September 9
Bit of admin; villainous pairs
0 voters
0 voters
0 voters
0 voters
I said Klebb, but wasn’t it Kronsteen’s plan? Klebb was right she points out he forgot he was “dealing with Bond!”
It’s difficult to decide who’s the main vilain in FRWL, basically they are all Blofeld’s henchmen/women and they are all acting on his behalf. Klepp is probably the most important and has some authority, but she must also obey him completely. So I say it’s Blofeld, not Klepp, Grant, or Kronsteen.
I think Craig had the best debut and conclusion for a Bond so far. OHMSS is a fine movie but almost doesn’t feel like a debut because it stands alone and leads nowhere as an era, despite it being so integral to the fabric of Bond’s personality. I still like GE, but also think TND would’ve been a fine introduction for Brosnan as well. Especially since they used another delayed reveal for him during the arms bazaar pre-title sequence.
It depends on who’s the one doing the job, the one who confronted Bond the most, some villains do work only in the background, so are they main villains? No, because it’s mostly on the exposure.
A.) For that case, I’d say, Klebb, because sure, she received orders from Blofeld, but she’s still the one who had put a threat in the film, Red Grant was a henchman, because he’s being controlled by Klebb, Kronsteen doesn’t have that much of an exposure in the film, he had a little role (although, he’s the one who had set the plan up), but compared to Klebb, he’s not that much essential, some may argue it’s Blofeld, but he’s mostly in the background alone, so who’s the one doing it all? It’s all down to Rosa Klebb.
B.) In Octopussy, it’s Kamal Khan, same statement as with From Russia With Love, who’s the central person of the plot? But that’s not to say General Orlov is a henchman, he’s not, but a sub villain, he’s a villain in the film, but mostly a minor one, not a minion of Khan’s, he’s different from Khan, but he’s not the central villain of the plot, he’s not Bond’s focus in the film, and Khan had the most exposure.
With Orlov, just like his plan or his plot, it’s mostly a subplot, a minor one, like in a food, an appetizer, not the main dish, which was Kamal Khan.
C.) In The Living Daylights, I think it’s the same as with Octopussy, Koskov was more of a minor villain, a side villain, along with the main villain who’s Whittaker, it depends on Bond’s focus, which of these two was the most focus of Bond more? Which of these two was the one he’s really after? It is Whittaker, right? His plot is more bigger than the one with Koskov, meanwhile, Koskov’s plot was a sub one, because it mostly revolved around his connection/relationship with Kara that involves Bond, but not the central focus of the film.
D.) And in No Time To Die, is M really considered a villain? For me, it’s more like a mistake at M’s part, a result of his carelessness, so, is he a villain? No, I consider M as a victim of himself, of his own move.
If any, I expect Blofeld to be the one competing with Safin, but like in the other three (FRWL, OP and TLD), it’s mostly the same, of course, it’s Safin, as he’s the main focus of the film, the central one.
This is what boggles some people, especially when it comes to The World Is Not Enough, who’s really the main villain in there? Elektra or Renard? Now, I’d liked to hear the side of the people in here.
September 10
OK then, a postscript to the one above
The World is Not Enough - main villain?
0 voters
Renard is a henchman, smitten by Elektra who - as every main villain - has the ideas and makes others carry them out.
September 11
As last times round go…
0 voters
But I wish I could also vote for DAF!!!
If considering a missed opportunity, Diamonds Are Forever would be my go-to, since, it committed a sin of going into different direction after the cliffhanger ending of OHMSS and not giving that ending a closure and resolution (not just for Tracy, but also for Blofeld).
But if considering the quality and effect it had on the audiences like me, it would be No Time To Die, the effect of that film for me is more tragic and painful than how DAF sneaked away the revenge sequel, because yes, there’s the injury that’s already done, but NTTD revived that injury by retconning the OHMSS motifs, putting the Bond and Tracy romance into Bond and Madeleine’s relationship which kinda hurt me, the film felt like it pretended to endorse itself as the new OHMSS and forget the original one, no, it’s not Bond’s death that hurt, I don’t mind it to be honest, but it’s the use of the Bond and Tracy romance as a bait to attract emotional responses, which for me are spoon fed
What is more insulting than lazily putting the “We Have All The Time In The World” in Bond and Madeleine’s romance?
