FRWL viewing.

Joe Don Baker is just terribly uninteresting to me, here and elsewhere, so he is definitely the weak link in TLD. Also I would have preferred the brutal kitchen fight to have featured Dalton (he could have muttered, "What about the over burn-ners?' a la 'sting-gers' in LTK), though I have to admit the guys who are in it do just fine.

Salomé wrote:

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Seve's right. Fleming's Bond was frequently wringing his hands over killing. This was most prominent in The Man with the Golden Gun where Bond really cannot bring himself to gun down the supposedly unarmed Scaramanga despite the fact that he's a murdering monster. At times Fleming's Bond's scruples drive me nuts!

:x

I found that aspect of the literally Bond quite... endearing for lack of a better word. As much as we like the cinematic Bond who quips as he kills, his literally counterpart is more human and real in that aspect of his behavior and psychology.

Frankly, a cold aloofness in matters of murder would make Bond too unsympathetic.

It only works in the movies because they inhabit a slightly different realm than the novels.

I see what you're saying and I understand why Fleming did what he did, but the omniscient reader cannot help gritting his teeth when Bond mollycoddles about killing a beast who needs killin', or gets all morose over his bourbon after taking out a lowlife thug like Capungo. But then again, I suppose I might react the same way if I had the same terminal duties as Bond.

trevanian wrote:

But take for example the most uncharacteristic kill I can think of for Bond, when he pumps round after round into Stromberg after the latter has shot his wad. SPY is a schizophrenic pic anyway, but that bit of action just always seemed so wrong to me.

Really? I thought that was one of the best parts in Spy. Yes, maybe it is one too many bullets, but I always liked how Bond gave him what he deserved, and took advantage of it.

trevanian wrote:

But take for example the most uncharacteristic kill I can think of for Bond, when he pumps round after round into Stromberg after the latter has shot his wad. SPY is a schizophrenic pic anyway, but that bit of action just always seemed so wrong to me.

Yep. As I've always said, SPY is the entire Brosnan era (or at least TND onwards) in a microcosm.

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Salomé wrote:

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Seve's right. Fleming's Bond was frequently wringing his hands over killing. This was most prominent in The Man with the Golden Gun where Bond really cannot bring himself to gun down the supposedly unarmed Scaramanga despite the fact that he's a murdering monster. At times Fleming's Bond's scruples drive me nuts!

:x

I found that aspect of the literally Bond quite... endearing for lack of a better word. As much as we like the cinematic Bond who quips as he kills, his literally counterpart is more human and real in that aspect of his behavior and psychology.

Frankly, a cold aloofness in matters of murder would make Bond too unsympathetic.

It only works in the movies because they inhabit a slightly different realm than the novels.

I see what you're saying and I understand why Fleming did what he did, but the omniscient reader cannot help gritting his teeth when Bond mollycoddles about killing a beast who needs killin', or gets all morose over his bourbon after taking out a lowlife thug like Capungo. But then again, I suppose I might react the same way if I had the same terminal duties as Bond.

perhaps you would like to see Anders Behring Breivik replace Craig and be the next James Bond then?

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

I see what you're saying and I understand why Fleming did what he did, but the omniscient reader cannot help gritting his teeth when Bond mollycoddles about killing a beast who needs killin', or gets all morose over his bourbon after taking out a lowlife thug like Capungo. But then again, I suppose I might react the same way if I had the same terminal duties as Bond.

