You can blame Flemming for the Caribbean setting that's where he set the stories (I think he was also living them at the time they were written).
Grade: Roger Moore's James Bond movies
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
You can blame Flemming for the Caribbean setting that's where he set the stories (I think he was also living them at the time they were written).
^ Yes. Fleming's villa on Jamaica (IIRC) was called Goldeneye, which is where they got the name for Brosnan's debut.
Licence to Kill was originally going to be set in China but then The Last Emperor beat 007 to be one of the first high-profile Western movies filmed there, so they re-moved its location to South America and, er, the Carribean.
Licence to Kill was originally going to be set in China but then The Last Emperor beat 007 to be one of the first high-profile Western movies filmed there, so they re-moved its location to South America and, er, the Carribean.
to be fair given how little many Bond films resemble Fleming's novel, I don't think that affected their decision about where to set the films. After all Fleming said M was a man too...
Live And Let Die: C (this movie comes off really racist when you view it today)
The Man With The Golden Gun: B
The Spy Who Loved Me: B
Moonraker: B-
For Your Eyes Only: C-
Octopussy: C-
A View To Kill: D
The Man With The Golden Gun: B
The Spy Who Loved Me: B
Moonraker: B-
For Your Eyes Only: C-
Octopussy: C-
A View To Kill: D
Hmm, never knew that. I imagine I'd like the film more if it was. The Florida and "Isthmus" (
) settings are so... pedestrian.
Well, it IS Roger Moore's best Bond. And one of the better Bonds of any actor.
To each their own, I guess.
... After all Fleming said M was a man too...
And, aside from Brosnan & Craig's films, M has been a man!
Judi Dench is pretty cool in the role, though. I like her.
... After all Fleming said M was a man too...
And, aside from Brosnan & Craig's films, M has been a man!
Judi Dench is pretty cool in the role, though. I like her.
So do I, but if Craig's movies are going to be prequels like they've been promoted, she should have been recast with a man in the part when he came in. See her first scene with Pierce Brosnan in Goldeye for more details.
Also ways liked her reparte with Geoffrey Palmer in Golden Eye
"Frankly M, I don't think you've got the balls for this job"
"well at least means I don't have to think with them".
I kind of wish they were prequels. I think the spy genre has been missing something ever since the Cold War ended. I'd love to see the James Bond franchise continue as a series of period films set in the 1950s-'60s.
Clifton James is still in the Donner cut of Superman II but his scenes have been cut down to the barest essentials. They cut out the early "comedy" bit where he talks to his deputy about where they're going to eat lunch. They also cut out much of the early scenes of the Phantom Zone villains terrorizing East Houston before the army shows up.
There's no dispute that James' scenes were directed by Lester, not Donner. The question is whether his character was present in Mankiewicz's drafts of the script before he & Donner left the project. Even if Mankiewicz wrote the entire sequence, it's not surprising that it was so severely cut down in the Donner cut. Michael Thau & Richard Donner have a very low opinion of Richard Lester and cut out every single frame of film that Lester had shot for Superman II unless it was absolutely essential to furthering the plot. (It's a shame that they seem so incapable of recognizing Lester's positive contributions to the film. It so sorely needs the Paris opening, yet that was the first deal breaker for Richard Donner deciding that he did not even want to share directing credit with Lester for the theatrical cut.)
Yeah, compared to this film, Clifton James is a model of subtlety in Superman II.
Live & Let Die is an excellent theme song but I think it sometimes reappears on the score in oddly inappropriate places.
And while I'm a huge fan of David Arnold's scores and think they do have a timeless quality, it's probably too early to say whether they have dated. Tomorrow Never Dies was only 12 years ago, and the only pop culture stuff from the late-1990s that has dated so far is the size of cell phones and inaccurate depictions of how the internet works.
If it's racist against anyone, it's white Southerners.
I suppose we should stop hijacking the thread over an issue we can't satisfactorily resolve. But I have to agree with you about the failure of Donner & Thau to recognise that Lester did bring some decent stuff to the table. Personally, I prefer his cut of the movie to the Donner edition.
The racial aspect has always made this film a little odd. Supposedly it was to take advantage of the "blaxploitation" genre that was the rage at the time. And it has strange racial attitudes - the blacks are the "bad guys", but are interested in dealing drugs to their own people - whites are for the most part portrayed as buffoons - even Bond, as when he is in Harlem, and the Black CIA agent says to him "clever disguise, Bond - whiteface in Harlem" - and Bond is captured rather easily on a number of occasions by Kananga's black henchmen. Of course, the "voodoo" stuff is racially sensitive. Its seems the film makers were keenly aware of the racial aspect of the film and it almost subliminally permiates the movie. I even have discussed this movie with my friends of African heritage, and we can't seem to decide if it is in fact racist or not.
Of the four Brosnan films, Tomorrow Never Dies was by far my favorite, in no short part thanks to the abundance of great one-liners... like when Moneypenny calls Bond and he's busy 'brushing up on a little Danish.'
"You always were a cunning linguist, James." (to M) "Don't ask."
"Don't tell."
That's true, they're not prequels. But they were promoted that way. When I first heard that, I was hoping that Casino Royale would be a period piece set in the 1950's.
On the other hand, we ARE talking about James Bond films. Suspension of disbelief is a viewer requirement.
^ They weren't promoted as prequels, CR was promoted as a re-boot. Unfortunately, some rather silly people in the media who covered the movie can't tell the difference. Batman Begins faced just the same problem - a lot of people assumed it to be a prequel to the Burton/Schumacher movies, even though it was very evidently set in a different continuity.
Basically, the Star Wars prequels have a lot to answer for - anything that goes back to a character's roots is seen as a prequel, even if, as with the above movies, it's actually a brand new take on old material - think Smallville, often wrongly described as a prequel to the Superman movies.
Basically, the Star Wars prequels have a lot to answer for - anything that goes back to a character's roots is seen as a prequel, even if, as with the above movies, it's actually a brand new take on old material - think Smallville, often wrongly described as a prequel to the Superman movies.
Similar threads