My love for OHMSS makes me dislike both of these films.
The other three are just fine and never offended an audience (and Bond fan) like me, like how DAF and NTTD did.
The history of the Bond franchise is going in different direction with great frequency.
What ending does Tracy need? She’s dead.
As for Blofeld, DAF is a film of indeterminacy, not just in terms of plot, but in terms of who gets to play Bond. Blofeld may be left hanging in midair, but then so much of the film is (designed) that way, including the ending.
I’ve always said that NTTD homages a film that in no reality it could co-exist with - so at that moment it’s a film that wins the “most meta” Bond film competition - IMHO a 3-way battle with DAD and DAF, all films attempting to comment on a series from a distance that their existence as part of a series does not allow.
Now there’s a post that’s “meta” if there ever was one.
As for the actual topic, I voted for NTTD as it’s an ending for both tenure and character (a number of characters, to be fair - as an aside it would have been fitting if M had bitten it but what does it say about MI6 losing that many Ms in a short space of time…), a feat of drama that none of the others could hang their hat on.
Personally speaking, I can never get enough of LTK, but that’s me for you… 
As films NTTD and LTK are the best. From a thematic point of view I think NTTD and NSNA are the best. They were both made knowing their star was returning for the last time and their endings are definitive and contrasting. They provide the only two outcomes for Bond - death or permanent retirement.
That said, I think LTK also could’ve served as a good conclusion to the entire franchise. Especially at the time Bond going rogue felt so different to what came before, and allowed the focus to be firmly on Bond and his values. Walking away from everything in the pursuit of justice and honouring his friends is definitely climactic.
Of the others I feel like DAD wraps up the Brosnan era in a way that suggests completion, even though it wasn’t intended. DAF has an interesting purgatory thing going on, while the AVTAK shower sequence doesn’t do anything for me. They really should’ve assumed it was Moore’s last at his age and given him something else.
This one has to go to NTTD, as it’s the only one that’s really approached as a deliberate and intentional “last time around.”
Yes, DAD can be interpreted as an extended valedictory “homage” to earlier entries, but that reading is blunted by the fact that Brosnan’s entire tenure is a prolonged homage to earlier films. In that respect it’s just par for the course (if the “course” is 18 holes of miniature golf with ridiculously over-engineered windmills and neon loop-de-loops). There’s no “grand goodbye” element to it; certainly it came as a surprise to Brozza that it was his farewell performance, as it did to most of us, and even his biggest fans would agree there could have been a much better note to end on.
LTK has its merits and its champions but again doesn’t feel like a goodbye at all. It feels like a solid sophomore effort building up to an awesome third entry that never got to happen. Dalton never got a goodbye, and LTK does not satisfy on that level.
Arguably everyone involved in AVTAK must have known it was Roger’s swan song, but nothing’s really done with that knowledge: FYEO makes more hay of the passage of time and OP feels more like a “victory lap/transition to retirement.” Either would have been a superior exit point. In AVTAK, the “last go round” aspect is the elephant in the room: everyone is laboriously pretending that it’s business as usual and that Roger’s the same young buck he was in LALD. For his part, Roger looks like he’d rather be at home in his recliner.
DAF doesn’t feel like a goodbye, either. Depending on your point of view, it’s an apology for OHMSS, a 70s reunion movie for a series and star that peaked in the 60s or the pilot episode for a reengineered 70’s Bond (new and improved, now with more humor and wider lapels). It’s a callback, a new beginning and a one-off pit stop between Laz and Moore, but it’s not a goodbye. For one thing, it’s not even Connery’s last go at the role.
