63 replies to this topic

[Mr_Incognito]

What's with the hate for TND's finale? I wouldn't want it every movie by any means but it was pretty cool in a whole 'Bond literally in the middle of impending nuclear war fights tooth and nail against the villain's army' sort of a way. And Brosnan pulls of the whole thing very well; forget TWINE, this was his 'meanest' portrayl of Bond.

TND was Brosnan's 'coolest' Bond film, it was high-tech, it was stylish and it was in parts witty. It was a modern Bond film; just an enjoyable romp.
Plus Wai-Lin's infinitely better than Jinx.

[Qwerty]

What's with the hate for TND's finale? I wouldn't want it every movie by any means but it was pretty cool in a whole 'Bond literally in the middle of impending nuclear war fights tooth and nail against the villain's army' sort of a way. And Brosnan pulls of the whole thing very well; forget TWINE, this was his 'meanest' portrayl of Bond.

TND was Brosnan's 'coolest' Bond film, it was high-tech, it was stylish and it was in parts witty. It was a modern Bond film; just an enjoyable romp.
Plus Wai-Lin's infinitely better than Jinx.

Tomorrow Never Dies's finale is many times better than that for The World Is Not Enough or Die Another Day.

[Mr_Incognito]

^ Exactly. I feel it's a little 'fashionable' nowadays to criticise Brosnan's films. They are by no means perfect, but they were for the most part damn enjoyable. I'm sorry to see him go (but relishing the prospect of a new Bond.)

[Qwerty]

He's often bashed a bit for films like The World Is Not Enough. To each his own.

[Mr_Incognito]

Yeah... That was a little less enjoyable that the others, wan't it? I guess every chain has a weak link...

[Qwerty]

I found it to be enjoyable, moreso than some other fans.

[Mr_Incognito]

I liked it, but did't find it to be particularly 'watchable.' Maybe too serious and dark to be viewed as many times as GE or TND.

That doesn't mean I don't rate TWINE highly; I do and think its quite under-rated but it's not a 'fun' film to watch.

It's quite paradoxical, really.

[Qwerty]

I favor GoldenEye and Tomorrow Never Dies more, yes. The World Is Not Enough is often in the middle for me: nothing absolutely spectacular.

[Roger Moore's Bad Facelift]

I think DAD is going to age better -- maybe it will capture that "Moonraker" mystique and become a cult favorite among Bond fans after years of contempt. I loved TND when it first came out (boldly proclaiming it one of the best, in fact) but I like it less with every subsequent viewing. It's an unfortunate quirk of many modern Bond films that they peter out before the climax, but TND seems particularly bad for this -- it's just a bloodbath (by Bond standards, anyway) for a bloodbath's sake and lacks the excitement of previous epic battles such as TSWLM and TB (yes -- I said TB). At least it's memorable compared to the non-event that was the end of TWINE, but then again that movie couldn't have got any worse by the end anyway.

If TND has one advantage over DAD, it's dialogue. Give me Bruce Feirstein over Purvis and Butt-Head any day .

Hate to break it to you, but Feirstein, along with P & W is responsible for that movie of which you proclaim to be a "non-event" and "couldn't have gotten worse".
Yep.
Read the credits.
Feirstein tried his hand at TWINE's script and personally, I think his influence in certain scenes is fairly obvious.
Molly Warmflash anyone?

Whatever you say the majority prefers TND over DAD.

Yeah, that may be so, but what of it?
Tell me, what does that have anything to do with what I just said?
The fact remains that Feirstein (along with P&W) is culpabale for any percieved shortcomings of TWINE.
'JackLordisfelix'(along with many others here) solely chastise P & W for TWINE's failure as a Bond movie, while giving TWINE co-writer, Feirstein, a complete and total pass.
It's worth noting that P&W AND Feirstein both recieved writing credit for the movie and ergo, both are to blame.
That has absolutely nothing to do with whether I feel TND is a better or worse film than DAD. Rather, that is simply a fact worth pointing out to those which misguidedly believe that Feirstein can do no wrong when it comes to 007.

Edited by Roger_Moore's_Bad_Facelift, 13 April 2005 - 04:29 AM.

[YOLT]

I think DAD is going to age better -- maybe it will capture that "Moonraker" mystique and become a cult favorite among Bond fans after years of contempt. I loved TND when it first came out (boldly proclaiming it one of the best, in fact) but I like it less with every subsequent viewing. It's an unfortunate quirk of many modern Bond films that they peter out before the climax, but TND seems particularly bad for this -- it's just a bloodbath (by Bond standards, anyway) for a bloodbath's sake and lacks the excitement of previous epic battles such as TSWLM and TB (yes -- I said TB). At least it's memorable compared to the non-event that was the end of TWINE, but then again that movie couldn't have got any worse by the end anyway.

