Kim Basinger is bad, Sean Connerey phones in his performance, the villians are good but the pacing is slow and boring, the effects are terrible, not too mention the cheesy scene where Bond plays the video game against the villian which shocks you if you lose. Instead of a casino he had a big arcade room? what the hell?! What was so bad about Thunderball anyway? Leave well enough alone. I would've rather have had George Lazenby in this one. Also, it dosen't even have the gunbarrell credits!!!! The Motorcycle chase was cool, but instead of the Bond theme, you get a lame elevator music jazz score playing over it. If this WAS an official 007, I'd put it in the same class as Moonraker or Diamonds are Forever. CRAP tastic
"who goes in a Renault 5. Americans may not be very familiar with European cars, but the Renault 5 is a typical lowbrow working-class vehicle "
Now, here you are completely wrong, the Renault 5 Alpine turbo, was one of the fastest cars of its time, the 1982 model, witch I believe is the one on the film had a 1.4 L engine and produced 160BHP, with a max speed of over 200km/h. and therefore it wasn't a "lowbrow working-class vehicle"
I cant believe you thought that the Renault 5 in this was a normal boring one - did you see it ? The one in this movie is a very rare mid engine road going rally car with rear wheel drive.They were mega expensive when new and are still worth upwards of ten thousand pounds today. It shares hardly any parts with the normal 5 and although they only make 160 odd bhp in road trim, they could be tuned to upwards of 400bhp in race trim. Further more a variation of this engine was used in the Renault Formula 1 car of the time which produced nearly 1500bhp.
"when in doubt - kill !" Richard Crenna , First Blood
You are absolutly right on this one. I watched this film about a year ago on tape and boy it SUCKED. I mean, I love Sean Connery, don't get me wrong, but he was just way too old to be in this film. Not to mention, why the heck did the producers have Lorenzo Semple, Jr. write this? He did scripts for the campy 1960's "Batman" TV show, not Bond films! A poor choice for a screenwriter, a director (Irvin Kerschner "The Empire Strikes Back") who is great but isn't great here and just a terrible waste of a Bond film. It should remain listed as "unofficial." Total garbage. 1/10.
"He should be whipped, not only for this Gruyère cheese of a script, but also for the 1976 King Kong, and, especially, for the 1980 Flash Gordon. It's horrible to see Alex Raymond's graphic masterpiece turned into... that"
The Flash Gordon movie is entertaining for what it is, but the real blame for that film (and King Kong 76) is Dino DeLaurentis. Anyhow, we'll always have season one of the awesome Flash Gordon cartoon from the same time period, so don't fret. Besides, I'll take the 1980 movie any day over that garbage Sci-Fi Channel gave us!
* * * * If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?
I definitely think this is inferior to all the official James Bond films, even "Thunderball", which IMHO is the most over-rated Sean Connery vehicle (while "You Only Live Twice" is his best and most under-rated IMO).
If Kevin McClory HAD to make his own Bond film, it shouldn't have been partly a remake of any official entry, and George Lazenby would be the only Bond worth casting in it! (McClory almost got to make "Warhead" in 1975, but this was thwarted by legal action from EON Productions.)
And "Diamonds Are Forever" would have been a better film if Lazenby had agreed to do it (instead of a bored, rather unenthusiastic Sean Connery), while "Moonraker" is IMHO one of the best Bond movies ever, starring the best Bond of them all, Sir Roger Moore!
"If Kevin McClory HAD to make his own Bond film, it shouldn't have been partly a remake of any official entry, and George Lazenby would be the only Bond worth casting in it!"
An interesting thought, Lazenby being in this. I bet he would have been better than Connery managed to be, at least less laughable. Maybe then the plot wouldn't have had to nbe altered to reflect the age of the star. Anyhow, as already mentioned, McClory had no choice but to stick with Thunderball's plot. It was all he had the rights to via a court ruling. In all honesty, this film never should have happened at all.
* * * * If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?
