110 replies to this topic

[sharpshooter]

1. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
2. QUANTUM OF SOLACE
3. LICENCE TO KILL
4. TOMORROW NEVER DIES
5. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN

This ranking for me as well.

[The Richmond Spy]

Sorry, but I still have to give the nod to FRWL. QoS is 2nd in my book.

[DR76]

The best second Bond film? Hmmmm . . . "FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE".

[Double-Oh Agent]

How I rate on my favorites list (the top three are well ahead of the bottom two.):

1. Licence To Kill
2. Tomorrow Never Dies
3. From Russia With Love
4. Quantum Of Solace
5. The Man With The Golden Gun


What I consider the best made:

1. From Russia With Love
2. Licence To Kill
3. Tomorrow Never Dies
4. Quantum Of Solace
5. The Man With The Golden Gun

[Quincy]

1. Quantum of Solace
2. From Russia With Love
3. Licence to Kill
4. The Man With The Golden Gun
5. Tommorow Never Dies

[000]

From Russia With Love. No contest.

[SecretAgentFan]

Since FRWL is one of the best if not THE best Bond films the question is kinda mean...

[HildebrandRarity]

I can't believe FRWL is ahead of Q0S in this poll. I showed it to my 13 year old [who was raised on Thunderball (pirate, sharks), Moonraker (space shuttles) and Octopussy (jungle chase) since the age of three...and who has seen TWINE, DAD, CR and Q0S with me at the theatre] and we had to turn it off after an hour.

"Boooorrrringgg" was the response. Kids! What can you say?

Anyway, I grew up LOVING From Russia With Love when it was on TV back in the later 1970s.

Now, I find Connery's lipstick and mascarra and ever-changing toupe' a real distraction because nothing exciting happens until the gypsy camp at the 45 minute mark.

I'm having a tough time getting over Connery's girly makeup and the lack of any good action until Grant kills Bond's would-be killer at the camp.

Anyone else feeling the same way?

[sharpshooter]

Anyone else feeling the same way?

Nope.

[Safari Suit]

I can certainly imagine that many of those up to the age of 13 would find FRWL a bit boring. I imagine, however, that this group makes up a fairly small percentage of the website's registered voters.

Not FRWL's biggest fan I will admit. Still not sure why you're quite so fixated on a dabs of lipstick and mascarra though.

[O.H.M.S.S.]

1. From Russia with Love (10/10)
2. The Man with the Golden Gun (8/10)
3. Licence to Kill (8/10)
4. Quantum of Solace (7/10)
5. Tomorrow Never Dies (6/10)

Never saw The Return of the Man from U.N.C.L.E., is it worth it? I liked George Lazenby as Bond and On Her Majesty's Secret Service is my favourite Bond film.

[HildebrandRarity]

Still not sure why you're quite so fixated on a dabs of lipstick and mascarra though.

Because when there is no action for the first 45 minutes of a movie, then you focus on other things, like the scenery (Istanbul, Daniella Bianchi ), the suits...and, unfortunately Connery's horrible makeup is very distracting. I wish I had stayed away from the UE because now my opinion of FRWL has been soiled no thanks to the sharp picture quality. And with Craig now on the scene with CR and QOS, it's making the older more "realistic" Bond movies look inferior.

Craig is making the others look like amateurs and CR and Q0S is making the older Bonds look inferior, even 'childish'...especially after Mike Meyers ripped the guts out of Blofeld.

The kid was laughing as Blofeld strokes his pussy and talks "all menacing". There's no menace left in Blofeld after Mike Meyers did his three movies.

[Loomis]

I can't believe FRWL is ahead of Q0S in this poll. I showed it to my 13 year old [who was raised on Thunderball (pirate, sharks), Moonraker (space shuttles) and Octopussy (jungle chase) since the age of three...and who has seen TWINE, DAD, CR and Q0S with me at the theatre] and we had to turn it off after an hour.

"Boooorrrringgg" was the response. Kids! What can you say?

Anyway, I grew up LOVING From Russia With Love when it was on TV back in the later 1970s.

Now, I find Connery's lipstick and mascarra and ever-changing toupe' a real distraction because nothing exciting happens until the gypsy camp at the 45 minute mark.

I'm having a tough time getting over Connery's girly makeup and the lack of any good action until Grant kills Bond's would-be killer at the camp.

Anyone else feeling the same way?

No.

