278 replies to this topic

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Most overrated:
2) From Russia with Love - I mean, is there anybody who has anything negative to say about this one? I've never seen any FRWL-bashing so far.

Ayn Rand hated it. She writes in her book, "The Romantic Manifesto",

If you think that the producers of mass-media entertainment are motivated primarily by commercial greed, check your premises and observe that the producers of the James Bond movies seem to be intent on undercutting their own success.

Contrary to somebody's strenuously spread assertions, there was nothing "tongue-in-cheek" about the first of these movies, Dr. No. It was a brilliant example of Romantic screen art—in production, direction, writing, photography and, most particularly, in the performance of Sean Connery. His first introduction on the screen was a gem of dramatic technique, elegance, wit and understatement: when, in response to a question about his name, we saw his first closeup and he answered quietly: "Bond. James Bond"—the audience, on the night I saw it, burst into applause.

There wasn't much applause on the night when I saw his second movie, From Russia with Love. Here, Bond was introduced pecking with schoolboy kisses at the face of a vapid-looking girl in a bathing suit. The story was muddled and, at times, unintelligible. The skillfully constructed, dramatic suspense of Fleming's climax was replaced by conventional stuff, such as old-fashioned chases, involving nothing but crude physical danger.

I also seem to recall that John Brosnan's book "James Bond in the Cinema" claimed that during the 1960's, FRWL had no middle ground: people either thought it was the best or the worst (Connery?) Bond film.

Film historian Robin Wood also hated FRWL. His book "Hitchcock's Films" compared FRWL unfavorably to Hitchcock's North by Northwest.

I also think that DN is better than FRWL, but I wouldn't be so harsh with Connery's second entry (at least it has a better score than its predecessor).

[PrinceKamalKhan]

 

Most overrated:
2) From Russia with Love - I mean, is there anybody who has anything negative to say about this one? I've never seen any FRWL-bashing so far.

Ayn Rand hated it. She writes in her book, "The Romantic Manifesto",

If you think that the producers of mass-media entertainment are motivated primarily by commercial greed, check your premises and observe that the producers of the James Bond movies seem to be intent on undercutting their own success.

Contrary to somebody's strenuously spread assertions, there was nothing "tongue-in-cheek" about the first of these movies, Dr. No. It was a brilliant example of Romantic screen art—in production, direction, writing, photography and, most particularly, in the performance of Sean Connery. His first introduction on the screen was a gem of dramatic technique, elegance, wit and understatement: when, in response to a question about his name, we saw his first closeup and he answered quietly: "Bond. James Bond"—the audience, on the night I saw it, burst into applause.

There wasn't much applause on the night when I saw his second movie, From Russia with Love. Here, Bond was introduced pecking with schoolboy kisses at the face of a vapid-looking girl in a bathing suit. The story was muddled and, at times, unintelligible. The skillfully constructed, dramatic suspense of Fleming's climax was replaced by conventional stuff, such as old-fashioned chases, involving nothing but crude physical danger.

I also seem to recall that John Brosnan's book "James Bond in the Cinema" claimed that during the 1960's, FRWL had no middle ground: people either thought it was the best or the worst (Connery?) Bond film.
 

 

Fascinating. I had never read Ayn Rand's take on any Bond film so this is very interesting.

 

[AMC Hornet]

So, what about SKYFALL?

 

Immensely successful, mightily praised, yes, but hasn't it too been over-rated?

What makes it so great? That it's better than QoS in pretty much every way?

Granted, but is that really saying much?

However much of an improvement it may be, it has not supplanted any of my top ten (a list which includes pretty much every entry that has been underrated in this thread).

I can't even say why - it just didn't quite tick all my boxes.

So, after B24 comes out, if it's a wower we may see SKYFALL get cut down to size by a fickle public that can't love something new without turning around and hating what came before.

And if that happens, I will probably reappraise SKYFALL and become one of its proudest defenders.