I never found Fleming's approach terribly frustrating because bottom line, Bond did get the job done. He was always up to the task. If he needs to reflect, so be it, as long as the job gets done. In these situations he's basically the noble soldier, minus the uniform. The job is to kill the enemy because in the broader picture, the enemy is a threat to king and country, and what you hold dear. Bond's moral justification is an extension of the self-defence morality, but he is human, so cause for pause is understandable, but not too much as the job needs to be done.
The noble soldier throughout human history has always been recognized as an honorable and necessary profession. Bond's moral justification is solid but still he is human.
===As for Dalton and his romantic inclinations in TLD, I think this was all part of his broader strategy to distance himself from the more cartoonish Moore Bond and establish his Bond as a more intense human character, as envisioned by Fleming. He pulled it off reasonably well,if that's your cup of Bond. I'm not sure it was quite Fleming but it was an honest effort on Dalts part. Nothing contrived, although the goo goo eyes for Kara were I think a bit much.
I much prefer Sean's more disaffected approach to the character though and I think this approach goes over better with cinema audiences as well.
Although Craig seems to be turning the franchise on its ear. He's got away with a broodier more human Bond in his last two films. We'll have to see what the end resuls are in B23 but I suspect it won't be much different than what we've seen, albeit minus the growing pains.
I think Craig's evolved Bond will be closer to Dalt's Bond than Sean Bond.

Both Dalts and Craig are serious dramatic actors and neither it seems wanted to do a Sean imitation. They both desired to put their own stamp on the character.
I can understand this but it doesn't mean I like it. Personally I would prefer that Eon hire less ambitious actors to play Bond and instead find good capable young actors that are content to deliver their best tribute to what Sean created.
I think Bond works best when the Bond character and his issues aren't the focal point of the story. I'd rather seen the established Bond persona engaged in whatever the next dangerous, fantastical adventure presents complete with eccentric and exotic characters, situations etc.
We the audience live vicariously through Bond.
This is the way the first 7 films were done, as well as the Rog films, although the Rog Bond persona was not quite as dark and dangerous as the Conners/Lazenby interpretations.

I agree with the notion that Bond's story shouldn't be the main focus, it should be about the mission. You can have character moments for him IN THAT CONTEXT, like when Fiona puts him in his place in TB, and it just makes it all play better for creating some depth in the drama/action.

I don't know that anybody outside of Adrian Paul would be satisfied delivering a Sean impression, but again, if I had a time machine, I think you could plug Eric Braeden in as Bond at nearly any point in the first 20 years and have somebody who was close enough to Connery to make things play well given an adequate script.

Last Bond film I saw was Quantum of Solace. It was Bond as imagined by the BBC, written by Ellswoth Toohey and edited by Nintendo. Self-rightious, leftist propaganda, totally devoid of colour and life, and with an uneducated ape in the lead. Ticked all the boxes in other words.

Now you guys say that there's going to be another film. What the hell does it take to kill a series these days?

Avarice wrote:

Last Bond film I saw was Quantum of Solace. It was Bond as imagined by the BBC, written by Ellswoth Toohey and edited by Nintendo. Self-rightious, leftist propaganda, totally devoid of colour and life, and with an uneducated ape in the lead. Ticked all the boxes in other words.

Now you guys say that there's going to be another film. What the hell does it take to kill a series these days?

What you weren't moved by QoS to get down to Bolivia and start digging wells.

The Bond we know may have died in the Bolivian desert, but he does have two lives. However he only lives twice and that's it, at least according to Fleming.

Another bleak message movie like the last, and he may join Greene in the desert slurping motor oil.

Avarice wrote:

Last Bond film I saw was Quantum of Solace. It was Bond as imagined by the BBC, written by Ellswoth Toohey and edited by Nintendo. Self-rightious, leftist propaganda, totally devoid of colour and life, and with an uneducated ape in the lead. Ticked all the boxes in other words.

Now you guys say that there's going to be another film. What the hell does it take to kill a series these days?

I think you're going to fit in here pretty good.

Avarice wrote:

Last Bond film I saw was Quantum of Solace. It was Bond as imagined by the BBC, written by Ellswoth Toohey and edited by Nintendo. Self-rightious, leftist propaganda, totally devoid of colour and life, and with an uneducated ape in the lead. Ticked all the boxes in other words.

Now you guys say that there's going to be another film. What the hell does it take to kill a series these days?

Welcome back Ambler, we missed you. ;)

Salomé wrote:

Avarice wrote:

Last Bond film I saw was Quantum of Solace. It was Bond as imagined by the BBC, written by Ellswoth Toohey and edited by Nintendo. Self-rightious, leftist propaganda, totally devoid of colour and life, and with an uneducated ape in the lead. Ticked all the boxes in other words.

