137 replies to this topic

[Vauxhall]

If I remember correctly, I think Mallory referred to them being NATO agents during his attempt to fire M just after the title sequence.

Correct. 

 

For some reason, they cut the word "NATO" out of Mallory's dialogue in the international trailer.

[Hockey Mask]

 Probably wishful thinking, but it would be nice to know that Skyfall didn't end up being a complete waste of 2.5 hours.

 

Sometime it is more enjoyable to stop swimming up stream, relax and let the current take you on a fun ride.

[007jamesbond]

deleted

Edited by 007jamesbond, 06 January 2013 - 01:30 AM.

[tdalton]

 

 Probably wishful thinking, but it would be nice to know that Skyfall didn't end up being a complete waste of 2.5 hours.

 

Sometime it is more enjoyable to stop swimming up stream, relax and let the current take you on a fun ride.

 

 

Because the movie was such a financial success I'm supposed to go with the popular opinion and like the film?  I'm honestly asking because I'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make.

 

It's not like I went into Skyfall wanting not to like it.  I don't think I've ever gone into a film thinking, "Boy, I hope this sucks".  I really wanted to like it, but it didn't turn out to be the case. 

[Hockey Mask]

The movie isn't sh#t, it has received nearly universal praise.  If you come at Skyfall from a new direction maybe you'll discover something "new".  I can't help but think you're more disappointed in Skyfall because it didn't meet your expectations and less about he quality. 

 

The quality is there.  A billion dollar box office.  92% fresh rating. Best Picture Oscar talk.

[tdalton]

The movie isn't sh#t, it has received nearly universal praise.  If you come at Skyfall from a new direction maybe you'll discover something "new".  I can't help but think you're more disappointed in Skyfall because it didn't meet your expectations and less about he quality. 

 

The quality is there.  A billion dollar box office.  92% fresh rating. Best Picture Oscar talk.

 

I went into Skyfall with no different expectations than I go into any other Bond film (or any other film, for that matter).  All I want to be is entertained.  I wasn't entertained by Skyfall. 

[Guy Haines]

 

 

... and Silva would have had a much easier time accomplishing his goal of killing M, which he ultimately accomplished anyway.

 

 

I'm not sure that really was his goal. I like to think all he wanted was her calling him by his name.

 

But of course you are right, having all that sensitive information on one single device, outside a Fort-Knox-like compound is utter lunacy by any standards of operative security. Meaning it's probably standard operating procedure...

 

 

Actually, sensitive information left on laptops by government officials (which then gets stolen) is nothing new in real life. Take the First Gulf War (1990/1991). I remember a report of a laptop containing secret stuff being left on the backseat of a car driven by an RAF officer - and which was stolen. So, a computer with a list of NATO agents on it seems far fetched (and don't forget the data would have to be decrypted by the thief) - but such carelessness has happened in real life.

[Guy Haines]

Discarding the disc is a mistake, though, and by doing so they pull out an already (very) shaky foundation from under the film leaving it nothing to stand on.  The disc and the aftermath of its theft paint every character in such a poor light that it's impossible to care about their story.  Dench's unwillingness to pull her agents from the field makes her look like a monster (she utters a throwaway line about pulling them out, but never follows through on it and it's clear that she never relayed that order to her agents, who begin dying).  Silva is probably the most sympathetic of the characters, but once he begins terrorizing the London underground, he throws that goodwill away, as though the screenwriters realized up until that point that he was quite villainous enough to outdo the likes of M and put in a random attack that does nothing for the plot and relies on coincidence rather than actual planning.  Bond looks no better for protecting the film's actual villain throughout the film, and he looks disinterested throughout the entire proceedings, making one wonder why he didn't just stay "dead".

Silva was never an really sympathetic character for me. Moreso than some past villains, perhaps, but it is hard to truly sympathise with someone who hacks into and blows up MI6's headquarters - a row of Union Flag draped coffins as proof that he killed people in there - reveals the true identities of MI6 agents on YouTube, sets up his girlfriend as a William Tell style target and then casually shoots her dead ("redundant" is the word Silva uses - lends a whole new meaning to redundancy!), and sets an explosion on the London Underground. A murderer and a terrorist by any standards. But he seems sympathetic set against M's reaction to what he does, and what she did to him all those years ago.

