25 replies to this topic

[1q2w3e4r]

GoldenEye, ears, nose and throat.

I'm sure to ruffle a few feathers here. But I think GoldenEye is possibly the most overrated Bond film.

It's not exactly a bad Bond film. But I don't think its a "classic" as others do, but I classify LTK and OHMSS as classics, so here's why.

Pre-title sequence was WAY over the top. The producer's broke Fleming's no one rule. Bond should always do the improbable but not, the impossible. The plane chasing threw that out the window.

Also, Pierce isn't really comfortable playing Bond in this film. Sure he wore the suit, drove the Aston Martin, gambled in Monte Carlo, travelled to the exotic Carribian and had 3 gorgeous girls along the way. But it's a smart effort on the filmmakers part. Surround the actor with props. Pierce is Bond, but he's in no way sure footed. I always thought on first viewing that he looked particular uncomforable and uneasy in the meeting with Zukofski and his heavys. Turns out they shot this first.

And what's with Brosnan's hair? It looks like he spends an hour doing it in the mornings. Anyway. I thought that the use of 006 didn't really stand up as well as I believed it would. The relationship between the two wasn't built up enough. Its not bad casting on Sean Bean's part, he's great in Bravo Two Zero.

The BMW had no part in a Bond movie. Im glad he ditched it off to Wade, James Bond should never own a 1.8ltr 4 banger. Wade got it right when he said he was going to go bombing around it it. Because that's what it was.

The action scenes knock it for me. Pierce really doesn't pull it off properly in my opinion. Lazenby said that "Bond's supposed to be able to walk into a room and fight five guys at once. If he (brosnan) walked into a room I doubt anyone would look up." I agree with him here. He doesn't carry himself too well in the fight scenes, this could be due to scripting. The fight with Xenia in particular. I can't for the life of me seeing Connery, Lazenby or Dalton putting up with that. Connery and Lazenby would have simply hit her.

But more importantly they looked like they could thump you, and enjoy it. The scenes with the "widow" in Thunderball show Connery like this, as does The Rock with Nic Cage. I never got the feeling that Brosnan could handle himself that well. But he looks better in the fight scenes in DAD.

Maybe its because I like the simple character driven films, and this one's really an action film showing that Bond can compete with the rest. I haven't seen DAD yet. But I know i'll like it, because Bond get's the Fleming treatment for the first hour. GoldenEye doesn't in my opinion do anything really different. It kind of follows the formula of the series pretty well. But it's different from TWINE and probably DAD in that it's a vechile that seems specifically designed to not stray from the formula, but repackage it.

Its a good film, but I don't think its Brosnan's best. The guy can act. He's best Bond film's The Thomas Crown Affair. He nailed Bond's character in that film, hopefully from what I've read he got the chance in the first hour of DAD before it went all Moonraker on him.

For me though. I just doesn't stand up to repeated viewings, and GE feels to me a lot more like Roger's Bond films of the early 70s than that of Connery's of the 60s. I think TWINE is a better film. It lacks punch in the action scenes, but it's got a good story. Nice B story and good characters that are developed. Something GoldenEye lacks.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by 1q2w3e4r

And what's with Brosnan's hair?  It looks like he spends an hour doing it in the mornings.  

There's also the famous bit where Brosnan minces down the stairs of the Soviet installation before his rendezvous with 006.

I think you'll find Brosnan's performance in DAD much more assured and powerful. I found him good but a little green (unsurprisingly) in GE, charismatic but one-note in TND, and bored and ditchwater-dull in TWINE. He's never been better than he is in DAD.

But I think GE works brilliantly because this time Bond is throughout the entire movie engaged in a deeply personal way, more so than in DAD and more so even than in OHMSS. Only in LTK is Bond driven by a similar level of involvement with another character.

GE is about Bond's guilt over the death of his closest friend, then his realisation that said friend was never his friend and in fact manipulated his loyalty over the course of many years. The last third of the movie is about Bond trying to settle the score.

[Sir James]

GoldenEye is IMO a classic film, and the series second best (to DAD) And while it does have some weakneses, it is nevertheless a Bond film that perfectly captures the combination of suaveness, action, gadgets, tension, characters and women that seemed to have been lost since the hey-day of Sean Connery

[Felix's lighter]

The other night, after coming home from watching DAD, I turned on the TV to see no other than GoldenEye. The thing that struck me the most was how much better-suited Brosnan now looks physically in the role compared to GoldenEye: the guy's gone from scrawny to downright buff over the course of seven years - pretty impressive for a 50-year-old. It was a bit of an inspiration to myself; prior to seeing DAD, I thought I had an excuse to let myself go just because I'm pushing 30!

