153 replies to this topic

[Robinson]

Nontheless, the main problem that I got with LTK is its heavy eighties style- unlike the rest of the Bond movies of that decade-. The vulgarity of that fad, with the role models of Miami Vice or Die Hard or almost every american action movie of that time, seems so inappropriate as inspiration for the characteristic elegance of Bond.

I've been hearing the LTK-Miami Vice comparisons for quite some time now. I still don't get the comparison. Sure, Latino drug lord, a "cop" bent on revenge, portions set in Florida and a couple of pastels but that's it. If anything LTK has LESS style than Miami Vice did during its heyday. I don't see any stunning cinematography or stylized direction in LTK. There's no music that totally underscores the mood a la Phil Collins' "In The Air Tonight." It's pure John Glen and EON "coasting" on the screen.

I loved LTK when it came out in '89. I saw it three times in the theaters & I still think the pre-credit sequence, transitioning into Gladys Knight's "Licence to Kill" still send chills down the spine. 20 years later, I can see the films weaknesses and I find that some parts of the action sequences are contrived (gee, that pile of rocks really disguised that ramp that Dalton will use to tilt the oil tanker). I also see where Dalton didn't connect with mainstream audiences. My older cousin who grew up on the series wondered if Dalton was even British!

As for QOS, I enjoy the film and give it credit for not being CR, Part 2. I have my problems with the film's pacing and with the editing, which is more akin to a Michael Bay flick than Greengrass' Bourne sequels.

I have a nitpick. People complain that Bond's pursuit of Mitchell is another free running sequence. It's not. I don't see Craig/Bond moving with the grace, efficiency and dexterity of Foucan/Molaka. At best, Bond has taken what he's learned from CR and tried to be inventive in closing the distance between himself and Mitchell.

As for the QOS plot being "thin," I'd say Bond's motive is a rather simple one: He's really trying to find Mr. White and learn more about Quantum. The trail lead to Greene. Once Greene had told him about Quantum, he focused on Yusuf. Sure, there's a lot that transpires during Bond's journey but the Point A to Point B is straightforward. There's no directive from M in her office, like most Bond films. It's go get Slate and see what he knows.

I thoroughly enjoyed both films. They are by no means perfect but enjoyable. I'm eager to see where the series goes next.

[byline]

I've been hearing the LTK-Miami Vice comparisons for quite some time now. I still don't get the comparison. Sure, Latino drug lord, a "cop" bent on revenge, portions set in Florida and a couple of pastels but that's it. If anything LTK has LESS style than Miami Vice did during its heyday. I don't see any stunning cinematography or stylized direction in LTK. There's no music that totally underscores the mood a la Phil Collins' "In The Air Tonight." It's pure John Glen and EON "coasting" on the screen.

I think the comparisons are less literal, more just the fact that "Miami Vice" thrust to the forefront of public attention this whole theme, which "Licence to Kill" (and so many others) then seemed to capitalize on. It has less to do with the particulars and more to do with the overarching theme, I believe. It just felt too familiar, and at a time when people were looking for something new. But Latino drug lord, revenge and even portions set, not in Miami, but in the Keys, just felt . . . well, a little too familiar for the times. In some ways, it felt like "Miami Vice" lite . . . for the very reasons you describe.

However, had the writing, direction and production values been better, it's possible that none of this would have mattered. I do think that some of the shortcomings you described took away from the "travelogue" aspect that many have come to expect from a Bond film. It was more down to earth, yet in a way that, for whatever reason, didn't resonate with a lot of people. I have tried to like it, and it certainly improves by seeing it in in the DVD restoration, as opposed to the old VHS version I first watched, but it just doesn't come together for me the way that "The Living Daylights" does.

Edited by byline, 22 May 2009 - 06:45 PM.

[Robinson]

I have tried to like it, and it certainly improves by seeing it in in the DVD restoration, as opposed to the old VHS version I first watched, but it just doesn't come together for me the way that "The Living Daylights" does.

Ahhh! TLD, the last "romantic" Bond film before CR.

I'll say it again, if there's no Dalton from 87-89, then you don't have Craig.

[Safari Suit]

LTK bares only a vague overt resemblance to Miami Vice, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't an influence. After all, when you get down to it there aren't actually many similarities between Star Wars and Moonraker!

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

I have tried to like it, and it certainly improves by seeing it in in the DVD restoration, as opposed to the old VHS version I first watched, but it just doesn't come together for me the way that "The Living Daylights" does.

Ahhh! TLD, the last "romantic" Bond film before CR.

I'll say it again, if there's no Dalton from 87-89, then you don't have Craig.

As much as I like TLD (the last really good Bond movie until CR, imo), I don't see such a close similarity between Dalton's Bond and Craig's- I mean, for start, the former didn't have humor, the latter has-.

