And if so why? I like Dr No and Casino Royale equally but I'm not looking forward to watching Quantum of Solace because I'm willing to bet that QoS stunk and it probably pales in comparison to From Russia With Love.
Printable View
And if so why? I like Dr No and Casino Royale equally but I'm not looking forward to watching Quantum of Solace because I'm willing to bet that QoS stunk and it probably pales in comparison to From Russia With Love.
Pretty sure the review at Spill.com of QoS said that it was like Casino Royale, only more so. Plus its a direct sequel if I remember correctly, not just another Bond adventure
I love most of the Bond films, the only ones that are hard for me to watch are "In Her Majesty's Secret Service" some of Roger Moore's films, both of Timothy Dalton's flicks and the last two Pierce Bronson(sp?) flicks.
QoS was a damn fine film in my opinion, I felt it really went back to Bond's roots with less zany super villains and more political intrigue. It felt like more of a spy flick than some of the others.
Ben Lyons from At The Movies said "The problem with Quantum of Solace is the direction I don't know if the film was trying to be grounded in reality or an escapism from it."Quote:
Originally Posted by Vyk
voted for the last one
That's like half the series. In theory you don't like most of the Bond films.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
Personally I'm not a fan of the pre-Daniel Craig/Casino Royale films. Generally they're boring to watch.
I do actually like all of them but I can only watch half the films consistently. Roger's films were at least unintentionally comical as well as Timothy Dalton's (Angry Bond!!!). Pierce started off really strong but his last two films seemed rather bizarre and generally unbelievable. I was surprised how terrible they were considering how good of a Bond he was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Maxx PowerThat's like half the series. In theory you don't like most of the Bond films.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
Personally I'm not a fan of the pre-Daniel Craig/Casino Royale films. Generally they're boring to watch.
I think the real question is whether you can watch and appreciate old films. I personally love the first two Bond films while I only moderately liked Casino Royale and didn't care much for QOS.
What made classic Bonds so good were their villains. I mean Dr No's villain had bionic hands and a dragon guarding his base. You just don't get that kind of awesome anymore.
Yeah I agree I don't think the three inconsecutive Bond films (Dr. No, From Russia with Love and Thunderball) directed by the late Terence Young get enough credit. It wasn't for Terence Young James Bond would've faded away into obscurity after the death of Ian Fleming in 1964. The Fleming novels are great but it was the Bond films themselves that captured the public's attention and boosted book sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
Ummm...between From Russia with Love and Thunderball there was Goldfinger >.>
I like these past to movies better than the original 2 outings. I thought Casino Royale was arguably the best Bond film to date(I still think Goldfinger is the best) and I liked the direction of the over arching story they are taking with the introduction of Quantum in Quantum of Solace. I like the fact that MI6 and M are taking on a larger role than 'Here is your mission'. I like the fact that everything isn't so cut and dry "We are on your side Bond" with the CIA and other government agencies. I like the over arching theme of trust that they continue to flesh out.
Quantum of Solace was not a great movie but I felt it wrapped up the last movie and set up enough things for future movies while maintaining the themes from the previous movie. It seemed more like a filler but I viewed the real struggle as being against Bond himself and I found that to be quite interesting. He became more reckless and careless as things went on. I do wish they had maybe given certain scenes more time to better flesh things out but I am fine with how it turned out.
From Russia with Love and Dr. No are both good movie as well but I don't think they had the as much to make them as interesting to me. They stand the test of time but compared to the last two I don't think they are close to matching them.
From Russia with Love is by far the most overrated of the classic Bonds. Thunderball and Goldfinger are easily the best duo. Goldfinger is still the best in the entire series and probably my favourite film from the 1960's.
Yes, I enjoyed the Sean Connery ones, but my favorite is Her Majesty's Secret Service. I wish George Lazenby came back for Diamonds are Forever. Casino Royale, also good. I have not seen Quantum of Solace, but a friend of mine who owns all the Bond movies (besides QoS) says it was horrible, so I don't know if I'll like QoS. I still want to see it, though.