[tdalton]

 

Discarding the disc is a mistake, though, and by doing so they pull out an already (very) shaky foundation from under the film leaving it nothing to stand on.  The disc and the aftermath of its theft paint every character in such a poor light that it's impossible to care about their story.  Dench's unwillingness to pull her agents from the field makes her look like a monster (she utters a throwaway line about pulling them out, but never follows through on it and it's clear that she never relayed that order to her agents, who begin dying).  Silva is probably the most sympathetic of the characters, but once he begins terrorizing the London underground, he throws that goodwill away, as though the screenwriters realized up until that point that he was quite villainous enough to outdo the likes of M and put in a random attack that does nothing for the plot and relies on coincidence rather than actual planning.  Bond looks no better for protecting the film's actual villain throughout the film, and he looks disinterested throughout the entire proceedings, making one wonder why he didn't just stay "dead".

Silva was never an really sympathetic character for me. Moreso than some past villains, perhaps, but it is hard to truly sympathise with someone who hacks into and blows up MI6's headquarters - a row of Union Flag draped coffins as proof that he killed people in there - reveals the true identities of MI6 agents on YouTube, sets up his girlfriend as a William Tell style target and then casually shoots her dead ("redundant" is the word Silva uses - lends a whole new meaning to redundancy!), and sets an explosion on the London Underground. A murderer and a terrorist by any standards. But he seems sympathetic set against M's reaction to what he does, and what she did to him all those years ago.

 

 

I didn't mean to imply that Silva is a straight-up sympathetic character.  He's not.  Compared to the other characters in the film, though, he comes out as one of, if not THE, most sympathetic, albeit all of the characters in Skyfall are pretty unlikeable. 

[Guy Haines]

 

 

Discarding the disc is a mistake, though, and by doing so they pull out an already (very) shaky foundation from under the film leaving it nothing to stand on.  The disc and the aftermath of its theft paint every character in such a poor light that it's impossible to care about their story.  Dench's unwillingness to pull her agents from the field makes her look like a monster (she utters a throwaway line about pulling them out, but never follows through on it and it's clear that she never relayed that order to her agents, who begin dying).  Silva is probably the most sympathetic of the characters, but once he begins terrorizing the London underground, he throws that goodwill away, as though the screenwriters realized up until that point that he was quite villainous enough to outdo the likes of M and put in a random attack that does nothing for the plot and relies on coincidence rather than actual planning.  Bond looks no better for protecting the film's actual villain throughout the film, and he looks disinterested throughout the entire proceedings, making one wonder why he didn't just stay "dead".

Silva was never an really sympathetic character for me. Moreso than some past villains, perhaps, but it is hard to truly sympathise with someone who hacks into and blows up MI6's headquarters - a row of Union Flag draped coffins as proof that he killed people in there - reveals the true identities of MI6 agents on YouTube, sets up his girlfriend as a William Tell style target and then casually shoots her dead ("redundant" is the word Silva uses - lends a whole new meaning to redundancy!), and sets an explosion on the London Underground. A murderer and a terrorist by any standards. But he seems sympathetic set against M's reaction to what he does, and what she did to him all those years ago.

 

 

I didn't mean to imply that Silva is a straight-up sympathetic character.  He's not.  Compared to the other characters in the film, though, he comes out as one of, if not THE, most sympathetic, albeit all of the characters in Skyfall are pretty unlikeable. 

 

All the characters? Eve comes across as likeable to me, even if her marksmanship skills aren't what they should be. Tanner is his usual unflappable self. The new "Q" may seem a bit geeky but his a dry wit about him. Even Mallory redeems himself in the enquiry scene by his quick reactions when Silva bursts in.

Kincade is sympathetic towards M and is, I think quite a likeable chap, when he isn't giving Silva's goon squad a special shotgun-blast "Welcome to Scotland".

[Hockey Mask]

 

The movie isn't sh#t, it has received nearly universal praise.  If you come at Skyfall from a new direction maybe you'll discover something "new".  I can't help but think you're more disappointed in Skyfall because it didn't meet your expectations and less about he quality. 

 

The quality is there.  A billion dollar box office.  92% fresh rating. Best Picture Oscar talk.

