80 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

If we are going to say BA equals "Brosnan acting," than I would argue that TWINE is more BA than GE.

[Jim]

If we are going to say BA equals "Brosnan acting," than I would argue that TWINE is more BA than GE.

TWINE is probably more BS than BA.

You'll have noted the quotes around "Acting"

If TWINE is also BA, I'd say it was more like Brosnan accc-TINGGGG!

[blueman]

Tried watching it again recently, got so bored stopped watching it halfway through. Oh well.

[Virgosy]

For a long time, "Goldeneye" was my favourite James Bond film, or one of them at least. But now, I've changed my point of view on it. I'm eighteen years-old, so "Goldeneye" is the Bond-symbol of my generation, both movie and video game ! Before "Goldeneye", six years have passed, so a generation has grown, a generation of people who were too young to see "Licence to kill". In six years, the world has changed, the Cold War is over.

Is "Goldeneye" a real great movie, or is it just a movie with an important nostalgia effect in people who discovered Bond thanks to it ?

Moreover, it's the film that was the most represented in derivatives, in particular in video games, even in 2010 with another actor ! We can easily say that "Goldeneye" is the most commercial movie of the saga.

"Goldeneye" is a great movie, but it also has its problems ! For instance, why Xenia kills the two pilots without a sound suppressor, on a boat full of militars and people ? What about the admiral ? What about James flying like Superman to catch up with the plane ?

Growing up, I changed my vision of this film. I feel that all characters were created to please to the general public. Boris the funny perverse programmer ; Natalya the nice girl ; Pierce as James Bond, the general public waited for him since 1986/1987 ; Xenia the crazy bad girl...

Therefore, "Goldeneye" is surely a great movie, but I think it's over-rated, and I feel that all in this film is created to please. I think that the production of Goldeneye should have ameliorate the movie rather than to attract the public who hadn't had his Bond movie, or his two Bond movies, between 1989 and 1995.

[jaguar007]

"Goldeneye" is a great movie, but it also has its problems ! For instance, why Xenia kills the two pilots without a sound suppressor, on a boat full of militars and people ? What about the admiral ? What about James flying like Superman to catch up with the plane ?

I did ask myself last night how did Ourumov manage to shoot and kill one of his own guards in the pre-title sequence with the same gun that just a few seconds before fired a blank to make Alec's death look real.

One can put a blank in the first chamber and bullets in the rest.

[The Shark]

The biggest problem I had with his soundtrack was Bond's driving into the casino at Monte Carlo. The score in that scene is too downbeat....it's very somber, like a man reflecting on his life...quite depressing really, considering the scene is meant to be filled with exotic beauties and international intrigue. It has none of the romance of Barry's score for the gambling scene in Octopussy or Thunderball, or even the brassy background music of the dancers in the Willard Whyte hotel in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER.

I wouldn't say it's depressing. More hazy and romantic, like Bond's soaking in the atmosphere. That's a very a Fleming-esque (to quote a cliché) approach to gambling and casinos, who took it to an almost existential level. i.e. The opening chapter of Casino Royale.

Besides, a straight lounge jazz cue at that point would have been too predictable. Serra's offers a different narrative - inside Bond's head.

[Virgosy]

I did ask myself last night how did Ourumov manage to shoot and kill one of his own guards in the pre-title sequence with the same gun that just a few seconds before fired a blank to make Alec's death look real.

One can put a blank in the first chamber and bullets in the rest.

Thanks for replying, but there's still a problem. Russian soldiers fire with real bullets. Apparently, only Alec and Ourumov know the arrangement, so why did Alec take the risk to being killed by Russian soldiers, who fire with real bullets ?

[jaguar007]

Why even blow up the building?

Because the producers/studio thought there needed to be an explosion. Kids like explosions.

yes, there are a few gaping plot holes in what is otherwise a very mediocre Bond film.

[Major Tallon]

I know, I know...it's James Bond....but still...

I sympathize. I like "Goldeneye", but there's a serious problem with the logic underlying the PTS that raises unsettling questions about Trevelyan's attitude toward Bond later in the film.

[AMC Hornet]

The biggest problem I had with his soundtrack was Bond's driving into the casino at Monte Carlo. The score in that scene is too downbeat....it's very somber, like a man reflecting on his life...quite depressing really, considering the scene is meant to be filled with exotic beauties and international intrigue. It has none of the romance of Barry's score for the gambling scene in Octopussy or Thunderball, or even the brassy background music of the dancers in the Willard Whyte hotel in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER.

I wouldn't say it's depressing. More hazy and romantic, like Bond's soaking in the atmosphere. That's a very a Fleming-esque (to quote a cliché) approach to gambling and casinos, who took it to an almost existential level. i.e. The opening chapter of Casino Royale.

Besides, a straight lounge jazz cue at that point would have been too predictable. Serra's offers a different narrative - inside Bond's head.

Too right, Shark. Go-go music would be as out of place in a Monte Carlo casino as would, say, a room full of 'Centipede' video game consoles.

Edited by AMC Hornet, 14 February 2011 - 03:28 AM.

