Based on what? Your astute appreciation of film-making? I don't like Craig, but I won't say Casino Royale sucked because of it. I didn't like Dalton either, but Liscense To Kill was well made. Either you're being imprecise with your wording, or you're letting personal feelings corrupt your objective critical analysis IMO.
Who do you think would have made the greatest Bond but never got the chance due to age or other reasons... Rob
That warrants a thread to itself. But names who come to mind: Patrick McGoohan James Mason Cary Grant Errol Flynn Peter O'Toole Terence Stamp Richard Burton Mel Gibson Christian Bale Hugh Jackman
I thought the Brosnan films sucked because they were action-driven blockbuster extravaganzas with little in way of actual storytelling, plot, and character development. I grew up with Brosnan as Bond and so I have a very special appreciation of those films, but I can still say they sucked. Then again, I enjoyed GoldenEye, which is why I said they 'mostly' sucked.
LOL! We are talking BOND here, right? What Bond movie besides On Her Majesty's Secret Service was ever close to having Character development? What Bond movie period was ever not an action-driven blockbuster extravaganza? Maybe From Russia With Love?? Your simplistic broad linguistic strokes betray you here, Jack.
Uhhh, whatever Douchebag Holmes. Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace have brought back a sense of character and humanity to James Bond that has been sorely lacking for quite some time. I would even say Casino Royale was the best Bond flick since On Her Majesty's Secret Service for precisely that reason.
I think the criticisms of the plots or storytelling in the Brozzer movies could have been levelled at any of their predecessors. But I'd say some of the scripts were actually somewhat sharper than the earlier ones, especially the Bond-M repartee. And Bond pretty much invented the idea of the blockbuster extravaganza, from about Goldfinger onwards. As to character development, we had references to Bond being a cold-war relic, with his wish to avenge Alec Trevalyn, then discovering that the man was a traitor, we had the death of a recurring character (Robbie Coltrane's character), we had Bond captured and tortured, then suspected of being a traitor (DAD), we had acknowledgement of the passing of the original Q, we had Bond suffering an injury and still feeling it all through the movie (TWINE), we had the most developed M of all the series. Not bad for what is essentially a commercial series of movies, that have never been all that hot on continuity or on referencing its previous entries.
Perhaps. I thought the Moore movies were just downright silly some of the time (I seriously can't watch Live Or Let Die without cringing... same goes for Moonraker). The early Connery movies were the best. License to Kill was just too much of a generic action movie. The Connery Bond movies were event pictures. Yet they were, in my opinion, espionage thrillers above all. Take From Russia With Love, for instance, a cinematic classic. It had style, substance, and an aura of mystery. There's such a thing as a summer blockbuster with substance, and I think the early Connery movies had those. Casino Royale finally brought that type of well-developed, classically made event picture back into the fold within the Bond franchise, and for that I am grateful. Which is why I consider GoldenEye the best of the Brosnan movies. With all due respect, how is the death of one character constitute as 'character development'? What was his arc? What was his thematic purpose? Did his character have a beginning, middle, and end? Not really. He just re-appeared in The World Is Not Enough as a secondary, sort of non-important character. At least Jeffrey Wright's Felix Leiter had some character development in Quantum of Solace with his loyalties being tested towards the CIA. I agree, that was one of the better parts of Die Another Day, until it devolved into another generic action blockbuster. Again, how is that character development? I liked that. I still felt it was underdeveloped. Bond was suppose to feel vulnerable in The World Is Not Enough by falling for the wrong woman and not realizing it, and that injury was suppose to be an externalization of that... physical manifestation ... but I still felt like more focus could have been given to that character arc. Regardless, I still consider TWINE to be an uneven film despite that. I would say the Craig films have developed M the most successfully so far. I think you might have missed my point. I wasn't referring to continuity. I was referring to character development, like how Bond basically transforms from being a 'blunt instrument' in Casino Royale to being a much fully-formed character by the end of the film affected by the death of someone he loved. Brosnan's Bond never got that sort of in-depth treatment in any of his movies, but I will concede that his films are a lot better handled than either Moore or Dalton's. There are a lot of subtleties and hidden nuances to be found in Brosnan's films, just never enough in my opinion.
At your service, sir. In the form of, uhhh.. scowling? Hard body abs? Digitally enhanced stunt work? I find myself needing examples here. THANK YOU!
Well, he couldn't really; he never did a "first adventure" Bond. And Quantum has shown what character development is in store for Bond going forward: same as it ever was. They shot off their character development clip in Casino.
Replying to Jackson Archer ^ Oh, I agree with the latter point most definitely. And so would Pierce Brosnan, who pushed for Eon to make Bond more in the vein of the current series but was constantly rebuffed. But for all that, his movies definitely went further in humanizing 007 than any of his or their predecessors did. I also think for their to be character development there has to be a degree of inter-movie continuity. In the pre-Brosnan movies, there was rarely any acknowledgement of what had gone before. Thus we had 3 successive movies with Blofeld as the baddy (YOLT, OHMSS, DAF), yet he's played by 3 different actors (one of whom, Charles Gray, appeared 2 movies earlier as a different character) in an entirely different way, with no reference to the previous movie(s). Even the death of Bond's wife! (the injokes at Connery's expense at the start of DAF don't count). To that extent, the fact that Bond can acknowledge the death of old friends like M or uneasy allies such as Coltrane's character - who did grow somewhat between Goldeneye and TWINE - constitutes a certain amount of character development. As to M, I probably should clarify that I don't really distinguish between Judi Dench's M in the Brosnan movies and her in the Craig movies. Different Bond, different continuity, but effectively the same character. She got to mother hen, scold, bollock out, suspend and defend both Bonds. But the Brosnan ones did it first. I agree, the movies didn't go far enough. But they went further than the earlier ones and I think they helped lay down the groundwork for the Craig versions (which are certainly superior movies). And I still think they hold up as better action movies than the Lazenby/ Moore/ Dalton efforts and some of the Connery ones.
