129 replies to this topic

[Rufus Ffolkes]

Which Bond film disappointed you the most? It doesn't have to be the worst, just the one that you had high expectations for that weren't met.

For me, it's definitely Goldeneye. I had high hopes for this one. After a six year gap, the series was back on track with a new Bond, a revamped creative team and a much bigger budget.

I was glad to see Brosnan finally get the role, as I'd never completely warmed to Dalton. I liked Brosnan in Remington Steele, and was disappointed that he lost out on the part in 1986, so I looked forward to his take on Bond.

Bringing in fresh writers and a new director was certainly a step in the right direction. John Glen's direction and Michael Wilson's writing were responsible for two of the worst films of the series in my opinion (the ones with "kill" in the title), so any change was welcome there. I'd liked Martin Campbell's Criminal Law and thought No Escape was a fun little B-movie, and I thought Michael France's script for Cliffhanger featured some clever, Bondian set pieces.

The Goldeneye trailer was terrific and only served to heighten my anticipation. The film looked like a fun romp - a throwback to the style of You Only Live Twice and The Spy Who Loved Me, complete with villain's lair and killer satellites.

But pretty soon after the film started, something felt off. We first meet Bond hanging upside down in a toilet stall, delivering a lame one-liner. And things didn't improve much from there.

Brosnan's performance seemed stiff and hesitant. He looked slight and awkward in front of the camera and lacked screen presence. The spark that he had brought to Remington Steele was missing here. He seemed uncomfortable and overwhelmed by the role.

Based on what was actually on screen, I'm not sure that I would have known that there was a new production team in place if I hadn't heard about it already. Campbell's direction was more solid and assured than Glen's, but it wasn't that much better. And the script had many of the same flaws that plagued the Wilson era - too convoluted, too long, lacking any real wit.

In the end, I left the theatre somewhat grateful that Bond was back, but with a sense of longing for the return of another Connery or Moore era.

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

After the marvellous Casino Royale, I must say Quantum of Solace let me down a bit. In the light of 20 EON's in 40 years Die Another Day was a huge letdown.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

Quantum of Solace, without even thinking about it.

[FLEMINGFAN]

QUANTUM OF SOLACE

[Mr. Somerset]

DAD for me, although I enjoyed the first half immensely. The climax aboard the plane is what great disappointed me, as well as the Moneypenny tag at the end. Not as funny as intended. Still, I've grown to enjoy DAD far more now.

[Santa]

Quantum of Solace.
I disliked DAD more as a film but having been disappointed by the Brosnan era anyway I didn't expect much from it, whereas after CR I had high hopes for QoS.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I'd have to say it's You Only Live Twice; it's the disappointing first film to depart completely from the book...

[Jim]

Licence to Kill; so much opportunity, so little payoff. You've let me down but most importantly, you've let yourself down.

[The Shark]

Everything post 1989.

[00Twelve]

The World Is Not Enough.

Such brilliant concepts, such lackluster execution.

[Guy Haines]

Without a doubt, Moonraker. I'd looked forward to the film of the book, even with one or two foreign locations added. It didn't happen. I've already had my say on other threads as to what I believe was wrong with it, so I don't wish to repeat them here - except to say that I was disappointed enough that I did not return to the cinema for a second viewing of MR until it returned in a double bill with TSWLM two years later (I normally go back to the flicks for a second viewing of Bond within a week of the first.)

I also felt that the middle section of Licence To Kill sagged a bit although LTK is still a better film than most.

And given the stratospheric critical success of Casino Royale, QoS was bound to struggle to exceed expectations. Again, however, I still think that Quantum Of Solace is a better Bond film than many that preceded it.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

Its TWINE.
Having liked GE and TND I was getting in the strides of Bond again. TWINE was the first film where I left the cinema with genuine disappointment in the true sense of the word. I had no desire to see it again in the cinema and got no buzz from the film either.

[Mr_Wint]

Licence To Kill!

Followed by DAD & QOS.

[Cuish]

-Diamonds are Forever - http://uk.imdb.com/t...sercomments-241
-Licence to Kill - After a great debut in The Living Daylights, this film didn't live up to Dalton's first film. Due to Glen's terrible direction.

[zencat]

Oh, License To Kill, no doubt. A crushing disappointment in 1989. But I've made my peace with it and now like it for what it is.

