|
I personally think License to Kill is Dalton's best (I love it so much), but it's rather polarizing, and Moore's best is either For Your Eyes Only or The Spy Who Loved Me (I like For Your Eyes Only more, but it's drat close).
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:59 |
|
|
I would argue that For Your Eyes Only is Moore's best. Spy Who Loved Me is great, and pretty much the defining Moore film... but For Your Eyes Only is so reserved and Moore is just great in it. I'm a big fan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
It has varied over time, the one consistent variable so far being that each bond actor ends their run with their worst movie, or one of their worst. Connery's best was probably From Russia With Love (#2), and he ended with the terrible Diamonds are Forever (#6) (or if you want to count it, Never Say Never Again (#7), also not a strong entry). Lazenby only had 1, so doesn't really count. Moore didn't hit his stride until #3 or #5 depending on how you're counting it (or never, if like me, you don't like his entries). For Your Eyes Only is his best movie imho. Brosnan, most people give it to Goldeneye, I actually prefer Tomorrow Never Dies, and again, Die Another Day was his worst. I've kind of been hoping Craig could dodge the curse and finish out on a high note, but maybe it just isn't destined to be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Saw this tonight - I enjoyed it, but it probably wasn't as good as Skyfall. It hasn't got the pathos that did (the lack of Dench, I suspect), and despite the villain being built up to high heaven, he didn't feel like as much of a threat as Silva. There were also some odd moments that seemed out of place - perhaps due to a tumultuous development: It felt bizarre that Blofeld's crater base just blew up for no real reason. Did the explosion watch set off a chain reaction or something? We weren't shown it. Also, Blofeld made a huge deal about his brain drills altering Bond's mind, and then there was never any follow-up from that. Since they said he'd have face blindness, I wondered if they'd play a Fight Club-esque twist where in the entire final section of the film the Swan we see on screen isn't the Swan who's actually there, and she was actually a completely different woman in the same dress that Bond was unable to identify or something. But nothing came of it, it was never mentioned again. I also thought that Dave Bautista looked like if Ricky Grover really got himself in shape.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
vegetables posted:In some ways, it reminded me of Die another Day, in that it takes the established format of the Bond movies immediately preceding it and stretches it to the point that it snaps apart completely. A real problem it has is that the overarching narrative now spans ten years, and to an extent this means that the concerns the film deals with seem like the ones people had in 2005 rather than the ones we've got here in 2015. Today, I'd say what characterises the world is a broad collapse of the post Cold War order, as tensions between major states steadily increase and the political situation in minor ones undergo complete collapse. To me, it's a world defined by a growing sense of rudderlessness and chaos— but the threats in SPECTRE's world, by contrast, are ones defined by total order. It was a strange experience to go and see a film where the bad guys' plan depends on the USA and China giving each other access to their security infrastructure, then coming out of it to find those two countries have engaged in military posturing out in the South China Sea. It made me feel that the world where SPECTRE win and get to spy on everyone was still, on balance, a safer and more secure one than actual reality. It made me feel like the world I lived in had more in common with a James Bond movie than the one I saw on the screen. The movie is more modern than you appreciate but the point it's making is pretty straightforward. Spectre is a post-Snowden movie. The baddies use an alphabet agency to do their bidding. The themse is that Big Surveillance is bad. kapparomeo fucked around with this message at 02:13 on Oct 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
Spectre: The cat dies Really enjoyed the first two acts especially the opening segment it really nailed it for me, brought back memories of watching bond films at Christmas when I was a kid. The ending bugged me though, did Blofeld set up the net so he could escape, out of mutual respect or just to gently caress with him more? Also I think the opener to the next film will be Mrs bond getting killed on her wedding day ala on her majesty's secret service. Mystery Steve fucked around with this message at 13:02 on Oct 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
^^broken spoiler tags though
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
bullet3 posted:It has varied over time, the one consistent variable so far being that each bond actor ends their run with their worst movie, or one of their worst. License to Kill is wonderful, dammit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