If TND has one advantage over DAD, it's dialogue. Give me Bruce Feirstein over Purvis and Butt-Head any day .

Hate to break it to you, but Feirstein, along with P & W is responsible for that movie of which you proclaim to be a "non-event" and "couldn't have gotten worse".
Yep.
Read the credits.
Feirstein tried his hand at TWINE's script and personally, I think his influence in certain scenes is fairly obvious.
Molly Warmflash anyone?

Whatever you say the majority prefers TND over DAD.

Yeah, that may be so, but what of it?
Tell me, what does that have anything to do with what I just said?
The fact remains that Feirstein (along with P&W) is culpabale for any percieved shortcomings of TWINE.
'JackLordisfelix'(along with many others here) solely chastise P & W for TWINE's failure as a Bond movie, while giving TWINE co-writer, Feirstein, a complete and total pass.
It's worth noting that P&W AND Feirstein both recieved writing credit for the movie and ergo, both are to blame.
That has absolutely nothing to do with whether I feel TND is a better or worse film than DAD. Rather, that is simply a fact worth pointing out to those which misguidedly believe that Feirstein can do no wrong when it comes to 007.

I dont mind TWINE that much. I am against your view that "TND is the worst bond film ever made for me". In which terms TND is the worst movie? You may dont like it but the worst?
TND is the Bond that screams out that its JUST a Bond film, nothing more. I want enjoyment, and DAD couldnt enjoy me as such as TND. TND is the best 007 film in recent years. It passed TWINE and DAD with the time, and it will pass GE in the following years, naturally People do like GE because its the end of the too long wait.

[Roger Moore's Bad Facelift]

I dont mind TWINE that much. I am against your view that "TND is the worst bond film ever made for me".

Then you should've written that in the according post (where I was actually discussing TND) and not in the one in which I was discussing Feirstein's complicty (and inexplicable exoneration by fans) in TWINE's overall suckiness.

In which terms TND is the worst movie? You may dont like it but the worst?
TND is the Bond that screams out that its JUST a Bond film, nothing more. I want enjoyment, and DAD couldnt enjoy me as such as TND. TND is the best 007 film in recent years. It passed TWINE and DAD with the time, and it will pass GE in the following years, naturally People do like GE because its the end of the too long wait.

I'm terribly sorry that the notion of a differing opinion is too much for you to handle, I have talked about this movie ad nauseum, but will indulge you all the same, and systematically list the reasons why I feel it sucks...


First, I

Edited by Roger_Moore's_Bad_Facelift, 13 April 2005 - 11:10 PM.

[Scottlee]

Well, each to their own, but I disagree completely with almost everything you've said. The only two things I dislike about TND are the motorbike chase and the way the producers seem scared to show even a solitary drop of blood. Everything else gets my adrenalin pumping like a good Bond film should.

I don't see the big deal about Carver being 'wasted'. To me he is one of the highlight villains of the Brosnan era (along with Trevelyn). He's also the closest of the Brosnan villains to one of the old-school baddies from back in Connery's day ; witty, charming, OTT, but murderous if you cross him. He was a good change in pace from Trevelyn's rogue agent of the previous film. Also, the imitation of Wai Lin's kung-fu skills is one of the funniest moments in the series for me, and comes mere moments after another instance that gets me laughing (see my sig). Carver might be a physical weakling, but his psychopathic presence can be felt throughout the movie, even when he isn't in shot. Johnathan Pryce over cooks the "There's no news like bad news" line, sure. On the whole though, this is a great villain for me.

[Qwerty]

My past review:

Not going for second best in the Brosnan Bond films, this one simply is number one for me. To start off with the plot, it truly is one of the oddest, most outlandish, yet original of the series. Ever. Usually criticized for being too cartoonish or un-credible, it

[JackLordIsFelix]

Well, each to their own, but I disagree completely with almost everything you've said. The only two things I dislike about TND are the motorbike chase and the way the producers seem scared to show even a solitary drop of blood. Everything else gets my adrenalin pumping like a good Bond film should.

Well, Bond films are not renowned for much bloodshed (TB and LTK being possible exceptions). However, the blood on that newsprint in TND was more than a drop;P.

Edited by JackLordIsFelix, 19 April 2005 - 12:10 AM.

[Qwerty]

Well, each to their own, but I disagree completely with almost everything you've said. The only two things I dislike about TND are the motorbike chase and the way the producers seem scared to show even a solitary drop of blood. Everything else gets my adrenalin pumping like a good Bond film should.