[Attempting Re-entry]

What a crappy film.

[Mr.Zukovsky]

Easily the best film of the Broz era,mostly because of the supporting cast and the standard but more than competent direction. However, Broz himself was at his best as Bond in TND.

GE: nervous,skinny
TND: fit,confident
TWINE: drama queen
DAD: fat, old and bored

I actually agree with you on that, But i don't get when you say he was like a drama queen in TWINE, i thought he was more of a badass in that. Die Another Day would of been better if the script wasn't the damn same as Diamond are Forever and it was a stronger script, brosnan could of easily pulled it of greatly, just remember how old Moore was in his final three films. Brosnan was not fat at all in DAD. He was around 200 lbs, he wasn't old, and he was of course not boring. The only boring bond i know was Bob Simmons in that horrible film spoof Casino Royale, which was not remotely funny in the slightest.

Edited by Mr.Zukovsky, 23 May 2011 - 10:21 AM.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

As I sat down to watch another Bond film tonight, I decided to go with Brosnan's debut film (and coincidentally, the next film in the series seeing as I watched LTK a few days ago).

I've dogged this film a lot over the years, finding new things in it to gripe about, but tonight when I watched it it felt like a whole new film to me (thanks in no small part I'm sure, to the fact that I haven't seen it in a few years). From beginning to end this film is entertaining, while it's been said that this film seemingly plays like a greatest hits package, what a package it is. One thing that surprised me was the look of the film, this film looks so different than the rest of the films of Brosnan's run, due to Campbell no doubt. While the film takes place after the end of the Cold War, those tensions are still evident in the film, and it's this atmosphere that really gives the film it's edge. While I don't care for the over saturated look he gives the Cuban beach scene (a complaint I hold with CR as well) the Monte Carlo scenes are beautifully shot and really...well really look grand (for lack of a better word).

Brosnan has also gotten a lot of flack for this film, and while I still hold the complaint that he's not given a whole lot to do in the first half of the film. I feel his performance here is much more grounded than we got in the films to follow. Why the Brosnan era had to have such an inconsistent tone I'll never know. If only Campbell came back for the follow up.

Lastly, while I know the Brosnan films get a lot of flack for favoring action over story (a complaint I've made time and again as well). What surprised me the most is how talky the film really is. Aside from the teaser Bond doesn't see any real action until the second half of the film. And while I still feel the tank chase is a little silly, it's undeniably a well put together sequence and pretty exciting. It's also nice to see Bond doing some real detective work here as he has to follow the leads to get to his goal, rather than just having everything fall into his lap. I'd also be remiss if I didn't give props to the Ken Adams inspired satellite control room in the finale. It's a real shame this is the only Brosnan film with a villian's lair. While I don't have any particular problems with the stealth ship, sub, and airplane finales of the next three, it's a little disappointing nonetheless.

I like to say it's a real shame Brosnan's films didn't follow the formula of Tomorrow Never Dies, and while I still hold that belief. What's a real shame is that they didn't use Goldeneye as a template for the Brosnan erea.

It is TND which feels like a greatest hits package. It's mostly a SWLM/FYEO ripoff. I remember seeing it at a prerelease screening and feeling there was nothing new in it and it was too short, as if they'd nothing up their sleeves. When I saw GE on opening day, it was so different in many respects, so exquisitely shot by Campbell and Meheux after years of Glen's TV style, so ellegant and sexy, that I took me a second visit to the cinema to realise what a great film it was. CR is brilliant but it doesn't have a shot in it as good as Pierce holding his Walther as he enters the Admiral's yatch bedroom. That, on a proper movie screen, is the most unforgetable memory I have of experience Bond on the big screen.
Pierce was never as good again. It wasn't his fault. Given a script as good as GE's, I reckon he'd have done it again and I understand his discomfort with the TND mess.
Time and time again, EON has made the same mistake of hiring the script polisher to write the followup. Mankiewicz in LALD, Wood in MR and Feirstein in TND. I'm not saying these writers are not capable of providing an interesting plot but there was no way of knowing from their work in respectively DAF, TSWLM and GE that they actually could. In the case of the Brosnan films, EON should have made an efforrt to return to either France or Caine who'd more input into creating a plot. Feirstein just ironed the wrinkles and made a very good job of it but I find that in spite of the grand spectacle, GE was a serious film (I remember a non Bond friend commenting he'd felt emotionally connected with the film during the Severnaya GE blast), whereas TND is just an action movie.
Even during Connery's tenure, they didn't make exactly the same mistake (but they did try to tempt Hopkins into writing the followup to TB) but for some reason that no Bond "expert" has clarified in all these years, they made do without the talent of Mr Maibaum in YOLT, which is purespectacle and no substance. EON should always stuck to the same writer for at least the initial draft. Unfortunately, writers aren't perceived as important enough in English language filmmaking (directors rarely write or are given writing credit). Writing is the skeleton of any film and if you don't start well there, you can put flesh if you've no bones. For a similar example, look at Hitchcock first four films for Paramount (Rear Window, To Catch a Thief, The Trouble with Harry, The Man who Knew Too Much). They represent a perfect collaboration with writer John Michael Hayes. Throughout the rest of his subsequent career, Hitch struggled with different writers and the results were sometimes great, sometimes not. European directors, on the other hand, tend to work with the same writer.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

CR is brilliant but it doesn't have a shot in it as good as Pierce holding his Walther as he enters the Admiral's yatch bedroom. That, on a proper movie screen, is the most unforgetable memory I have of experience Bond on the big screen.

