Sign in to follow this  
slaytonf

The four watchable Bond movies.

75 posts in this topic

I don't think I could watch two Bond movies in a row, so I stuck with Moonraker last

night. Pretty entertaining with the usual James Bond stuff you expect in a Bond movie.

You've seen one you've just about seen them all. I must admit most of Bond's puns are

pretty obvious and certainly not very clever, but that's a minor complaint. I haven't seen

Close Encounters in many years, but the notes that open the door into the Venice lab

sound like the same ones from CE.  Ben did mention that the recent space flicks were at

least part of the inspiration for Moonraker. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

Ben did mention that the recent space flicks were at least part of the inspiration for Moonraker. 

In fact, the "Bond Will Be Back" credit at the end of '77's The Spy Who Loved Me suggests they were originally planning to go straight on to '81's For Your Eyes Only...Somebody got bumped up in line for '79.

I'm not a Bond fan, and I find Connery's Bond mean and misogynistic (of course, he's supposed to be that way, and I do realize that these are entertainments designed by and for men).  However, I enjoy Roger Moore and saw most of those when I was going to movies with dates in the late 70s and the 80s;  I have fond memories of them as being a pleasant way to spend a rainy afternoon or evening.  Viewing these movies last night, I still found they had great entertainment value because Roger Moore is constantly winking at the audience as if underneath it all he knows we're not expected to believe all this stuff. 

The late 70's were more popcorn fun than the "major motion picture" 60's or the gritty early 70's, so the Moore movies made him more of an implausible comic-book hero, which is what most of us remembered growing up on watching the Connerys on Sunday night TV.

It's only after the 70's, in the early 80's, that Moore was showing his age, and, like Fred Astaire, they had to stick him with younger and younger girls to give him that "father-figure" appeal.  And sitting down to watch Octopussy, I'd always had theater memories of that being one of the "fun" Moores, until we got the circus-clown scene, and telling the tiger to "Sit!"  That was stretching the populist appeal a tad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always felt that Moonraker had one of the most disturbing deaths in the series: When Michael Lonsdale lets the dobermans loose on the person he regards as being a traitor......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CinemaInternational said:

I always felt that Moonraker had one of the most disturbing deaths in the series: When Michael Lonsdale lets the dobermans loose on the person he regards as being a traitor......

yeah, I never could get that excited about seeing a beautiful woman get run down by a group of ravening Doberman pinschers. I always change the channel because that scene is just very disturbing and I see no point to it at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and as far as moonraker I just doan buy space shuttles full of beautiful people completely indifferent to the idea of Drax's mass extermination of billions of men, women and children.

where did Drax recruit that group? SoCal?

and afterwards which of them had the task of waste disposal of billions of human corpses? I mean the women might get their metallic bikinis soiled.

all Drax hadda do was tell Jaws that pigtails would live.

:D

Image result for moonraker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

and as far as moonraker I just doan buy space shuttles full of beautiful people completely indifferent to the idea of Drax's mass extermination of billions of men, women and children.

Then you don't buy Dr. No's people.  Or Emilio Largo's people.  Or any of the dozens of armies of Bond nemeses that habituated vast subterranean complexes.

 

51 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

where did Drax recruit that group? SoCal?

Ah, the song of envy.  Soooo sweet.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, EricJ said:

In fact, the "Bond Will Be Back" credit at the end of '77's The Spy Who Loved Me suggests they were originally planning to go straight on to '81's For Your Eyes Only...Somebody got bumped up in line for '79.

 

 

I guess the producers decided to call an audible after Star Wars took off. 

The death of the girl at the hands of the Dobermans is disturbing as a thought, but in the

movie they cut away from the worse of what happened to her. And of course I doubt viewers

were too surprised that a Bond villain would do something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vautrin said:

I guess the producers decided to call an audible after Star Wars took off. 

The death of the girl at the hands of the Dobermans is disturbing as a thought, but in the

movie they cut away from the worse of what happened to her. And of course I doubt viewers

were too surprised that a Bond villain would do something like that.

Drax wasn't exactly no **** for the women so why does he get to pick and choose?

notice that Drax had no babe.

he's gonna reshape the earth and enjoy tea and cucumber sandwiches.

:D

Image result for hugo drax moonraker

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say something about For Your Eyes Only (1981), except I forgot what was in it.   Oh, I remember, in this one the woman seeking revenge doesn't have to die--and she even succeeds, unlike in Goldfinger (1964).  I guess you could call that progress.  Parenthetically, I'm thinking of starting a thread called: James Bond is Unhealthy For Women.

I saved Octopussy (1983) for tonight, thinking one Bond a night might get me through it.  I got as far as Bond on the Isle of Women.  Taj Mahal looked good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made it all the way through View to a Kill (1985).  Don't know how, or why, because I don't like it.  Maybe there was something interesting enough, or nothing so intolerable as to keep me watching.  I do have some observations.

*The 1980s was a strange time.