I guess maybe I'm a little bit biased for like OHMSS b/c I've actually been to that ski resort that was Blofeld's hideout. I did not ski off of it though; I just rode a gondola up there lol
Um that's why I said "inconsecutive" consecutive means "back to back" but if you attach an "i" and a "n" in front of it the word becomes "inconsecutive" and that's the exact opposite of consecutive. You probably don't understand that though.Quote:
Originally Posted by edczxcvbnm
You can drop remarks like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by John_912
Classic Bond is ace. Newer stuff generally feels tired in comparison, though Casino Royale was rather solid.
Smurf QoS.
I wasn't talking to you anyway who are you his mother?Quote:
Originally Posted by Levian
If you didn't know, Cid's Knights are moderators.
There's rules on this forum and they apply to you too.
Quantum of Solace is, as others have said, a direction continuation of Casino Royale. It's brutal, rough, and unrelenting; far more believable than the cheesy corniness of most of the earlier Bond films.
From Russia With Love is, in my mind, one of the better Bonds. Brilliant Cold War suspense, plenty of intrigue, a fair amount of action. Yet still firmy rooted in the Cold War mythos and very much a product of 1960s film production values. It is perhaps more engaging than Quantum of Solace, though that depends a lot on exactly what any given viewer is looking for in a film. I think it's fair to say that QoS suffers slightly from what we can call "middle of a trilogy syndrome", whereby the story neither truly begins nor truly ends. It began in the previous film and will continue in the next; there's not the same level of closure of completeness that you get in a strictly stand-alone movie.
But if you want a Bond who's believable as an ex-military, secret service agent combating believable and plausible opponents, then the new Bond films are right on all counts. No 'novelty villains' with ludicrous super-weapons or freak-show henchmen. Sure, they offer a different approach and a different perspective, and this won't agree with everyone. But if people just want to watch the same old formula again, they've got 20 films from across 40 years to fall back on.
Pffft it's not my fault he doesn't know what inconsecutive means and I didn't like having to explain myself that's why I got a little irritable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Levian
Also I'm quite the potty mouth so there was a lot worse things I could've wrote than "You probaby wouldn't understand that."
Just drop it, dude. You're not going to win anyone's favour by carrying on an off-topic argument with a moderator.
Yes sir.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man
Anyway have you seen Quantum of Solace? I heard it sucks because Marc Forster (the new director) couldn't surpass what Martin Campbell did in Casino Royale.
I still haven't seen it. Casino Royale would be a difficult picture to top but I'm told there's a lot of political commentary that's likely to appeal to me in QoS, so I'm looking forward to seeing it at some point. I honestly haven't seen that many of the old films either, so I haven't bothered voting.
I think you should pick up the single disc versions of Dr No, From Russia with Love and Thunderball. I don't know about you but I think those Bond films I mentioned are surprisingly good considering they were shot in the early to mid sixties. And they're only ten bucks each at Amazon.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man
I've already bought too many films lately, so I'll probably just give those films a rental when I have time to see them. QoS is definitely my top priority though, although from what I've heard I also need to re-watch Casino Royale since QoS apparently picks up right where CR left off.
QoS shouldn't be dismissed sight unseen, in my opinion. As you say, the political commentary's interesting enough, and the characters are really quite unique for a Bond flick. MI6 isn't an all-knowing, omnipotent government entity; the CIA isn't everybody's bestest buddy; allegiances are often fragile and often matters of convenience. In none of the older Bond films would you ever hear M say something like "I don't give a :skull::skull::skull::skull: about the CIA and their trumped-up charges!", one of her most badassed comments to date. QoS sees governments, agents, corporations and individuals competing for their individual self-interest; there are no saintly civil servants giving their all for "the greater good".Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man
I love you Big D for understanding why QoS was a damn fine flick. I like the fact that the new Bond is bringing back the more political side of Bond. The films never completely recovered from having the Cold War fizzle out. I feel the new films and especially QoS to be bringing the series back closer to its more realistic roots. To be honest, (SPOILER)Solace is basically being presented as a modern day Spectre .
What always drew me to the Bond films was more of the political intrigue. The wacky villains were amusing but sometimes I felt it was overemphasized and the overall political commentary was lost or the cleverness of the plot would get diluted at times. The new Bond films are bringing back that gritty reality to it. As Big D pointed out, it was refreshing to see MI6 and other political powers presented more in a gray area like the early films.