[jeff319]

Indeed, Brosnan really looks in physically better shape than he did for Goldeneye.

[ShakeNotStirred]

Well this is to the person that started this thread. I think u are totally wrong and have no idea what ur talking about. First of all, ur an idiot. The Thomas Crown Affair was not a Bond movie. It was produced by Brosnans movie company. Second of all, Zukovsky is how u spell his name. Third of all, Goldeneye is not overrated, it is one of the best bond movies. It has an awesome awesome opening scene. Sean Bean plays an awesome 006 and it just plain rocks. It sounds like you have no idea what ur talkin about there.

[IrishCrown]

On the DVD, I was shocked to see that Pierce had to have a stunt double in the scenes where Xenia is throwing his *** around. Pierce has a bad back, and couldn't or wouldn't do that stuff. It's really weird to look at it now, knowing that in that quick angle, plain as day, that's not Pierce!

[Sir James]

Originally posted by ShakeNotStirred
Well this is to the person that started this thread. I think u are totally wrong and have no idea what ur talking about. First of all, ur an idiot. The Thomas Crown Affair was not a Bond movie. It was produced by Brosnans movie company. Second of all, Zukovsky is how u spell his name. Third of all, Goldeneye is not overrated, it is one of the best bond movies. It has an awesome awesome opening scene. Sean Bean plays an awesome 006 and it just plain rocks. It sounds like you have no idea what ur talkin about there.

Hey, I completely agree with you here, and you have excellent points. However, you wont be able to convince this guy!

[1q2w3e4r]

Originally posted by ShakeNotStirred
Well this is to the person that started this thread. I think u are totally wrong and have no idea what ur talking about. First of all, ur an idiot. The Thomas Crown Affair was not a Bond movie. It was produced by Brosnans movie company. Second of all, Zukovsky is how u spell his name. Third of all, Goldeneye is not overrated, it is one of the best bond movies. It has an awesome awesome opening scene. Sean Bean plays an awesome 006 and it just plain rocks. It sounds like you have no idea what ur talkin about there.

Thanks for your opinion. The idea about the Thomas Crown Affair being Brosnan's best Bond film is that in the film he get's the character right. He doesn't manage it in GoldenEye, TND or TWINE. I know Irish DreamTime produced it and it was with his partner Beau St Clair.

Why is GoldenEye one of the best films? I said why I thought it was over rated. I think that FRWL, Thunderball, OHMSS and LTK are all better films than anything Brosnan's done up to Die Another Day.

I'm of the opinion that the guy on the screen should at least be a symbol of the literary character he was created on 50 years ago. Up till Die Another Day minus a few excellent scenes in TWINE Brosnan doesn't do that.

Die Another Day looks like it phases back to Fleming's literary roots, so I'm sure it'll be good. A Bond films more to me than a tux, nice cars and big explosions. I like character driven Bond movies. And I don't agree that Sean Bean was good as 006, and I think it's due to an under developed character.

And I take great offence that you say I have no idea what Im talking about when I at least gave a reason why I thought everything. Look forward to hearing from ya.

And to Irishcrown, I was shocked about that bit when I watched the audio commentary to, talk about having a laugh!

[Sir James]

Originally posted by 1q2w3e4r
Why is GoldenEye one of the best films

Because its a Bond that perfectly captures the combination of suaveness, action, gadgets, tension, characters and women that seemed to have been lost since the hey-day of Sean Connery

[JackChase007]

Brosnan is my favorite Bond actor, and I do like all of this Bond movies, but I will say that he was truly in his prime in TWINE and DAD. I agree that GoldenEye is rather overrated - it's okay, but it's not that great. I think that TWINE and DAD are much better. Also, part of what ruins part of the movie for me is Eric Serra's rather unforgivable score...

[ray t]

the score makes GoldenEye weaker than it would have been if barry or arnold had done it. i was utterly dissapointed by the music when i first saw goldeneye at the theatre, right from the underwhelming strains of serra's gunbarel "music".

...and that travesty at the end when the geezer "sings" his own song was a real downer

in that respect, goldenEye is slightly overrated as a 007 movie. DAD and TND are more bonian than GE

Arnolds effort on TND elevates that movie above GE, in my humble opinion

as far as DAD is concerned, it is the best james band movie in over 2 decades

[JimmyBond]

I think the film is a bit weak in places, wouldnt call it overrated though, it deserves all the praise it gets.