The same goes for other annoying usual comparison Moore's 007 with Brosnan's, being one of the main difference in this case, that whereas the former had class, the latter seems just affected.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 22 May 2009 - 10:37 PM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

LTK bares only a vague overt resemblance to Miami Vice, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't an influence. After all, when you get down to it there aren't actually many similarities between Star Wars and Moonraker!

Except the ridiculous laser-guns, perhaps?

[Tybre]

[color="#FF8C00"][font="Century Gothic"]I've been hearing the LTK-Miami Vice comparisons for quite some time now. I still don't get the comparison. Sure, Latino drug lord, a "cop" bent on revenge, portions set in Florida and a couple of pastels but that's it. If anything LTK has LESS style than Miami Vice did during its heyday. I don't see any stunning cinematography or stylized direction in LTK. There's no music that totally underscores the mood a la Phil Collins' "In The Air Tonight." It's pure John Glen and EON "coasting" on the screen.

Bit old, I know, but responding nonetheless. Anywho, maybe I'm just lucky in that I was born three years after the end of Miami Vice and that I've only caught a total of four episodes in syndication on various channels, but I fail to see any real comparison to Miami Vice. What's there is tenuous at best and most of it is coincidental. Revenge aspect and Floridian setting both tie into the shark incident, which is taken from the literary Live & Let Die, just modified because, obviously, LTK is not LALD. Only connection people have made I'm willing to grant is the Latin American drug lord and, well, it's the 1980s. Cocaine was the "big" drug at the time and Central/South America have long been the world's big producers of the white powder.

[Safari Suit]

LTK bares only a vague overt resemblance to Miami Vice, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't an influence. After all, when you get down to it there aren't actually many similarities between Star Wars and Moonraker!

Except the ridiculous laser-guns, perhaps?

Well, yeah, that and the whole space thing But my point was while it's almost undeniable MR cashed in on Star Wars, the actual similarities are few.

[byline]

LTK bares only a vague overt resemblance to Miami Vice, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't an influence. After all, when you get down to it there aren't actually many similarities between Star Wars and Moonraker!

Except the ridiculous laser-guns, perhaps?

Well, yeah, that and the whole space thing But my point was while it's almost undeniable MR cashed in on Star Wars, the actual similarities are few.

True. But why else send Bond out into outer space except for that?

[Safari Suit]

That's why I said it was an "almost undeniable" influence.

[Robinson]

As much as I like TLD (the last really good Bond movie until CR, imo), I don't see such a close similarity between Dalton's Bond and Craig's- I mean, for start, the former didn't have humor, the latter has-.

The same goes for other annoying usual comparison Moore's 007 with Brosnan's, being one of the main difference in this case, that whereas the former had class, the latter seems just affected.

I think, Dalton's approach to making the character more in line with Fleming's creation, is where I see it. If that attempt isn't made (successful or not), you're essentially stuck playing a one-note character with no real development.

[DaveBond21]

Yes, I can see the similarities. QOS has polarized Bond fans just as Dalton's two films did at the time. Dalton came at a time when people were young enough to remember seeing Connery's Bond in the theatre and had come to know and love Moore's films.

The difference is that everyone loved CR.

There are other similarities - South American setting, a Bond girl who can handle herself in a fight, the darker tone, the licence revoked, an old friend comes to help Bond out, and a revenge theme.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Yes, I can see the similarities. QOS has polarized Bond fans just as Dalton's two films did at the time. Dalton came at a time when people were young enough to remember seeing Connery's Bond in the theatre and had come to know and love Moore's films.

The difference is that everyone loved CR.

I agree. But- besides the four year gap- there must to be a good reason for that, don't you think??!!!

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 15 June 2009 - 07:30 AM.

[Dekard77]

I don't think QOS is dark just think that it's the similar to CR in terms of tone. QOS has better action than LTK and more of a expensive feel to the whole thing. Bond elements are more obvious in QOS than LTK.
Both films are very good. Dalton never had his audience from day one. He had a remarkable talent for being a serious Bond, which is not very easy to pull off but was too moody for the general public. Craig is a very efficient Bond . I like the way he brings out the confidence in Bond in dangerous situations.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

I don't think QOS is dark just think that it's the similar to CR in terms of tone. QOS has better action than LTK and more of a expensive feel to the whole thing. Bond elements are more obvious in QOS than LTK.
Both films are very good. Dalton never had his audience from day one. He had a remarkable talent for being a serious Bond, which is not very easy to pull off but was too moody for the general public. Craig is a very efficient Bond . I like the way he brings out the confidence in Bond in dangerous situations.