Since people are saying what their favourite Bond films are I'll start by saying that mine is The Spy Who Loved Me. It perfects the Bond formula. Good Bond girl (though with questionable acting talents), legendary henchmen (Jaws!), iconic Bond car (The Lotus Esprit sub is probably 2nd only to Goldfinger's Aston Martin as the best Bond car.) Sexy Femme Fatale and so many memorable moments such as the Lotus Esprit chase, the fight with Sandor on the roof where Moore in one of his most brutal moments kills him by hitting his own tie away and then there is the jaw-dropping ski jump off the cliff into the Union Jack parachute. Oh and Nobody Does It Better is the best Bond song. The only bad thing about TSWLM is the weak villain.
Someone said they hated OHMSS! That's one of the very best! Lol, it's probably the most loved Bond film and at the same time the most hated Bond film, well Die Another Day has probaby stolen the 'Most Hated Bond Film' title.
Anyway QoS was a good film. I'm not sure where it would sit in my top Bond film list, but around 12th I reckon, somewhere near (but just below) Dr. No. My only problem with QoS is that I miss the classic formula in the Bond films. Yes after the overblown DAD something had to change, but did they really have to be this far removed from the usual 007 films? I am hoping that Bond 23 will be almost a back-to-basics film featuring the usual Bond trademarks.
So I like Dr. No a bit more than QoS so I guess this comes down to if I like Russia With Love more than Casino Royale. Now this is tough! I dunno why people would think FRWL is overrated. Red Grant is the best henchmen, Rosa Klebb one of the best villains and it possibly has the best plot of any of the films. I love FRWL, but Casino Royale is just incredible. It's my second favorite Bond film of them all. I even like the theme tune too now!
So imo CR > FRWL > DN > QoS. Hmm, I am going to call this a tie.
The problem with the last two Bond films is that they can't seem to have any fun with themselves. Bond is now a mopey sod who is just depressing to watch. Bond used to be a slick, charasmatic guy who could still be funny even in the most dire of situations. Maybe some people didn't like that but I don't think Bond was ever a super serious franchise.
Plus in the last two Bond films, especially QOS they seemed to favour shooting the film in the same style as the Bourne films with the infamous shakey cam technique. Lack of gadgets pulled the series even further away from what it previously was and the film didn't have the identity that previous Bond films had. Even while watching the Brosnan films you could tell there was something unique about the Bond franchise. Now they just seem to be by the book action films which are admittedly well made for what they are but are all too similar to every other action film out there.
With your first point I think you might be right, but I think there is a lot of fun in Casino Royale. Yes there aren't any of the cringe-inducing quips that Moore and Brosnan loved but there is a lot of humour left- the exchanges between Bond and Lynd come to mind with the "that' because you know what my little finger can do" being a highlight.
You're right about QoS being rather dour, but it had to be really after the tragic end to CR. Watch the end of OHMSS and then watch the following film Diamonds Are Forever and you'll be furious at DAF. Rather than be out for revenge against Blofeld, Bond just doesn't seem to care about what he did to his wife in OHMSS. QoS is really the film DAF should have been.
Also this isn't the first time we've had more serious films in the Bond series. Licence to Kill also didn't have much fun in there, but I for one loved that movie.
I do agree that there is a lack of Bond-ness that hurt the last two, QoS especially, but I think they had to be like that and I like he way we've seen Bond evolve into 007. Now we've seen that happen however I want to see the next Craig film to feature the gadgets, the unstoppable henchmen and eccentric bad guy in his lair. Sadly I don't think the next one will be like that.
I always liked the shaky cam technique. It contributes to a sense of confusion which, in the midst of a spy flick, is highly justifiable.
QoS went a little over the top with the shaky camera, but otherwise I thought it was a good movie. The opera scene is awesome. Daniel Craig is great as Bond.
I like Dr No and From Russia With Love more than I like The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day. Whilst Pierce was a great Bond, only Goldeneye was a really good Bond movie with him in the role. There's only so much the actor can do.
