
The Spy Who Loved Me- As good as you think, probably even better!
#31
Posted 10 November 2003 - 12:52 AM
#32
Posted 10 November 2003 - 01:43 AM
I like it.. but I think Octopussy is the best 007 film.
#33
Posted 10 November 2003 - 03:41 AM
Originally posted by 4 Ur Eyez Only
I like it.. but I think Octopussy is the best 007 film.
Yeah, I love Octopussy too, it's right up there with TSWLM, MR and LALD.
Roger Moore really had some style.
#34
Posted 11 November 2003 - 03:58 AM
#35
Posted 11 November 2003 - 04:01 AM
#36
Posted 11 November 2003 - 11:04 AM
debut, now what was to follow was another thing TMWTGG was one
of his worst Bond films and MR would have be his second worst,true TSWLM was a good film but certainly not the best for Roger i would have picked as two of his best FYEO and Octopussy,as for the best Bond we are yet to see,but my favorites Dr.No,FRWL,GF,TB,YOLT the two roger Moore films i have mentioned.OHMSS,TLD,GOLDENEYE,TND.
The thing is you can always get something out of a Bond film even the
bad ones as i will still watch each film back to back.
#37
Posted 11 November 2003 - 11:33 PM
I liked Stromberg but they didn't give him the lines that a Bond villian needed. Drax in MR was much slicker and more evil, but still Stromberg remains one of my fav JB baddies. From the opening ski scene to the great title sequence to bang-up ending Spy is a classic James Bond film.
#38
Posted 12 November 2003 - 12:27 AM
"What a helpful chap!"
#39
Posted 12 November 2003 - 07:41 AM
Originally posted by Qwerty
Yeah, I love Octopussy too, it's right up there with TSWLM, MR and LALD.
Roger Moore really had some style.
Yeah.. what a run huh!
TSWLM
MR
FYEO
Octopussy
Kick azz!
Imagine if they didn't make MR..
WHO else had 3 in a row like that!

Maybe sean.. but who can't make the first 3 great in the series when it goes 40 years:rolleyes:
making 10,11,12,13 is pretty amazing
#40
Posted 13 November 2003 - 03:32 PM
Originally posted by 4 Ur Eyez Only
WHO else had 3 in a row like that!
IMO, Brosnan had four in a row. :-)
#41
Posted 13 November 2003 - 04:07 PM
#42
Posted 14 November 2003 - 08:26 AM
Originally posted by Doubleshot
IMO, Brosnan had four in a row. :-)
LOL 3 bad ones.. thats not in a row he was looking for

BUT to be honest.. I finally saw for free at the library DAD!.. and I have to say "They" finally started to get it right! I liked it!! I think this was teh first one where Pierce wasn't rippin off Sean.. I think this is his first one I didn't get that feel.. I think he was/they were giving it a John Glen/Roger feel!
I think it was clearly his best one.. and I finally consider a Pierce 007 Film part of the Other 007 actors!
The end with all that action wasn't great.. but the whole set up was nice! I wasn't bored.
#43
Posted 14 November 2003 - 11:55 PM
The other thing is that I thought was weird that they would give a neo-Nazi figure (let's face it, he wanted to create a super-race in Atlantis) a Jewish-sounding name!!!! Think about it...
#44
Posted 15 November 2003 - 01:29 AM
Originally posted by Triton
Jaws could have been one of the most horrific, menacing, and memorable villain's henchman in the entire James Bond series ranking above Harold Sakata as Oddjob. Unfortunately, this potentially menacing character is used as comic relief and escapes from accidents unscathed that would kill mortal people. Jaws seems like he is the Coyote from a Warner Bros. Road Runner cartoon. This cartoon-like portrayal made the character a favorite of children everywhere. This lead to the "goodie" Jaws in Moonraker.
That is really missing the point. James Bond films are supposed to feature unbelievable plots, villians, and gadgets that are, for the most part, ridiculous, stupid, and preposterous and it's part of the fun. Jaws being able to survive all the dangerous situations Bond forces him into is intentional as he is no doubt supposed to be indestructable. Sure, he "escapes from accidents unscathed that would kill mortal people," but in James Bond's world, mortal people are rather dull and live in a silly world needlessly serious. James Bond films were never really supposed to be serious or believable and from the beginning we have seen idiotic things such as "the dragon that runs on diesel engines," Goldfinger's scheme to blow up fort knox, the volcano lair with a rocket that swallows space capsules, and LALD's Tee-Hee with that claw for a hand. These ridiculous elements are what James Bond films are all about. Jaws isn't only meant to please children, but please those who watch Bond films for their silly and preposterous fun; which is why most people enjoy them. And who said James Bond films had to be serious, adult entertainment? If you want serious characters, stick to the Godfather films. Jaws is one fo the most memorable villians, but if you want horrifying characters than Daniel Day Lewis's butcher in "Gangs of New York" might be your answer. But the Bond films are not supposed to be serious, scarry, or dramatic and maybe the weakness of Licence To Kill is that it took itself seriously.