58 replies to this topic

[marktmurphy]

Golden Gun for me. The villain being a shadowy version of Bond himself? We should have seen more of that.
Mind you, the trail being left by his girl is quite a clever, and rather Fleming plot.

[marktmurphy]

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.

Yes; you were the first person in the world to like that film

[Messervy]

For me, it would have to be TND.

I find it very mediocre, yet it had huge potential, most notably because it featured a media tycoon as Bond villain (first time we get that, which is great since this area is so important for world affairs nowadays), your typical Bond henchman (we had none as such in GE), a great PTS, a great actor (J. Pryce), etc.

But it failed miserably to deliver. The plot is weak, the henchman is shallow, the villain's lair (stealth boat) is ridiculous, etc. In the end the film is just a collection of "whams" and "bangs".

Pitty; I think we missed a great opportunity to get a truly good film.

[Quincy]

Diamonds Are Forever by far. If they could have got Lazenby to reprise the role as 007 and took it as serious revenge against Blofeld thrille it could have been better than Quantum of Solace possibly.

[Colossus]

For me, it would have to be TND.

I find it very mediocre, yet it had huge potential, most notably because it featured a media tycoon as Bond villain (first time we get that, which is great since this area is so important for world affairs nowadays), your typical Bond henchman (we had none as such in GE), a great PTS, a great actor (J. Pryce), etc.

But it failed miserably to deliver. The plot is weak, the henchman is shallow, the villain's lair (stealth boat) is ridiculous, etc. In the end the film is just a collection of "whams" and "bangs".

Pitty; I think we missed a great opportunity to get a truly good film.

Yes but then again Bond firing two machine guns in both hands hasn't been seen before or since!

[The Shark]

For me, it would have to be TND.

I find it very mediocre, yet it had huge potential, most notably because it featured a media tycoon as Bond villain (first time we get that, which is great since this area is so important for world affairs nowadays), your typical Bond henchman (we had none as such in GE), a great PTS, a great actor (J. Pryce), etc.

But it failed miserably to deliver. The plot is weak, the henchman is shallow, the villain's lair (stealth boat) is ridiculous, etc. In the end the film is just a collection of "whams" and "bangs".

Pitty; I think we missed a great opportunity to get a truly good film.

Yes but then again Bond firing two machine guns in both hands hasn't been seen before or since!

Thank god. No more Terminator Bond ™

[Guy Haines]

For me, it would have to be TND.

I find it very mediocre, yet it had huge potential, most notably because it featured a media tycoon as Bond villain (first time we get that, which is great since this area is so important for world affairs nowadays), your typical Bond henchman (we had none as such in GE), a great PTS, a great actor (J. Pryce), etc.

But it failed miserably to deliver. The plot is weak, the henchman is shallow, the villain's lair (stealth boat) is ridiculous, etc. In the end the film is just a collection of "whams" and "bangs".

Pitty; I think we missed a great opportunity to get a truly good film.

Yes but then again Bond firing two machine guns in both hands hasn't been seen before or since!

Thank god. No more Terminator Bond ™

TND went through too many re-writes. You only have to compare the Raymond Benson "novel of the film" and the finished product to see that. It had potential, but for me they didn't follow through on what was supposed to be the main hook of the film, namely a media tycoon starting wars to show on TV and boost ratings. (it probably dawned on the screenwriters that starting WW III to increase audience share is a very short term way of increasing profits, given that most of the audience would cease to be shortly thereafter). Benson's adaptation suggested what was supposed to happen was the first of a series of limited wars, not enough to destroy the world but sufficient to keep the world's eyes glued to the TV screen.

Instead we had this (equally improbable) stuff about starting a war to force a change in the Chinese government, so that Carver could have free range to take over that country's media. Would a media tycoon need to go that far? I wonder.

[The Shark]

For me, it would have to be TND.

I find it very mediocre, yet it had huge potential, most notably because it featured a media tycoon as Bond villain (first time we get that, which is great since this area is so important for world affairs nowadays), your typical Bond henchman (we had none as such in GE), a great PTS, a great actor (J. Pryce), etc.