Craig's films are really a departure than any previous Bond. Craig's a meaner, stronger, and angrier spy who actually seems more concerned with stopping the terrorists than fixing his Windsor knot. He's a man you'd want in your corner, double-elbowing embassy guards and knee-kicking bombers. Craig's Bond is at no lack of emotion, full on crying at one point and giving troubled stares into the mirror which emote his angst over killing. This Bond is exactly the type that Fleming imagined all those decades ago: the type of misogynistic, flippant asshole with a dangerous streak and a cold-hearted nature. The film opens, black-and-white, in Prague, as Bond dispatches two targets in the line of obtaining double-oh status. The scene is intercut with a brutual, senseless beating in a bathroom, showcasing Bond's relentless and callousness. The other is almost witty in its efficiency; classic Bond in a nutshell. Following the lead of a terrorist bomber in Madagascar, Bond proceeds in a thrilling chase sequence (utilizing the highly-publicized sport parkour or free-running) in and out of a construction site, showcasing the true trademark of the picture: the genesis of Bond. In the chase, Bond takes the short cuts his target bypasses, bashing through drywall and using brute force. This isn't the refined Bond we are accustomed to ... no, this is the Bond who isn't quite yet familiar with agility and the fine art of subtlety ... he just wants to get the job done. Here we glimpse a rougher, tougher 007. When M scolds Bond for being careless, he treats her more like a meddlesome aunt rather than the high-profile boss she really is. In his conversations with Vesper Lynd the witty banter is contagious; at one moment, Bond even yells a "Shut up" in her face. Not exactly the sophisticated ladies' man, quite? But what makes the movie so gripping is the connectivity of the characters and most importantly the connectivity we feel for Bond. Hard-edginess and masochism aside, Bond is a vulnerable, beatable entity who bleeds and hurts, not only physically but emotionally as well. When a waiter asks Bond how he wants his Vodka martini: shaken or stirred, Bond merely replies, "Do I look like I give a damn?". And a Bond who hardly gives a damn is a Bond we can all the more give a damn about.
Thanks Jack, that was really incisive. Okay, your point is taken. Best Bond movie by far given that standard. If Clive Owen had starred, chances are it's be my favourite movie as well. As it is, that spot is held by TND. Again, thanks for the in-depth.
Of course. I would have loved to have seen Clive Owen in the role. He was my top choice before Craig was cast. And Captaindemotion... You're next.
^ the next James Bond? They've been pestering me for years ... (I would have cast Hugh Jackman last time out, FWIW ...)
I agree. You have a good point. I forgot that Coltrane's character became an alley in The World Is Not Enough. He even died saying Bond's life. I guess we also must mention Colin Salmon's character and Tanner, who appeared in GoldenEye and then very briefly in The World Is Not Enough. I think M and Craig's Bond have a closer bond (no pun intended...) than Brosnan's Bond and M ever did, but I definitely see your point there. The M in Craig's movies is more of a motherly figure than in Brosnan's movies. She outright scolds and reprimands Bond in the Craig movies where the M in the Brosnan movies is a bit more conservative. I definitely agree, however I think On Her Majesty's Secret Service is better than any Brosnan Bond movie.
It's certainly one of the most faithful to the novels. It has that 60's spy feel to it, and it was a grand production. And it had Mrs. Peel.... I just love Brosnan in the role, I guess.
Yes, I planned it like that. I think that Bond can be bankable for a summer release. LtK was released during the summer, but bombed due to it being the summer of 1989 (when a gajillion summer blockbusters were released). With the recent run of films continually to out gross the previous one, I think they have a steady shot to release it during the summer. As you mentioned, they were considering it for QoS. That can be a possibility for Bond 23. Regardless of personal favor, there is can be no doubt that they were popular and became increasingly more profitable with each one (a trend that continued into the Craig era). I think what happened between DAD & CR is that they looked at the criticisms that DAD received. The main one seemed to be that the movie became a little too over the top. On a positive, many critics seemed to like the first half of the movie where it was a little more bare bones Bond. Combine those with a somewhat current trend of action movies becoming more gritty, and you get what the producers were thinking. Also, lets face it, the Bond movies have always emulated what was popular at the time. That is partly the reason they are still around to this day.
Actually, up until Live & Let Die, Bond movies were innovation, it was only AFTER Diamonds Are Forever that Bond became noticeably trendy- Live & Let Die; blacksploitation Man With The Golden Gun; kung-fu craze Spy Who Loved Me; Marvin Hamlish & disco Moonraker; Star Wars *ugh, I can't go on...*