posted
Well, that's kinda unfair since Lazenby was only in the one Bond film, don't you think? Not a whole lot of material to compare the others with.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
How you can rate TND below TWINE is illogical and senseless. For that matter, how you can rate any of the Brosnan films above GoldenEye is just pure Omegadity.
posted
Now pay attention, Snay. I never rated any Bond film higher than Goldeneye. It is my favorite Bond film (along with Goldfinger.) And, only a fool would consider TND better than TWINE. Why, the villian's plot wouldn't even work: if he started a war to launch his network, there would be no commercials for awhile, so... no money.
quote:if he started a war to launch his network, there would be no commercials for awhile, so... no money.
Key word ... "For a while" ... but once that "while" ended, he'd have a complete monopoly and he'd be all set. Besides, he's a pretty wealthy guy -- look at all the cool toys he got. He can afford no 'Johnsons & Johnsons' Baby Shampoo' commercials for a few months or even years, I'd say. Besides, as we saw early in the film, the dude was the Bill Gates of the Bond universe -- or did you forget he told one of his goons to release the bugged software?
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
After spending some quality time in meditation on the rankings, I have come to a suitable conclusion.
From Best to Worst, here they are: 1. George Lazenby 2. Roger Moore 3. Timothy Dalton 4. Sean Connery 5. Pierce Brosnan
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Your taste in Bond Actors = Jeff's taste in films.
Unless you meant "from worst to best"?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Nope. I meant from Best to Worst. That's what I wrote.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
1. Sean Connery: He embodies and epitomizes James Bond 007. Though the part of James Bond does not often require much "range" from an actor, he exuded the coolness and deadliness of a sauve spy who would make love to you, then kill you, and Connery did that just by standing around and "being Bond." Also, in my opinion, Sean Connery is the most accomplished "Bond" actor outside of his Bond role.
2. (tie) Pierce Brosnan, Timothy Dalton: Like Sean Connery (and Roger Moore) Pierce Brosnan, for lack of a better term, exudes (a certain kind of) "Bondness." Regardless of one's opinion of his acting range and/or skills, he has become undeniably associated with the role, and he will go down in history as an "important" Bond actor. Personally, I think he is a pretty good actor, and I cringe at the thought of Roger Moore attempting to act out the emotional scenes that Brosnan has helped introduce to the past few Bond movies. Likewise, Timothy Dalton is also a pretty good actor, though I do not consider "his Bond" iconic. His performances, however, were fairly faultless, whether or not you liked his version of Our Man.
4. Roger Moore: In his own words: "My acting range runs the gamut from A to B."
5. George Lazenby: Above, I put "worst" in quotation marks because I do not consider Lazenby's performance to be bad. Considering that he was a model with no acting experience, I think he performed rather well. Again, picture Roger Moore trying to act out the emotional scenes. That said, "Lazenby's Bond" is utterly forgettable and uniconic.
[ December 11, 2001: Message edited by: Raw Cadet ]
posted
I tend to tie Connery and Brosnan. Connery was a great Bond when he played the part. Brosnan is a great "modern" Bond.
Both Brosnan and Connery had that great, cool, calm wit.
Dalton was wooden. I remember seeing one of his films a little while ago...I think it was License To Kill... I almost didn't make it through. He just seemed so emotionless. Just didn't work for me.
quote:Originally posted by Veers: And, only a fool would consider TND better than TWINE. Why, the villian's plot wouldn't even work: if he started a war to launch his network, there would be no commercials for awhile, so... no money.
I agree. In my opinion, the conflict Carver intended to start would have either developed into a brief exchange, perhaps numbered in hours, or World War III. Indeed, the former seemed to be part of Carver's plan since he indicated his Chinese collaborator would sue for peace as soon as Beijing was bombed. If so, how profitable would the few COMMERCIAL-LESS "Special Reports" that would likely comprise the coverage be? At least they would be more profitable than if the conflict turned into World War III . . .
Carver's only real profit would come from his exlcusive Chinese broadcast rights, assuming General Chang lived up to his end of the bargain. Plot problems aside, "Tomorrow Never Dies" also suffers from too few and rather unexotic locales, which they do not even show the local color of (Hamburg--ooh, that's exotic; and the Far Eastern locales just cover territory seen (better) in "The Man With the Golden Gun"), too few outfits (only two suits), and too many retreads: a megalomaniac (at least his motive was greed), a thuggish aryan henchman (see: Donald "Red" Grant, Vargas, Hans, Gunther, some guy from "For Your Eyes Only," and some guy from "The Living Daylights"), a car (though setting the chase in a parking garage/car park was inspired, in my opinion), etc. "Tomorrow Never Dies" is a high-tech, lavish movie with excellent action sequences, but, in my opinion, only a middling Bond movie.
[ December 11, 2001: Message edited by: Raw Cadet ]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