I eagerly await the 21st Bond movie. :)
I think what ultimately changes one's view of this is whether you loved or hated Roger Moore's portrayal of Bond. Personally I don't care for the "gentleman spy". Roger Started off great but I felt the quality of his films got worse with each new installment and the plots hinged more on the now "Iconic" eccentric super villains, death traps, and themed henchmen. Towards the end, I felt he made Bond more of a cheesy lampoon of itself rather than being the intelligent Cold War spy films of the earlier era. Granted, he built on what was established in Sean's film but I felt the writers took it too far during Roger's turn. What was really sad was that A View to a Kill was a pretty decent film but by then, Roger was obviously too old to be playing Bond, so I felt it suffered because of that.
Timothy could have been a decent Bond if he was likable, he lacked any of the charm of the previous Bonds and always seemed angry or at least looked like he was constipated in most of his films. He tried to bring Bond back his edge from the first films but sacrificed the charm and grace to do so.
Pierce was a great Bond at first, Goldeneye was a fantastic film imo, and brought back a Bond not seen since the first films. Tomorrow Never Dies was a clever film as well; even if it walked a bit of the thin line of being unbelievable. I felt his last two films were quite terrible if only cause Bond seemed written out of character (just like OHMSS) and the entire plot of Die Another Day was just cheesy and terrible, taking the worst qualities of the Moore era Bond films and pushing it to the extreme.
I have not seen the new Casino Royale but I did see Quantum of Solace and felt that Craig did an exdellent job as Bond. The film was funny but in a very black humor way and I felt Craig brought back the reality of Bond being a professional assassin for the British government yet still being a charming womanizer. He still holds the great chemistry with the new M that Pierce had with her. I felt he is doing a great job and I am quite happy with a return to true political intrigue instead of eccentric billionaires with too much time on their hands so they build a lab on a deserted island and hire a private army. :roll2
I felt the Bond films were great in the past cause they used the backdrop of history to help tell the story and create greater tension. One of my favorite films was You Only Live Twice, which presented both the Russians and Americans as the showboating pricks they were during the 60's. The whole plot hinged on taking advantage of the political turmoil of the time. Yes they had their eccentric villains but they never overshadowed the idea of the political tension that created the true suspense of those films.
You didn't think YOLT was at all cheesy and silly Wolf Kanno? Yes nothing tops Moore's Tarzan yell in Octopussy, but YOLT has it's moments- Bond becoming Japanese being one of the stupidest moments in the series. What about the hallowed-out volcano! Okay it's an awesome lair, but still a bit preposterous like the Moore films you didn't like.
Also I don't think the Moore films got worse as they went along, but they go- Good film, bad film, good film, bad film etc.
Live and Let Die- Good albeit silly film.
TMWTGG- It is very memorable but so stupid.
TSWLM- One of the very best.
Moonraker- Fun but again stupid. That double taking pigeon is unforgivable.
For Your Eyes Only- Some call it too serious and label it as dull and forgettable, but I think it's a gripping spy thriller.
Octopussy- No, no, NO! Tarzan yell, Bond dressed as a gorilla, Bond dressed as a clown, bond in the alligator submarine... wtf is going on here?!
A View To A Kill- Okay this isn't much better. Great theme tune however.
I am one of the few people that seem to like The World Is Not Enough. It's nowhere near as bad as everyone says. Electra King is one of the most fascinating of all of 007's foes, the plot is complex and is one of those rare Bond's where both James and M become emotionally involved in the story which I liked. Also the opening boat chase is incredible. I think it's very underrated. Not as good as his first two, but a different class to the likes of Die Another Day, Diamonds Are Forever and Octopussy. Okay Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist was bad, but Christmas Jones is not the worst Bond girl ever, that dubious honour would have to go to either Tanya Roberts' Stacy Sutton from AVTAK or Halle Berry's Jinx.
Speaking of underrated the Dalton films are great! I can see your point on Dalton not being too likeable, but you could argue that no other actor has come closer to Ian Fleming's 007 as well as Timothy did. Yes in LTK he isn't too likeable, but I felt he had a lot of charisma in The Living Daylights. Also the stunt-work in these two, TLD especially is phenomenal. I think people just weren't ready for this kind of Bond film until Daniel Craig took over.
