58 replies to this topic

[Shaun Forever]

and by bad Bond films, I'm referring to the films that get the most grief, here being the usual suspects


Diamonds Are Forever
The Man With The Golden Gun
Moonraker
A View To A Kill
Never Say Never Again

These seem to be the least popular films, based on what I've read on here, and various other Bond forums over the years.

I'm not asking which is the most underrated, I'm asking which could have been really good, had it not been for a handful of bad scenes, bad supporting cast, silly jokes etc...

This thread isn't limited to the five Bond films mentioned above by the way, so feel free to add your own, I wasn't sure whether to add YOLT or not, seems it's got quite a mixed feel amongst fans.


For me......

Diamonds are Forever

I caught this on ITV a few months back, and gave it a viewing (albeit, about 30 minutes in).


In a way, this is a really dark Bond film, OK in places... Mr Wint and Mr Kid are simply excellent, really underrated villains, dangerous (ignore their final scene), and obviously unique.

I found these two characters very creepy, not because of their sexuality or anything like that, but due to their odd nature, and the way they joke about death.

The scene with Bond trapped in the coffin, a very tense moment, again dark and disturbing.


I'm probably going to get laughed off the forum here, but Charles Grey has his moments of brilliance, again ruined by poor decisions on behalf of the script (dressing up as a woman).

He plays Blofeld rather well, and seems to have a lot of fun with the role, if made more menacing, could have been very memorable.

To sum it up, if only a more serious tone were to be taken, could have been so much better, I'm not even go to mention a true revenge story, which we all crave..

There is a lot more, but I'm going to give someone else a go..


Have fun!

[jaguar007]

I'm surprised you did not add DAD to the list, the film that is probably the most ridiculed of them all.

I'm going to agree with you on DAF. The whole Willard Whyte story was unique and had potential. Connery seemed to have more fun than his previous outing (although a bit out of shape). It is too bad they tried to go a more humorous route.

NSNA could also have been better using basically the same script with a different director, composer and leading lady.

[Dr. Metz]

Even though i love DAF and everything about it, i wish they had followed the OHMSS storyline more than they did. While i find the movie to be one of my favorites because of how bizarre and fun it is, Lazenby and Hunt had should have stayed to make this one. Although it would pain me to lose one of my favorites, i would rather have a fitting end to the movie version of the "Blofeld Trilogy", With the story focusing on the revenge of Tracy's death than basically a "60's Batman meets early 70's James Bond" type movie. Anyway, the one that i think had the most potential was AVTAK. To me, it should have been Dalton's first film. It had a good cast that was underused(Christopher Walken, Patrick Macnee) and even though it bared many similarities to Goldfinger, The story was interesting enough to be a good film on its own. But the movie isn't as bad as people say it is.

Edited by Dr. Metz, 19 April 2010 - 03:07 PM.

[AMC Hornet]

DAF was my first exposure to 007, so I won't say a word against it. TMWTGG remains one of my favorites, despite the number of cringeworthy moments. MR, however, contains too many cringeworthy moments to count, or ignore. Thirty years on, it's still pure fantasy. NSNA was a remake - what can you say? It was an interesting experiment, akin to travelling to an alternate universe. And I am one of those few proud supporters of DAD. Loved it. (I know, I know.)

AVTAK, however...

Nothing was wrong with it that a completely different script and cast couldn't have fixed. The best thing about it is that it makes Moonraker and NSNA seem like classics. I can only imagine that AR©B said that he was "prouder" of this one than any other in order to forestall people taking him to task over it in person.

I am gratified to see that young and old fans alike have caught up with me in embracing OHMSS as the underrated classic that it is. I think it's ironic that 37 years after George Lazenby was found guilty of that most heinous crime of not being Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan has been retrocatively found guilty of that most heinous crime of not having been Daniel Craig! (At least DC was exonerated by most of his accusers of the crime of not being Bond at all.)

My attitude towards CR was that if I couldn't get used to the reboot idea, then I would like the next one better, once Craig was established as 007. As it turned out I like CR fine and find QOS unnecessary, and I'm still looking forward to the next one, now that Craig is established as 007. Enough character arch already!

[sharpshooter]

Moonraker more than realised its potential and I don't think it should be on the list. I know it will always show up on there, though. Anyway, Diamonds Are Forever as it should have been is the biggest missed opportunity, that's for sure. But frankly, does it really matter? That film came out 39 years ago and it is what it is.