The only real problem I have with the film is sometimes Bond is overshadowed by the Bond girl, or the plot. I think this has more to do with Brosnan not having the screen presence he will eventually get with films like Thomas Crown affair, and DAD. Roger Moore also had almost no screen presence in LALD, it took him a few films, it took Brosnan a few films.

Also the stealing of the Goldeneye sequence goes on far too long, though not as long as the sinking of the Devonshire in TND.

[JackChase007]

One thing still puzzles me about GE, however - now, did 006 betray Bond because Bond left him there (after all, 006 did yell at James to set them off - friggin' hypocrite), or was he in cahoots with Ourmouv all along from the very beginning?

[Felix's lighter]

What I wanna know is IF or WHERE Ouromov actually shot him. I mean, there was absolutely no trace of a wound (unrealistic even for a Bond movie). It looks like he shot him right in the head, but how can you FAKE shooting someone in the head?

[JackChase007]

Yes, that's what REALLY confuses me.

There's scenario one: Trevelyan and Ourmouv were working together from the start. Okay, fine, but what's with the scar???

Two: Trevelyan later convinced Ourmouv to work with him - HE WOULD BE DEAD!!!

[1q2w3e4r]

Yeah actually. That does leave a rather large plot hole. Why all the exploits? Why not just shoot Bond in the cellar room? Oh, I suppose it's because we wouldn't get a 2 hour Bond film!

Sir James, nice points. GoldenEye does get HUGE points for what you pointed out it's got all the elements of a Thunderball or Goldfinger, but i just didn't feel it all came together. But it had the best director of photography (haven't seen DAD) But it was beautifully shot, the entire film has a exotic feel to it, much like the early Bond films like Dr No and Thunderball.

I know that Brosnan respected the literary roots of the character and kept a copy of Goldfinger with him on the set, it's not entirely his fault that I don't think the characters are right, he does a good job, it's the script. It's great, but it's really like no other Bond film before it. It's action on a massive scale. Which is great, but HUGE action pieces leave less room for character and TND is a great example. Thankfully the producers have realised that if you pace a film well you can add 10-15 mins worth of back story and have a better film.

I see where you think GoldenEye lays the way for stories that involve Bond personnally. But i think that's unfair and the real credit for that lies with Timothy Dalton and TLD and LTK. LTK wasn't a huge success, but it made 3 times it's money. And TLD was as successfull as some of Roger's outings. I think Dalton ultimately paved the way for the Bond on screen today. Brosnan plays it differently, which is good. But Dalton gave Bond that hard edge, and his films personnally involved Bond's character and emotions. People all to often over look Dalton's two films contribution to the series, but without them. I seriously doubt you could have had GoldenEye. It's a shame his films really suffered from low budgeting and the production costs of LTK really show this. But the producer's as always did a great job.

I was just re-reading your first paragraph, and you could also use it to describe The Living Daylights.

[ShakeNotStirred]

First of all, Ouromov fired a blank. Trevelyan betrayed James long before that. Trevelyan was against MI6 all along. Ouromov fired a blank, but Bond didnt realize it, and he just assumed he died. Ouromov and Trevelyan were working together before the Dam Scene and the Facility Scene. They were working together all along and Trevelyan was just playin Bond and has just started to initialize his plan.

[SamuelKevlar]

First of all, I love GoldenEye. It's got Famke, it's got Sean, and it has possibly the greatest chase sequence in the series.

However:

Originally posted by ShakeNotStirred
First of all, Ouromov fired a blank.

If so, how did he shoot (and kill) the soldier who opened fire prematurely? That's my only little problem with GE.

[john007]

My only problem with GoldenEye is the score. At certain parts you blood starts to boil...but the music doesnt suit the mood. sure for some parts it does..but for others it just ruins it.

Otherwise a great film.

john007

P.S. This is my 400th post

[Spectre001]

Originally posted by 1q2w3e4r


But he looks better in the fight scenes in DAD.

Maybe its because I like the simple character driven films, and this one's really an action film showing that Bond can compete with the rest.  I haven't seen DAD yet.  But I know i'll like it

You crack me up 1q2w3e4r. How can you comment on the fight scenes in DAD if you haven't seen the movie yet?

A couple of other points. Felix's_lighter mentioned that after seeing DAD and watching GE afterwards how much better Brosnan looked in DAD. Funnily enough I think Connery went the other way in that the older he got the worse he looked (as Bond).

Thirdly, GE and any of FRWL, GF, TB etc. are different films made in different times. Don't you think that if they had the technology in the 60's they would have used it? But they didn't so they had to make a film with a storyline to it...makes sense to me.

