SPECTRE - Bond 24

[Shryke]

Daniel Craig is definitely the best Bond, but let's not overstate things either.

Connery was also a great a Bond, and with the exception of Thunderball, which was crazy boring, and Dr. No, where they were still figuring out what they had here, all his movies were a lot of fun.

Lazenby was a bad Bond, but the rest of On Her Majesty's Secret Service was really good; especially Diana Rigg.

Moore was awful and let's never speak of him.

Dalton was too serious, but The Living Daylights was still really good and his seriousness worked there; License to Kill was horrible.

Brosnan was in one great movie (Goldeneye), the worst movie in the series (Die Another Day), and two middling but perfectly acceptable movies.

Overall, the pre-Craig series was batting right around .500, which is better than Star Wars (I'd don't like RotJ much). And Craig's movies have more in common with the rest of the series than people usually credit them with. Bond movies have always reflected what other popular action movies of the time are doing, which is why Craig's are serious and realistic(ish); they're trying to be the Bourne series. As soon as a different formula proves to be the most popular, Bond will change to that. Its what the series always does, and there's nothing so special about the current movies that they should be separated out from the previous ones.

I disagree. Pre-Craig Bonds are alot of fun, but they feel fairly hollow for the most part. They are all style action flicks with nothing much to say. Craig's Bonds are just great movies all around. They are actually interested in crafting a story about this character and having something to say about him.

It's not that the old ones are necessarily bad, it's that they just aren't on the same level. They style change isn't what makes them better, it's the substance beneath that.

Also, Quantum of Solace is deeply underrated.

Agreed there. I will never understand the dislike for this film. Watching it again last year, I thought it was fantastic.

Talking to some people, I get the sense alot of the dislike is because the film does not hold your hand at all on any plot or character points and the villains plot is so realistic as to apparently hit some sort of uncanny valley where people don't like it anymore.

[Shryke]

I don't understand all the Roger Moore hate here. As a child of the 70's, Roger Moore was James Bond for me. He did an outstanding job with the character, and some of his movies were the best of the series. My favorite villain comes from the Roger Moore days as well. Richard Kiel played Jaws and was amazing in that role.

Also, though I like Craig a lot, he is certainly not the best Bond. That would without question go to Connery.

They are corny as hell. Moore's era is the apex of everything that Casino Royale shat on while doing it's reboot.

[aceluby]

Out of all the Craig films, QoS is my favorite of the three. And I agree that Craig has been the most fleshed out Bond from a character perspective. I get all kinds of crap when I say Craig is the best that it's weird to come to this board and have so many agree. Almost nobody agrees, lol.

[KiDisaster]

Craig is my second favorite of the Bonds. I'll just always enjoy Connery the most, watching his Bond movies with my dad as a kid just set the bar for me.

Brosnan is my generation's Bond but he's actually my least favorite of all of them.

[Howdyphillip]

They are corny as hell. Moore's era is the apex of everything that Casino Royale shat on while doing it's reboot.

What you say is corny, I say is suave. Roger Moore gave a swagger to Bond that we hadn't seen before. It also firmly planted him as an elitist. These are different times, and we don't tend to use these kinds of people as role models anymore, but when they were released, Roger Moore's Bond was an aspiration for people.

[Fez]

What you say is corny, I say is suave. Roger Moore gave a swagger to Bond that we hadn't seen before. It also firmly planted him as an elitist. These are different times, and we don't tend to use these kinds of people as role models anymore, but when they were released, Roger Moore's Bond was an aspiration for people.

Roger Moore's Bond.

No thanks.

[Shryke]

What you say is corny, I say is suave. Roger Moore gave a swagger to Bond that we hadn't seen before. It also firmly planted him as an elitist. These are different times, and we don't tend to use these kinds of people as role models anymore, but when they were released, Roger Moore's Bond was an aspiration for people.

I'm not sure you understand what the word corny means or is being referred to when people use the term wrt Bond movies.

[Rhom]

I'm not sure you understand what the word corny means or is being referred to when people use the term wrt Bond movies.

:agree:

Setting up one of the most epic car stunts ever filmed... a legit barrel roll jumping over a canal and landing on all four tires... then in post production overlaying a slide whistle sound effect. That's corny. Also a travesty.

[Howdyphillip]

:agree:

Setting up one of the most epic car stunts ever filmed... a legit barrel roll jumping over a canal and landing on all four tires... then in post production overlaying a slide whistle sound effect. That's corny. Also a travesty.

Can you explain to me how any of this is Roger Moore's responsibility and how he was cheesy? If the charisma of Roger Moore wasn't present to carry these movies, Bond would have died out long before Daniel Craig ever sniffed the role.

Also, I don't think the tongue in cheek antics that both Moore and Brosnan displayed made for bad movies at all. Some of the most successful movies in this 50 year franchise had more than their share of them.