Well, Bond films are not renowned for much bloodshed (TB and LTK being possible exceptions). However, the blood on that newsprint in TND was more than a drop;P.

On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. "He had lots of guts."

[JackLordIsFelix]

On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. "He had lots of guts."

[/quote]

LOL -- indeed he did .

[Qwerty]

Point noted all the same, I remember reading a review of Tomorrow Never Dies where it said something along the lines of this one having upped the violence in the series.

[Genrewriter]

I like both but in terms of overall quality I have to give the nod to TND; though I rank DAD hbigher simply because the henchman is stronger.

[Scottlee]

Well, each to their own, but I disagree completely with almost everything you've said. The only two things I dislike about TND are the motorbike chase and the way the producers seem scared to show even a solitary drop of blood. Everything else gets my adrenalin pumping like a good Bond film should.

Well, Bond films are not renowned for much bloodshed (TB and LTK being possible exceptions). However, the blood on that newsprint in TND was more than a drop;P.

Oh, I forgot about that bit. What really frustrates me though is the way that gunshots never produce a visible dent in the body. Look at what bullets do in Bond compared to what bullets do in Robocop, for example.

[Qwerty]

I like both but in terms of overall quality I have to give the nod to TND; though I rank DAD hbigher simply because the henchman is stronger.

Both henchman are pretty weak in the whole though I'd say. Zao and Stamper really don't have much to make them memorable.

[JackLordIsFelix]

Oh, I forgot about that bit. What really frustrates me though is the way that gunshots never produce a visible dent in the body. Look at what bullets do in Bond compared to what bullets do in Robocop, for example.

[/quote]

Sometimes a little more realism would be nice. Having said that, like Robocop, Bond movies have a unique style all their own which -- for reasons artistic and commercial -- does not include the graphic results of violence. I think that's fairly in line with Fleming who, although describing violence in more graphic terms than in the films, still showed a lot of restraint.

[Scottlee]

I'm not saying gunshot wounds have to be as violent as they are in Robocop, but you have to at least be able to see the effect of the bullet sometimes.

I remember watching this guy keel over and die in For a few dollars more, when he quite clearly hadn't been shot at all. It's got to at least be better than that. Some of the 'bullet' deaths in the Brosnan films are pretty lame.

[Genrewriter]

I like both but in terms of overall quality I have to give the nod to TND; though I rank DAD hbigher simply because the henchman is stronger.

Both henchman are pretty weak in the whole though I'd say. Zao and Stamper really don't have much to make them memorable.

I don't agree, I'd say a guy with a face full of diamonds is pretty memorable. At least with Zao there is some character for the actor to play. They just didn't do enough with Stamper.

[Loomis]

I'm not saying gunshot wounds have to be as violent as they are in Robocop, but you have to at least be able to see the effect of the bullet sometimes.

I remember watching this guy keel over and die in For a few dollars more, when he quite clearly hadn't been shot at all. It's got to at least be better than that. Some of the 'bullet' deaths in the Brosnan films are pretty lame.

Check out the pre-credits sequence of GOLDENEYE, with Russian soldiers being riddled with machine gun fire, getting jerked into the air, spinning round and falling.... without any visible bullets, wounds or blood (what I mean is, it's really obvious that there aren't any bullets, wounds or blood). Pretty ridiculous. Not saying they should have shown graphic gore, but going about it the way they did just made it look stupid.

[Genrewriter]

Yeah, those did look kinda silly. Probably should have added some smoke in to cover the lack of any blood squibs.

[Loomis]

Yeah, or had the soldiers dying in long shot, or something. The way they did it really takes you out of the film if you notice it.

[Genrewriter]

And ther weiord thing is that in the shootout later in the film, Bond is seen shooting through railings and there are tons of paper flying around to cover the lack of any blood (one of the things I love about the film). I guess they saw the dailies of the orecredits scene and decided to cover themselves better for the rest of the film.

[Scottlee]

The pre-titles of GE was actually one scene I had in mind. There's one soldier in particular who looks stupid. He just seems to be charging towards the camera one minute, and then does a stupid imitation of a man being riddled with machine gunfire the next. I'm sure you know which guy I mean.

Edited by Scottlee, 26 April 2005 - 06:46 PM.

[Genrewriter]

I know exactly who you mean. Talk about cheesy!

[JackLordIsFelix]

I know exactly who you mean.  Talk about cheesy!

Even more cheezy is a guy (Travalyan) being shot in the head point-blank with no wounds whatsoever. Even though the death was a fake, how are you supposed to fake a guy getting shot in the head without some evidence he actually was?

Frustrating, frustrating stuff -- not to mention bad storytelling to boot. I'm sure a LITTLE blood would not have pushed the movie into R territory.