Alec 006
Commander
"Finish the job, James! Blow them all to hell !!"
Posts: 422
|
Post by Alec 006 on Feb 1, 2008 4:42:26 GMT -5
Hello, For me, it's no contest. My vote goes to "Diamonds Are Forever". Connery looks bored, out of shape, and seems to be just "going through the motions". The film lacks the "epic Bond" feel...we get Las Vegas, rather than exotic locales. Charles Gray, who I liked in "You Only Live Twice" as Henderson, is totally mis-cast as Blofeld. Considering the gut-wrenching, tragic ending of the previous movie with Tracy being killed, and Bond knowing it was Blofeld, the pre-titles sequence from "For Your Eyes Only" would've been so much more satisfying. The whole diamond smuggling plot was confusing and silly, and casting "the sausage king" Jimmy Dean as Willard Whyte? Bond being knocked on his arse more than once by "Bambi" and "Thumper" I will say though, that Jill St. John made a beautiful and sassy Bond girl...and Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd were pretty creepy. While DAF was in pre-production...David Picker, President of United Artists, flew to England in a last ditch effort to lure Connery back. A record breaking salary, a share of the profits, and a promise to finance two films of Connery's choosing. Wow! I guess they figured having Connery back would be enough. For me, it wasn't. Take Care!
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Feb 1, 2008 7:25:36 GMT -5
MR, OP and AVTAK are generally considered to be more tongue in cheek than the more serious Bond films. That said, they work really well and all 3 films boast some of the best 'spy' related scenes in the whole franchise.
|
|
|
Post by adam on Feb 1, 2008 15:28:14 GMT -5
I've seen regular criticism of Connery in DAF. To me he looks to be in good shape. He looks his age but his age was only 41 which is easily young enough to play Bond. There had been a four year gap from YOLT so he looked older than in his 60's hey day. But he compensated for that with charm, confidence, humour and moved effortlessly through all the scenes. I disagree he was sleep walking through the film. He had been given a record breaking fee and he knew it was his last Bond movie. So professional pride would have seen him making an effort. The film had it's faults but was entertaining and put the seris back on track after OHMSS flopped.
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Feb 1, 2008 16:51:39 GMT -5
I've seen regular criticism of Connery in DAF. To me he looks to be in good shape. He looks his age but his age was only 41 which is easily young enough to play Bond. There had been a four year gap from YOLT so he looked older than in his 60's hey day. But he compensated for that with charm, confidence, humour and moved effortlessly through all the scenes. I disagree he was sleep walking through the film. He had been given a record breaking fee and he knew it was his last Bond movie. So professional pride would have seen him making an effort. The film had it's faults but was entertaining and put the seris back on track after OHMSS flopped. OHMSS is quite popular amongst hardcore Bond fans, but not so much with the worldwide audience. I actually thought DAF was weak in comparison with OHMSS and easily behind the classic LALD, which in my opinion rejuvenated the series.
|
|
|
Post by benny on Feb 1, 2008 21:01:41 GMT -5
Define silly though. I thought YOLT was silly in some areas. Bond going Japanese...a hollowed out volcano. Or DAF for it's over use (though often very funny) use of humour. TMWTGG is one that could be considered silly because it's so dated in its storyline. TSWLM and MR both have alot of tongue in cheek humour and silly ott settings and villains. Then the more modern Bond films. The highly praised though over rate GE with it's secret satalite base in Cuba, or Carvers stealth boat and Graves space laser...they're all silly in there way. If you look at it, there are many silly elements to the Bond films. All of them. But of the lot the silly award would got to DAD. Bond surfing, an out of character entry to the hotel in pyjammas, dna face transformations, invisible cars, obvious double agents...more surfing, and space lasers. For me that's silly. If CR is more Bourne inspired then DAD is the result of the XXX movies, which were for a better word crap! Just like DAD.
|
|
|
Post by smartboy on Feb 2, 2008 6:57:04 GMT -5
OK! im going to stand up DAD , it certainly was not crap, a little over the top but not crap!