Mystery Steve posted:Spectre: The cat dies The building was rigged for demolition as they said at the beginning of the movie, and there was building equipment scattered around. The net was set up by the workers to protect them from any debris falling down the shaft as they worked. Bond making use of it was just some lateral thinking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:I personally think License to Kill is Dalton's best (I love it so much), but it's rather polarizing, and Moore's best is either For Your Eyes Only or The Spy Who Loved Me (I like For Your Eyes Only more, but it's drat close). My ranking goes something like this FWIW: I think Live and Let Die is Moore's most enjoyable film because it's so insane if you think about what's going on for even a second. The Spy Who Loved Me is probably the best overall because while it's ridiculous, I don't remember it having any really appalling parts that just kill the movie either. It's basically the essence of Roger Moore's Bond, for better and worse. For Your Eyes Only is probably the next best, but the opening where Blofeld gets dropped down a smokestack is garbage and the movie just rolls over and dies in the middle when Bibi the underage ice skating nymphomaniac shows up. Plus he's already waaaayyyyy too old. After that, ugh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:For Your Eyes Only is probably the next best, but the opening where Blofeld gets dropped down a smokestack is garbage sean10mm posted:and the movie just rolls over and dies in the middle when Bibi the underage ice skating nymphomaniac shows up. Plus he's already waaaayyyyy too old. And the end of For Your Eyes Only with the mountain assault...and Topol...and Julian Glover...I love that movie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Generally an enjoyable Bond film, but some bits of it felt a bit weird/off after I walked out of the cinema. The opening scene was really well shot as everyone knows, but I couldn't really suspend my disbelief for the rest of it. Firstly it was the Day of the Dead celebration continuing even after Bond brought an entire city block down - no one really seemed to care outside of the immediate area. Secondly the whole helicopter fight scene seems ridiculously reckless even for Bond, I can't think of another film where he (directly!) put so many bystanders at risk of a violent fiery death. Then later I got confused as they headed to Blofield's lair on the train. How did the Henchman guy get on the train and wait so long to attack? Why did he even try to kill them? Didn't Blofield want them to find the lair? How did he know to send a car out to get them? Why did bond go to the lair (what did it do?) with no plan, just to instantly get captured an tortured? Why did the torture machine do nothing at all? Was replaying the footage of Mr White killing himself really that big of a deal? Really this whole section I had no idea why the gently caress anything was actually happening, did I miss something? And seconds later it all blew up from a single bullet. And finally I didn't really like how they retroactively made the previous 3 films to be part of Spectre's plan the whole time. I was never convinced that those plots actually had anything to do with this film, aside from showing us a bunch of pictures of dead people from other films. Also Blofield/Spectre really didn't seem threatening, at the least nothing compared to Silva. Maybe its because global surveillance is already a thing that is real and is happening. But I think I liked it overall. I think I need to re-watch the previous 3 now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
I feel like this is the third film in a row that attempted to follow up on the end of Casino Royale.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
I'm not a massive Bond fan but I thought this movie was very weak. It had essentially the same plot as MI: Rogue Nation, and I enjoyed MI so much more. I can believe Spectre had production problems tying everything together with all the emphasis on tracking nanomachines in the blood- pretty much pointless because Q doesn't get in trouble for covering for Bond, and the torture to remove recognition. I thought perhaps Bond would confuse Madeline as his love from Casino Royale and that would give him the strength to carry on and defeat the torture, but, nope... irrelephant. I had a bit more respect for the film when Madeline told Bond that she wouldn't be falling into his arms, and they had a nice conversation about her being able to make her own choices... but really, there was no choice: she would fall into his arms, and be madly in love with him in record time. Combined with the seduction of the assassin's wife, it just seems so creepy that the targets of his seduction are women who should be grieving. But I guess overcoming the extra challenge means he's extra manly? BOFF! Train sequence was just like a video game quality quick-time event. And everyone on the train disappeared? Perhaps we can assume there was a stop just before dinner where Bautista's character made everyone leave. Or something. Speaking of Bautista, what a terrible entrance into a terrible organisation. An elite cabal of assassins. Well, maybe they're not so elite- they singularly fail at everything on-screen, and the losses Bond inflicts on them beyond the one in the opening aren't noticeable. Maybe they have a really good union? MI6 must have a rubbish union of course (Thatcher probably destroyed it), since Bond gets fired despite being the only semi-competent spy in the movie. Really, the only evil spy organisation in modern cinematic history that has achieved anything was Cobra in the second GI Joe movie... As someone else mentioned, this is Austin Powers level of obvious parody but played straight, and it just does not help the movie. It wasn't exactly a surprise that Bond managed to take down the helicoptor at the end of the film- he blew up an entire base with hundreds of employees just as easily earlier in the film, after running across so much open ground with the usual stormtrooper shooting. He did take cover for maybe a tenth of the sequence though. And as much as I like a good splosion, the base's big boom was so overdone it was like one of those times that someone accidentally sets off 45 minutes of fireworks in one go So, yeah, not a fan. Opening sequence was good, much more vibrant than Rogue