But it failed miserably to deliver. The plot is weak, the henchman is shallow, the villain's lair (stealth boat) is ridiculous, etc. In the end the film is just a collection of "whams" and "bangs".

Pitty; I think we missed a great opportunity to get a truly good film.

Yes but then again Bond firing two machine guns in both hands hasn't been seen before or since!

Thank god. No more Terminator Bond ™

TND went through too many re-writes. You only have to compare the Raymond Benson "novel of the film" and the finished product to see that. It had potential, but for me they didn't follow through on what was supposed to be the main hook of the film, namely a media tycoon starting wars to show on TV and boost ratings. (it probably dawned on the screenwriters that starting WW III to increase audience share is a very short term way of increasing profits, given that most of the audience would cease to be shortly thereafter). Benson's adaptation suggested what was supposed to happen was the first of a series of limited wars, not enough to destroy the world but sufficient to keep the world's eyes glued to the TV screen.

Instead we had this (equally improbable) stuff about starting a war to force a change in the Chinese government, so that Carver could have free range to take over that country's media. Would a media tycoon need to go that far? I wonder.

Agreed. Wasn't one of the screenplays based around Carver interfering with the '97 Hong Kong handover for ratings? That would have been far more topical, and interesting, than just a tired and ineffectual reworking of the whole Nuclear Armageddon/"play both sides off against each other" stick that we've had in YOLT and TSLWM.

IIRC Spottiswood said that that draft was finished in about January 97, but had to be called off since it occurred in July, and would be passé by the time of the film's December release. They still could have set the film in the summer though, just like Thunderball and nearly every other winter/autumn released Bond film.

[Quincy]

Interesting that you found the PTS sequence for TND great. I thought it was on of, if not, the worst in the series.

[tdalton]

Interesting that you found the PTS sequence for TND great. I thought it was on of, if not, the worst in the series.

Completely agreed with you there. I thought that the PTS for TND got the film off to a terrible start, and one from which it was never able to recover.

I really like the concept behind TND, but the execution behind it fails at just about every turn, so it's hard to really find anything about it to like.

[BoogieBond]

Moonraker is a "great" Bond film IMO but could have been better as mentioned with a couple of minor tweaks in scenes, and some modifications to the space scenes, couple of deletions there, getting rid of some of the goofier moments, it could be fixed and be up there with TSWLM.
In the Moonraker novel Drax is also trying to kill Bond and pass it over as an accident, in the film it is so obvious(sniper) in the book an explosion causing a cliff to fall, but Bond knows hes onto something either way. I would add the Blades scene between Bond and Drax in there, an updated car chase, flesh out Drax's history as per the novel, and you're there.
The others I think require major reworking to the story, different writing of characters, different actresses etc. DAF for instance would have to, for me, elliminate the whole satellite angle and stick with the diamond smuggling. TMWGG would also need the Solex angle elliminating, but this is not just a couple of scenes added/deleted. AVTAK is not bad, but I don't think it could be as easily fixed as Moonraker.
DAD for me, doesn't have that much potential, but the start did, once we were onto Gustav Graves then the thing went south for me, the Ice Palace etc, all wrong and requires more than just a couple of scenes tweaking(CGI surfing), you would have to go back to the beginning, keep the Bond captured element but ditch the rest.

[Messervy]

Interesting that you found the PTS sequence for TND great. I thought it was on of, if not, the worst in the series.

I found it great fun and entertainment.
Of course it isn't one of the best PTS, it lacks depth and does not connect with the movie itself, but I took it as sheer entertainment, and it put me in the appropriate mood to watch a good film thereafter. Only to be decieved.

[Messervy]

For me, it would have to be TND.

I find it very mediocre, yet it had huge potential, most notably because it featured a media tycoon as Bond villain (first time we get that, which is great since this area is so important for world affairs nowadays), your typical Bond henchman (we had none as such in GE), a great PTS, a great actor (J. Pryce), etc.

But it failed miserably to deliver. The plot is weak, the henchman is shallow, the villain's lair (stealth boat) is ridiculous, etc. In the end the film is just a collection of "whams" and "bangs".

Pitty; I think we missed a great opportunity to get a truly good film.

Yes but then again Bond firing two machine guns in both hands hasn't been seen before or since!

Thank god. No more Terminator Bond ™

TND went through too many re-writes. You only have to compare the Raymond Benson "novel of the film" and the finished product to see that. It had potential, but for me they didn't follow through on what was supposed to be the main hook of the film, namely a media tycoon starting wars to show on TV and boost ratings. (it probably dawned on the screenwriters that starting WW III to increase audience share is a very short term way of increasing profits, given that most of the audience would cease to be shortly thereafter). Benson's adaptation suggested what was supposed to happen was the first of a series of limited wars, not enough to destroy the world but sufficient to keep the world's eyes glued to the TV screen.

Instead we had this (equally improbable) stuff about starting a war to force a change in the Chinese government, so that Carver could have free range to take over that country's media. Would a media tycoon need to go that far? I wonder.

Agreed. Wasn't one of the screenplays based around Carver interfering with the '97 Hong Kong handover for ratings? That would have been far more topical, and interesting, than just a tired and ineffectual reworking of the whole Nuclear Armageddon/"play both sides off against each other" stick that we've had in YOLT and TSLWM.

IIRC Spottiswood said that that draft was finished in about January 97, but had to be called off since it occurred in July, and would be passé by the time of the film's December release. They still could have set the film in the summer though, just like Thunderball and nearly every other winter/autumn released Bond film.

I agree with you all. That's precisely my point: it had great potentail, had it been done the correct way, but it failed to deliver.
I knew they wanted to develop something around Hong Kong but couldn't get it finished before the actual handover. But then again, even without this missed-opportunity, they could still have delivered something big with media tycoons, local wars, asian connections, etc. All we got was an absurd plot, a weak villain (made even weaker since from the very beginning Bond knows who the villain is, contrary to the previous films), a ridiculous side-kick, etc.

[Quincy]

I actually enjoyed Moonraker until it took to outer space.

Edited by Quincy, 04 July 2010 - 09:20 PM.

[marktmurphy]

Interesting that you found the PTS sequence for TND great. I thought it was on of, if not, the worst in the series.

Completely agreed with you there. I thought that the PTS for TND got the film off to a terrible start, and one from which it was never able to recover.

One of the best I'd say; a thrilling action scene that actually relies on tension. Is good.

[bondrules]

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.

I agree with QoS. Lots of potential, but didn't quite nail anything. Fell short in every single major department. Even the Bond Craig played was way too somber. Couldn't Forster just stick to what Craig gave us in Casino Royale? They already showed us at the end of that movie how upset Bond was for the death/betrayal of Vesper. Couldn't they just retain that tone? No. Forster had to go darker still. Big mistake.

[elizabeth]

I agree with QoS. Lots of potential, but didn't quite nail anything. Fell short in every single major department. Even the Bond Craig played was way too somber. Couldn't Forster just stick to what Craig gave us in Casino Royale? They already showed us at the end of that movie how upset Bond was for the death/betrayal of Vesper. Couldn't they just retain that tone? No. Forster had to go darker still. Big mistake.

QoS, definitely. I loved the action, but it just seemed so short.

[Guy Haines]

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.

I agree with QoS. Lots of potential, but didn't quite nail anything. Fell short in every single major department. Even the Bond Craig played was way too somber. Couldn't Forster just stick to what Craig gave us in Casino Royale? They already showed us at the end of that movie how upset Bond was for the death/betrayal of Vesper. Couldn't they just retain that tone? No. Forster had to go darker still. Big mistake.

The curious thing is that Bond's feelings about Vesper didn't carry over from the novel "Casino Royale" to its successor "Live And Let Die". As far as I recall, Vesper didn't get a mention again until the start of the book "OHMSS", some ten years later. But then, QoS was a direct continuation film from CR, so we could hardly have expected an emotionally raw Bond to casually dismiss his feelings of betrayal and bereavement (despite his comment early on in QoS "You don't have to worry about me. I'm not going to go chasing him (Yusef Kabira), he's not important. And neither was she.")

If we wanted Craig's Bond as he was in most of CR, it begs the question, should CR have set up QoS as a direct sequel, rather than allow it to be merely the next Bond film along, with no direct link? Personally, I liked the end of CR and how it led to the next story. In fact I liked QoS in general. As I've mentioned before, its just one or two direction/editing decisions I had issues with.