[The Shark]

Diamonds Are Forever
The Man With The Golden Gun
Moonraker
A View To A Kill
Never Say Never Again

With the exception of NSNA (since it isn't official) - None of them.

I consider Tomorrow Never Dies, Quantum of Solace, The World Is Not Enough to be among the weakest Bond films.

A least four of the five above had John Barry, Roger Moore and decent scripts.

[tdalton]

Of the films listed, definitely DAF. It had a great path laid out for itself, with the possibility of Bond going after Blofeld for revenge over Tracy. Unforunately, they went completely in the other direction, but there was potential in the project simply from the standpoint that it could (and should) have been a follow-up to OHMSS.

Overall, though, I'd say that the bad Bond film with the most potential was DAD. It had some very good things going for it, with Bond being captured and then going off on his own. I think that they could have made DAD a great bookend to Brosnan's time in the role by having them 008 after him after he went rogue, as a call-back to GE when Bond was then hunting down 006. I think that having Bond deal with another 00 agent on his tail while also trying to uncover Gustav Graves' plot would have made for an interesting film.

[Guy Haines]

I would pick Moonraker. There was no need to take Bond into space, doing battle with the enemy using sci-fi style weapons such as hand held laser guns. Even today, 31 years on, it seems too far fetched.

By contrast, the novel Moonraker, with its tale of what is, in effect, an attempt at nuclear terrorism disguised as a grand act of philanthropy, seems almost plausible - I say "almost" because I doubt that a terrorist group would lob a nuclear missile at London when a device in a suitcase, car or boat would do the job.

A perfectly good film could have been made out of Fleming's original novel. Foreign locations could have been added - Drax's rocket base could have been located abroad, for example, but within range of the UK. But it seems to me that the film makers missed out on producing an fairly authentic Fleming story for the cinema, with a colourful arch villain (can't help wondering who might have been cast if Drax had been written for the screen as Fleming envisaged him), and some creepy sidekicks, a decent gaming scene, a car chase (Bond's Lotus or Aston Martin -v- Drax's Mercedes, for the screen version?), and a tense finale.

If the film had been made for Connery in the 1960s, the above is probably what we would have got. Unfortunately, it was a late 1970s product and reflected the sci-fi space craze of the era. Pity.

[General G.]

Probably A VIEW TO A KILL...

Cast different actresses (ditch Roberts & Jones), get rid of the firetruck comedy chase, and replace Roger Moore with Timothy Dalton.

Voila! A much better movie.

[jamie00007]

Leaving aside the cast and crew (which with all the original cast, Goldfinger's director and John Barry, DAF should have had the most potential) and focusing on the story, I'd go with TWINE though its not on the list.

It could have been a killer movie, Brosnan's OHMSS. There was so much potential with the story and some of the cast, but they totally squandered it.

Surprised that you didnt include DAD, it seems by far to be the most unpopular Bond movie.

Edited by jamie00007, 18 April 2010 - 09:13 AM.

[Mr_Wint]

Out of the four worst Bondfilms (LTK, GE, DAD & QOS) I think DAD had some potential after all.

[Publius]

Really, all but one. And out of those you listed, DAF probably required the most radical overhaul. It's the only Bond film I find consistently dull and dreary throughout, like no one involved really cares, especially Connery.

Even in their worst Bond movies, even when they failed (sometimes really badly) at least Moore always cared about making people laugh, Brosnan always cared about trying to scratch beneath Bond's surface, etc.

Even in YOLT Connery had some great moments, like Aki's death, in an otherwise bored-looking performance. In NSNA it looked like he was thrilled to be back.

Not so much with DAF, and since I weigh Bond movies heavily based on how well the Bond actor did, it's no surprise I give DAF the worst overall marks and think it needed the most dramatic changes to be salvaged.

As negative as my post might seem, that's just my way of saying all the others had a lot of potential and probably could have been made much better with some minor tweaks.

Note that I would also argue DAF had by far the most potential... if it had been fully embraced as the follow-up to OHMSS. But given what they were aiming for (and really, it comes across as rather aimless, which is probably it's problem), not so much.

[AliasTheJester]

NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN

OK, they had a limited framework to work with, for leagal reasons. But within that framework they really could have done something special, something that stood out, something that felt like the film EON weren't hip enough or wouldn't dare to do. Instead they just did what EON did 20 years earlier (with more than a hint of what they'd done since) only with far worse production values, weaker pacing, a flat score, less competently staged action scenes and a damp (in more ways than one) squid of an ending. I still enjoy it but it could have been a lot more.

I don't agree with the general tone of comments currently being directed towards (or perhaps "flug at") DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER; I think it was one of the more creative, original entries in the series, although admittedly a lot of what it created and influenced is what people don't like about later entries!

[David_M]

In re-reading the original question here, the poster asks which of the films could have been great with just a few tweaks, which is different from asking which could have worked if you threw out the entire script and cast and started from scratch. So in that vein:

Diamonds Are Forever - seemed intent on going the humor route, so probably could not be "fixed" with just a few tweaks. That said, the Howard Hughes analogy (it's easy to replace a man nobody ever sees) and Wynt and Kidd had potential. As others have noted, to really amount to much the film should have done more with the revenge angle. Even another five minutes would have doubled what we got.

The Man With The Golden Gun - the slide whistle and the final "fight" with Nick-Nack I could do without, but this one, too, needed another rewrite or two before ever turning on the cameras. So much potential in the Scaramanga/Bond rivaly, squandered with an uninteresting McGuffin and "energy crisis" side plot.

Moonraker - this is your winner, right here. Drop the "bondola" and the Jaws/Dolly romance (or at least the shmaltzier moments) and you're nearly there. Unlike others, I had no problem with Bond going to space (after all it's only Earth orbit, and many have been there), though it does strain credulity to imagine the station being built with no one noticing.

A View To A Kill - try as I might I can't find any reason for this film to exist. It's a paint-by-numbers affair with no joy or energy. You could drop the "Beach Boys" music and re-cast Stacy, but the real problem is the tiredness of the whole affair, symbolized but not wholly attributable to Roger's age. I feel like the tagline for this film should have been, "Oh well, it's been two years: Here's another one."

Never Say Never Again - this one started off promisingly as a look at how advancing age would affect a man like 007, but that theme was dropped after the clinic in favor of a standard Bond romp, only cheaper and tackier. A bigger budget and better script could have saved it, but those aren't minor tweaks.

So, there's my answer: Moonraker can be "fixed" with minor tweaks (though I like it as-is), the rest need more extensive repairs. But having said that, each is somebody's favorite, so they must have done something right.

[Lachesis]

Moonraker - this is your winner, right here. Drop the "bondola" and the Jaws/Dolly romance (or at least the shmaltzier moments) and you're nearly there. Unlike others, I had no problem with Bond going to space (after all it's only Earth orbit, and many have been there), though it does strain credulity to imagine the station being built with no one noticing.

Agreed - I think MR is a great film spoiled by excess, it has some gorgeous cinematography, locations, characters, its got solid action work and Moore is on great form but again and again just as you start to think wow...you end up groaning squirming in embarassment. Not entirely sure judicious editing alone could save the day (I'd remove Jaws completely if I could) but certainly there is some great stuff here that doesn't get a fair chance to strut its stuff.

[jaguar007]

One of my biggest problems with Moonraker (apart from the excess/space stuff)is that there are too many scenes where they do things for no real reason. Why would Drax want to have Bond killed on his property when Bond is doing a routine investigation? At that point Drax was not (as far as he knew) a suspect. Something happening to Bond on Drax's property would just divert the investigation toward Drax.

[AMC Hornet]

A synopsis of Moonraker in four lines:

Bond: A space shuttle is missing? I'll investigate the builder!
Drax: A secret agent is investigating me? I'd better kill him before he finds anything!
Bond: Aha! Someone's trying to kill me - I must be on to something!
Drax: D'oh!

[Skudor]

Moonraker is one of my favourits - the plot may be barmy, with space and all that, and AMC Hornet isn't wrong, but I still love it.

I'd say Diamonds Are Forever is the biggest missed opportunity - the follow up to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service could have been something special (but since they'd already done YOLT, I can see why they didn't).

Die Another Day also had so much promise and probably wouldn't even need that much to improve (not counting a total overhaul of the dialogue as a major tweak here).

[Trident]

Moonraker is one of my favourits - the plot may be barmy, with space and all that, and AMC Hornet isn't wrong, but I still love it.

I'd say Diamonds Are Forever is the biggest missed opportunity - the follow up to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service could have been something special (but since they'd already done YOLT, I can see why they didn't).

Die Another Day also had so much promise and probably wouldn't even need that much to improve (not counting a total overhaul of the dialogue as a major tweak here).

Agreed, those would have been my prime suspects too. I'd settle for DAF probably, as this could have profited so much from the OHMSS momentum, the added potential of the predecessor practically promising a rocket start. Instead, we've got a film that isn't even truly bad, just a mediocre and forgettable affair. A missed opportunity, if ever there was one.