Now you guys say that there's going to be another film. What the hell does it take to kill a series these days?

Welcome back Ambler, we missed you. ;)

One does wonder.

:)

Avarice wrote:

Last Bond film I saw was Quantum of Solace. It was Bond as imagined by the BBC, written by Ellswoth Toohey and edited by Nintendo. Self-rightious, leftist propaganda, totally devoid of colour and life, and with an uneducated ape in the lead. Ticked all the boxes in other words.

Now you guys say that there's going to be another film. What the hell does it take to kill a series these days?

The Man With the Golden Gun



"You see, Mr Bond, l always thought l liked animals. Then l discovered that l liked killing people even more."

Ooh, that line gave me the willies! :face: What a crock. The Richard Maibaum scenes really stand out. He must have been pissed to have Mankeywitz and Michael G. Wilson 'add' to his work. The only character I liked was Lazar. There was pretty much no charisma anywhere else. Hip was hilarious, not in a good way. "The girl is dead. Call the police!" I roared at that line. Dude, you are the police. At least Maud Adams was hot, but Bond let her die. She expressly tried to get his help and offered herself to him as payment (along with whatever else he wanted), so in return he was an asshole to her, used her for information and then let her be killed by Scaramanga. What a charmer. The movie does another boat chase a la LALD, only this one's terrible. JW Pepper shows up for no good reason, too. I skipped all the scientific BS regarding Scaramanga's solar laser... and, well, the whole climax, really. The fight with Nick Nack was enjoyable. But in the end, Bond didn't save Andrea, he didn't get the Solex... at least we got to see the Goodnight subplot conclude. Talk about crackling sexual tension!

Avarice wrote:

Now you guys say that there's going to be another film. What the hell does it take to kill a series these days?

money talks
and Bond still walks the walk at the box office
;)

tiffanywint wrote:

The Bond we know may have died in the Bolivian desert, but he does have two lives. However he only lives twice and that's it, at least according to Fleming.

Bond only lives twice, but Fleming says nothing about how many times he can "die" (metaphorically speaking)

Seve wrote:

Bond only lives twice, but Fleming says nothing about how many times can "die" (metaphorically speaking)

I find it to be a truly chilling moment when Blofled turns to Bond and cautions, "You only live twice, Mr. Bond" Gives me goosebumps. That scene couldn't have been written better. The first screen face to face between Bond and Blofeld, is one of the series great moments IMO. Both seem somewhat in awe of the other for a moment anyway, and then its back to business.



YOLT is ultimate Bond. Bond has never been done to such scale and probably never will again. Its a truly awesome epic Bond adventure. Blofeld is like a demon living in a volcano and Bond takes the fight right to his lair. Goosebumps.:shock:

Belfast's Waterfront Hall (a local concert venue) is running a season of 'classic' movies ... YOLT is showing tomorrow night, so naturally I'm going :D . And I'm off to a showing of Alien next weekend, too.

trevanian wrote:

But take for example the most uncharacteristic kill I can think of for Bond, when he pumps round after round into Stromberg after the latter has shot his wad.

I need to watch SPY again if this is half as pornographic as it sounds.



NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN

Been about seven years since I saw this last. Better than expected.

This story sports two of the best villains this side of the sixties - slimy humanitarian Largo and eccentric seductress Blush work because their actors aren't attempting imitations. Both have horrible taste in jazz, which is quite villainous in itself. Blofeld's most memorable moment? Ending SPECTRE's threat of nuclear annihilation by surprising his cat with a fake detonation of the bombs.

Well-composed shots throughout (though soft-lens does lose its charm after the twentieth time). Soundly edited and paced too, with action and stuntwork more than comparable to EON's films. Darker narrative details abound - the use of heroin to bend an air-force pilot to SPECTRE's will, its description as a "cruel mistress", is reminiscent of Fleming. Certain scenes might be reordered for extra tension (much like in the original), but sadly - and in great Bond tradition - the climax disappoints. By the time I realize it's Largo that Bond's fighting, and not some anonymous lackey, Domino materializes out of nowhere and kills him.