I agree with your whole post except for this (and of course I don't think that LTK nor QOS are "very good", however, I much prefer the latter). Because I believe that whereas CR- just like TLD- is a perfect balanced Bond movie in tone, LTK and QOS are way too dark, to say the least, for the EON series, so I don't see much of a resemblance betweeen Craig's debut and his second entry.

Perhaps, that could explain why CR was acclaimed by almost everyone, whereas QOS polarized Bond fans and got mixed reviews from the critics.

[havok_007]

I'm not a big fan of the 007 movies in which he goes out alone after revenge, I think that's the big similarity to me. It all gets a bit emotional and James Bond is supposed to be that cool calm causal guy who doesn't get tangled up in his emotions, and when he does he shouldn't show it.
Both of these movies he gets really pissed off and upset which is unusual.

He needs more rules to break and he needs to pull things off without sweating and making a joke.

And thats what it all about.

Edited by havok_007, 15 June 2009 - 01:45 PM.

[Royal Dalton]

The difference is that everyone loved CR.

I didn't.

[Dekard77]

I don't think QOS is dark just think that it's the similar to CR in terms of tone. QOS has better action than LTK and more of a expensive feel to the whole thing. Bond elements are more obvious in QOS than LTK.
Both films are very good. Dalton never had his audience from day one. He had a remarkable talent for being a serious Bond, which is not very easy to pull off but was too moody for the general public. Craig is a very efficient Bond . I like the way he brings out the confidence in Bond in dangerous situations.

I agree with your whole post except for this (and of course I don't think that LTK nor QOS are "very good", however, I much prefer the latter). Because I believe that whereas CR- just like TLD- is a perfect balanced Bond movie in tone, LTK and QOS are way too dark, to say the least, for the EON series, so I don't see much of a resemblance betweeen Craig's debut and his second entry.

Perhaps, that could explain why CR was acclaimed by almost everyone, whereas QOS polarized Bond fans and got mixed reviews from the critics.

True... it polarized most fans/audience due to fact that CR ended with Craig being BOND. Which was not the case. QOS is the film that establishes BOND....... at the end (with gun barrel). Most people expected gadgets and the moment we see Bond killing everything in sight like Bourne it lost the audience.In CR he is more affectionate and playful. I saw QOS as a sequel to CR. Meaning that if Bond didn't behave cold it would have completely ruined the movie (OHMSS to DAF). As in I didn't think that Bond should have got cosy with Camille ect. Craig pretty much keeps in character till the end of the movie.
Also I feel the biggest assests in the Movie are two villains and the lead Bond girl. They both have bigger meaning in the story than usual .

[DR76]

I had no problems with Bond having an emotional crisis in both LICENSE TO KILL and QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Made the stories of both movies interesting for me. And I'm glad that EON followed up CASINO ROYALE with what happened in QoS. I still have not forgiven them for the fiasco they did with Bond's character in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER . . . especially since it happened on the heels of Tracy's death.

[byline]

I don't think QOS is dark just think that it's the similar to CR in terms of tone. QOS has better action than LTK and more of a expensive feel to the whole thing. Bond elements are more obvious in QOS than LTK.
Both films are very good. Dalton never had his audience from day one. He had a remarkable talent for being a serious Bond, which is not very easy to pull off but was too moody for the general public. Craig is a very efficient Bond . I like the way he brings out the confidence in Bond in dangerous situations.

Not only that, but I clearly recall a sentiment among the general public (at least in North America) that Brosnan was a shoe-in for the role, and when that didn't happen, Dalton paid the price. The backlash wasn't as vitriolic as what Craig endured pre-"Casino Royale," but it was there all the same, essentially dooming his tenure as Bond no matter what he did. IMO, despite their similarities, "Quantum of Solace" is vastly superior to "Licence to Kill" . . . and I say that having come to appreciate "Licence to Kill" a lot more with recent viewings. But I still feel like it doesn't quite come together the way it should have. While there are elements of "Quantum of Solace" with which I am not entirely satisfied, they don't bother me to that extent. Ultimately I enjoy the film and find it a worthy second act to "Casino Royale"'s first.

[JimmyBond]

He needs more rules to break and he needs to pull things off without sweating and making a joke.

And thats what it all about.

I enjoy that facet of Bond too, but after a while it gets kind of old. I enjoy what Moore did in the role, but even then his Bond was allowed to be realistic a few times, which were interesting. I'd rather Bond behave more like a real human being and sweat a little, to me that is more interesting than the image of an unfallible chararcter who stares down certain death without breaking a sweat (or even seeming to care).

[tdalton]

He needs more rules to break and he needs to pull things off without sweating and making a joke.

And thats what it all about.

I enjoy that facet of Bond too, but after a while it gets kind of old. I enjoy what Moore did in the role, but even then his Bond was allowed to be realistic a few times, which were interesting. I'd rather Bond behave more like a real human being and sweat a little, to me that is more interesting than the image of an unfallible chararcter who stares down certain death without breaking a sweat (or even seeming to care).