[Shaun Forever]

The first hour or so of A View To A Kill..........


Rather good, isn't it?

Personally I've always rated the film, but the scenes where Bond is investigating Zorin, and
everything that takes place at the manor really entertain me, that is if you can forgive the
weak fight in the warehouse.

So from the gunbarrel up to Bond switching the tape at the spa (or whatever it was) , I think the film is excellent, would anyone agree with that?

I like everything that takes place after, but judging by a lot of comments, I don't think many people
can take Stacey Sutton too seriously.


What could have saved this film, for you?

[Messervy]

The first hour or so of A View To A Kill..........


Rather good, isn't it?

Personally I've always rated the film, but the scenes where Bond is investigating Zorin, and
everything that takes place at the manor really entertain me, that is if you can forgive the
weak fight in the warehouse.

So from the gunbarrel up to Bond switching the tape at the spa (or whatever it was) , I think the film is excellent, would anyone agree with that?

I like everything that takes place after, but judging by a lot of comments, I don't think many people
can take Stacey Sutton too seriously.


What could have saved this film, for you?

A younger Bond, no Paris taxi pursuit and no San Fransisco firemen truck chase.
Apart from that, I think AVTAK is very good.
I never fully understood this hatred towards Statcy Sutton: how is she any different from, say, TLD's Kara?

[Judo chop]

Golden Gun for me. The villain being a shadowy version of Bond himself? We should have seen more of that.
Mind you, the trail being left by his girl is quite a clever, and rather Fleming plot.

There's my vote. By far, MWTGG has the most untapped potential of any of the films. Might've been one of the greatest Bond films instead of...

well...

I don't want to hurt Loomis' feelings this close to Christmas. And now having just seen THE EXPENDABLES, I realize he must be in an awful state already.

[plankattack]

Once again, my good friend Judo beats me to the punch.

For "most potential" it has to be TMWTGG (sorry Loomis, old mate). I know there's a feeling that DAF should have been something more than the "romp" that it is (and I do believe it's a witty script, with some great lines, rather than groaners) I do feel what it is far removed from what it could have been. To turn DAF into OHMSS continued so to speak, we'd have to create a completely new film.

GG on the other hand, has much of what was needed to be a classic already there, but those elements are undone by what else is in the film. Not to get into a scrap with GG fans, but IMHO, the subtraction of JW Pepper, the idiot-but-allegedly-funny interpretation of Goodnight, Guy Hamilton's desire to be "humourous" - whether that be slide-whistles or karate-kicking teenage girls amongst other things - and the film as it exists now might be onto something.

A Bond-book somewhere once made a great point about GG - Bond v Scaramanga almost plays second-fiddle to the maguffin of the Solex rather than the other way around (as is the case with FRWL and race to retrieve the lector machine). Scaramanga is dead and gone with still nearly twenty minutes of the film to go - a serious mistake if the film is about the man with the golden gun. Yes, FRWL has SC and Shaw going at it with nearly a reel left but FRWL is more than just Bond v Grant. GG shouldn't be - it Bond v Scaramanga, but too often Scaramanga plays second fiddle to Solexes and midgets.

There's so much about already existing about GG with the potential to be great - Sir Rog is still young and menacing, a terrific car stunt, a glamourous setting, and some great lines and scenes (especially in the first hour). For potential wasted, in my book its TMWTGG.

Edited by plankattack, 17 December 2010 - 04:51 PM.

[Guy Haines]

The first hour or so of A View To A Kill..........


Rather good, isn't it?

Personally I've always rated the film, but the scenes where Bond is investigating Zorin, and
everything that takes place at the manor really entertain me, that is if you can forgive the
weak fight in the warehouse.

So from the gunbarrel up to Bond switching the tape at the spa (or whatever it was) , I think the film is excellent, would anyone agree with that?

I like everything that takes place after, but judging by a lot of comments, I don't think many people
can take Stacey Sutton too seriously.


What could have saved this film, for you?

A younger Bond, no Paris taxi pursuit and no San Fransisco firemen truck chase.
Apart from that, I think AVTAK is very good.
I never fully understood this hatred towards Statcy Sutton: how is she any different from, say, TLD's Kara?