Legrand's score works about 30% of the time, and the rest is just unfortunate. One short piece I really like - "Bond Returns Home" - reflects a Bond in the autumn of his life, with an air of relaxed resignation to it that evokes the novels wonderfully. I can almost feel the wind tracing through the curtains as Bond returns from his night at Casino Royale.

He then finds Nicole dead, and the viewer finds NSNA's best action in a well-choreographed motorbike chase. No backscreen projection here (take that Moore).

Another standout sequence? Bond's game of Domination against Largo. It's a nice twist on the old standard, with similarities to the villain's plot amusingly blatant. Also refreshing to see: Bond's frankness in telling Domino that he's looking for a reaction (thus a distraction) when he kisses her in plain view of her owner. A small moment lending Connery's depiction a humanity often absent from past films, where he seemingly baits the villain solely for sport.

Connery's Bond hasn't been this human since FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. He makes mistakes, even gets his ass kicked once or twice. His advanced years aren't ignored (or flat-out contradicted - looking at you, CASINO ROYALE), nor are his skills of situational improvisation. I really like seeing Connery deviate from the unflappable ubercool of THUNDERBALL.

With all that said, I'd be lying if I said NSNA's portrayal stood out to me. I probably prefer it to the original's (definitely prefer '83 Largo and Felix), but there's a spark missing somewhere in the performance. He's not quite as... dangerous, anymore. Maybe that's intentional. An entertaining Bond film either way.

01. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
02. NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN

Watched OHMSS last night. Simply the best. But that's not news.

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Watched OHMSS last night. Simply the best. But that's not news.

No, but it's good to hear everytime.

Loved OHMSS' production, particularly up through the Gumbold office sequence. Very stylish and retro, even by 1969 standards.

Sleeper wrote:

NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN

Been about seven years since I saw this last. Better than expected.

This story sports two of the best villains this side of the sixties - slimy humanitarian Largo and eccentric seductress Blush work because their actors aren't attempting imitations. Both have horrible taste in jazz, which is quite villainous in itself...

...Another standout sequence? Bond's game of Domination against Largo. It's a nice twist on the old standard, with similarities to the villain's plot amusingly blatant. Also refreshing to see: Bond's frankness in telling Domino that he's looking for a reaction (thus a distraction) when he kisses her in plain view of her owner. A small moment lending Connery's depiction a humanity often absent from past films, where he seemingly baits the villain solely for sport...

...Connery's Bond hasn't been this human since FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. He makes mistakes, even gets his ass kicked once or twice. His advanced years aren't ignored (or flat-out contradicted - looking at you, CASINO ROYALE), nor are his skills of situational improvisation. I really like seeing Connery deviate from the unflappable ubercool of THUNDERBALL...

...With all that said, I'd be lying if I said NSNA's portrayal stood out to me. I probably prefer it to the original's (definitely prefer '83 Largo and Felix), but there's a spark missing somewhere in the performance. He's not quite as... dangerous, anymore. Maybe that's intentional. An entertaining Bond film either way.

nice to read an objective review, not coloured by silly "unofficial" prejudices
;)

Nice review, Sleeper.

I enjoy NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN for what it is. Bond enjoys fine women, fine food, kicks a bit of ass, and gets a bit of ass. If that were the last Bond film to ever be made, I think it'd be perfect, as it shows off a near-retirement Bond as I would imagine him.

I'd take it over any of the more recent Bond films.

YOLT ... in all its absurd magnificence on the big screen in a crisply remastered print :) .

Mr. Brown wrote:

I'd take it over any of the more recent Bond films.

I'd take all of Die Another Day's faults over pathetic close ups of a horse jumping over cliffs, Bond dancing, earning himself the centre of attention, an insipid Domino and pretentious Fatima Blush (despite her beauty), a ridiculous villain/Bond battle and a lacklustre fight between Bond and henchman ending in piss in the face.