104 replies to this topic

[Iceskater101]

I believe he is even though they don't really make any mention of it. In the novel, he spends about a month recovering and even mentions having to make sure everything still works down there. I think in the film pretty much the first 75% of it take place in the span of roughly 7-10 days and the last quarter takes place about 1 month after the rest of it.

 

Yeah in the book it's a lot longer of a recovery and that's what I say whenever I watch it. I mean he must have a strong penis in order for it to still be working.. I like the torture scene though. It's kind of kinky in a way because she has dominance over James Bond when usually it's the other way around for James seemingly how he is usually the dominant one.

[Mallory]

It is not the penis, it is the testicles. I would share similar but not as extreme experience but everything seemed to be working fine a week after recovery.

[seawolfnyy]

It is not the penis, it is the testicles. I would share similar but not as extreme experience but everything seemed to be working fine a week after recovery.

Um, not sure what to make of that....

[B5Erik]

Back to the subject of TWINE...

 

I really like this movie.  A lot.  The pre-credits sequence is excellent, and the action scenes in the movie really work for me.  I'm also a big fan of Pierce Brosnan as Bond, and I think this is a fine performance on his part.  Sophie Marceau was very good as well.  Denise Richards gets a lot of crap for her performance, but it's not her fault - she's just horribly miscast.  They needed an actress who was at least five years older than her.

 

I watched TWINE again about a week ago and really enjoyed it.  Far more than Goldfinger or Live and Let Die, for example.

 

I think TWINE gets a lot of unfair bashing - it's a very good Bond movie.

[Mallory]

Denise Richards was cast because she was one of the hottest actress back in 1999 and to put her name on the poster would sell more tickets. It wasn't as shameful as Halle Berry's casting when she was given nearly as the same if not more promotion as Brosnan. The problem with Denise was not age, it was her lack of chemistry with Pierce Brosnan. Almost like they never tested them out. 

 

This started with TND when Teri Hatcher was cast as Paris because she was known for her role on Lois and Clark. Half her lines were cut because the test screeners couldn't stand her. Brosnan wanted Monica Belucci and that enough would have made the role of Paris a lot better. If you look at the scenes Brosnan does with Denise or Halle, he seems embarrassed. Connery was more into it because he got along with his leading ladies. Lazenby seemed to get on well with Diana inspite of what was said, Roger Moore did well before he got old and embarrassed, Dalton was a professional even Daniel Craig had excellent chemistry with Eva Green and Berenice. They chose the right women for those men when Brosnan's best girl was Isabella in GoldenEye. Hell I would rather have Maria Grazia Cucinotta be the main  Bond girl in TWINE but she had to blow herself up.

[B5Erik]

Denise Richards was cast because she was one of the hottest actress back in 1999 and to put her name on the poster would sell more tickets. It wasn't as shameful as Halle Berry's casting when she was given nearly as the same if not more promotion as Brosnan. The problem with Denise was not age, it was her lack of chemistry with Pierce Brosnan. Almost like they never tested them out. 

 

Richards WAS too young for the role.  There's no way she was old enough to play a PHD in nuclear physics who had been in the field for a couple of years.  Plus, if she had been older there may have been better chemistry between her and Brosnan.  That would be like me trying to have chemistry with a woman half my age.  I'd feel weird being old enough to be her father, and I'm sure to some degree Brosnan did as well.

 

Age can factor into it in a lot of ways, and with Richards it certainly did.

 

But, again, other than that bit of miscasting (stunt casting, if you will) TWINE is a very good movie.  I can't really fault anything other than that. 

[Mallory]

I don't think age has anything to do with it. She was 28 when she filmed her scenes and if that isn't old enough she could pass for a woman in her early 30's. You can say she's the youngest nuclear physicist ever. Graduated high school early. She wouldn't be able to pull it off today at 41 because she would still have no chemistry with Brosnan. 

[B5Erik]

She didn't look like she was in her early 30's.  She looked like she was 23, which is why she wasn't old enough for the part.  No one anywhere bought her as a PHD in nuclear physics who had been out in the field long enough to become a leading expert.  And there's no way to know what kind of chemistry a 35 year old Denise Richards would have had with a 48 year old Pierce Brosnan since they will always be much farther apart in age than that.

 

It was just bad casting.  Stunt casting. 

 

Even so, it's a damned good Bond movie.

[Iceskater101]

Yeah Denise Richards is bad but I love Sophie Marceau!

[Mallory]

I know plenty of people with a PhD who look 16 but they are in their mid to late 30's. So I don't think age has anything to do with it. She just sucks. A more talented actress could have pulled it off. 

Edited by Mallory, 01 January 2013 - 04:55 AM.

[nickjb007]

I recently watched TWINE with the in-laws on Christmas night.  I picked it because of this discussion, because of Christmas Jones and everybody wanted to watch a Brosnan film.  I cannot remember the last time I watched this film it has been at least five years or more.  I’m fond of this film because it was the first Bond film I saw in theatres.  My dad took me to see it, I read the novelization, I bought the trading card set, I followed the production details from Entertainment Weekly and the entertainment shows, I was ready for this film and it did not disappoint me.  Now, after watching this film a week ago I have been mulling over the film. Is it the best film in the series? It is most certainly not the best in the series but I like to say the film gave it a good shot and deserves something for trying.  Since Richards is being discussed towards the end this is the one thing that bugs me about her role, is that she is just pure eye candy for the films, what makes it so ridiculous is that as a nuclear scientist she is wearing short shorts and a cut off tank top as she gets out of the plastic suit, and the white shirt she is wearing in the submarine battle does not help here acting skills at the end.  Richards is no where near as bad as Roberts in AVTAK.

[Mallory]

  Richards is no where near as bad as Roberts in AVTAK.

 

Or Halle Berry.

[nickjb007]

I need to go back and re-watch DAD, its the Bond film I have watched the fewest times.  I saw when it came out in the theaters and I'm not sure I even watched it after I purchased the DVD. As for Berry's performance I don't remember so I am guessing I wasn't impressed.  At times I feel like Christmas Jones' character is to make up for Stacey Sutton's character in AVTAK.  Jones isn't screaming the whole time in the submarine for James to save her unlike sutton in the elevator shaft.  

[iBond]

I really enjoyed it. It's my favorite film of the Brosnan era. I do have problems with it, but I tend to overlook it.

[Professor Pi]

Somewhere in this script is a really good Bond film.  The idea that one of Bond's loves could turn out to be the villain, and how that affects him, was really intriguing.  Sophie Marceau does a great job playing that woman, and the movie makes subtle references to OHMSS to reinforce that Bond falls for her ("Have you ever lost someone close to you?", the ski scene, its score, Elektra's ski outfit, all very evocative of Tracy, the very title.)  But the dialogue is clunky, especially the technobabble Denise Richards was given to say.  Like they're explaining it to the audience.  And she IS miscast.  They tried to get Paulina Porizkova for GoldenEye, and she would have been much better in this role with her age and accent.

 

The writers were trying to do something different, but still felt bound by the traditional Bond formula, hence the awkward humor and action set pieces that stand out like a sore thumb.  It would have been better to not even have the Christmas Jones character at all but EON wasn't ready for Bond to not get the girl at the end.  But you can see in this film hints of what was to come in Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, and Skyfall.