I agree with all the above. AVTAK is a curious film - some parts are corny, but others are deadly serious, almost brutal (Roger Moore reputedly had qualms about the scene when Zorin and Scarpine "fire" the workforce down the mine.) As for Tanya Roberts, I think she gets some stick because she plays a professional character yet seems too feminine - as if the two are mutually exclusive.

I would add that AVTAK would improve even more for me if the pre title credits scene did not include that Beach Boys song. A case of being too clever by half on the part of the film makers. For me, it ruined what was potentially as good a ski/snow action sequence at the pre title scene of TSWLM.

[James Bond Jr]

I think Die Another Day is the biggest letdown in the series, even though I love some things about and hope they return.

It has excellent cinematography, choice of color, focus on technology, the villains are cast very well, it has my 2nd favorite title sequence, a brilliantly different theme song, the first black Bond girl and starts with Bond being tortured. And as an American, I love when Bond has a spunky American leading lady like in LTK and DAF. The scene with M early in the film is VERY good as well.

But other than all those things I listed, it sucks. I enjoy some of its badness out of kitsch like the invisible, futuristic car and the horrible CGI, but a lot of the film is as boring and predictable as a Bond film can get. And Halle Barry's character really shows up James some times which makes her seem like his competition and not his partner. I will defend her acting though. Brosnan has nothing to do in most of the film but react to all of the actors with better lines and stand in for his stuntman. It ranks low for me, mostly as it but was a sour note for Brosnan to end on.

I do not think its the worst though. I can watch DAD before I can watch FYEO. I think about half of AVTAK is very good. DAF is an all-time favorite. Its departure in tone was very good, but I wish it had more to do with OHMSS. LALD is pretty drab, but has a lot of great things. Moonraker is a perfect light follow-up to the perfect TSWLM. It's aged very well for me. QOS is the most moronic Bond film yet, but it is thrilling and fun in parts and one of the most stylish in decades. I have to rewatch TND and Octopussy before I can judge them fairly, but I remember Octopussy being extremely boring and unimpressive. YOLT is a big letdown for me. Its where the series dropped a lot in quality. Connery seemed really irritated to be playing in it and so much of the film has aged badly. I think TMWTGG could have been much better, but never have been a classic. It's not horrible though.

Edited by James Bond Jr, 19 December 2010 - 05:44 PM.

[Matt_13]

TWINE needed more flare. It was a bit too bland. Change in director and script tightening would have done the trick, as would improved pacing.

Die Another Day could have been helped with improved casting (see: Halle Berry) but quite honestly that film is a disaster in so many ways it is beyond repair, and I honestly can't picture it as a winner period. No potential there, just a really, really bad idea.

TND could have used a better directer, but it's serviceable, inoffensive fluff that I do thoroughly enjoy.

DAF is fine, just not my cup of tea.

Lay off Moonraker. It's probably Moore's best.

AVTAK could have used a better directer and no Tanya Roberts. John Glen was pretty awful.

QoS is a damn fine adventure, again, there is no fair complaint I can level against it. A more cohesive script maybe, but for what they had it's a remarkable feat in the Bond canon. If we had seen Forster operate with a full script it really would have been something extraordinary.

TMWTGG is adequate, too. Minor directorial problems aside, Maude Adams is something special in that work. Under appreciated Bond adventure, this one.

NSNA should never have been made.

[Revelator]

As far as I recall, Vesper didn't get a mention again until the start of the book "OHMSS", some ten years later.

It's the most notable mention, but not the first. In Chpater 16 of Goldfinger Bond is half-conscious and imagines he's dead and entering heaven:

There must be a whole lot of them, going up together. Would Tilly be on the same trip? Bond squirmed with embarassment. How would he introduce her to the others, to Vesper for instance? And when it came to the point, which would he like best? But perhaps it would be a big place with countries and towns. There was probably no more reason why he should run into one of his former girl friends here than there had been on earth. But still there were a lot of people he'd better avoid until he got settled in and found out the form. Perhaps, with so much love about, these things would't matter. Perhaps one just loved all the girls one met. Hm. Tricky business!

