Of all the Brosnan sequels. This is probably the best one. I know that's not saying much, but still.
shareI don't think that Tomorrow Never Dies is as bad as Pierce Brosnan's next two Bond movies (the one with Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist and the one with the cheesy CGI tidal wave). Maybe TND gets a bad rap because it isn't exactly as "deep" or complex as maybe some would like their Bond movies. It was just a fast past, high-octane action movie (it's probably the closest Bond movie to something along the lines of '80s, one man army, "shoot 'em up" movies like Commando or Rambo: First Blood Part II) that just wanted to go from A to B and keep you entertained. Unlike Brosnan's latter Bond movies, TND seemed to have a better grasp of what it was trying to be, which was throwback to the more comic book like Bond movies like You Only Live Twice or The Spy Who Loved Me.
sharethe one with Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist and the one with the cheesy CGI tidal wave
The problem with the tidal wave besides how bad the effects looked was that the Bond franchise (at least dating back to the Roger Moore years) always prided itself on the stunt-work being all done practically. For example, as insane as the free-fall stunt in the pre-credits teaser for Moonraker or the car doing the cork-screw flip in The Man With the Golden Gun, we immediately bought them because they were done for real and in camera. And you're really building a slippery slope if you're telling me that I might as well complain about other ludicrous elements in the Bond franchise, if I'm not allowed to criticize the CGI effects in Die Another Day.
Also, nobody ever said that a scientist can't be "good-looking" (don't put words in my mouth). The point is that can she be convincing to the point that I can legitimately believe this person as being an expert in that stuff. Quite frankly, I don't think that the chick from Wild Things is immediately who I would imagine as an expert in nuclear physics.
Okay, sorry for mistaking what you meant on both counts.
I don't remember how bad (or good) the CGI was in that iceberg tsunami scene, but Bond surfing the wave was certainly eye-rolling. Yet so were myriad other Bond action sequences throughout the years, like the opening of "Goldeneye" where 007 is able to get into the cockpit of a plane and save himself while freefalling from a high cliff. Why Sure! I guess it just goes to show that James Bond is basically a superhero minus a gaudy costume.
That tsunami scene was put together two decades ago so maybe we should have mercy with the CGI (although I'm presuming you think it was bad even for 2001 when it was made).
Speaking of which, as you well know the advent of CGI changed things forever as far as action pictures and historical epics go. We can pretty much kiss goodbye a lot of practical stunts and hundreds of extras, etc., as they are no longer necessary in the eyes of producers.
I'll give "The World is Not Enough" a fresh watch in a couple days to see how convincing or not convincing Denise Richards was in the role, but point taken.
[deleted]
I thought I was the only one who couldn't understand the hype with GE. This is my fav Brosnan one as well.
shareIdk but I enjoyed it a lot
shareI would say this is the best Brosnan sequel. Its an okay movie. Pierce's movies got worse and worse as his Bond career went on
shareI don't get it either. I always thought this was a fun movie and an adequate follow up to Goldeneye, though I don't find it quite as good as that one. I thought Jonathan Pryce made an interesting and believable villain, whose motivations and master plan made perfect sense for the time the movie came out. There were a lot of villainous media mogul type tycoons in the 90's and still are.
shareI think that Bond reviewer on YouTube(the reviewer makes only Bond related videos by the dozens, always in a white tux, he's pretty good), ranks all the Bond movies and he ranks Tomorrow Never Dies pretty high.
share[deleted]
Dialogue is terrible.
share