[rafterman]

I think Pierce is kind of out of place and uncomfortable in the film, to me he doesn't seem right, not yet...not until TND does he really seem perfect for the part...some people may think Pierce is getting too old, but I think he's fit Bond more as he's gotten older...

[Carver]

Goldeneye is a classic film, one of my all time favourite films. I don't think it is at all overrated, as Pierce is simply amazing in it, and everything fits in it. Brilliant storyline, lovely girls, a nice car (even though it isn't used!) and outstanding actors. After the 6 year gap, this is exactly what we needed to get us back into Bond. Pure classic, high tech for a new generation, but still elements of all the classic Connery films in there too. Prehaps the most breathtaking stunt ever is invlolved in this film, and one of my favourite actors, Sean Bean, as the lead villian. Ok, Pierce does walk kinda upright, and his hair does look as if he has had it permed, and that airbag phone box was just too stupid, but this film will remain one of the best in cinema history:)

[1q2w3e4r]

Originally posted by Spectre001


You crack me up 1q2w3e4r. How can you comment on the fight scenes in DAD if you haven't seen the movie yet?

A couple of other points. Felix's_lighter mentioned that after seeing DAD and watching GE afterwards how much better Brosnan looked in DAD. Funnily enough I think Connery went the other way in that the older he got the worse he looked (as Bond).

Thirdly, GE and any of FRWL, GF, TB etc. are different films made in different times. Don't you think that if they had the technology in the 60's they would have used it? But they didn't so they had to make a film with a storyline to it...makes sense to me.

Nice to know I crack ya up. I'm commenting after having seen the making of and trailers, clips of the movie. The fight with Zao in the clinic looks great. Better than anything else Brosnan has been in, and he looked to thin in the other movies barring TND where he looked a little chubby in parts.

I agree, Brosnan looks better over the duration of his films, not like Connery. But age doesn't wait for anyone, he can handle another one. But then your talking about a 5 year wait between 22 and now. Thats more than GE to TWINE. And he aged then.

I know there different films in regards to GF, TB etc. But you can't honestly tell me the producers didn't shoot for Goldfinger when they made GE. I honestly don't think they would have used the technology, they wouldn't have had Connery if they did. It's no secret that he was against all the technology and space stuff and said in his interview with Playboy that as far as he was concerned Thunderball was as far as they should go in that department and bring the series down to earth a little more. I agree with it, I think a Bond film should always be have unlikely elements but never impossible ones.

Also I disagree that they made "films with stories" because of a lack of technology. The early Bond films were ground breaking in their special effects, but Cubby and Harry rightly so thought they should stick to Fleming's stories because not only were they best sellers but interesting and had exotic elements.

[Adam]

Originally posted by ShakeNotStirred
Well this is to the person that started this thread. I think u are totally wrong and have no idea what ur talking about. First of all, ur an idiot. The Thomas Crown Affair was not a Bond movie. It was produced by Brosnans movie company. Second of all, Zukovsky is how u spell his name. Third of all, Goldeneye is not overrated, it is one of the best bond movies. It has an awesome awesome opening scene. Sean Bean plays an awesome 006 and it just plain rocks. It sounds like you have no idea what ur talkin about there.

Well, it's good to see we're conversing with 5 year olds..."First of all," anyone with the slightest bit of intelligence would be able to spot the irony in calling "The Thomas Crown Affair" a Bond movie. "Second of all" (or more appropriately, "Secondly"), does the spelling of an obscure movie character's name really matter? Give me a break...I hope no one took this kid's statements personally...

[kevrichardson]

the film Goldeneye,like any Bond film has many good point and many bad. It was Bronsan first Bond film. the 1 thing that people forget ,it was the firsr film that Cubby Brocolli did not fully take part in. Remember girls and boys ,he was very ill by then. the series of lawsuit over the 6-7 year period from the end of LTK drained most of his energy. The old creative team, the original makers of the series were also either dying, Binder,Maibaum, or like Glen and Dalton just let go. An entire new team took over. Wilson,and his sister Barbara, and a new Director Martin Campbell. MOst Bond are a little stiff in there first film, Connery was simply the first and he had Terrance Young, The coopration of the Producers(Brocolli,and Saltzman) , the youth of Maibaum writng. and other like Peter Hunt, John Barry,Bob Simmoms,etc . even by the time of say OHMSS every thing was still flesh in the minds of the filmmakers and the creative team. by LTK every thing was simply stale. Bronsan has grown in the role and has just revived the series.we really should be greatful for that .