Nation's airborne antics, but Tom Cruise's stunt was better even if they didn't show the actual resolution. Ah well. I look forward to the next Bond, and maybe some coherent plotting?! kapparomeo posted:The building was rigged for demolition as they said at the beginning of the movie, and there was building equipment scattered around. The net was set up by the workers to protect them from any debris falling down the shaft as they worked. Bond making use of it was just some lateral thinking. It probably seemed overly-convenient because they have one in the HQ in Divergent, so it's like, "Whoa, hang on, what's that thing from that other movie doing there to save the day?". Marmaduke! fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Oct 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Squalitude posted:It probably seemed overly-convenient because they have one in the HQ in Divergent, so it's like, "Whoa, hang on, what's that thing from that other movie doing there to save the day?". gently caress you for reminding me of Divergent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Thought it was a solid, classically-structured, globe hopping Bond with a very poor attempt to shoehorn in the 'It was me all along James' plot and make it bigger than it is. It looks good, very occasionally great, but pretty drab and disappointing after Skyfall. Also one of those films that even though I enjoyed it, it's a lot easier to nit pick rather than talk about the good stuff. Surprised there isn't more hate for the foster brother reveal. I mean, c'mon. Why the panic to stop the surveillance system going online? They were treating it like it was Skynet or something. How did the magic DNA device trace all those previous bad guys? Was the ring passed down from one Bond baddie to the next and no one else? Apart from that, I thought the investigation moving the plot forward worked fine up until he goes to the Bond Baddie Lair with seemingly no plan whatsoever and Batista tries to kill him even though Blofeld wanted him to arrive (?). Also, I can seen now why Mission Impossible was brought forward.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Saw this tonight. It's a mixed bag for me. Some of the action was really fun and it had a few set pieces that were classic "Bond does some ridiculously suicidal poo poo but it looks cool" without it being a farce. I think the tone was just right and it felt more like a Bond movie than any of the other Craig ones. It's way longer than it should be though. It really started to drag towards the end and I could feel people in the audience getting a little impatient. The ending was a mess. I only read about the Sony leak thing catching up with this thread tonight but boy could you feel it. It felt almost...BBC1-ish at times. And how many countdowns do you want? All this stuff just happens so fast in a movie that is already overstaying its welcome. I felt it relied on M and Moneypenny a bit too much. The whole surveillance part of the plot was a bit too on the nose without every making any kind of statement on the issue. The movie says it's bad but there is never really a discussion about the moral implications. It's bad because MI6 get poo poo done. The last two movies have featured M a lot. How about doing a Bond movie where he goes after some guys who have nothing to do with his backstory?. 8raz fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Oct 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Saw it tonight, I loved the intro as at the start the skeleton costume makes it seem as Bond is wiggling his rear end. Why did I stare at that more than the woman's rear end?  The absolute biggest plot hole for me was the "Yeah the government didn't pay for all this NSA poo poo, a private company did." And M didn't completely freak out at this. I love Ralph Fiennes' utterly British teeth. Overall it was ok, although I was dead sure on Hinx pulling a Karl at the last minute. Have Bond Villains gone through worse? Squalitude posted:As someone else mentioned, SPOILAH You should appreciate the dedication of loyal employees who sleep on the floor of their offices due to the housing crisis on-base and stand to attention when The Boss turns the lights off (Pray he doesn't take meds and just flick lights on and off all night). Wasn't your parent murdered by your own hand for nothing!? Kids these days... School Nickname fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Nov 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
I only have one question. Does the theme from OHMSS come up in the movie like it did in the trailers and is it as awesome a moment as I hope it is?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
School Nickname posted:Saw it tonight, I loved the intro as at the start the skeleton costume makes it seem as Bond is wiggling his rear end. Why did I stare at that more than the woman's rear end? That's one of the things I really respect the Craig Bond films for: their willingness to describe Bond as a sexual object, not just the women. Saw it last night; thought it was excellent. When you break it down the villain's plan doesn't make any sense, but that goes for most of them, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 08:27
|
|
|