No, this one has to go to NTTD, the only film where the writers, producers, director, star and cast all knew it was a “goodbye.” The others left us either wishing our guy had gotten one more inning to get a proper goodbye, or wishing our guy had had the good sense to step away one film earlier. Mind you I’m not claiming NTTD beats the other contenders in any other category, but it has to win as a “goodbye.”
September 12
“Third is best”. Thirds. Best?
0 voters
Voting for Skyfall, I think it’s the best of this round.
Skyfall very much perfected everything that the other competitors in this round failed to do (great characters, great acting and performances, big role for Bond and the other characters, interesting and emotionally affecting storyline, great direction, excellent aspects of filmmaking like the cinematography, it’s just a perfect third Bond film).
The others are iconic, but in terms of deep quality, it’s not on par with Skyfall, so here are my opinions regarding the other competitors in this round:
Okay, so let’s start with the obvious one, Goldfinger, I think this film pretty much introduced all the iconic elements that the Bond films would be later known for, it would be a neck to neck battle with Skyfall if not for one thing: lack of competency in Bond’s role.
It’s almost a film that worked in different styles like fun, cinematic quality and almost everything, even the characters are really a delight to watch, but one big stain is really keeping it from being up, and it’s the most essential one, that to have your protagonist almost do nothing in the film could really brought down a great film, Bond was held captive in the film, he almost did nothing and even failed to deactivate a bomb, he’s pretty much incompetent in this film, he’s only use? To turn Pussy Galore into the good side after forcing her in that barn.
Next, The Spy Who Loved Me, another iconic Bond film, but lacking in quality, it might be subjective, or just might be only me, or some minor camps out there, but here are my opinions regarding the marks that this film failed to tick:
First of all was the poorly written characters, none of them are interesting and strong characters in my view: Stromberg? The man who just sits on his chair commanding his minions to do the work? Well he did that in the whole film, he’s not an interesting villain, lacking of personality and just there, almost inactive and weak, no threat at all, heck, Bond even killed him easily, almost without an effort, and it’s all because of his laziness.
Anya? The best Russian KGB that’s heavily trained in Military and in survival course, but what did she do? She’d still ended up a damsel in distress at the end, her weapon of choice is a coathanger that she used to slap against Jaws in the train, and even got herself to be jealous over Naomi, went with Stromberg in his lair only to get tied up to that recliner and wait for Bond to save her, and swore a revenge for her boyfriend’s death, but she loves Bond isn’t she? Well, that’s the whole story of Anya in this film, I’m afraid @Jim but Mother Russia would’ve thrown her out of the window.
It’s only Jaws the one who’s interesting in the film, but never came off as threatening or scary.
Second, the acting, for me, the cast of The Spy Who Loved Me were to say, a bit stiff in their acting, like they have no facial expressions, their motions are by numbers, and almost like a statue or a mannequin, very wooden, Curd Jurgens, Barbara Bach, and even Roger Moore, like they’re not natural in their performances, lacking in the reactions, not showing much emotions, very one note and one dimensional (okay, let’s make it two dimensional, I’m more forgiving), in their performances, forced expressions (some like even phoning it; not in the mood to act), some even have this obvious line readings, bland and dull acting, even the emotional moments that should be emotional doesn’t comes off as emotional and affecting because the acting was so stiff they have no facial expressions, serious straight face that showed no emotions and just still (like a painting).
The film had an interesting concept, but what makes it down are the characters and their performances/acting.
3 of those thirds seem strong to me. Goldfinger establishing the iconography, Skyfall picking it apart and The Spy who Loved Me revelling in it. The Spy who Loved Me it is (I am in my annual good mood today).
I am not sure what The World is Not Enough is doing, nor doing in such august company (my annual good mood can, as ever, have its girth measured in seconds, not hours).
Really?
Double post
Have to say* I have never noticed that necklace before. Is it Jaws’ willy?
(*I don’t actually have to, but said nonetheless for the sake of a cheap laugh on a dull day).