I said the cheesy villains and lair started in the Connery films but what separates YOLT from some of the Moore films was that despite the super lair; the premise was about starting a confrontation between Russia and America, and a criminal organization making profits off the war efforts.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Turk
Being made in the height of the Cold War, its cheese factor is outweighed by the suspense of bringing in a real threat that people faced in those days. It worked with the political chaos of the times to tell a gripping story about Cold War politics. Moore's had an asshole with too much time on their hands, even when the Russians were involved they tended to be far more in the background and half the time were just mentioned being involved. They also lacked the political commentary of the earlier films.
The more serious political commentary of the early films made it possible to look past the hallowed out volcano lair, or Odd Job, or Dr. No's "dragon". Like the MGS series, I feel if the main premise is strong and the commentary and symbolism is strong, an audience can swallow the more cheesy and unbelievable aspects of the films and see them for what they were. I felt many of Moore's films lacked this.
This is just my opinion so don't take it to heart. My main issue was the lack of Cold War politics and the fact that Moore always seemed like a "hands off Bond" who was more interest in romance than kicking ass. Despite that, he's still more likable than Dalton.Quote:
Also I don't think the Moore films got worse as they went along, but they go- Good film, bad film, good film, bad film etc.
Live and Let Die- A good film and probably my favorite of Moore's films.
TMWTGG- I love the premise but it did have too many silly factors. Still Christopher Reeve is a fave actor of mine.
TSWLM- My other favorite Moore film. One of the few films where Moore actually kicks some ass
Moonraker- Its TSWLM without the charm and it takes place in space instead of the ocean... terrible film.
For Your Eyes Only- I'm having a hard time remembering this one but if memory serves me correct, this is the first film I started to feel Moore was too old for it cause I believe this is the one with the embarrassing scene where he's got the 15 year old trying to seduce him when its obvious by comparing the two that Moore could pass as her grandfather.
Octopussy- I agree, this film is terrible...
A View To A Kill- I like the villain and the premise but the Bond girl has no real reason to be there and Roger is way too old to be doing any of the stunts outside of walking and breathing. It was nice to have the lead from the Avengers in there though.
I rank Christmas up there as one of the worse if only cause she was completely unable to be a convincing nuclear physicist. She was a bimbo brought in so guys can ogle over her massive DD's.Quote:
I am one of the few people that seem to like The World Is Not Enough. It's nowhere near as bad as everyone says. Electra King is one of the most fascinating of all of 007's foes, the plot is complex and is one of those rare Bond's where both James and M become emotionally involved in the story which I liked. Also the opening boat chase is incredible. I think it's very underrated. Not as good as his first two, but a different class to the likes of Die Another Day, Diamonds Are Forever and Octopussy. Okay Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist was bad, but Christmas Jones is not the worst Bond girl ever, that dubious honour would have to go to either Tanya Roberts' Stacy Sutton from AVTAK or Halle Berry's Jinx.
I actually disliked seeing Bond get emotionally involved and felt it was a very un-Bond thing to do. He has used woman constantly and this poor girl somehow speaks out to his nurturing side? I just couldn't swallow that, and the other MI6 agent falling for her as well seemed even more unlikely. There was just too many unrealistic factors in the film that kept me from buying it. Not to mention they kill off my Russian dude from Golden Eye... It is still a better film than Die Another Day.
I just could not get into LTK, it didn't feel like a real Bond film, it felt like a bad fan-fiction where a pissy James Bond went up against Scarface. Living Day Lights was a good flick but once again, I felt Dalton's performance made it a weaker film than it should have been. I also disagree that Dalton was the closest to Ian Flemming's vision of Bond. Hell even the actress' hated working with him cause he basically played himself in those films.Quote:
Speaking of underrated the Dalton films are great! I can see your point on Dalton not being too likeable, but you could argue that no other actor has come closer to Ian Fleming's 007 as well as Timothy did. Yes in LTK he isn't too likeable, but I felt he had a lot of charisma in The Living Daylights. Also the stunt-work in these two, TLD especially is phenomenal. I think people just weren't ready for this kind of Bond film until Daniel Craig took over.