This movie was pretty decent, but what really stood out to me is how they try to ideologically pivot Bond into something liberal... ish. Like, I think that the comments about this being a post-Snowden movie are only partially correct. Snowden himself worked for a private security contractor, and is responsible for helping to bring forwards public consciousness about government surveillance. However, this film puts a significant focus on the fact that the Nine Eyes program is as much a private venture as anything. The surveillance company (GIC?) is a contractor. An unnamed private donor put up money for the new surveillance building (and I think the clear glass aesthetic is very on point). Combine this with the fact that MI:6 is being done away with in the name of 'government efficiency,' and this film starts to look like it has a distinct anti-Cameron streak to it. Then you've got the dialog between M and C over 'the way forward' and 'democratic accountability' and all that. Even Q taking down the Nine Eyes program is presented to some degree as a triumph of bureaucracy - "this is my quartermaster, he's very good." I guess in that sense it's a fairly substantial sequel to Skyfall, not just in plot. Skyfall looked back at what Bond was, and how that couldn't fit in the modern world. Spectre tries to give an answer as to what Bond has to be in the future. And I guess I'm pleasantly surprised that the answer they give is more progressive than the answer you get back in Goldeneye, but I have no idea how well it can stick. I mean, unaccountable assassins for democracy and (limited) anti-capitalism doesn't seem the most coherent thing, does it? e: This reminds me of another thing: I don't think that Bond is ever referred to as a spy in this film. Always an assassin.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
What's pretty funny is that for all the poo poo that studio execs get, they're completely right when they talked about the Spectre script. And they clearly didn't fix those issues. First off, I think that up until Tangier the movie is pretty good. That opening is fantastic (Though also victim to some unfortunate green screen) and the plot moves along well enough, but the third act is such a let down. I don't actually think the big reveal was all that bad mainly because Waltz plays it just like a petulant and bitter child. Some of his line readings were pretty great in that regard, though you can tell he's really trying to do the best with what he's got.. I don't know how the gently caress you fix that third act though. One moment I absolutely detested is when she tells Bond she loves him. It's so unearned, and insulting to a character whom, literally 2 days before, told Bond that she would kill him if he touched her. What's the point? Why does she need to suddenly be in love with him? Likewise (And again this is the exact thing that gets raised in those leaked emails), from Bond's point of view why her? Why now? What does Bond get from her that he hasn't from countless others? It's a question the movie just doesn't attempt to answer. I don't know why that bothered me so much, but it just took me out of the movie completely. Funnily enough in my screening you could some murmers after she said it, which leads me to believe that no one else really bought it either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:(Though also victim to some unfortunate green screen) This was so jarring and bad for this day and age, I couldn't help but wonder if it was deliberate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Junkenstein posted:This was so jarring and bad for this day and age, I couldn't help but wonder if it was deliberate. I think it's more due to an already rushed production. There's an incredibly jarring transition where Bond goes from inside the room to out on the balcony as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:I think Live and Let Die is Moore's most enjoyable film because it's so insane if you think about what's going on for even a second. Every so often the climactic fight scene from that movie pops into my head and I just kind of sit around perplexed as I try to figure out the confluence of events that lead to this being put on screen. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Enjoyed this one. The audience gave an appreciative chuckle at "now we know what C stands for" I noticed in this film and Skyfall that M, Q and Moneypenny have a more frontline role than previous films. I don't dislike the change of dynamic, but it feels a bit like the Buffy gang are in charge of MI6.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
So, is Waltz signed on to reprise the role with whichever actor is Bond in the next film, or was it a one and done kind of deal? From all the rumblings online it doesn't sound like there was much in this film for him to work with or anything to convince him to do a second one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Rap Record Hoarder posted:So, is Waltz signed on to reprise the role with whichever actor is Bond in the next film, or was it a one and done kind of deal? From all the rumblings online it doesn't sound like there was much in this film for him to work with or anything to convince him to do a second one. Time for another reboot obviously
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Honestly I was pretty surprised to see that Craig has another Bond film to do since this sort of attempts a sense of finality. I just assume that they'll use Waltz if they want to, but given how little he's giving to do here I couldn't blame him if he stays away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 12:17
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Every so often the climactic fight scene from that movie pops into my head and I just kind of sit around perplexed as I try to figure out the confluence of events that lead to this being put on screen. Well, you see, there was this guy, and he was a Caribbean island dictator, who was also a Harlem heroin dealer, who also ran a chain of seafood restaurants from New York to New Orleans as front businesses, oh and also occult bookstores and alligator farms. The secret to his success was a captive white virgin woman voodoo priestess. Then a white English guy appears and things get weird...