DAD on the other hand wanted to be all and everything, parody and serious thriller, progressive and traditional, action and character, stunts and CGI. And all of that 150 per cent. The shortcomings are not so much a disappointment, than a result of the gigantic aspirations. What DAF lacks in aspiration DAD had too much.

[DR76]

Well . . . that depends upon what we consider good and bad Bond films. We all have different ideas on which was which.

[Eric Stromberg]

It's DAD for me. I can remember sitting in the theater thinking how great it was that they were finally taking some chances with the story and Pierce's performance had some grit to it. That was for the first forty minutes or so, then it was straight to the crapper.

In retrospect it's even more disappointing because Brosnan never got to make a really cracking good 007 movie.

[elizabeth]

Thunderball, definitely. It had Sean, who was amazing in it. And if they could've just cut back on the underwater scenes, it would have been great (and kept me awake).

[Guy Haines]

Moonraker - this is your winner, right here. Drop the "bondola" and the Jaws/Dolly romance (or at least the shmaltzier moments) and you're nearly there. Unlike others, I had no problem with Bond going to space (after all it's only Earth orbit, and many have been there), though it does strain credulity to imagine the station being built with no one noticing.

Agreed - I think MR is a great film spoiled by excess, it has some gorgeous cinematography, locations, characters, its got solid action work and Moore is on great form but again and again just as you start to think wow...you end up groaning squirming in embarassment. Not entirely sure judicious editing alone could save the day (I'd remove Jaws completely if I could) but certainly there is some great stuff here that doesn't get a fair chance to strut its stuff.

In spite of my doubts about the space based plot, MR could have been watchable, for me, if the "excess" you mention above had been dropped.

[Colossus]

TMWTGG, even though i actually love this Bond and appreciate its hearty defenders like Loomis, but from those choices it's that. The premise of the bad mirror image of Bond was inspiring, evil mirror anything always is. Just like Red Grant before him, only Scaramanga specialized more in the gunmanship side instead of brawn. Red Grant was already seen as one of the things that made FRWL so great, now imagine everything else stripped away and Red Grant becomes the main badguy as well, is as charming and connoiseuristic as Bond, tone down his physical strength and increase his gun skills and walla. From this alone the movie could have even been right up there with FRWL objectively.

[Binyamin]

I used to loathe Diamonds. Caught is several months ago on cable and greatly enjoyed it. So, I'd say that one could have been redeemed completely with a few tweaks.

Golden Gun is still a guilty pleasure, and could have been brilliant with several changes. So, my vote is for those two.

[O.H.M.S.S.]

I wouldn't call any of those Bond films bad. I would only list TND and DAD as 'bad' Bond films and I would say both had some potential for sure but failed at being Bondian in the second half of these films. However DAF, TMWTGG, MR, AVTAK (and even NSNA) feel more like a Bond film then TND or DAD.

[Drax Industries]

DAF could have been a great continuation from OHMSS. Bond, on the trail of Blofeld in revenge for what he and Irma Bunt did to him and Tracy at the end of the the previous film. We could have had an emotionally spectacular film where Bond goes against the grain to foil Blofeld's latest plot, but what do we get. Bond in a pink tie wrestling two women, Charles Grey in drag and Tiffany Case's cheeks.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the movie, taken on its own it's an enjoyable watch, but when viewed immediately after OHMSS you can see the signs that say 'wrong direction'.

[Slight Inferiority Complex]

For me Quantum Of Solace is the biggest near miss.

But as that film's perceived weaknesses have been done to death on here since its release I don't think anyone would want me to go into them further other than to say that there's so much in it that's good that a couple of tweaks (if you consider a different style of editing and a slightly extended script a tweak) could have put it right at the top of the pile.

[hilly]

The Man With The Golden Gun is, for me, the one that could be easily fixed. The whole premise of the golden bullet and Scaramanga's admiration of Bond is a very interesting one. It has some great action scenes and some suitably glamorous locations and Bond-style idiosyncracies (Nick Nack, the fun-house, Scaramanga and his 3 nipples). I think that if you remove a few of the sillier elements:

Sheriff Pepper
The slide whistle over the car jump
The boat chase (or even just ATTEMPTED to make it a little different from LALD)
The Karate kickin' schoolgirls
..and made Goodnight a little less gormless, then you'd have a pretty good Bond film.

[The Shark]

QUANTUM OF SOLACE by far. Possibly THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, and DIE ANOTHER DAY, too. If only they were written, directed, scored, and cast by someone else.