GoldenEye actually exceeded my expectations.

[Wade]

For me, it was Moonraker. After the incredibly rousing Spy who Loved Me, MR just landed like a sack of manure. It was the same exact plot, and the one-liners were delivered as if wrapped in plastic. And even though I liked Jaws in TSWLM, seeing him return was ridiculous. Worst of all, it was paced like a funeral dirge.

[tdalton]

There are several rather disappointing Bond films, so picking out just one is going to be fairly difficult. Goldfinger, You Only Live Twice, Diamonds Are Forever, The Man With the Golden Gun, Moonraker, A View To a Kill, and the Brosnan Era would all qualify, for me, as disappointments. If forced to choose just one, however, I'd go with You Only Live Twice. Great novel with some wonderful moments that are completely dropped in favor of one of the worst stories in the series.

[Joe Bond]

For me, it was Moonraker. After the incredibly rousing Spy who Loved Me, MR just landed like a sack of manure. It was the same exact plot, and the one-liners were delivered as if wrapped in plastic. And even though I liked Jaws in TSWLM, seeing him return was ridiculous. Worst of all, it was paced like a funeral dirge.

The one thing good about Moonraker is that it looks pretty amazing on Blu-ray but its shame the movie isn't as good. Tough choice for me since I like the majority of the Bond films. Looking at some of the choices I can understand why some are disappointed with QoS but I wasn't since my expectations were in check after reading reviews for the film. I think I will have to go with Moonraker as well since I just rewatched this one hoping that I would like it better than what I remembered and while there are scenes I enjoy I just didn't like it as much as some of the other films in the series. This is disappointing to me since TSWLM was a very entertaining adventure film that I really enjoy.

[DamnCoffee]

Quantum of Solace, without a doubt.

[Lachesis]

Quantum of Solace, after the clumsy DaD Bond seemed to be reinvigorated with CR then they put out what is imo the most bland and dreary film in the entire series.

[danslittlefinger]

Quantum of Solace, without a doubt.

Ditto. Left me with a very sour stomach and a one hell of a headache.

[BoogieBond]

I would go for DAF. Connery is back and you so much want the film to take off and be as exciting as its predecessors, but its merely an entertaining campy romp. I couldn't help feeling let down.

[danslittlefinger]

I would go for DAF. Connery is back and you so much want the film to take off and be as exciting as its predecessors, but its merely an entertaining campy romp. I couldn't help feeling let down.

Yes I forgot about DAF and NSNA.

[Vauxhall]

Licence to Kill; so much opportunity, so little payoff. You've let me down but most importantly, you've let yourself down.

Any excuse for a silly joke, I'm afraid: "There once was an inflatable boy. The inflatable boy lived in an inflatable house with an inflatable family. He went to an inflatable school with an inflatable teacher. One day, the inflatable boy took a pin to his inflatable school. The inflatable teacher let out a gasp and said, "I'm very disappointed in you son. You've let yourself down, you've let me down and you've let the whole school down."

My answer to the original question: GOLDFINGER and DIE ANOTHER DAY.

[Guy Haines]

Quantum Of Solace keeps appearing on this forum, and I'm not surprised. And I say this even though I prefer it to a good many of its predecessors from the 1970s and 1980s.

I think one reason many seem disappointed is that the film makers couldn't quite believe how well they had done with CR. It received near unanimous critical acclaim, received many awards or nominations for awards (I can't recall anyone being nominated for a BAFTA for playing James Bond until CR came along). And of course it did rather well at the box office.

Which should have encouraged the producers to carry on in the same vein, or even take risks, and some would say they did this in hiring Marc Forster. But I also recall one of the producers stating that QoS would have "twice as much action" as CR, followed by Forster stating that he wanted to bring the film in under two hours. As I've said elsewhere in these forums, something had to give.

I think the film makers wanted to play safe ("twice as much action") whilst hiring a director who had his own ideas about the film, and not necessarily ones that would work.

[elizabeth]

After the marvellous Casino Royale, I must say Quantum of Solace let me down a bit.

This.

[Professor Dent]

Licence to Kill for me. After being introduced to a new Bond in The Living Daylights & really liking what I saw, I was hoping for so much more. I've grown less disappointed with it over the years. Maybe spending some time touring the Licence to Kill filming sites in Key West last summer has helped a bit.