Completely, 110% agreed.

[Dekard77]

I had no problems with Bond having an emotional crisis in both LICENSE TO KILL and QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Made the stories of both movies interesting for me. And I'm glad that EON followed up CASINO ROYALE with what happened in QoS. I still have not forgiven them for the fiasco they did with Bond's character in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER . . . especially since it happened on the heels of Tracy's death.

Agreed! That's the reason why Craig keeps things business.

[DaveBond21]

I must add that I love both movies. I am a big fan of all 22 of the Bond films, but LTK is certainly an excellent film. I love the revenge theme in this one, and Davi is a great villain. To me it's exotic - and that is an important part. Because many of the people who have a problem with LTK is that it's too close to home (ie they live in the US) and too similar to 80's drug movies and Miami Vice. Having not seen any 80's drug movies or Miami Vice must, I suppose, help me to appreciate LTK a lot more.

It also features Q in his biggest role - something people often forget.

[Major Tallon]

I'd rather Bond behave more like a real human being and sweat a little, to me that is more interesting than the image of an unfallible chararcter who stares down certain death without breaking a sweat (or even seeming to care).

Amen, Jimmy Bond. Amen.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

He needs more rules to break and he needs to pull things off without sweating and making a joke.

And thats what it all about.

I enjoy that facet of Bond too, but after a while it gets kind of old. I enjoy what Moore did in the role, but even then his Bond was allowed to be realistic a few times, which were interesting. I'd rather Bond behave more like a real human being and sweat a little, to me that is more interesting than the image of an unfallible chararcter who stares down certain death without breaking a sweat (or even seeming to care).

I agree, but with some limitations, what I want from Bond is the perfect balance achieved by movies like TLD or CR, and not the two extremes of DAD or LTK.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

I must add that I love both movies. I am a big fan of all 22 of the Bond films, but LTK is certainly an excellent film. I love the revenge theme in this one, and Davi is a great villain. To me it's exotic - and that is an important part. Because many of the people who have a problem with LTK is that it's too close to home (ie they live in the US) and too similar to 80's drug movies and Miami Vice. Having not seen any 80's drug movies or Miami Vice must, I suppose, help me to appreciate LTK a lot more.

For you Davi's character is 'exotic', for me he's simply way too tacky for the EON series- albeit for something like Die Hard, he's just fine-. And I say this as someone who lives very far from the US (in fact, I live much more close to the south pole, than the States).

[Double-Oh Agent]

Licence To Kill is the much better film. It has a fantastic villain and henchman that are head and shoulders above those in Quantum Of Solace--in the case of Dario vs. Elvis, LTK is head, shoulders, waist, knees, ankles, and heels above QOS. LTK has the much better action scenes--scenes that one is able to see and comprehend without slowing the film down or having to conduct repeat viewings. Parts of LTK is based on Ian Fleming (i.e. Felix Leiter's shark attack from Live And Let Die). Bond acts like Bond, albeit a pissed off Bond, throughout LTK, unlike in QOS where Bond desecrates the memory--and body--of a good friend. LTK has a better story and plot that is well orchestrated with Bond stealthily picking off Sanchez's men one by one. And lastly, as has been previously mentioned by DaveBond, LTK has Q's biggest appearance--and it's a good one.

The one clear advantage QOS has is in the music where David Arnold outshines Michael Kamen.

[havok_007]

Well he is obviously going to sweat a little... I mean i love when hes in a sticky situation and doesn't look like hes got it under control and then he manages to pull something out of the hat, get out of it, look good and 'act' like he didn't break a sweat... Thats what I mean.

If its too realistic and hes doing all these action scenes like any other agent it becomes just another spy/action movie, like Jason Bourne or Die Hard.

The next movie need to be more stylish like the majority.
We have had a break from the fancy stuff and got down, dirty and gritty and 007 seems to get thrashed around a tad. Now lets see handle things with a bit more style and grace. Without the stupid CGI like in DAD of course.

Edited by havok_007, 16 June 2009 - 01:27 PM.

[sharpshooter]

I enjoy that facet of Bond too, but after a while it gets kind of old. I enjoy what Moore did in the role, but even then his Bond was allowed to be realistic a few times, which were interesting. I'd rather Bond behave more like a real human being and sweat a little, to me that is more interesting than the image of an unfallible chararcter who stares down certain death without breaking a sweat (or even seeming to care).

Agreed.

Timothy Dalton said it best.

"You can't relate to a superhero, to a superman, but you can identify with a real man who in times of crisis draws forth some extraordinary quality from within himself and triumphs but only after a struggle. Real courage is knowing what faces you and knowing how to face it."