[Shryke]

Can you explain to me how any of this is Roger Moore's responsibility and how he was cheesy? If the charisma of Roger Moore wasn't present to carry these movies, Bond would have died out long before Daniel Craig ever sniffed the role.

Also, I don't think the tongue in cheek antics that both Moore and Brosnan displayed made for bad movies at all. Some of the most successful movies in this 50 year franchise had more than their share of them.

I think you are missing that people are talking about Moore's movies. Not just Moore himself.

[Howdyphillip]

I think you are missing that people are talking about Moore's movies. Not just Moore himself.

Well, if you are complaining about unrealistic events happening in Bond movies, I will say that isn't just limited to Roger Moore films. Have you guys even seen Thunderball? (My favorite Bond movie by the way)

[Shryke]

Well, if you are complaining about unrealistic events happening in Bond movies, I will say that isn't just limited to Roger Moore films. Have you guys even seen Thunderball? (My favorite Bond movie by the way)

/sigh

You asked why Moore gets alot of hate. It's because his movies are shit and cheesy as hell. It's awful.

If you like that kind of thing, I guess you'll like those movies. But there's a huge group of people who don't. They are the people who loved Casino Royale in large part for ditching the cheese the series had descended in to.

[Howdyphillip]

/sigh

You asked why Moore gets alot of hate. It's because his movies are shit and cheesy as hell. It's awful.

If you like that kind of thing, I guess you'll like those movies. But there's a huge group of people who don't. They are the people who loved Casino Royale in large part for ditching the cheese the series had descended in to.

To be fair, there are probably a lot more people that look back upon those movies with fondness and nostalgia than with contempt and scorn.

I am certainly glad that you liked Casino Royale. I liked it a lot as well, but I also happen to be a Bond fan that likes the vast majority of the movies put out in this franchise.

Also, I don't think that Roger Moore brought more cheese to the series than was already firmly established by the Sean Connery films. He just brought a vastly different take of the character.

[Shryke]

To be fair, there are probably a lot more people that look back upon those movies with fondness and nostalgia than with contempt and scorn.

I am certainly glad that you liked Casino Royale. I liked it a lot as well, but I also happen to be a Bond fan that likes the vast majority of the movies put out in this franchise.

The success of CR would suggest otherwise. They felt the need to reboot the series' feel for a reason. Hell, they tried to do the same with Goldeneye years earlier for the same reason.

As fondly as many look back on those films, there were huge swaths of people who both liked the old films and hated the old films who wanted something that wasn't cheddary. More then liked the old style it would seem from the reception. Cause the voices complaining about the change in style are a distinct minority.

Also, I don't think that Roger Moore brought more cheese to the series than was already firmly established by the Sean Connery films. He just brought a vastly different take of the character.

No, Moore's movies brought the cheese way harder then Connery ever did. I mean, Connery's films got a bit cheesier towards the end, but nothing like Moore's oeuvre. Slide-whistles, inflating people, crying clowns, jaws, it's all ridiculous.

[Fez]

Also, I don't think that Roger Moore brought more cheese to the series than was already firmly established by the Sean Connery films. He just brought a vastly different take of the character.

Except for the one-liners, Connery wasn't cheesy, he was suave, dangerous, and more than a bit rape-y.

[Jaxom 1974]

I think it's more that the Moore films took a certain irreverence to the franchise. It wasn't that it was campy, maybe it was, but they also seemed to take on a bit of the personality of the times they were bring made.

[ants]

Is there really that big a difference in how the Craig films compare to Goldeneye and The World is not Enough?

[Veltigar]

Is there really that big a difference in how the Craig films compare to Goldeneye and The World is not Enough?

No Robbie Coltrane, that's a huge difference!

[Peregrinus]

I was a real bond fanatic in my early teens, I read most of the books and have seen all of the movie. I tried going back to the books recently and couldn't do it. They seem awfully stilted to me now.

I've loved the Daniel Craig reboots, he is the perfect Bond in my mind. Growing up, I didn't have a favourite.

I hope that the writers get a chance to flesh out their original plans for QUANTUM. They seem like interesting villains in the vein of SMERSH.

Also, Bond timeline has never made any sense. Best pretend it doesn't exist.

[williamjm]

Agreed there. I will never understand the dislike for this film. Watching it again last year, I thought it was fantastic.

Talking to some people, I get the sense alot of the dislike is because the film does not hold your hand at all on any plot or character points and the villains plot is so realistic as to apparently hit some sort of uncanny valley where people don't like it anymore.

I think maybe the reason it gets a lot of negativity is that it's probably the least Bond-like of the Bond films, in many ways it feels closer to the Bourne films than Bond. I agree it's under-rated, I don't like it as much as Craig's other two films but it's a good action film.