And I'm sure that even Daniel Craig wears makeup as Bond, indeed that all the actors and actresses in the Bonds and pretty much all other films wear makeup of some sort or another. It's part and parcel of filmmaking.

You don't think Craig walks onto the set of a Bond flick looking exactly as he would naturally, do you? I believe that, for instance, his hair is in reality grey or greying heavily, and that he has a Conneryesque receding hairline that in the Bonds is masked by hairpieces.

Furthermore, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Craig shaves/waxes his chest and other areas, plus that he's had some work done on his teeth and skin. He's a pasty limey with - at best - average looks. You don't think the sight of Craig as Bond is the same as Craig au naturel, do you?

But, hey, it's all part of showbusiness.

[HildebrandRarity]

We have to face facts:

The younger generation who are going to see Q0S over and over again find the old Bonds like FRWL either boring or laughable.

Facts are facts.

As the Graham Ryes leave the scene in due time, these 13 year olds will be the writers and critcs of tomorrow.

Such is life.

And I'm sure that even Daniel Craig wears makeup as Bond

You don't think Craig walks onto the set of a Bond flick looking exactly as he would naturally, do you? I believe that, for instance, his hair is in reality grey or greying heavily, and that he has a Conneryesque receding hairline that in the Bonds is masked by hairpieces.

Furthermore, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Craig shaves/waxes his chest and other areas, plus that he's had some work done on his teeth and skin.

But, hey, it's all part of showbusiness.

Of course and i'm sure you're right.

But FRWL is a glaring exception because Connery's lipstick and eyeliner and changing wig is brought to the fore moreso than in, say, Thunderball and also because there is no "action" in FRWL until 45:00 min into the movie.

Craig's 'makeup' is more subtle and you don't notice it given that you have to have your eyes peeled on rapid-fire story-telling and blistering action.

The thrust of my rebuttle is that *only* in FRWL does Connery look 'drag' and this is juxtaposed (and heightened) because the movie moves at glacial pace for the first 40 percent of the movie. It's a real yawner or snooze fest for the younger audiences and so the focus goes to Connery's lipstick and thick eyeliner and wig (which is changing from scene to scene).

[Loomis]

We have to face facts:

The younger generation who are going to see Q0S over and over again find the old Bonds like FRWL either boring or laughable.

Facts are facts.

As the Graham Ryes leave the scene in due time, these 13 year olds will be the writers and critcs of tomorrow.

Yeah, well, until that happens let's let the writers and critics of today have their say.

When I was 13, I was a huge Bond fan, and a huge FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE fan. Indeed, it was the first 007 flick I made an effort to acquire on VHS (back in the days when a pre-recorded VHS tape might set you back £40 or so).

In any case, the Bond series does not and should not always pander exclusively to the very young.

[sharpshooter]

Well, I disagree with these young folk - I try not to hate them; I simply pity them. I hope in time they come to appreciate the influential works of art that they are.

[HildebrandRarity]

They find it tough getting over the Dr Evil parody of Blofeld. They find glacial/padestrian story-telling unexciting and their focus shifts to things like "Why is Bond wearing thick lipstick?" when there is no "action" for over 43 minutes into the movie.

And this is coming from someone who got fed Thunderball, Moonraker and Octopussy as a three year old and has seen the four most recent Bonds in the theatre between the age of 4 and 13.

So, it's not like Bond is an alien concept to them.

[Publius]

I still haven't voted, because I can't decide. This is one of the best collections of Bond films right here. If it was a box-set, it'd be the first I'd buy in a heartbeat, and probably the one I'd give to someone interested in getting acquainted with the series. If nothing else, all of these feature their respective Bond giving his best performance in the role.

[[dark]]

Yeesh, this is the first time I've ever heard someone level Sean Connery's make-up as a legitimate (and major) complaint against From Russia With Love. Surely, that ain't enough to ruin a classic Bond film.

[Harmsway]

FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE is top-notch stuff. If the young 'uns of this age can't enjoy it, it's their loss. But I hardly put much stock in that age group's opinions, anyway, because they've got a lot of growing up to do.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the future film critics in that age group end up thinking of FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE just as highly as most of us do.

[HildebrandRarity]

Yeesh, this is the first time I've ever heard someone level Sean Connery's make-up as a legitimate (and major) complaint against From Russia With Love. Surely, that ain't enough to ruin a classic Bond film.

It's not a "major complaint" per se. It's certainly noticable, made worse by the fact that there's no action until the 45 minute mark.