 

I went into Skyfall with no different expectations than I go into any other Bond film (or any other film, for that matter).  All I want to be is entertained.  I wasn't entertained by Skyfall. 

 

That is what I am trying to say.  That is a problem with you...not the movie. It was acted well, directed well, shot well, big action scenes and had a good story.  Whag more could you possibly want? 

[tdalton]

 

 

The movie isn't sh#t, it has received nearly universal praise.  If you come at Skyfall from a new direction maybe you'll discover something "new".  I can't help but think you're more disappointed in Skyfall because it didn't meet your expectations and less about he quality. 

 

The quality is there.  A billion dollar box office.  92% fresh rating. Best Picture Oscar talk.

 

I went into Skyfall with no different expectations than I go into any other Bond film (or any other film, for that matter).  All I want to be is entertained.  I wasn't entertained by Skyfall. 

 

That is what I am trying to say.  That is a problem with you...not the movie. It was acted well, directed well, shot well, big action scenes and had a good story.  Whag more could you possibly want? 

 

 

That's your opinion, but doesn't make it a fact.  I'm entitled to mine just as you're entitled to yours.  It's quite presumptuous of you to claim that someone has a "problem" because they don't agree with your opinion of a movie.

 

Just because someone dares to say that they don't like your favorite Bond film doesn't mean that they have a "problem".  It just means that they disagree with you. 

Edited by tdalton, 06 January 2013 - 02:24 PM.

[Hockey Mask]

 

 

 

The movie isn't sh#t, it has received nearly universal praise.  If you come at Skyfall from a new direction maybe you'll discover something "new".  I can't help but think you're more disappointed in Skyfall because it didn't meet your expectations and less about he quality. 

 

The quality is there.  A billion dollar box office.  92% fresh rating. Best Picture Oscar talk.

 

I went into Skyfall with no different expectations than I go into any other Bond film (or any other film, for that matter).  All I want to be is entertained.  I wasn't entertained by Skyfall. 

 

That is what I am trying to say.  That is a problem with you...not the movie. It was acted well, directed well, shot well, big action scenes and had a good story.  Whag more could you possibly want? 

 

 

That's your opinion, but doesn't make it a fact.  I'm entitled to mine just as you're entitled to yours.  It's quite presumptuous of you to claim that someone has a "problem" because they don't agree with your opinion of a movie.

 

Just because someone dares to say that they don't like your favorite Bond film doesn't mean that they have a "problem".  It just means that they disagree with you. 

 

As far as I am concerned you can burn your entire Bond collection and switch to Twilight.  I was just trying to help a fellow Bond fan to not to miss out on an opportunity to like a Bond movie.

 

That said, my opinion is the majority opinion.  90% or so enjoy Skyfall.  What incentive would I have to switch my opinion and dislike it? None.  What incentive would you have?  As a Bond fan, I would think a lot.

 

Your replies have come off hostile and immature.  You are not worth my time.  Too bad.

[tdalton]

 

 

 

 

The movie isn't sh#t, it has received nearly universal praise.  If you come at Skyfall from a new direction maybe you'll discover something "new".  I can't help but think you're more disappointed in Skyfall because it didn't meet your expectations and less about he quality. 

 

The quality is there.  A billion dollar box office.  92% fresh rating. Best Picture Oscar talk.

 

I went into Skyfall with no different expectations than I go into any other Bond film (or any other film, for that matter).  All I want to be is entertained.  I wasn't entertained by Skyfall. 

 

That is what I am trying to say.  That is a problem with you...not the movie. It was acted well, directed well, shot well, big action scenes and had a good story.  Whag more could you possibly want? 

 

 

That's your opinion, but doesn't make it a fact.  I'm entitled to mine just as you're entitled to yours.  It's quite presumptuous of you to claim that someone has a "problem" because they don't agree with your opinion of a movie.

 

Just because someone dares to say that they don't like your favorite Bond film doesn't mean that they have a "problem".  It just means that they disagree with you. 

 

As far as I am concerned you can burn your entire Bond collection and switch to Twilight.  I was just trying to help a fellow Bond fan to not to miss out on an opportunity to like a Bond movie.

 

That said, my opinion is the majority opinion.  90% or so enjoy Skyfall.  What incentive would I have to switch my opinion and dislike it? None.  What incentive would you have?  As a Bond fan, I would think a lot.

