MovieChat Forums > pjl69 > Replies
pjl69's Replies
"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.
The chemistry between Ford and Connery was indeed one of the strong points. Nazis are also good bad guys, I welcomed them back after Temple of Doom misadventure. John Williams score. Those I liked. The one I didn't like was the young Indiana Jones adventure in the beginning. And making Brody (Denholm Elliot) a comic relief.
Raiders is the best of the series. It has an incredible cast and all around clever high quality film making that is probably wasted on regular/casual viewers. They don't make movies like that anymore, and probably haven't done much before either.
Funny thing that you brought up these two movies, because I've been long thinking that James Franco maybe would have made a very good Anakin, based on his performance in Spider-Man...
To your question, I have to answer true, because I don't even like Spider-Man.
"the overall consensus for the films in the Craig era like CR and Skyfall were good, which is why EON is still going to take that route for future films."
Actually I don't think there's a single route bond movies have taken during Craig era. The way I see it, there's Casino Royale (2006) and Quantum of Solace (2008) and then there's what became after them under the direction of Sam Mendes. EON had a good thing going on in 2006-2008, altough QoS wasn't well received among fans and critics. Maybe they got scared and forgot whole Quantum criminal organization. Skyfall was a decent stand alone movie (like Goldfinger between From Russia with Love and Thunderball when Bond used to fight against Spectre), but then came Spectre and they screwed up everything. Its my understanding that EON got rights back for Spectre and Blofeld, which made it possible for them to use them again in their movies. That was very unfortunate. I think Quantum was a good criminal organization and they should have continued with it in style of Casion Royale and Quantum of Solace. Now, what comes to No Time to Die, I'm not very enthusiastic about it, because it seems to continue Spectre storyline. I've seen every Bond movie in theater since Moonraker (1979), but its likely that I won't be seeing this one, which would break a long tradition for me. Most likely I'll catch this one on blu-ray... Its a shame, because I like very much Daniel Craig's Bond (in CR and QoS) and I think he deserves better.
Well there aren't too many examples left to make conclusions either way if those don't please you.
I prefer Quantum of solace over Skyfall, so I didn't list them, but I admit I'm in minority and can see why people may dislike QoS. Spectre was definately worse than Skyfall, I'll give you that.
"When has a lengthy delay ever resulted in a better Bond film?"
Almost every time:
The Man with the Golden Gun (1974) -> The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
Licence to Kill (1989) -> Goldeneye (1995)
Die Another Day (2002) -> Casino Royale (2006)
Of course its all very subjective.
Should have been 4 hours long with an intermission, like other biblical epics. Scott is an excellent director, but he tends to ruin his movies in editing stage.
Luckily it was made loong before Sharknados...
I do, I think its clearly the best of the prequels. I especially like the confusion that storm troopers start as seemingly good guys. Unfortunately Lucas' made it also a toy and game commercial, so its a mixed bag. After this I think I grew out of Star Wars and almost didn't bother seeing Revenge of the S*th in theater, because despite of promising premise, I was certain Lucas would screw it up somehow and I wasn't wrong. I know I'm in minority on this one, but I think Revenge of the S*th is the worst Star Wars movie (haven't seen The Rise of Skywalker). It could have been great, but it wasn't ment to be.
Munich is much better, altough Bridge of Spies is good too, but deserved a better ending...
2010 had an unthankfull job of being a sequel to Kubrick's hailed film. If you can look past that, 2010 stands on it's own feet just fine and is a great movie. Certainly career peak of the director, Peter Hyams. I especially like the clean tech future in the era when Alien, Star Wars and Blade Runner made old, rusty and dirty technology fashionable.
I'm not sure which one I prefer. 2010 is more entertaining and has more wow factor, but I'm just glad both movies got made.
Dirty Harry
The good, the bad and the Ugly
Firefox
Who's Beth?
He was the funniest thing in this movie. I read his character was based on John Milius.
Jim Morrison.
Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid and Little Shop of Horrors.
Star Wars (1977)
Alien (1979)
Not quite the best, but close. I think there are better movies:
The Empire Strikes Back
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Amadeus
Robocop
Die Hard
His role in Batman Begins was perfect for him.