[Dustin]

Still too early to regard SKYFALL either way. I suppose its importance for the series very much depends on the outcome of BOND 24 and subsequent films, more so than with any other Bond. The watershed moments of the series - GF, OHMSS/DAF, GE, CR - used to be important because of their depiction of Bond and his world and how it would all resonate with the audience.

SKYFALL now also promises to set the stage for the future, although in what way exactly nobody knows yet. So all depends now on what kind of direction Bond on screen takes from here. Which in turn would also very much depend on whether it's going to be another Sam Mendes project.

[Hansen]

Well, as for me, I do not need to wait : SKYFALL is by far the most overrated of all. I am quite alone on this but I am confident that time will bring me some joiners.

[tdalton]

Well, as for me, I do not need to wait : SKYFALL is by far the most overrated of all. I am quite alone on this but I am confident that time will bring me some joiners.

 

You're not entirely alone in that opinion.  Skyfall is, for me, easily the most overrated of the series.

[Dustin]

Well, as for me, I do not need to wait : SKYFALL is by far the most overrated of all. I am quite alone on this but I am confident that time will bring me some joiners.

You're not entirely alone in that opinion. Skyfall is, for me, easily the most overrated of the series.

Of course you two are not alone, there must be a significant part of the audience and the fanbase that doesn't agree with the film and its standing with the general audience and critics, they just don't bother to be very vocal about it.

But that's not really the interesting part for me, I'm fairly sure that's probably the case with most films. To me the astonishing thing is that you find only few people who are indifferent about SKYFALL, most seem to either love or hate it. And amongst those hating it you find both kinds, the outspoken 'traditionalists' and those fans that embraced the reboot and the new direction that came with it.

[tdalton]

 

But that's not really the interesting part for me, I'm fairly sure that's probably the case with most films. To me the astonishing thing is that you find only few people who are indifferent about SKYFALL, most seem to either love or hate it. And amongst those hating it you find both kinds, the outspoken 'traditionalists' and those fans that embraced the reboot and the new direction that came with it.

 

 

I think the more interesting aspect to Skyfall would be to examine how it seemingly has become the barometer by which you're judged as a Bond fan.  Goldfinger used to have this distinction to itself, but I never remember it being as pervasive as the notion of Skyfall as a barometer of fandom has been over the last 9 months or so.  

[AMC Hornet]

To me the astonishing thing is that you find only few people who are indifferent about SKYFALL, most seem to either love or hate it. 

Count me as one of those few who are indifferent. I certainly don't hate SKYFALL - I saw it three times in theatre and have watched my bluray twice so far, but still I feel it didn't quite live up to the hype it receive both before and after release.

Not that there is anything wrong with it, and I don't presume to be qualified to suggest improvements. Like LTK, it just wasn't my kind of Bond film (yet I still slip that one in occasionally as well).

[Dustin]

But that's not really the interesting part for me, I'm fairly sure that's probably the case with most films. To me the astonishing thing is that you find only few people who are indifferent about SKYFALL, most seem to either love or hate it. And amongst those hating it you find both kinds, the outspoken 'traditionalists' and those fans that embraced the reboot and the new direction that came with it.

I think the more interesting aspect to Skyfall would be to examine how it seemingly has become the barometer by which you're judged as a Bond fan. Goldfinger used to have this distinction to itself, but I never remember it being as pervasive as the notion of Skyfall as a barometer of fandom has been over the last 9 months or so.

This is truly ridiculous. If you're longer than three hours on the Internet with any kind of interest you must by default encounter a percentage of weirdos and fanatics - where the term 'fan' originates from - who only really consider their own brand of orthodox-ism as the true and only school of their particular craze. That's what happens when brains are replaced by religious/pseudo-religious fervour.

I trust most of us on CBn are both long enough on the turf and intelligent enough not to fall for such nonsense.

Or at least too well brought up, should the first two categories not apply.