I assure you I loved FRWL growing up and as an adult...until the UE and Daniel Craig came along.

But if you asked a group of 11 to 27 year olds to rate FRWL v Q0S, FRWL would get CRUSHED!

[[dark]]

I assure you I loved FRWL growing up and as an adult...until the UE and Daniel Craig came along.

But if you asked a group of 11 to 27 year olds to rate FRWL v Q0S, FRWL would get CRUSHED!

I imagine any older Bond film would get crushed by that age group against the likes of Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace. Not surprising for a film made for 1960s cinemagoers vs. 2000s cinemagoers.

[Harmsway]

I assure you I loved FRWL growing up and as an adult...until the UE and Daniel Craig came along.

But if you asked a group of 11 to 27 year olds to rate FRWL v Q0S, FRWL would get CRUSHED!

I imagine any older Bond film would get crushed by that age group against the likes of Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace. Not surprising for a film made for 1960s cinemagoers vs. 2000s cinemagoers.

Not just any older Bond film, probably most cinematic masterpieces would be taken down, too. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, VERTIGO... Since when did this age group become the decider for cinematic quality?!

[[dark]]

I assure you I loved FRWL growing up and as an adult...until the UE and Daniel Craig came along.

But if you asked a group of 11 to 27 year olds to rate FRWL v Q0S, FRWL would get CRUSHED!

I imagine any older Bond film would get crushed by that age group against the likes of Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace. Not surprising for a film made for 1960s cinemagoers vs. 2000s cinemagoers.

Not just any older Bond film, probably most cinematic masterpieces would be taken down, too. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, VERTIGO...

Precisely.

Since when did this age group become the decider for cinematic quality?!

Only insofar as they're the ones that contribute to films becomming commercial successes (completely unrelated).

In any case, I imagine a lot of that generation were the ones that contributed to quality fare like Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace and The Dark Knight becoming box office hits. Though they're also the reason Meet The Spartans managed to top the US box office. Still, I suspect turkeys still managed to perform as well commercially in the '60s as they do today.

[Safari Suit]

You can't say how 13 year olds in general find FRWL, or 2001 for that matter, based on the opinion of one particular 13 year old, or even a small sample of them.

[HildebrandRarity]

You can't say how 13 year olds in general find FRWL, or 2001 for that matter, based on the opinion of one particular 13 year old, or even a small sample of them.

Indeed. I was ~ 4 when my parents took me to a pre-Sean Connery Is Back As James Bond re-release of YOLT at a drive in in 1971...and then took me to DAF itself (though I recall buiding a volcano rocket base in the front yard moreso than I remember the space laser from DAF at the time)...and then I grew up on Connery on ABC TV...so, I LOVED FRWL BEFORE I was 13.

I must say, however, that it takes new technology to pick out the weak spots of older movies (like SC's horrid lipstick, eye-liner and wigs in FRWL and SPECTRE guns blasting LARGE holes into oil drums with no explosions) just as it takes a new set of eyes to pick out the "sillyness" of them as well.

I'm sure when you have your own children, you'll be picking up on things you wouldn't ordinarily pick out right now.

Wait till you have kids.

[Blonde Bond]

1. Licence To Kill
2. Quantum Of Solace
3. Tomorrow Never Dies
4. From Russia With Love
5. The Man With The Golden Gun

Fancy that.

[Mr. Somerset]

1. FRWL- classic and very Fleming-esque in it's feel (IMO).

2. QoS - I do rate this one highly as well- dark and gritty, but fum for my tastes..also I have a new fixation on Olga.

3. LTK - "Well they must've hit the FUEL-LINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

4. TMWTGG - Christopher Lee is my hero.

5. TND- As much as I do love PB, his films seem to be my least favourites of the series.

[DaveBond21]

FRWL.

It's the best Bond movie, of them all (along with FYEO).

[Mr. Blofeld]

They find it tough getting over the Dr Evil parody of Blofeld. They find glacial/padestrian story-telling unexciting and their focus shifts to things like "Why is Bond wearing thick lipstick?" when there is no "action" for over 43 minutes into the movie.

I had that problem with YOLT: I couldn't get over the Dr. Evil stereotype, and so was horrified when Donald Pleasance turned in possibly the only over-the-top performance in the history of film to be delivered in monotone.

Sean Connery's pasted-on hairpiece, noticeable flab, and fake tan didn't help things, either...