 

Your replies have come off hostile and immature.  You are not worth my time.  Too bad.

 

 

I never said that you should switch your opinion and dislike the film.  I'm glad that you enjoyed the film. 

[Hockey Mask]

 

Edited by 00Hockey Mask, 06 January 2013 - 02:47 PM.

[SirCliff]

I think Skyfall is one of the biggest hyped movies ever due to the 50th Bond anniversary.  I would never say it is a bad film and it doesnt stoop as low as Diamonds are Forever, Die Another Day etc.  but it's a fairly substandard Bond film for me, probably ranking somewhere around number 15.  

I am still looking forward to the DVD so I can re-watch the film minus the hype and maybe my opinion will improve (which I think it probably will).  But I also think general opinion towards the film may also cool over time and I dont think it will be regarded as a classic in the same way that even Casino Royale has achieved.  

Having said that Im opening myself to criticism here but I think QoS is hugely under-rated and I cant understand the hate for that film so maybe Im a bit odd when it comes to what I enjoy in a Bond movie.  : )

[Hockey Mask]

I think Skyfall is one of the biggest hyped movies ever due to the 50th Bond anniversary.  I would never say it is a bad film and it doesnt stoop as low as Diamonds are Forever, Die Another Day etc.  but it's a fairly substandard Bond film for me, probably ranking somewhere around number 15.  

I am still looking forward to the DVD so I can re-watch the film minus the hype and maybe my opinion will improve (which I think it probably will).  But I also think general opinion towards the film may also cool over time and I dont think it will be regarded as a classic in the same way that even Casino Royale has achieved.  

Having said that Im opening myself to criticism here but I think QoS is hugely under-rated and I cant understand the hate for that film so maybe Im a bit odd when it comes to what I enjoy in a Bond movie.  : )

 

I too am a big fan of QoS.  Every time I pop it in after a long hiatus I expect to not like it but end up liking it more. 

[The Shark]

Having said that Im opening myself to criticism here but I think QoS is hugely under-rated and I cant understand the hate for that film so maybe Im a bit odd when it comes to what I enjoy in a Bond movie. : )

You said it! Aside from a few titles (DAD, TND) your Bond film ranking almost the inverse of my own.

[DRESSED_2_KILL]

I was expecting Casino Royale 2.0, instead I
felt like this was a poor attempt at trying to
blend the old movies with the current style
of Craig's era. I heavily disliked all of the
things pointing back to the past bond films,
it was so retarded to include the gadgets on
the Aston Martin DB5, first off it doesnt even
make sense, in Casino Royale bond won that
car in the casino in a poker game bet with
Dimitrios . So basically the writers
completely forgot about that. Another thing I
highly disliked was Silva, wow what a stupid
villain. The story felt rushed and overall
boring.

Things I did like were the scenes of Bond
infiltrating Shanghai, hanging on the
elevator, being isolated on the beach
drinking. Basically the beginning was alright
but just went downhill. I thought the plot
and story was very unrealistic. Daniel Craig
was fed so many quips and one liners. The
one liners felt extremely forced and out of
place. Seriously I mean the line where Bond
said, " what a good waste of Scotch",
literally made me wana puke.
I can tell where the producers are heading
with the franchise and it feels awkward , out
of place and reliant on the past. I expect to
see the franchise going into another Pierce
Brosnan era with subpar plots and too much
action.
Casino Royale makes skyfall look like thrash
. I did like the scenes where Bond was
working out and training though. I feel the
writers should have emphasized way more
on bonds isolation during his time off duty.
Skyfall really missed the ball. I Also feel the
ending battle at Bonds house was
prolonged , boring, unrealistic and just
sloppy writing. I also really missed David
Arnold, Thomas Newman's soundtrack felt
out of place to me towards the end.

Let’s start with the opening scene. Someone
steals a list of secret agents from a
computer in a hotel room. First, this has already been done with Mission Impossible – start with something a little more original. Second, why was this information on a laptop in Turkey?
At least Mission Impossible had this info stored in an embassy

After Bond gets picked up in the SUV and
they take off after the bad guy (Patrice), they end up in a gunfight where Patrice takes out this gun with a double barrel supply of bullets.
He obviously can’t carry that in his jacket which is the point of a handgun for this. Why wouldn’t he just use automatic assault rifle? Also,how many bullets were fired during this scene –
and no one gets hit? What is this, GI Joe
(the cartoon)? You are a spy and an assassin and neither of you can shoot your target?