What you said, ol' buddy! You were lucky to be old enough to watch my favourite Bond film on the silver screen! Wow!

[jrcjohnny99]

Every time I watch it, it falls another notch down on my list;
Right now it's just above DAF and AVTAK but I suspect it'll be at the very bottom (shy of the abysmal NSNA) very soon.

[00 Brosnan]

GoldenEye is my favorite Bond film. I have absolutely nothing bad to say about it.

Though I think Brosnan looked his best in TND, I liked the "big hair" look and wasn't a fan of his really short hairstyles in TWINE and DAD (they made him look older). I love Eric Serra's score as well. It's very 1990s and sounds unique. A lot of the Bond films have very similar sounding scores w/ a few exceptions like TSWLM, YOLT, TMWTGG, TB, and a few others. The film has one of the best Bond girls in Xenia Onatopp and a unique adversary in 006.

Good action sequences, cool PTS, interesting story, great characters, good ending. Excellent film.

[JimmyBond]

A lot of the Bond films have very similar sounding scores w/ a few exceptions like TSWLM, YOLT, TMWTGG, TB, and a few others.

That's a bit unfair. Sure a few scores sound similar (this is no more true than with Arnold's Bond music. But for the most part each film is imbued with it's own unique sound. I'm fairly confident that if someone played a random track from a Bond film I'd have no problem identifying the movie it's from.

[00 Brosnan]

A lot of the Bond films have very similar sounding scores w/ a few exceptions like TSWLM, YOLT, TMWTGG, TB, and a few others.

That's a bit unfair. Sure a few scores sound similar (this is no more true than with Arnold's Bond music. But for the most part each film is imbued with it's own unique sound. I'm fairly confident that if someone played a random track from a Bond film I'd have no problem identifying the movie it's from.

I really don't think it's an unfair statement to make. Sure, there are some Bond films that have scores that really standout and are unique to their respective films. Again. TSWLM, YOLT, TMWTGG, TB, & GE come to me off the top of my head.

There are certainly more that sound unique, but there are also a good amount of films that sound very similar to one another which can sometimes be attributed to overuse of the Bond theme in various arrangements. When I say similar though, I don't mean exact.

[MajorB]

The PTS just doesn't make sense if you assume that Trevelyan and Ourumov were in cahoots from the beginning. The only possible explanation is that Alec was a goodie at the beginning, but that being shot (not fatally) by Ourumov and being "abandoned" by Bond--and being scarrred when Bond's shortening of the bomb countdown kept the Russians from finding it before it went off--caused him to snap. Ourumov got him back to health and talked him into defecting, playing on his family history and possible envy of Bond. However, nothing in the film hints at this, so I have no idea what the actual backstory was meant to have been.

I don't hate Serra's score, though it's not my favorite. But I do in fact think there were two scene-killers, both during the Monte Carlo sequence. The worst is the overscoring of the casino scenes. I don't terribly mind the somber tone of the music, but the fact that it's one continuous tune played through several scenes causes them to flatten out. It takes the viewer away from the individual moments. The music is telling you "These events are all part of a continuum, the specific incidents don't matter." That's bad drama. It's why "mickey-mousing," musically punctuating small moments in a scene, is used so often: It usually works. Good for Serra for trying something different, but I think it damaged those scenes. Similarly, the totally unexciting music that plays when Bond is racing to stop the theft of the helicopter kills that drama too. I guess Serra's trying to evoke a cynical tone, since Bond has no hope of succeeding, but this is supposed to be a thriller, dammit!

[JimmyBond]

A lot of the Bond films have very similar sounding scores w/ a few exceptions like TSWLM, YOLT, TMWTGG, TB, and a few others.

That's a bit unfair. Sure a few scores sound similar (this is no more true than with Arnold's Bond music. But for the most part each film is imbued with it's own unique sound. I'm fairly confident that if someone played a random track from a Bond film I'd have no problem identifying the movie it's from.

I really don't think it's an unfair statement to make. Sure, there are some Bond films that have scores that really standout and are unique to their respective films. Again. TSWLM, YOLT, TMWTGG, TB, & GE come to me off the top of my head.

There are certainly more that sound unique, but there are also a good amount of films that sound very similar to one another which can sometimes be attributed to overuse of the Bond theme in various arrangements. When I say similar though, I don't mean exact.

Still going to disagree with you there. With a few exceptions (notably Arnold's Brosnan era scores) The Bond theme is never just presented as "The Bond theme" it was always made unique for the particular film it was in.

[Royal Dalton]

Awful film. Hated it at the time. Still do.