Anyone realized how the "turbo" button on the bike was installed on the DASHBOARD instead of the handles? Bond had to take one hand off the handle to push it! That's an absolutely idiotic desing! Just think about what would happen if you received a super-duper speed jolt riding a bike ONE-HANDED!!!
I agree with the rest of the posters here, but for me two things were the most ridiculous of all: one, the way all the women reacted to Connery. I mean, not even in his prime he got such a reaction from the ladies! And here he looked far too old for the role. The other, the motorcycle chase. It wasn't bad by itself, but it took itself too seriously, and the idea that a sixty-year-old-looking Connery (I know he wasn't 60, but he looked like he was) was "riding" the bike in a tuxedo and doing all that was waaaaay too much.
THIS "FILM" ISN'T EVEN CONSIDERED A BOND FILM! Which I might add, is good because if this was released by 007's producer Albert R. Broccoli, this pile of garbage would've thrown the series clear off track.
Dude, every single OFFICIAL James Bond fansite will tell you the same thing: "NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN" IS NOT AN OFFICIAL BOND FILM! Just because they threw in Sean Connery doesn't make it "official." Not to mention, this wasn't even made by Albert R. Broccoli, therefor it is not a film of the series. It was actually produced by Kevin McGlory, a long-time friend of Ian Fleming (I hope you know at least who THAT is). McGlory fought a long lawsuit claiming that he should be granted the 007 film series rights because he helped create Bond. He got to finally make his Bond film and it sucked. "Never Say Never Again" got slammed by the real Bond film "Octopussy" in the same year, 1983. Get your damn facts straight before you mess around with hardcore 007 fans. Who's the idiot now?
What's your point? your just rambling on about nothing, that's your opinion which means didley. Everyone knows Connery is bond, "license to ill" you haven't figured that out yet? And no i never heard of that producer, but i have heard of the director, he did "Empire Strikes Back " so wise up and stop posting useless information.
Rambling on and on? Man, I'm the one with the facts (or as you call, "useless information"). Plus, you never heard of that other producer?!? YOU CALL YOURSELF A BOND FAN? Just get out of here, you're the one with the facts wrong! You are no Bond fan! Hell, you put a bad face on us REAL fans. Fans who know that this film sucks.
P.S. So what if Sean Connery is in it?!? And who gives a rats ass if he has the "license to kill?" Didn't you read my last post about this film not officially being a Bond film?!? "Goldfinger," "The Spy Who Loved Me," "The World is Not Enough," etc. those are REAL 007 films. "Never Say Never Again" falls into the same exact damn category as does the 1967 film "Casino Royale" (a comedy spoof of James Bond) starring Peter Sellers (or did YOU even know that there was a "Casino Royale" made long before the new one out now?!?). Look it up before you start your crap here dumb@$$! Don't even bother writng here again! This is for the haters of this crappy "movie!" NOT UNOFFICIAL BOND FILM FANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here's a proper excuse for a fight: should George Lazenby have agreed to make "Diamonds Are Forever", or did it deserve to be made with the bored, older-looking Sean Connery?
I must say that I think this entire line of conversation is ridiculous. Why argue with an idiot who doesn't even know who Ian Flemming is? I mean, its pointless! Its like telling someone with Alzheimers that they have Alzheimers. Why? They'll simply forget it the next day! Afish20 needs to stop harping on his "point" if he has one. I don' think he does. Maybe he's one of those people that starts stuff just for enjoyment. Either way, its stupid and he doesn't really know what he's talking about.
PS: We're not geeks, just so everyone knows. We just like good movies, and we're intelligent enough to know the difference between a good movie, and this one.
I know this conversation is ridiculous. I just want that so-called 007 fan to leave. That guy's a fan of this film, we are haters of it. This conversation is done. Now, for a new direction:
Question: Who do YOU think had the absolute worst acting in this film?