Next. So Patrice apparently uses depleted
uranium bullets. These are supposed to be
used because uranium is a denser material
soit can pierce through more materials such as
metal but they don’t go through the metal of
the Caterpillar when Bond is in it? Also, MI6
is able to find out how this guy is as apparently
only three “bad guys” in the world use
depleted uranium bullets. Only three guys in
the world use this type of bullet? Do they not
know that government agencies could track
them this way? Smooth moves Patrice!
Next. Bond is fighting Patrice on the train
(with a gun shot to his shoulder) and then
getsshot off the train. First, where did he get
shotthe second time? I saw where he was shot
the first time (shoulder) but where was the
second bullet wound? Also, he gets hit twice, falls off a train with enough height to kill someone, and still survives? Bourne rip off. Later, we find out that there were still bullet
fragments inside his body – he just left them in there? What was the point of that?

Next. the evil villain who we haven’t met yet
blows up MI6 by turning on the gas. Really?
You can access gas to a secured government
facility by internet? So a haggard Bond
comes back to MI6 and goes after Patrice in
Shanghai. First, we see Patrice just walk into
a building and shoot the security guard – why
was the front door not locked? No cameras
he was worried about? No one else in the
building at all to worry about walking in or
out

(cleaning crew, someone working late) who
would call the cops while he is stuck in the
building? We follow him upstairs to find out
he is about to assassinate some guy in another
high rise building. At first, I thought “oh, the
guy who is about to get shot has bodyguards
so the villain needs an assassin to take him
out.” Nope, those bodyguards work for the
villain so that means there are 4 people in
that room and 3 are with the villain but they
need to pay an assassin 4 million euros to
take him out? One of the three could’t have
brought a gun with them or knife and just saved the 4 million? Anyway, Bond lets Patrice kill the guy before doing anything. I understand Bond is supposed to be ruthless but that just sounds stupid. You let your enemy kill his enemy –
why wouldn’t you save him to see what value
he would be, I mean he is the enemy of your
enemy and all.

So in a homage to old Bond films, 007 finds
a clue in a poker chip which Patrice was
supposed to cash if for the job. Alright, a
little cheesy but alright (they wouldn’t have done that in Casino Royale). Hell, why didn’t they just wire him the money? Anyway, Bond
fights three guys in a casino with a briefcase full of money that he throws around like it is empty (I am thinking 4 million euros weighs quite a bit). Bond has a gun on him and he knows these guys want to kill him but he doesn’t pull it out and shoot or just say “hey, i have agun, get out of my way or I am going to shoot you.” Also, since when do these types of lizards eat people?

Next, he goes on a boat to hook up with the
typical Bond girl full well knowing that the
guys on the boat probably work for the main
villain. They just let him on board the boat?
And he gets to sleep with the villain’s girl?
Did she really not know she was going to die for doing this? What, she just could’t resist Bond so she sleeps with him right below all the
villain’s bodyguards? Why did they let him on
board and not immediately cuff him?
Next, the Bond girl dies (well that was
quick).

Suddenly, Bond is able to take out 5 guys at
the same time even though he was unarmed
and they all had guns. Amazing since he
couldn’t take out Patrice at the beginning of
the film even while he had a gun.
About that island. How did the villain (Silva)
get an entire island? Fear of a chemical leak
that evacuates an entire island and the
world press nor any country investigates?

Amazing!
So this former MI6 spy is also a genius
computer hacker? If he is not the hacker,
who is? They can just hack into the MI6 whenever they want? A little stretched.
Everyone is back at the new MI6
headquarters and the new Q plugs their computer system into Silva’s laptop which suddenly hijacks their computer system.

WHAT? This is the smartest computer guy at MI6 and he didn’t think this could happen? Really? Anyway, M is in a hearing with top government officials when
a train (with apparently no passengers)
plunges through a tunnel. When that happened and it would most likely be viewed as a terrorist attack, they kept on with the proceedings inthe courtroom? Wouldn’t they stop the proceedings to deal with something like this?

