bond hasnt been the same
since the 80s
its just true
The Living Daylights is the last genuinely good Bond film that has been released. In all of the other films since then, I can only enjoy parts of them. None of them are worth watching in their entirety.
LTK is garbage other than a few action scenes.
GE is pure trash with a story that makes no sense with maybe only one or two good scenes.
TND is good for the first half or so and then it rapidly deteriorates.
TWINE could have been decent but it has almost no redeeming qualities, and again the story makes no sense.
DAD is good for the first hour and 15 minutes before it rapidly deteriorates.
CR is okay for the most part, but I hate Craig's acting performance and the entire third act of the film (post-torture scene).
QoS is Craig's best film but it still has too many weak moments, but I feel like they were actually on to something in this one, but unfortunately they flushed it down the toilet for ShitFall.
SF and Spectre are the two worst Bond films ever made.
The last 30 years of Bond have been awful. I love the 80's films outside of LTK. John Glen was the perfect director for Bond. The 80's really got Bond back on track after some disappointing films in the 70's.
Since LTK is such a big change for the series in terms of atmosphere and feel, The Living Daylights feels even more like a classic Bond film. I love Goldeneye, maybe a tad bit overrated because its the first one I saw in theaters and the its the first one after the hiatus.
I think Brosnan gets a bad wrap as Bond, especially by Craig fan boys. His movies were bad, but you came blame Puris & Wade, Roger Spottiswod, Apnew, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson for that. His Bond was fine, he acted and looked like James Bond should.
The movies were bad but they felt like Bond movies. Die Another Day in 2002 was the last time we had a Bond movie that felt like one, all of Craig's are just generic action, Bourne ripoffs.
It is crazy to think, going back 40 years to 1980, there have only been three really great Bond movies released, with a couple other good ones imo.
Brosnan's Bonds seemed to move towards camp comedy with each entry. By the last one, we were were all the way into Roger Moore 70s Bond territory, with the invisible car and all that nonsense.
shareThe film version of Bond does interject humor into the movies. The problem is it can get over the top, as it did a times in the Moore era. Regarding Die Another Day, even Moore said they went too far with the invisible car, lol. The wind surfing CGI was a bigger issue or Hale Berry saying, yo moma.
The literature version of Bond, where he beats women and get so drunk he can barely stand up, wouldn't have sold even back in 1962, hence the added humor and suaveness.
And in Moore's first Bond movie, he blows up Yaphet Kotto like a balloon, causing him to fly to the ceiling and explode, LOL. When Moore says you've gone too far, it's probably true.
Yeah, Bond was kind of a savage in the books. It's kind of a balancing act, with Bond films. You want some humor and no one is expecting strict realism from them, but at the same time you don't want to "nuke the fridge". I like most of the movies, even the more comical ones. I do prefer Bonds like The Living Daylights and For Your Eyes Only, that didn't play just about everything as comedy, though.
The Living Daylights is my favourite Bond film. It's a pure classic, and Dalton is perfect as Bond. LTK was a huge disappointment, and it's strange that even though Dalton is probably my favourite Bond, he is only in one single film that I actually like.
Brosnan was mediocre in the role. I think he finally got good at it in DAD, but unfortunately that was the end for him, so we don't know if he could have had another good performance in him. Although I still dislike the second half of DAD outside of a few short scenes, I appreciate the film a lot more in retrospect because it is truly the last normal and proper Bond film that has been made, and it's hard to believe that's it's been nearly 20 years of deconstructionist pretentious art film Bond since then. DAD might not be very good, but it is now a classic, perhaps only because we are forced to grasp at any small redeeming qualities because we are so starved for a proper Bond film.
Purvis and Wade have clearly had some decent ideas, but they've never written a good complete script from beginning to end. I was re-watching TWINE recently which I loathe, and it was a little better than I remembered (still in the bottom third overall), and I just thought it could have actually been good if they gave Renard a larger role in the story and got rid of the ridiculous M. Night Shyamalan-style twist with King's character. Apparently we're supposed to believe that she puts herself in a situation where she could easily be killed by those paratroopers if Bond doesn't succeed in saving her. I also hate the actress and think she's kind of ugly. The action scenes and cinematography are also dreadful. They also missed a great opportunity to have Bond pick up the walkie after killing King and talking to Renard before escalating into the final scene on the sub. I am still baffled as to why Renard is confused and doesn't believe Bond that King is dead when he obviously would have heard a gunshot on the walkie.
Dalton got roasted back in the day because audiences didn't accept him after a decade plus of Moore. I wish he got to do more Bond films. I always see the ideas they float around for his third Bond movie with the story taking place in Hong Kong with nano technology. Parts of Goldeneye were taken from that script and as we know GE was written with Dalton in mind.
Dalton could pull of a serious Bond while still being in a Bond movie, something Craig could never achieve. Dalton would have been perfect for today...
Die Another Day is actually a dark movie for the first hour. James Bond getting tortured and gets abandoned by MI6, then gets his 00 status revoked. Its actually a good movie until they get to the ice palace, then all the CGI driven, invisible car hell breaks loose.
Pierce wanted to do a serious, dark Bond for Casino Royale, but with a reboot I understand why they had to go with a new Bond.
As you said, it's appalling that in 40 years there's been only a handful of good films.
share"Since LTK is such a big change for the series in terms of atmosphere and feel, The Living Daylights feels even more like a classic Bond film."
Not saying, that I'd agree Living Daylights being the latest good Bond film, but its maybe worth noting that it was composer John Barry's last Bond film. Is this just a coincidence? After that Bond film soundtracks have not been the same. Michael Kamen did Licence to Kill, then came Eric Serra's experimental score in Goldeneye and after that David Arnold took over (his best work being Casino Royale, the rest is quite generic action stuff). Sam Mendes brought Thomas Newman with him for Skyfall and Spectre, which resulted nothing to write home about. Maybe this has something to do with "Bond feeling" of the movies... There's been other good composers doing Bond scores in the past, but I think John Barry was quite essential part of it all, adding that final spark of magic.
Regarding John Barry, very true.
shareBarry's absence is certainly part of the declining quality of the films, but there are other composers like Conti who made something completely original that worked very well despite being radically different than the typical Barry score. Arnold is too much of an imitator, and his scores are okay but mostly forgettable. I'm not very optimistic about what Zimmer will create for NTTD.
shareYes, Conti's For your eyes only is one my favourite Bond scores, altough there are people who dislike the disco sound. Marvin Hamlisch (The Spy Who Loved Me) and George Martin (Live and Let Die) are also very good. Hans Zimmer doing the next score is probably the most interesting aspect of the upcoming movie, to me at least. I'm a fan of his.
shareI agree. The Daniel Craig era feels more like Jason Bourne than James Bond tbh.
share