[tdalton]

 

 

But that's not really the interesting part for me, I'm fairly sure that's probably the case with most films. To me the astonishing thing is that you find only few people who are indifferent about SKYFALL, most seem to either love or hate it. And amongst those hating it you find both kinds, the outspoken 'traditionalists' and those fans that embraced the reboot and the new direction that came with it.

I think the more interesting aspect to Skyfall would be to examine how it seemingly has become the barometer by which you're judged as a Bond fan. Goldfinger used to have this distinction to itself, but I never remember it being as pervasive as the notion of Skyfall as a barometer of fandom has been over the last 9 months or so.

This is truly ridiculous.

 

I don't see where it's really all that ridiculous a notion.  I've seen it far, far more on Bond forums with regards to Skyfall than any other Bond film.  That notion has died down here in recent weeks/months, but it was rampant here as well at one point.  Not even Casino Royale had that kind of following, even when it was met with near universal adulation back in 2006.

Edited by tdalton, 07 July 2013 - 06:24 PM.

[Dustin]

But that's not really the interesting part for me, I'm fairly sure that's probably the case with most films. To me the astonishing thing is that you find only few people who are indifferent about SKYFALL, most seem to either love or hate it. And amongst those hating it you find both kinds, the outspoken 'traditionalists' and those fans that embraced the reboot and the new direction that came with it.

I think the more interesting aspect to Skyfall would be to examine how it seemingly has become the barometer by which you're judged as a Bond fan. Goldfinger used to have this distinction to itself, but I never remember it being as pervasive as the notion of Skyfall as a barometer of fandom has been over the last 9 months or so.

This is truly ridiculous.

I don't see where it's really all that ridiculous a notion. I've seen it far, far more on Bond forums with regards to Skyfall (i.e. the notion that if someone doesn't like Skyfall they're labeled as being an inferior fan or an 'idiot') than any other Bond film. That notion has died down here in recent weeks/months, but it was rampant here as well at one point. Not even Casino Royale had that kind of following, even when it was met with near universal adulation back in 2006.

Sorry, I didn't obviously make myself clear enough. Not the notion is ridiculous in my view - I know such delusional state of mind exists - but the idea one's unquestioning appreciation of X could indicate anything else than just that. Certainly it doesn't serve as the ultimate litmus test of topic Y or one's specific membership in the exclusive in-group of ultra-hardboiled-true-followers of Z.

Isn't that self-evident? Ought to be...

Edited by Dustin, 07 July 2013 - 06:32 PM.

[tdalton]

 

 

 

 

But that's not really the interesting part for me, I'm fairly sure that's probably the case with most films. To me the astonishing thing is that you find only few people who are indifferent about SKYFALL, most seem to either love or hate it. And amongst those hating it you find both kinds, the outspoken 'traditionalists' and those fans that embraced the reboot and the new direction that came with it.

I think the more interesting aspect to Skyfall would be to examine how it seemingly has become the barometer by which you're judged as a Bond fan. Goldfinger used to have this distinction to itself, but I never remember it being as pervasive as the notion of Skyfall as a barometer of fandom has been over the last 9 months or so.

This is truly ridiculous.

I don't see where it's really all that ridiculous a notion. I've seen it far, far more on Bond forums with regards to Skyfall (i.e. the notion that if someone doesn't like Skyfall they're labeled as being an inferior fan or an 'idiot') than any other Bond film. That notion has died down here in recent weeks/months, but it was rampant here as well at one point. Not even Casino Royale had that kind of following, even when it was met with near universal adulation back in 2006.

Sorry, I didn't obviously make myself clear enough. Not the notion is ridiculous in my view - I know such delusional state of mind exists - but the idea one's unquestioning appreciation of X could indicate anything else than just that. Certainly it doesn't serve as the ultimate litmus test of topic Y or one's specific membership in the exclusive in-group of ultra-hardboiled-true-followers of Z.

Isn't that self-evident? Ought to be...

 

 

It's perfectly self-evident to me.  I've never subscribed to such nonsense, just curious as to how it arose with Skyfall and not the other successful Bond films we've seen over the past couple of decades.