|
|
|
Post by poirot on Feb 2, 2008 16:05:12 GMT -5
The problem with this thread is that the Bond films, by their very nature, are silly escapism. They've become synonymous with colorful villains, exotic locales, and over-the-top stunts. If you take an element like Dr. No's dragon, a golden girl, a space laser, an ice palace, a magnetic/buzzsaw watch, a submarine car, or an ejector seat and place it in another film, it would just seem silly. But in a James Bond film, it's exactly the type of thing audiences expect. This is why EON was able to go further and further over-the-top in the 90's, because people naturally accept that kind of approach for a Bond movie. The only thing that's really silly is the current attempt to suggest that Bond is a franchise grounded in reality. The fiction was always more fantastic than its peers, and the films have always been more over-the-top. You can count on one hand the films that could be considered "serious" spy fare, and even those contain fantastic elements. There was a bigwig terrorist eliminated last week. I wonder if he was lured into a Texas Hold `Em poker game? Isn't that the type of cold hard reality we're currently faced with today? ;D
|
|
|
Post by benny on Feb 3, 2008 0:20:57 GMT -5
OK! im going to stand up DAD , it certainly was not crap, a little over the top but not crap! Crapfest number 1 aka Die Another Day. It was Crap central, the lord of all dump. Craptacular. The only good that came from it was that the producers saw the light, let Brosnan go and hired a better actor who was younger to play James Bond. And yes there were silly moments in CR, and they'll be silly moments in QOS. I can live with that.
|
|
|
Post by 009 on Feb 3, 2008 7:34:03 GMT -5
On Her Majesty's Secret Service is silly as well. Why didn't he just get some of his operatives to realase the virus instead of hypnotising those women in his lair? It makes me wonder why many people wish for a more realistic Bond and complain about most of the Bond series being silly.
|
|
|
Post by smartboy on Feb 3, 2008 10:52:30 GMT -5
So you thought DAD a crapfest Benny, isnt there one bit of the film you liked, i saw it at a charity showing at pinewood , i was a little shocked in bits, but i loved the gunbarrel, loved the hovercraft chase, loved the new car and the car chase, loved the babes, pierce was great as he is always was.
|
|
|
Post by smartboy on Feb 3, 2008 10:54:29 GMT -5
Oh and i forgot to say Toby Stevens - i think that was his name gave an excellent performance!
|
|
|
Post by Robert Sterling on Apr 25, 2008 8:23:14 GMT -5
Hello everybody! I'm great defender of AVTAK as it's one of my favourite Bond films. If you ask me Sir Roger gave one of his better performances in the role here. I don't find any real silliness in it (Beach Boys song in PTS being an exception). Actually the film seems to be one of the darker adventures of Moore's Bond. Almost as dark as often praised for its seriousness FYEO. Let me remind you: garrotting of Tibbet and dialogue between Bond and Zorin afterwards, crushing of the KGB agent on the pumping station, gunning down of the workers at the mine by Zorin - all pretty intense scenes.
For the silliest film of the series I'd definitely pick DAF. Genneraly I'm not a supporter of dark, gritty approach to Bond and much more prefer lightheartedness and irony. But DAF is too much even for me. While so often crucified for ridiculousness MR is merely an action comedy (as opposite to the majority of Bond films which are action thrillers), DAF is pure nonsense. MR (and the like, OP for instance) at least have solid plot, intrigue that make sense and, as Skywalker pointed it out, a lot of memorable sets and scenes - Bond classics. What we have in DAF? Well, Moon buggy chase.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Apr 25, 2008 12:58:09 GMT -5
Welcome to the forum Mr Sterling. And name this fish.
|
|
|
Post by Robert Sterling on Apr 25, 2008 13:26:05 GMT -5
Thank you for welcome. As for the fish let's say that I recognize that variety, of course.
|
|
|
Post by poirot on Apr 27, 2008 20:36:44 GMT -5
I'm great defender of AVTAK as it's one of my favourite Bond films. If you ask me Sir Roger gave one of his better performances in the role here. I also think AVTAK gets better with each passing year, and actually regard it as the last "pure" Cubby Bond film. Once political-correctness entered the series, I think Bond lost a little bit of his mojo. Anyway, good observations about the darker moments in AVTAK. I've always felt that if Moore had been allowed to play an older 007, it could've been a very classy swansong for him. Ironically, the script already had plenty of elements which suited this approach. The mission itself was a more laid-back affair (ie. horse racing; old-fashioned espionage; etc.), and the threat pitted Bond against youth and technology (ie. eugenics and microchips). The latter is underscored by a scene where Bond is outdone in the gadget department: Zorin not only matches Bond's hidden camera trick- he improves upon it with his home computer! Ultimately, we see Bond forced to survive on both his old-school wit (ie. air from a tire) and honor (ie. Mayday).
|
|