[DCI_director]

Quantum of Solace. Hands down!

[PrinceKamalKhan]

Which Bond film disappointed you the most? It doesn't have to be the worst, just the one that you had high expectations for that weren't met.

Definitely Quantum of Solace. It may not be the worst 007 film from a technical filmmaking standard but it's definitely the most disappointing one for me. After Casino Royale showed that the post-Albert Broccoli EON was capable of making a Bond film of comparable quality of such 1960s classics as Thunderball, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and From Russia With Love for the 2000s, QOS was a real let down.

Also, A View to a Kill. I've read many folks were disappointed with Moonraker for its lack of fidelity to Fleming's original novel. In Moonraker's defense however it wasn't as though EON had been faithful to the Fleming novels during the 1970s. The precedent set by MR's previous four 1970s Bond films had been to discard most if not all of the Fleming source material and come up with their own story by that point in the series. However with A View to a Kill it came in the middle of the back-to-Fleming 1980s era after 2 films that had contained source material from the Fleming short stories and were at least somewhat faithful screen adaptations. From A View To A Kill is one of Fleming's best short stories and its content would make a good half hour opening to a Bond film much like The Living Daylights turned out to be for its excellent film version. I was disappointed that only the Paris location remained in the film version and the film version's story turned out to be yet another Goldfinger retread and a tired one at that.

For me, it's definitely Goldeneye. I had high hopes for this one. After a six year gap, the series was back on track with a new Bond, a revamped creative team and a much bigger budget.

I was glad to see Brosnan finally get the role, as I'd never completely warmed to Dalton. I liked Brosnan in Remington Steele, and was disappointed that he lost out on the part in 1986, so I looked forward to his take on Bond.

Bringing in fresh writers and a new director was certainly a step in the right direction. John Glen's direction and Michael Wilson's writing were responsible for two of the worst films of the series in my opinion (the ones with "kill" in the title), so any change was welcome there. I'd liked Martin Campbell's Criminal Law and thought No Escape was a fun little B-movie, and I thought Michael France's script for Cliffhanger featured some clever, Bondian set pieces.

The Goldeneye trailer was terrific and only served to heighten my anticipation. The film looked like a fun romp - a throwback to the style of You Only Live Twice and The Spy Who Loved Me, complete with villain's lair and killer satellites.

But pretty soon after the film started, something felt off. We first meet Bond hanging upside down in a toilet stall, delivering a lame one-liner. And things didn't improve much from there.

Brosnan's performance seemed stiff and hesitant. He looked slight and awkward in front of the camera and lacked screen presence. The spark that he had brought to Remington Steele was missing here. He seemed uncomfortable and overwhelmed by the role.

Based on what was actually on screen, I'm not sure that I would have known that there was a new production team in place if I hadn't heard about it already. Campbell's direction was more solid and assured than Glen's, but it wasn't that much better. And the script had many of the same flaws that plagued the Wilson era - too convoluted, too long, lacking any real wit.

In the end, I left the theatre somewhat grateful that Bond was back, but with a sense of longing for the return of another Connery or Moore era.

Good post RF although I do like Dalton more than Brosnan. GoldenEye was a mild disappointment for me, partly because I read John Gardner's novelization prior to seeing it and the GE movie I imagined in my mind was more entertaining to me than the GE movie that exists in reality. I enjoy it more that I used to but for me the ghost of Dalton's Bond does seem to haunt it as well as the absence of Bond vets John Barry, Richard Maibaum and Albert Broccoli as well.

For Your Eyes Only and The World is not Enough were mild disappointments for me also. FYEO was supposed to be Moore's FRWL and TWINE was supposed to be Brosnan's OHMSS but for me neither film was as good as either FRWL or OHMSS were or as good as The Living Daylights or Casino Royale(IMHO, a later day FRWL and OHMSS respectively) turned out to be.

On the other extreme, I would say Tomorrow Never Dies and Die Another Day were both films that exceeded my expectations and I enjoyed both of them more that I thought I initially would.

[jaguar007]

My first big letdown was NSNA. C'mon back in 1983 SEAN CONNERY was BACK as BOND! ....oh.

My second big letdown was LTK. After how impressed I was with TLD (Best Bond since the 60s), I felt letdown with LTK.

Same with QoS, CR became my new favorite Bond movie and QoS was a poor follow up.