*The movie represents both an advance and a retreat for women.  It has the first woman featured heavy (May Day).  She spoils it by a noble last act.  Guess Bond can't kill a woman.  But the woman heroine (Satcey Sutton) is a character straight out of 40s or 50s movies.  She's completely at the mercy of, or reliant on whatever male is around her.  She's always getting pulled up or down by someone.  But to be fair, she drives a mean fire truck.

*Christopher Walken makes a good heavy.  He should pursue this for career opportunities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

Drax wasn't exactly no **** for the women so why does he get to pick and choose?

notice that Drax had no babe.

he's gonna reshape the earth and enjoy tea and cucumber sandwiches.

:D

 

Well, a man who is planning to exterminate the world's population and then replace it doesn't

have a lot of time for extracurriculars. Tea and cucumber sandwiches. Gee if I were a super

villain who could eat anything he wanted, I'd pick something besides that. To each their own, I

suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, slaytonf said:

 Guess Bond can't kill a woman. 

He did but not very often. Such cases were in The Spy Who Loved Me, GoldenEye and The World is Not Enough. Thunderball I think it was somebody else's bullet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CinemaInternational said:

He did but not very often. Such cases were in The Spy Who Loved Me, GoldenEye and The World is Not Enough. Thunderball I think it was somebody else's bullet.

He also helps kill Rosa Klebb in From Russia With Love.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, that one I know about.  It's Tatianna who kills the Klebb monster to save her honey James.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2019 at 4:12 PM, Joe Gillis said:

I'd absolutely second that.  Goldfinger is, far and away, the standout Bond film to me though To Russia With Love and On Her Majesty's Secret Service (Thank you, Diana Rigg!) get a couple of thumbs up as well.

These would be my top three as well.  If Connery had stayed on long enough to do On Her Majesty's Secret Service, it may very well have challenged Goldfinger for my top spot.

I re-watched most of the Roger Moore Bond films recently and with the exception of The Spy Who Loved Me, I don't think they've held up very well at all. 

After Moore left, I stopped watching the Bond films regularly because I just got bored with them, although I have seen one film from each of the subsequent Bonds (Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig).  I liked them, but not enough to become a faithful viewer again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story everyone's sharing about Roger Moore

It's the touching tale being shared across social media following Roger Moore's death. Londoner Marc Hayes recalled a story about the actor, who was best known for his portrayal of James Bond in the '70s and '80s, on Facebook. The post is a poignant reminder of why we idolize television and movie stars.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/24/entertainment/roger-moore-marc-haynes-post/index.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On September 21, 2019 at 8:22 AM, slaytonf said:

Made it all the way through View to a Kill (1985).  Don't know how, or why, because I don't like it.  Maybe there was something interesting enough, or nothing so intolerable as to keep me watching.  I do have some observations.

*The 1980s was a strange time.

*The movie represents both an advance and a retreat for women.  It has the first woman featured heavy (May Day).  She spoils it by a noble last act.  Guess Bond can't kill a woman.  But the woman heroine (Satcey Sutton) is a character straight out of 40s or 50s movies.  She's completely at the mercy of, or reliant on whatever male is around her.  She's always getting pulled up or down by someone.  But to be fair, she drives a mean fire truck.

*Christopher Walken makes a good heavy.  He should pursue this for career opportunities.

I knew I was forgetting something:

*PRODUCT PLACEMENT!! I don't know what goes on in movies today, but I've never seen a movie that so blatantly pushes the unlikeliest of things on an unsuspecting audience.  I expected the G**********r blimp to make and appearance at the end to pluck Bond and his lady off the Golden Gate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night had the two with Timothy Dalton

 

The Living Daylights (1987) I give this one 5/10. Dalton was an interesting change from Roger Moore, he was more dangerous, but didn't have much humor. However the movie was too long and had a confusing story, introducing some many different characters, it was hard to figure out who the main villain was. 

Licence To Kill (1989) An improvement over the last one 7/10. This was more of a cold blooded revenge story, rather than the usual Bond formula. It was a good idea since Dalton played the role as tough and mean, this guy delivers the one liners as threats rather than jokes. Robert Davi is a despicable villain and Q is given his biggest role in the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree a bit with the critics Ben mentioned who thought License to Kill was like a high

budget two hour long Miami Vice. The villain's plans were much more modest than some

of the other Bond villains who want to take over the world; he just wanted to sell drugs

to more people. And shoot off the occasional Stinger missile. But taking that into account,

it was still a pretty entertaining flick, with the extra theme of Bond alienated from some of

his spy pals. The vehicle chase finale was very well done, likely the high point of the movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Vautrin said:

I agree a bit with the critics Ben mentioned who thought License to Kill was like a high

budget two hour long Miami Vice. The villain's plans were much more modest than some

of the other Bond villains who want to take over the world; he just wanted to sell drugs

to more people. And shoot off the occasional Stinger missile. But taking that into account,

it was still a pretty entertaining flick, with the extra theme of Bond alienated from some of

his spy pals. The vehicle chase finale was very well done, likely the high point of the movie.

Fans kept wondering what exactly was WRONG with Daniel Craig's "Quantum of Solace", but they just didn't believe me when I kept trying to explain how it was an almost plot-for-plot remake of Timothy Dalton in "License to Kill".