[Hansen]

In regards of SF, for me, it not a matter of love / hate as such. I truly felt betrayed by the film. I will not go again into explaning why.

I consider myself quite open-minded when it comes to Bond. Some are better than others, some attempts were succesful, other not.

All this made this franchise last so long and I will be forever grateful for that, but for SF, I cannot forgive this non-sense script.

That said, I quite agree with tdalton : thanks to this huge success, Skyfall has become a barometer and as for me it is a strange one as it puts some many wrong elements as standards and makes me worry for the next one.

[Dustin]

Well, granted. But feeling betrayed? I mean, really 'betrayed' - that's something I might feel when my wife runs off with another, or when my dog accepts a treat from someone I don't like. But a film, a series of films simply cannot betray me. Not after DAD...

No, I suppose we really must reconsider the standards of our expectations we usually bring to a Bond entry. It seems for the dedicated fan there exists now nary any middle-ground any more, it's always epic fail or landmark masterpiece. A simple 'decent' doesn't cut it any more. And this when even decent still has to make tons of money to break even.

Edited by Dustin, 07 July 2013 - 07:23 PM.

[tdalton]

No, I suppose we really must reconsider the standards of our expectations we usually bring to a Bond entry. It seems for the dedicated fan there exists now nary any middle-ground any more, it's always epic fail or landmark masterpiece. A simple 'decent' doesn't cut it any more. And this when even decent still has to make tons of money to break even.

 

I think that part of the problem with regards to this lies with the filmmakers.  When it takes them as long as it does to make these films nowadays, with two 4 year breaks within a span of three films, the films need to be great since we get so few of them.  Back when EON was churning the films out at a pace of one every two years, with the odd three year gap thrown in once or twice, a film that was merely decent would be more acceptable to the general audience, since a new one was more or less right around the corner. 

[Bond31]

"Betray"  . Hansen If it was up to you we'd be stuck with Moore and Brosnan type Bond films wouldn't we. Get over it, it made a ton of money, got the Critical acclaim and won a ton of awards and people went to see it over and over again not just Bond nerd like us. Bond fan forum's sometimes need to chill a little and look to the future instead of looking back at the past wanting things to go back.

 

Overrated- Dalton Film's (fine films but hugely overrated on these forums)

 

Underrated- QOS

[Professor Pi]

I wasn't keen on the casting of Craig initially, but I sure have eaten those words.  That was as close as I got to 'betrayed'.  But that was nowhere near the disappointment I felt with the overrated ...

 

GoldenEye.  Maybe it was the preceding six year gap, the awesome N64 video game, or that this entry was the introduction for a new generation of Bond fans, or that subsequent Brosnan Bonds were even weaker, but this movie seems to get a pass from the critical eye for most of its failings.  For one thing, Bond works alone so now he's had some partner we've never heard of?!  I think it was more the filmmakers way of distinguishing Bond from the buddy action Lethal Weapons and Die Hards of the 90s, despite ripping off Die Hard 2's cockpit escape. 

 

How Trevelyan goes from shot in the head to Orumov's boss isn't believably explained, and Orumov's fall from evil commanding Russian rogue general to alcoholic comedic relief is likewise problematic.  Trevelyan forcing himself on Natalya and Bond knocking Xenia out cold seem awfully sexist for the 90s, even in a Bond movie.  Trevelyan's motives and background are overly convoluted as well.  M's taking over from her predecessor is also not explained sufficiently, and she's clearly a different character than Craig's M. 

 

For all the talk of bringing Bond into the 90s, he's essentially the same character, it's just those around him are now willing to call him a "misogynist dinosaur" as Moneypenny feigns sexual harassment while still inviting Bond's flirtations.  And Bond, buddy, the satellite dish is obviously under the lake, a fact Trevelyan needlessly gives away by firing a missile out of it.  But the women leads are fabulous, Dench is a needed change for M, and they finally cast Michael Tanner well which prevents this from being a bad Bond, but not an overrated one.