I can't agree. Sure it was campier than a "real bond flick" but it had great moments. I LOVED Fatimah Blush. Kim Basinger is a decent bond Girl and I loved Sean Connery even though he was Long past his prim in this flick.
Though I would have lived to see the "Entrapment" Connery or the "The Rock" Connery here. I think they should have kept the Original Theme song "Phylis Hymen's Never Say Never Again... Lain Hall's is only good for end credits- no one really watches them
Rowan Atkinson was just dumb in this they tried to ham it up. Artificial humour is always tacky but it still gets an 8 because it was better than OctoPussy
Has anyone seen the original "Casino Royale" with David Niven as a retired 007? or the American version "Casino Royal" (how's that for creativity? just change the European spelling)
I can't remember which of the 2 films Woody Allen was in, but come on!!!
The Worst Bond movie EVAR is the one with Woody Allen!!
(And, if you haven't noticed from my previous posts, I cannot stomach "THE LIVING DAYLIGHT"!)
This film has never felt like a real Bond film to me. Even if I didn't know the politics of it's making it feels different. Besides, Connery looks way too old to be believable and it's just overall cheesy. My least favorite Bond film. Sean WAS good but he should have hung it up.
Most fans of James Bond hate "Moonraker" because they believe the character does not belong in outer space, and that the film has too much in the way of slapstick and light-hearted moments.
But I rate it as Roger Moore's best Bond movie, and the most under-rated entry in the whole series - for crying out loud, it's better than "Die Another Day"!
Moonraker is better than a lot of Bond films, The Man With the Golden Gun, Die another Day and Never Say Never Again for some, but it still isn't in top rank either.
hey GrantZilla, the only way you could hate Moonraker is fi you were some kind of moron who thinks that the whole point of a James Bond film is to copy the Ian Fleming novels. Maybe a few die hards want to see that but the vast majority of the public wants relevant up-to-the-minute entertainment, not some dusty pretentious novel adaption by some mouldy old fogey.
The James Bond books bear little resemblance to the films, because the producers of the movies had good sense to see how ridiculous the premise was and to make their films into tongue-in-cheek semi-spoofs. Bond with Connery or Moore (the greatest) was at his best; unflappable, invulnerable, cool, charming, sauve, and without the faintest hint of self-doubt, anger, or 2emotion". Like the Batman TV show, it worked best when it was a simpler, more comic book style, adventure.
By the way, having seen Casino Royale, I must say that even NSNA is better than that piece of crap.
"Are you a professional bore, or is it just some kind of hobby?"
give me camp humour and indesctructive likeable superheroes over "tortured, troubled, dark" characters any day. If I wanted more than an escapist fantasy, i'd watch a serious film.
Neither the Bob Kane series nor the Ian Fleming novels would be anywhere nearly as prominent now had it not been for the Adam West Batman and the flambouyant Bond vehicles. Personally I didn't like Dr No, Goldfinger, or Thunderball as much as the bigger and funnier entries in the series. Batman Begins was a decent film ,second only to Batman and Robin in the Batman series (B&R being the closest in style to the West version)
CR really has only done well due to its marketing campaign, DAD was the previous record holder, and TWINE before that, they have all been similar successes but it gets bigger with tiem due to inflation and expanding cinema culture. Any film with such a marketing assault would do as well - look at crappy Batman 89 and all the money it made, that was like the most marketed film ever at the time.
"Are you a professional bore, or is it just some kind of hobby?"
Well the Batman series and B&R were amusing and watchable, throwaway adventures, far more watchable than Burton's "dark" and "troubled" version, which I found dull.
As for homoeroticism, there are some great homoerotic movies out there, usually action movies, which are so hilarious to watch, given they are pitched towards young men: Rambo Commando 1980s Rocky prety much anything starring Arnold Lethal Weapon Heartbreak Ridge Top Gun
Csaino Royale just could not fail to be hit which so much publicity, I highly doubt whether it had any less than DAD or any other Brosnan or Moore movie.
"Are you a professional bore, or is it just some kind of hobby?"