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:Well, you see, there was this guy, and he was a Caribbean island dictator, who was also a Harlem heroin dealer, who also ran a chain of seafood restaurants from New York to New Orleans as front businesses, oh and also occult bookstores and alligator farms. The secret to his success was a captive white virgin woman voodoo priestess. Then a white English guy appears and things get weird... Doesn't Bond also seduce her by getting her to choose his fate by drawing a tarot card which turns out to be The Lovers, and then while they're making out he drops the pack and it turns out they were ALL The Lovers? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Doesn't Bond also seduce her by getting her to choose his fate by drawing a tarot card which turns out to be The Lovers, and then while they're making out he drops the pack and it turns out they were ALL The Lovers? Yup. Kananga also likes to use parades to assassinate people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
poo poo, I feel like I gotta go out and buy a copy of Live and Let Die now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
It's more fun to describe Live and Let Die than it is to watch it IMO, but it's still entertaining if you aren't offended by a movie that basically implies that all black people everywhere are in a motorboat alligator farm murder parade voodoo heroin gang interstate seafood restaurant chain dictatorship. Except for the black CIA, which is actually cool and good until it gets assassinated by a parade, because we can't have the black guy way cooler than James Bond who literally explained to the audience why everything James Bond does in this movie is dumb to live. It's also funny to watch a film from a time when an espresso machine is treated more like witchcraft than actual witchcraft. Though to be fair we're in a James Bond movie where magic is real.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Is this Craig's last bond film?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Fat_Cow posted:Is this Craig's last bond film? He's said as much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
I thought he had confirmed he had one more. I'm pretty sure in that interview that did the rounds he said he didn't want to think about it but he did indeed have another one to do. Which is odd as this one seems to have a touch of finality to it. Serious spoiler question now: Blofeld tells Bond he's been behind everything from the start, so doesn't that negate what happens in SKYFALL? Or are we to assume that he just stumbled across Silva and their paths aligned in such a way that they had a common interest. Furthermore, his plan seems to have been to let Bond know he was behind everything, so what, if Le Chiffre or Silva succeeded would he have just been really pissed? It's something the movie just tosses out there and doesn't really address because it wants to have this ultra villain
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:It's more fun to describe Live and Let Die than it is to watch it IMO Sorry if this has been brought up before, but what do people consider the WORST Bond film? Die Another Day is objectively awful but it's so awful that it kind of wraps around and becomes bizarrely entertaining. I loved Moonraker as a kid but it has not aged well at all, and speaking of not aging well..... Roger Moore in A View to a Kill is just kind of depressing to watch. I think that would probably be my pick for worst Bond film, which is especially depressing because it's got Christopher Walken as the villain which should have been amazing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
I wonder who the contractor was that designed the gasvalve in Blofeld crater. Bloody Stupid Johnson maybe? Or maybe Bevel Lemelisk... The entire headprobe scene was terrible. I flinched because it looked painful and then there's literally no follow up. Everything else was pretty fun. Daniel is slowly becoming more of a gentleman Bond instead of action hero Bond.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:59 |
|
|
Spectre is already breaking records overseas so I'm sure they can afford Craig for another one of they really want to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:29
|
|
