As a teen, having just watched a few Sean Connery Bond films, I rented the Man with the Golden Gun with Roger Moore. Now, the Connery films do have their tongue in cheek aspects, but there’s a serious undertone to them for the most part. On the other hand, The Man with the Golden Gun was Bond at its campiest, not helped with scenes of the over the top J.W. Pepper; Christopher Lee was decent as the main villain though. But the music and attempts at comedy really sunk it for me. Really, it’s a miracle I ever watched any more of Moore’s Bond. Even if I had made a different choice, though, it'd have still have been jolting. Connery is hard-edged, while Moore is pretty unconvincing as a killer (I do like his commentary tracks on the more recent Bond DVD releases, though). My point, therefore, is, when sampling the Moore-era Bond for the first time, don’t do so right after watching a few Connery Bond movies.
Showing posts with label james bond. Show all posts
Showing posts with label james bond. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Review: Quantum of Solace
Quantum of Solace has a lot of the elements that comprise a great James Bond film: lots of action, beautiful women, beautiful locations, good one-liners. One area that it falls down a bit on a bit is the lack of gadgets. In fact it's M, not Bond who gets the best toy, a fancy computer. However, they rebooted the franchise with the previous movie, Casino Royale, so I imagine they'll get to the gadgets in the meantime.
One thing I do like about the new Bond is its stronger sense of internal continuity. You can probably enjoy most of the film without seeing Casino Royale, but there are certainly bits you'll enjoy more if you've seen that film (a character from the previous film is mentioned a fair bit). There's also a cute allusion to one of the most famous scenes in Goldfinger (since it's a reboot Bond doesn't comment on the parallels directly, but it's undoubtedly intentional). And there is a nice revenge subplot with Bond's most important allies.
In Casino Royale I thought Daniel Craig struggled a bit with Bond's more human side, but here I thought he handled that side of Bond better.
One nitpick I do have is that, even though the series has always played a bit fast and loose with the laws of physics, Bond should have at least been limping at one point (in the real world there would have been broken bones or death, but in Bond's universe, limping would suffice).
Overall though I thought it was a fun action movie. Now bring on the gadgets!
One thing I do like about the new Bond is its stronger sense of internal continuity. You can probably enjoy most of the film without seeing Casino Royale, but there are certainly bits you'll enjoy more if you've seen that film (a character from the previous film is mentioned a fair bit). There's also a cute allusion to one of the most famous scenes in Goldfinger (since it's a reboot Bond doesn't comment on the parallels directly, but it's undoubtedly intentional). And there is a nice revenge subplot with Bond's most important allies.
In Casino Royale I thought Daniel Craig struggled a bit with Bond's more human side, but here I thought he handled that side of Bond better.
One nitpick I do have is that, even though the series has always played a bit fast and loose with the laws of physics, Bond should have at least been limping at one point (in the real world there would have been broken bones or death, but in Bond's universe, limping would suffice).
Overall though I thought it was a fun action movie. Now bring on the gadgets!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)