It Simply Isn't a Bond Film

[deleted]

It feels more like a Die Hard movie than Bond - Bond trolls the drug empiren in the same way that McClane might (although McClane was less intelligent). Because it switched from John Barry to Michael Kamen for the soundtrack, it also sounds like Die Hard in places. Those little guitar string twangs that play over certain happenings show up like in Die Hard as well.

[deleted]

Ive been going through and watching all of the bonds, as I was too young for any of them before the end of Brosnan era. This is one of my favorites. It lends the series a unique feel and doesnt rehash whats been done previously. I wish they would have had Dalton replace Moore years before they did.

I honestly couldn't disagree with you more. Dalton is indeed a wonderful 007 and Licence to Kill is a James Bond film that stands out from the norm of what came before with the exception of The Living Daylights. Roger Moore's tenure as Bond was way too long and his films became more and more campy and unbelievable. Ian Fleming wrote the character of James Bond as a ruthless, sexist killer who puts England before anything else. Dalton is a refreshing return of the days of Connery with his own twist. Licence to Kill breaks the mold, yes, but it is a very personal story that we've never seen before. This is a Bond that is let go from MI6 and works on his own ingenuity. Regarding your statement about there not being a franchise if Dalton starred in Dr. No; I would disagree. If Roger Moore were to star in Dr. No, I couldn't see there being a franchise after a sequel. The Bond films of the 80s became very formulaic and general, but The Living Daylights was the beginning of a change that not many were ready for.

People complain about the drug dealing plot, but isn't that the same as what LIVE AND LET DIE was about in '73 with Roger Moore ? And that film was super successful at the time. Maybe because it had more colorful characters than LTK ?

That's why it's my favorite Bond.

http://www.agonybooth.com/licence-to-kill-1989-57543

But just as Moonraker was accused of going overboard with the lightheartedness, many fans (myself included) thought that Licence went overboard in its attempts to be more mundane. By doing so, it comes across as downright boring in some scenes, and “boring” is something Moonraker cannot be accused of. Both Davi and Del Toro make fine villains, but the movie doesn’t seem to pick up the speed you think it would once Bond resigns and goes out on his own. I appreciate that the story is set into motion because of Bond’s friendship with Felix, which makes the viewers believe that it will lead to a nerve-jolting climatic confrontation between Bond and Sanchez (a la the fight between Bond and Grant in From Russia with Love). But no, said fight scene just consists of Bond whipping out a gadget that wasn’t supplied by Q and the villain quickly becomes charcoal.

What staggers me, however, is that those fans who love this film insist that it’s the closest to Fleming’s Bond. But as someone who’s read each book in that series more than once, I find it hard to agree with that sentiment. Not once did I imagine Bond to be as intense as Dalton plays him in either of his Bond outings. Now, before anyone says, “He’s closer to the books than Moore’s Bond,” as I once noted, both Connery and Moore gave the character a carefree aspect that I didn’t see in the books, which helped the film series become the great success it did. I can also say with 100% certainty that Bond never once frenched his BFF’s bride on her wedding day in any of the books.