Right down to Bond losing his License and going rogue on a personal vendetta, to kill the post-Cold War bad guy taken from the current headline issue of the week (00's third-world water, as opposed to 80's Central American drugs).  And both were uncharacteristically nasty, icky, and had Bond acting like an enraged Liam Neeson thug rather than Her Majesty's Secret Servant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much love for Dr. No here, that is the template for the whole Bond series. I would go for Goldfinger as the best Bond film, with Dr. No second. “My name is Bond, James Bond.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Living Daylights (1987), though not really good, seemed to be living up to what Ben Mankiewicz claimed as a reset to a less humorous mode.  That is, up to the point where the movie has Bond drive onto a frozen lake in a chase.  Drive onto a frozen lake, and take a shed with his Austin.  'Til then there had not been much to keep me watching, but not much to stop me.  That's where I stopped.  The fact is, Timothy Dalton, though good as a leading man, and even as an action hero, is not Bond.  He doesn't have the screen presence for him.

I could say a few things about License to Kill (1989), but I wonder if it is worth the effort to organize my thoughts.  Mmm, no.  I made it as far as when the woman with the sawed-off shoots a hole in the side of a building.  That's when my suspension of disbelief was overtaxed.  But I also made a neat discovery.  Instead of tuning to something else, for some reason I just turned the sound off.  This, along with dividing my attention doing other things, allowed me to watch the whole movie.  I found I could follow the story just as well, and it didn't irritate me nearly as much to watch.  'Course, I thought it was all about counterfeit money and not drugs, but that's not important.  (Parenthetical note:  It's surprising how sharks supply the source of danger and death in so many Bond movies.  The go-to ontological dread inducer).  The final chase with the tanker semis was good--not too many absurdities--and the semi tractor up on, um, three wheels was not shabby.

Remember the game guessing how many jelly beans are in a jar?  A similar game occurred to me.  Guessing how many rounds have been shot at BondJamesBond without hitting him.  Are all international agents of evil such poor shots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, EricJ said:

Fans kept wondering what exactly was WRONG with Daniel Craig's "Quantum of Solace", but they just didn't believe me when I kept trying to explain how it was an almost plot-for-plot remake of Timothy Dalton in "License to Kill".

Right down to Bond losing his License and going rogue on a personal vendetta, to kill the post-Cold War bad guy taken from the current headline issue of the week (00's third-world water, as opposed to 80's Central American drugs).  And both were uncharacteristically nasty, icky, and had Bond acting like an enraged Liam Neeson thug rather than Her Majesty's Secret Servant.

Until TCM had these James Bond Thursdays I had only seen the ones with Sean Connery. I lost

interest as I got older. I enjoyed seeing one with Moore and the other with Dalton. Of course there

aren't many surprises to me anymore in the Bond movies, but they are entertaining and have

some fantastic stunts. I think the maiming of Leiter and the killing of his wife are sufficient reasons

for Bond to be revenge minded.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What can you say for an action movie which has it's most exciting moment in it's first minute?  Even though bungee jumping has past out of the spotlight (a recommendation against tying a movie to transient cultural phenomena), the opening sequence to Goldeneye (1995), is still stunning, even on a small screen.  After that, it seems all a jumble, and I can only offer a jumble of thoughts.

I did make it all the way through, with the sound on.  But I did have to take a couple of breaks when the improbability factor got too high.  Like when the statue ended up on top of the tank hijacked by Bond, notwithstanding the implied political statement.  I can only attribute my perseverance to Pierce Brosnan (a name for an international spy as good as James Bond).  I had expected him to have even less Bondiness (Bondishness?) than Timothy Dalton, but was surprised to find he projected an image that echoed Connery's original.  Not the same, but in the line.

The self-referential quips got to be tiring after a while.  I got that the movie was spoofing/not spoofing itself and the Bond movies in general after the fifth one.  Don't need any more.

Product placement still ranked high in the set of moviemaking techniques.  It's crossed my mind if companies have to pay for the cost of the scene they are featured in.  If so, a certain fizzy water company must've paid a bundle.

For all it's posing as smashing the shaken-not-stirred icons of the Bond franchise, the movie still transmits some strong conventional messages.  That is, when it is consistent and coherent in its messages.  It's a collection of old spy movie elements stitched together into a sort-of quilt.  Like the old friend/comrade-in-arms turned baddie.  The modern angle comes from Natalya Simonova who criticizes Bond and the others for their game-playing and their unconcern for it's lethal consequences.  But that's the standard role of woman as culture bringer and civilizing force so often seen in movies.  And M's comments, delivered by Dame Dench, about Bond being a misogynistic dinosaur are really unfair.  Bond was never abusive, demeaning, or patronizing to the women he met in the movies.  True, being near him could prove unhealthy for a number of them, as a body count could show, but when one had ability he valued it and relied on it.  And when a woman saved his life--a not infrequent occurrence--he didn't dismiss it.  (I can't believe I'm defending a movie character as if he were a real person).

Anyway, movie bad; Brosnan, not so bad.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us