Then Silva and his henchmen just walk in the
courtroom by only shooting one security
guard at the entrance? One guard is it? And once inside, no one can kill the Silva with all the shots fired?

So Silva miraculously gets away and Bond
thinks the best solution is to go “off the grid”
instead of using all British intelligence to
track this guy down? He is in the UK where
cameras are everywhere and the they decide to go AWOL with M as bait. 2nd, they don’t stop to get any weapons along the way? While some
may like the old Aston Martin as a homage
to the best, I thought is was too cheesy and
absurd. When there is nothing new for a
franchise, it inevitably starts to feed on itself
with references to what was already done.
This is only the 3rd movie in this re-imagined
Bond –no need to start referencing the past
yet.

Skyfall? Seriously? Bond is apparently a rich
orphan? Stop stealing from Batman! He is an
orphan that did not come from money – that
is why he has a chip on his shoulder (as
diagnosed by the Bond girl in Casino Royale
on the train). This is a rip off of Harrison Ford’s
Witness (and not done as well). So I don’t
know why Silva didn’t attack at night under
the cover of darkness, but whatever. Also,
turning light bulbs into bombs? Was that M or
MacGyver? What exactly caused that big
explosion when the helicopter flew into the
house? Don’t think even a full fuel tank could
have caused that.

Next. M and the caretaker escape to the
church. Not really a bright idea to use a
flashlight so that the bad guys can track you.
Bond of course follows running in the open
across a frozen pond, not a bright idea to run
across in the open but whatever. So once he
was caught and Silva’s henchman is right
next to him with a gun, why did he not have his
gun not directly pointed at Bond? Was he hopingtoricochet a bullet off the ice at him? Wow, didn’t see that coming. Wait, I saw this in
Cliffhanger

When Silva reaches the church why were M
and the caretaker not ready for anyone to
come after them? Why would they assume no
one saw them walking over to the church? I
mean they did have their flashlight on.
In the end, Silva wants M to kill them both.
Some Bond villains are driven by money or
world domination but this guy is driven by his
mommy issues? Seriously? Silva is apparently
the best hacker the world has ever seen and
instead of rigging banks to transfer money
into his accounts or taking over countries, his
main plan is to get back at mum?
To summarize: this movie sucked and is
nowhere near the quality of casino royale

[Vauxhall]

Would be interested to hear what your top five Bond films are, DRESSED_2_KILL? I respect your opinion, but reading your review, I would imagine that you wouldn't like lots of the older classic films either. If CASINO ROYALE is your favourite, that's certainly fair, as it was mine too for a good while.

[Germanlady]

OMG - don't touch this guy with a pair of tongs.. He got banned on MI6 for many good reasons. If you are clever, do the same, before he is all over the place spreading his ridiculous and stupid hatred. I am sure, some here know him from MI6 and know, what I am talking about. He is a TROLL with capital T.

[Odd Jobbies]

OMG - don't touch this guy with a pair of tongs.. He got banned on MI6 for many good reasons. If you are clever, do the same, before he is all over the place spreading his ridiculous and stupid hatred. I am sure, some here know him from MI6 and know, what I am talking about. He is a TROLL with capital T.

 

I don't agree with the verdict of DRESSED_2_KILL, but thankfully we have a thing called freedom of speech. He's not trolling as he makes thought out arguments and has obviously spent some time spelling them out for us. Instead of instigating a witch hunt, it'd be far more interested in hearing you tackle the points DRESSED_2_KILL makes.

 

IMO Skyfall is 99% masterpiece - the best looking Bond movie ever with one of the strongest villains in the franchise (at least in terms of the performance and characterisation by Bardem, very detailed indeed).

I can forgive the few shortcomings and IMO put them down to 50th anniversary pressures.

 

Btw, Vauxhall, good point, you could rip any of the Bond movie to shreds just as easily, but criticism is always a good thing if tackled head on and not swept under the carpet with the trolls

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 06 January 2013 - 07:19 PM.

[Hockey Mask]

The Aston Martin DB5 had a production run of more than one. 

[DRESSED_2_KILL]

Would be interested to hear what your top five Bond films are, DRESSED_2_KILL? I respect your opinion, but reading your review, I would imagine that you wouldn't like lots of the older classic films either. If CASINO ROYALE is your favourite, that's certainly fair, as it was mine too for a good while.