 

As for underrated, On Her Majesty's Secret Service will always be the poster boy for that, no matter how much credit it gets among hardcore fans.

[Hansen]

"Betray"  . Hansen If it was up to you we'd be stuck with Moore and Brosnan type Bond films wouldn't we. Get over it, it made a ton of money, got the Critical acclaim and won a ton of awards and people went to see it over and over again not just Bond nerd like us. Bond fan forum's sometimes need to chill a little and look to the future instead of looking back at the past wanting things to go back.
 
Overrated- Dalton Film's (fine films but hugely overrated on these forums)
 
Underrated- QOS

Yeah... Tons of money like Independence Day. Awards like Shakespeare in love. Sorry great film are not defined by box-office or awards (remember Citizen Kane).
'Betray' is used on purpose and of course, Dustin, it has to be considered within Bond universe. But an't we talking Bond ? (not love or patriotism...)
That said, it is true that opinion on films are more and more extremist. Probably because of social networks (incl CBN), we have now so many places to have this kind of discussion that we all can have with friends where wehen we do not agree, we exagerate our opinions, mostly for pleasure of debating. Also, as everyone, we tend to want to have our voice heard and mild opinions do not work for that.

Coming back to Bond 31, I will ignore your quip and grant you that indeed, thanks to SF, I have never expected the next one so much. If Bond 24 turns out to be great. I may reconsider my position on SF as some kind of mandatory passage to get to some great Bond. But even with that, SF will always have wasted a great cast and great director into a very poor script. A promise that did not deliver. Somekind of betrayal.

[Dustin]

'Betray' is used on purpose and of course, Dustin, it has to be considered within Bond universe. But an't we talking Bond ? (not love or patriotism...)
That said, it is true that opinion on films are more and more extremist. Probably because of social networks (incl CBN), we have now so many places to have this kind of discussion that we all can have with friends where wehen we do not agree, we exagerate our opinions, mostly for pleasure of debating. Also, as everyone, we tend to want to have our voice heard and mild opinions do not work for that.

Coming back to Bond 31, I will ignore your quip and grant you that indeed, thanks to SF, I have never expected the next one so much. If Bond 24 turns out to be great. I may reconsider my position on SF as some kind of mandatory passage to get to some great Bond. But even with that, SF will always have wasted a great cast and great director into a very poor script. A promise that did not deliver. Somekind of betrayal.

 

 

 

Well, I can understand that. I'm just no longer sure that business factor that Bond is today is still able to deliver the kind of experience many of the hardcore fans are looking for beyond a certain point. We've had a poll somewhere here about whether one liked SF or not. One of the answers IIRC is something like: 'SKYFALL is a great film but not a great Bond film.' 

 

I initially thought that's a pretty curious one, but if you come to think of it it's probably addressing the core problem of any Bond film today: to haul in the biggest number of audiences a Bond production must now succeed on a different level than it used to twenty years ago. Probably even ten years ago, all things considered. The result is necessarily an enormous hype amongst the mainstream media, but also a tremendous disappointment for those who see their hopes..., well, 'betrayed'. 

 

Only, I do not know how to deal with this disappointment other than just live with it.  

[glidrose]

Count me among those who believe SF is overrated. It's an okay film with a wobbly script full of too many holes.

 

And for the first time ever Craig hits wrong notes for me in the role. Lots of wrong notes. And he's looking a wee too old for the role. And this isn't Bond. It's just some spy who shares his name. Same complaint I had about Gardner's Bond books. And it's not because the filmmakers aren't giving us the "same old" as before - Fleming's YOLT is clearly off the beaten track but it's clearly our Bond. Craig Bond does all sorts of things in SF that aren't, well, Bond.

 

Bring us back Bond for B24.

 

Too much maudlin emotion in the film straining for significance. Could definitely do without all that Batman/Bruce Wayne rip-off claptrap. The filmmakers don't even use China properly - what, no day time shots? The first half is increasingly dull. Solid pacing in the second half.