Diamonds are Forever... 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...due to their odd nature, and the way they joke about death.

In the novel Wint and Kidd come off as far creepier and menacing, especially in the hot mud scene with Tingaling Bell. The movie versions display Mankiewicz's dry wit, but so does everyone else in the film.

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

Agreed. So tense and disturbing that it seems to have come out of a different movie.

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).

Gray is always a pleasure to watch, but even when he's not in drag he seems to be under the impression that Blofeld should be played as a bitchy old queen. Out of all the bad Bond films I agree that DAF in some ways had the most potential--had the entire film been of the quality of its teaser it would have been one of the hardest and nastiest of the Bond films. But ultimately it was the wrong choice to have followed OHMSS with. I'd have like to have seen a version with the Spang twins as the villains, and with a Tiffany Case that didn't devolve into a shrill bimbo.

Edited by Revelator, 20 December 2010 - 01:17 AM.

[James Bond Jr]

TWINE needed more flare. It was a bit too bland. Change in director and script tightening would have done the trick, as would improved pacing.

Die Another Day could have been helped with improved casting (see: Halle Berry) but quite honestly that film is a disaster in so many ways it is beyond repair, and I honestly can't picture it as a winner period. No potential there, just a really, really bad idea.

TND could have used a better directer, but it's serviceable, inoffensive fluff that I do thoroughly enjoy.

DAF is fine, just not my cup of tea.

Lay off Moonraker. It's probably Moore's best.

AVTAK could have used a better directer and no Tanya Roberts. John Glen was pretty awful.

QoS is a damn fine adventure, again, there is no fair complaint I can level against it. A more cohesive script maybe, but for what they had it's a remarkable feat in the Bond canon. If we had seen Forster operate with a full script it really would have been something extraordinary.

TMWTGG is adequate, too. Minor directorial problems aside, Maude Adams is something special in that work. Under appreciated Bond adventure, this one.

NSNA should never have been made.

I agree with you on everything except DAD being a total dud. We have very similar tastes. Except that I love DAF and would still put TSWLM over Moonraker. Moonraker is my 2nd favorite Moore film. And I really can't stand John Glen's direction either. Such a terrible director. As a former editor, he was good at action and suspense sequences like the beginning of FYEO, but the rest of that film, Octopussy, AVTAK and even the two Dalton films have such TV-quality direction. Its a shame.

[Messervy]

The first hour or so of A View To A Kill..........


Rather good, isn't it?

Personally I've always rated the film, but the scenes where Bond is investigating Zorin, and
everything that takes place at the manor really entertain me, that is if you can forgive the
weak fight in the warehouse.

So from the gunbarrel up to Bond switching the tape at the spa (or whatever it was) , I think the film is excellent, would anyone agree with that?

I like everything that takes place after, but judging by a lot of comments, I don't think many people
can take Stacey Sutton too seriously.


What could have saved this film, for you?

A younger Bond, no Paris taxi pursuit and no San Fransisco firemen truck chase.
Apart from that, I think AVTAK is very good.
I never fully understood this hatred towards Statcy Sutton: how is she any different from, say, TLD's Kara?

I agree with all the above. AVTAK is a curious film - some parts are corny, but others are deadly serious, almost brutal (Roger Moore reputedly had qualms about the scene when Zorin and Scarpine "fire" the workforce down the mine.) As for Tanya Roberts, I think she gets some stick because she plays a professional character yet seems too feminine - as if the two are mutually exclusive.

I would add that AVTAK would improve even more for me if the pre title credits scene did not include that Beach Boys song. A case of being too clever by half on the part of the film makers. For me, it ruined what was potentially as good a ski/snow action sequence at the pre title scene of TSWLM.

Yes! Absolutely yes! Such a daft idea in an otherwise quite good scene. Makes it impossible to take it seriously.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

A View To A Kill. I really really love this movie! Sure, thyere are numerous things wrong with it/things that could have been better, but I still enjoy watching it and find it easy to gloss over the crap! The main strengths for me are the big action scenes, such as the pre-titles sequence, the fire-truck scene (yes it's daft, but it's still great entertainment) and the Golden Gate Bridge fight. Superb!