Thanks Vauxhall, to answer you're question my top 5 Bond films are -

1.CR
2. FRWL
3. DR.NO
4.LTK
5. QoS

I grew up with the Brosnan era, I'm 21 years old now. But during my younger years I really enjoyed Brosnan, he was my Bond. But as I have aged and see things differently, Brosnan's films are quite laughable. It's not Brosnan's fault, but more the producers, writers and directors. I feel as if Brosnan was forced to portray Bond in terms of a action hero, rather than the darker minded,cold-hearted snob that would have suited Brosnan's caricature. In my opinion TWINE was Brosnan's best effort and film. There were some really great moments in Twine that shined rays of light upon Brosnan's darker side, but sadly there was the usual cliched action scenes and poor writing. I must add that TWINE's soundtrack is my favorite of all the films, theres an eerie but calming feel to it. As for Rodger Moore, I think all of his Bond films are a joke and disgrace to not only the bond franchise, but also to Ian Fleming.
Sean Connery defined Bond, his first two films were the best, as for goldfinger, I believe Goldfinger was the first film to set the formula for the next 17 Bond films, but a formula that would repeat, repeat and repeat itself. That is why I loved Casino Royale, it brought back Fleming's formula and ditched all the cliched formulas. CR was more realistic and kept things simple. No crazy gadgets, no out of this world villains, It stayed true to Flemings Bond and thats why it was great.

[Germanlady]

Well Odd, just wait and see. i know, what I am talking about and you people will too, if he stays long enough. He is fun to have around, I promise.

He has made this post weeks ago on MI6 and behaved so bad, they finally banned him. Now he tried to find a new home. I already made a useless new tread, which was locked. But he is all yours to play with

[Hockey Mask]

 

Would be interested to hear what your top five Bond films are, DRESSED_2_KILL? I respect your opinion, but reading your review, I would imagine that you wouldn't like lots of the older classic films either. If CASINO ROYALE is your favourite, that's certainly fair, as it was mine too for a good while.

As for Rodger Moore, I think all of his Bond films are a joke and disgrace to not only the bond franchise, but also to Ian Fleming.

He was a different Bond for a different time.  Not meant to be a joke and he certainly wasn't a disgrace. 

Edited by 00Hockey Mask, 06 January 2013 - 09:58 PM.

[Odd Jobbies]

Well Odd, just wait and see. i know, what I am talking about and you people will too, if he stays long enough. He is fun to have around, I promise.

He has made this post weeks ago on MI6 and behaved so bad, they finally banned him. Now he tried to find a new home. I already made a useless new tread, which was locked. But he is all yours to play with

 

Well we can't say you didn't warn us

 

So, DRESSED_2_KILL you have quite a rep to live up to, lets see how many feathers you ruffle here. Putting QoS in your top is a good start

[SirCliff]

 As for Rodger Moore, I think all of his Bond films are a joke and disgrace to not only the bond franchise, but also to Ian Fleming.

 

 

With the realness of Bond really coming through with Craig in the past few films it's become quite fashionable to bash Moore.  It's no secret some of his films are my favourites and I wont defend the moments where the series pushed it too far i.e. most of moonraker. But when you peel away most of the Bond movies they are ridiculous and so are the books.  Doesnt Bond fight and kill a giant squid in the Dr. No novel as an example??? Even Skyfall expects us to believe a man could survive getting shot twice and falling off a huge bridge.  Im not saying fleming would endorse slidewhistles and double taking pigeons but I honestly think Bond films shouldnt take themselves too seriously and a bit of fun can be had along the way.  

For me in the Moore films for ever cringeyTarzan shout there is a union flag parachute ski chase too.  

[The Shark]

As for Rodger Moore, I think all of his Bond films are a joke and disgrace to not only the bond franchise, but also to Ian Fleming.

Funny enough, that's exactly how I view Purvis & Wade and Paul Haggis's CASINO ROYALE, though I imagine for different reasons than the anti-fun, dark n gritty Bond fans of the GOLDENEYE N64 generation.

[The Shark]

Mind you, I was just like that as a 16 year old fan of QOS and David Arnold.

Young, dumb and full of...