 

Agree with PP (Professor Pi) about GE. Never liked it. Always thought it one of the series' worst films. A big budget made-for-cable movie with no real action or suspense.

[Guy Haines]

Given the highly "personal" nature of the Skyfall storyline - one that I can't see being easily replicated in Bond 24 or future Bond films - I regard the movie as a great film, a great Bond film, but a one-off. There isn't even the potential for "Bond out on his own and out for revenge" in the next movie, because 007 killed Silva, who was himself the one seeking vengeance. This must be of some relief to many on Cbn who I know deprecate these "personal" storylines.

 

Whether Bond 24's director is Sam Mendes or someone else, I'll be surprised if it turns out to be "Skyfall Revisited". When Silva and Judi Dench's "M" died at the end of it, that really was "end of story". We may get further glimpses of "Bond the man" in 24, but I think it will be in the context of a more typical Bond plot.

[jaguar007]

Really all Bond movies are underrated and overrated at the same time. It all depends on ones personal taste.

 

As far as what I think is the most underrated Bond film (as far as mass public opinion), TLD. One of my favorites, but too frequently overlooked by the public.

[FOX MULDER]

I've always considered "The Man With The Golden Gun" to be criminally underrated.

 

Great story (Bond vs. the world's number 1 assassin).

Great villain (Scaramanga).

Funny, original henchman (Nick Nack).

Roger Moore is superb as Bond.

Britt Ekland and Maud Adams. Gorgeous.

Great climax in the funhouse.

Great song by Lulu.

Edited by FOX MULDER, 10 July 2013 - 08:04 PM.

[Walecs]

Overrated:

Goldfinger

Thunderball

You Only Live Twice

Live and Let Die

The Spy Who Loved Me

 

Underrated:

OHMSS

Licence to Kill

Tomorrow Never Dies

The World Is Not Enough

Die Another Day

Edited by Walecs, 10 July 2013 - 08:38 PM.

[Sir Godfrey]

Overrated:
Goldfinger

The spy who loved me

Skyfall (although I loved it)

 

Underrated:

All John Glen's movies

Die another day

I've always considered "The Man With The Golden Gun" to be criminally underrated.

 

Great story (Bond vs. the world's number 1 assassin).

Great villain (Scaramanga).

Funny, original henchman (Nick Nack).

Roger Moore is superb as Bond.

Britt Ekland and Maud Adams. Gorgeous.

Great climax in the funhouse.

Great song by Lulu.

 

Yes, you're right. Moore was excellent in this movie. The scene between Bond and Anders in the hotel room is great.

[S K Y F A L L]

Underrated;

 

DN

MR

AVTAK

DAD

QOS

 

Overrated;

 

TB

OHMSS

TSWLM

CR

SF

[bill007]

(disregard, wrong thread.)

[tdalton]

Underrated;

 

DN

MR

AVTAK

DAD

QOS

 

Overrated;

 

TB

OHMSS

TSWLM

CR

SF

 

Agreed with most of those.  Only one in each category I'd disagree with (DAD & OHMSS)

 

 

Underrated:

DN

MR

AVTAK

LTK

QOS

 

Overrated:

GF

TB

TSWLM

CR

SF

Edited by tdalton, 14 July 2013 - 07:55 PM.

[trevanian]

CASINO and SKYFALL are by far the most overrated of the Bonds, with SPY WHO LOVED ME following. CR is just one misstep after another, from the casting to the dialog and especially the kill-guys-to-get-cellphones as way to keep advancing plot, and I've still got no idea why it wasn't an utter failure. And SKYFALL ... geezus, I tried to see it a second time on dvd and it was just as horrible, but at least I could fast-forward. If I didn't know better, I'd think people who hated Fleming and Terence Young made this thing.

 

Underrated ... LTK I guess, since I've always had it in my top 3 with TLD and FRWL.