Excerpt from my article, "How to Write a Professional Bond Film Review":
First, your review must begin with the line: “Bond is back and he’s better than ever (and/or: “and he has a licence to thrill”), and he’s going to leave you shaken – but not stirred – in...” This establishes that you are aware of the iconography of the franchise, and that you are just as clever as the film makers when it comes to making up such an original play on words. THIS IS NOT OPTIONAL.
Also not optional is describing the lead actor as either:
- Donning the tuxedo
- Strapping on the Beretta, or
- Taking the wheel of the famous Aston Martin DBIII.
He is also the best actor in the role since Sean Connery.*
*Except for George Lazenby, who was terrible (more on that later.)
Whatever the plot of the film, you must describe the villain as seeking nothing less than world domination, whether it’s by threatening NATO, trading diamonds for opium, or charging a million a shot.
The lead actress is Bond’s equal in every way. She is a Bond ‘woman,’ not a Bond ‘girl’ like all the others who came before her.
Don't worry about getting names - or spelling of names - right. Diana Rigg could have played Tessa, Topol could have played Columbia...whatever.
Find sexual innuendo in absolutely everything. Here you can let your own sick, perverse imagination run rampant, then criticize what you’ve inferred for being too crude and obvious. (E.g.: “The timer is set for four hours – allowing for delays...” Delays? What kind of delays? Ooooh, tsk tsk. Hey, it must be deliberate – this is a Bond film).
Admit that the writing and directing of the film has its flaws – and it’s important to phrase this in a way that implies that you could have done better yourself, but modesty prevents you from saying so outright. Ditto for the editing and music.
Anything missing here probably appears elsewhere in the complete text.