37 replies to this topic

[AMC Hornet]

... LtK is for me such a slow and boring movie.

*Splutter* (Spit take)

[David_M]

I'll second that spit take.  It's not slow and boring.  Ugly and unpleasant to watch, yes, but not slow and boring.

 

I was then and remain now perplexed at Wayne Newton's inclusion.  He's far from the first guy you'd picture if someone said "TV evangelist" and you can't even call it a "casting stunt" in the traditional sense, as I can't imagine anyone in 1989 being moved to buy a ticket to a movie because they heard Wayne Newton was in it.  He'd last been relevant...what? In the late 60s, maybe?  And even then just within the city limits of Las Vegas.

 

For a long stretch there, EON had a knack for hiring on title song artists just a bit beyond their sell-by date, but between Gladys Knight and Wayne Newton, LTK had me wondering just what year Cubby thought we were living in.

[hilly]

 between Gladys Knight and Wayne Newton, LTK had me wondering just what year Cubby thought we were living in.

 Well said.

 

I don't really know enough about Wayne Newton to comment, but I have always been perplexed about Gladys Knight. Not quite current, but at the same time not as iconic enough as Louis Armstrong or Burly Chassis. It seemed a peculiar choice in 1989 (especially as Knight herself was uncomfortable about singing a song about killing) and, whilst it isn't a bad song, still seems a little odd today

Mind you, according to the Some Kind Of Hero book, Level 42 submitted a track for consideration, so it could have been worse...

Apparently Michael Kamen's choice was an Eric Clapton/Vic Flick collaboration, but Michael Wilson wasn't keen.

 

In hindsight, maybe that 6 year hiatus wasn't a bad thing.

[Grard Bond]

As no Englisman I don't know what "Splutter (spit take)" means, but it looks like some kind of insult, or affrond.

I only gave my opinion and that's as much worth than yours. Don't act superior. Respect someone else opinion.

Thank you very much.

[hoagy]

Oh, where to begin !  The love for the two Dalton films is not deserved.  (And while I'm at it, same for OHMSS -- and not because of the actor; he was all right.  The awful blue screening took the suspense, thrill, etc. right out, the first fight was too dark, seemed to have bits clipped and it was not clear and seemed speeded up, Blofeld was a horndog instead of a creepy asexual weirdo -- come on, it's not the masterpiece it's made out to be by the fans)

All those whose first Bond was Dalton -- step aside.  There's a group like that for each Bond, even David Niven...except, no, not for that TV Jimmie Bond.  And the judgment for each of those groups is tilted.  (As for me starting with the books and Connery, I anticipated and expected changes and was very happy with Moore except for the overly broad and forced "humor" and cartoonish aspects)

I understand it was a return to being tough and serious, but:  they were so dullll....especially LTK.  In no particular order:  It was a theater-bound episode of an 80s TV show, the 80s hair (dated looking even at the time), the childish jealousy in the Pam-Bond "relationship."  So, no, the sticking-out-like-a-sore-thumb aspect of the Cult and with Wayne Newton, but the time the film got there, was awful but not the first awful thing to come along in the film.  Well-observed that the producers were a step (or more) behind all too often and glad they've gotten past that.

It was just far too dull and unoriginal.  It was so uncomfortable, as a fan of the films from the beginning, to see the producers swing from overdone-ridiculous Moore films, which got reeled in, to overdone-dull and unoriginal Dalton films.  Some terrific books and ideas were just wasted....Goldeneye was SUCH a comeback.  They wound up squandering the restoration, but it was quite an accomplishment.

[AMC Hornet]

As no Englisman I don't know what "Splutter (spit take)" means, but it looks like some kind of insult, or affrond.

I only gave my opinion and that's as much worth than yours. Don't act superior. Respect someone else opinion.

Thank you very much.

No offense intended:

 

"Splutter (spit take)"  means being surprised by something you see or hear while you are drinking, and spraying your drink into your lap.

 

As David_M commented, it is surprising to hear LTK described as 'slow and boring' - that is how many posters describe Thunderball (and that makes me splutter too).

[glidrose]

I agree. I initially hated LTK but at the time admired its pace. One of the best-paced Bonds. Over the years I've grown to kinda like it, despite its cheapness. And it's still one of the best-paced Bonds.

 

And except for a couple of moments near the end I also believe Thunderball boasts solid pacing.

 

But yeah, Wayne Newton does seem incongruous. In the same way that Topol and Steven Berkoff seemed incongruous in their respective Bond films IMO. I seem to recall that one of our members who worked with John Glen has said that JG has a bit of a problem with tone...

 

http://debrief.comma...ainst/?p=981723

[David_M]

 

 

"Splutter (spit take)"  means being surprised by something you see or hear while you are drinking, and spraying your drink into your lap.

 

It's a time-honored comedy schtick, probably from Vaudeville, but arguably perfected by Danny Thomas on TV: