Week | Title | Year | Rich | Tom | Dragonfire | Piffi | |
Jan 26 - Feb 01 | Dr. No | 1962 | |||||
Feb 02 - Feb 08 | From Russia with Love | 1963 | |||||
Feb 09 - Feb 15 | Goldfinger | 1964 | |||||
Feb 16 - Feb 22 | Thunderball | 1965 | |||||
Feb 23 - Mar 01 | You Only Live Twice | 1967 | |||||
Mar 02 - Mar 08 | On Her Majesty's Secret Service | 1969 | |||||
Mar 09 - Mar 15 | Diamonds Are Forever | 1971 | |||||
Mar 16 - Mar 22 | Live and Let Die | 1973 | |||||
Mar 23 - Mar 29 | The Man with the Golden Gun | 1974 | |||||
Mar 30 - Apr 05 | The Spy Who Loved Me | 1977 | |||||
Apr 06 - Apr 12 | Moonraker | 1979 | |||||
Apr 13 - Apr 19 | For Your Eyes Only | 1981 | |||||
Apr 20 - Apr 26 | Octopussy | 1983 | |||||
Apr 27 - May 03 | A View to a Kill | 1985 | |||||
May 04 - May 10 | The Living Daylights | 1987 | |||||
May 11 - May 17 | Licence to Kill | 1989 | |||||
May 18 - May 24 | GoldenEye | 1995 | |||||
May 25 - May 31 | Tomorrow Never Dies | 1997 | |||||
Jun 01 - Jun 07 | The World Is Not Enough | 1999 | |||||
Jun 08 - Jun 14 | Die Another Day | 2002 | |||||
Jun 15 - Jun 21 | Casino Royale | 2006 | |||||
Jun 22 - Jun 28 | Quantum of Solace | 2008 |
Title | Year | Rich | Tom | Dragonfire | ||
Casino Royale | 1967 | |||||
Never Say Never Again | 1983 |
Tom, can you list the 2 'other' films as randoms, I'd like to watch them as part of the marathon.Something about the rights. Someone (I don't know who; I guess one of the producers who left the team) wanted to make another Bond film to cash in on the success. The only avaiable rights for any of the books, or he still owned that one, was for Thunderball, hence the remake.
And does anyone know how and why Never Say Never Again was made in 1983 outside of the usual studios and production team??
Tom, can you list the 2 'other' films as randoms, I'd like to watch them as part of the marathon.
And does anyone know how and why Never Say Never Again was made in 1983 outside of the usual studios and production team??
I might chime in when you watch Goldfinger and Thunderball and then again for Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace (which supposedly is crap but I'll probably buy anyway; and yes, it comes in March).
Tom, can you list the 2 'other' films as randoms, I'd like to watch them as part of the marathon.
I have a feeling it was out before Octopussy, but in any case, surely around that time.
...loooking back at John's review I now wonder: Who was Kerim? :-[
Methinks you're a little confused! Kerim was in From Russia With Love, not Goldfinger. I haven't reviewed that yet. I may have to wait until I've broke the back of this Oscar marathon, though I'm losing willpower! :training::slaphead: :stars: :-[
But I must admit, that the movie dragged a little towards the end for me.Hmmm, it's kind ofg funny you would say that. because forgot to say in my post that my impression was that the film was excellently paced. Despite the actual action sequences being rather few I felt it all went along quite nicely with the climax coming without me looking at the clock (to all: don't even think about it, I already thought of all jokes you could make about that sentence :P).
Is anyone else going to slip in Casino Royale at this point? :hmmmm:It's not even been two years since I watched it last. While I always enjoy seeing them "Play ball!", that is not enough time just yet to go through the entire movie again.
Why is it, that in English language movies, foreign words almost always get an English tough in the pronounciation?Actually, that is a very real "problem" to me. When I talk English, which I do most of the time here, and want to use a German word within an English sentence, I even give that an English tone to it, and that's my mother tongue! :laugh:
By far the worst of the Bond films so far, and unlikely to be worsened.
Top notch film, a young Roger Moore [...]You are, however, aware that Roger Moore was/is three years older than Connery? Probably the only time they replaced Bond with an older actor :laugh:
Top notch film, a young Roger Moore [...]You are, however, aware that Roger Moore was/is three years older than Connery? Probably the only time they replaced Bond with an older actor :laugh:
And later he promised a kid money but then simply kicked him off the boat!
Tom, is there a way you can update the first post on this thread, with our Encore ratings?
Week | Title | Year | Rich | Tom | James | |
Jan 26 - Feb 01 | Dr. No | 1962 |
Maybe something like this?
Week Title Year Rich Tom James Jan 26 - Feb 01 Dr. No 1962
I assume there's no real continuity I need to be concerned with, but I'm not certain.
I assume there's no real continuity I need to be concerned with, but I'm not certain.
Except with the latest two, there is no real continuity between the Bonds.
I have updated the first post. I included only those, who have given more than one review with rating.
Jaws is a perfect henchman - way more intimidating than Nick Nack was in The Man With the Golden Gun.When I read this name (The character played by Richard Kiehl, not the shark), the first image that pop in my head is this one:
Hmmm, with overall good reviews here it seems that "The Spy Who Loved Me" would be a good addition to my Wish List...
I only have a handful of Bond films. They're on every Bank Holiday in the UK! So I've seen all of them several times while growing up and found I was sturggling to keep up with this marathon, even though I don't have many. But then I saw, apart from Richie, a lack of love for my personal fave, Live and Let Die. So...
Live and Let Die
4 out 5
For me this is the most memorable Bond film. A fantastic change of pace for the new Bond in Roger Moore. Somehow I can't see Connery managing to pull off this story.
First, Moore himself. Richie said Connery could have him in a scrap; I'm not so sure. I love the way he plays him as an arrogant prick, wandering around like a lost English business man and well out of his depth. But just try something and he'll snap your neck as soon as look at you. That line to Rosie is a classic, when he threatens to kill her and she say's "you wouldn't after what we just did". "Well, I wasn't going to before..." :devil:
Witness possibly my favourite moment in any Bond film: when the booth spins and he realises he's in a trap. Impossible odds, but he still flirts, still teases the bad guys. Moore's style is brilliant as he walks in with an icy glare and theatrics for the thugs and a wink for Solitaire. And his grin while they drag him off! I do think Connery was the definitive Bond overall, but nobody else has come close to Moore since. Daniel Craig, much as I like him and he's perfect for the current mould, looks like an identikit agent compared, and no way would Matt Damon's Bourne been able to handle that situation.
This was a Bond back from the days when they were trying to be different and stand out, rather than play to the masses. Moonraker will change all that, though I do rate Octopussy pretty high. Therefore it is dated, it does drag in places and can be a bit too silly, with several contrivances that simply don't make sense, but I repeat, it is the most memorable for me.
I'm in full agreement on that bloody Sheriff. He's a poor character, badly played. I like the idea of him taking the lead throughout the chase sequences (Bond is a background character for a bit), but he's so awful it doesn't work. Really the whole film is dragging at this point. After the cracking mood of the opening hour or so, it just loses momentum. Still, the crocs are classic Bond and we finish with an underground lair and sharks! Sadly without frickin' lasers on their heads. Shame Kananga (bloody great villain) had to go in such silly fashion.
I believe For Your Eyes Only was the first Bond I saw in the cinema. While, looking back now, not the best by far, it is a solid entry in the series with good action (isn't there more skiing stuff in this one?) and fun humor (at least when I saw it :laugh:). I remember that cross bow that gets used by the girl and thought that that was one of the coolest things I had ever seen (did I mention I was a teenager then...?).
Octopussy...This is a good movie :thumbup:
Sounds like something that Jimmy would watch :devil:
This is a good movie :thumbup::hysterical:
Are we talking about this one?
(http://img223.imagevenue.com/loc403/th_01792_Clipboard02_122_403lo.jpg) (http://img223.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=01792_Clipboard02_122_403lo.jpg)
your last rating isn't showing up Tom?Not just the rating but the complete review, I suppose that he had decided to does it like you do usually.
your last rating isn't showing up Tom?Not just the rating but the complete review, I suppose that he had decided to does it like you do usually.
your last rating isn't showing up Tom?Not just the rating but the complete review, I suppose that he had decided to does it like you do usually.
Fixed it. By accident, I saved my review comments under the additional info variable I use for the rating. Thus my actual review was put inside the "mr" tag :laugh:
By the way, Rich: The way you do it, I often only see reviews of yours, when you put up the next one, because the first one doesn't show up as unread post (because it isn't a new post, but an edit to an existing one).
And now I'm behind on the Bond movies too...being behind on the Hitchcock movies just wasn't enough for me evidently. :laugh:
The Big "James Bond" Marathon
As it seems to be, that I am not the only one who needs a little incentive to watch the Bond movies again, I am opening this collective marathon.
Here is the schedule for this event :)
I only included the official Bond movie. The original "Casino Royale" and "Never Say Never Again" are not included, but feel free to also review those any time.
Each Bond week will start on a Monday and ends on a Sunday.
I am thinking that Quantum of Solace will already be available on DVD when we get to the finish line at the end of June.
Week Title Year Rich Tom Dragonfire Jan 26 - Feb 01 Dr. No 1962 Feb 02 - Feb 08 From Russia with Love 1963 Feb 09 - Feb 15 Goldfinger 1964 Feb 16 - Feb 22 Thunderball 1965 Feb 23 - Mar 01 You Only Live Twice 1967 Mar 02 - Mar 08 On Her Majesty's Secret Service 1969 - Mar 09 - Mar 15 Diamonds Are Forever 1971 Mar 16 - Mar 22 Live and Let Die 1973 Mar 23 - Mar 29 The Man with the Golden Gun 1974 Mar 30 - Apr 05 The Spy Who Loved Me 1977 Apr 06 - Apr 12 Moonraker 1979 Apr 13 - Apr 19 For Your Eyes Only 1981 Apr 20 - Apr 26 Octopussy 1983 Apr 27 - May 03 A View to a Kill 1985 May 04 - May 10 The Living Daylights 1987 May 11 - May 17 Licence to Kill 1989 May 18 - May 24 GoldenEye 1995 May 25 - May 31 Tomorrow Never Dies 1997 Jun 01 - Jun 07 The World Is Not Enough 1999 Jun 08 - Jun 14 Die Another Day 2002 Jun 15 - Jun 21 Casino Royale 2006 Jun 22 - Jun 28 Quantum of Solace 2008
Additional Bond movies, which can be included optionally:
Title Year Rich Tom Dragonfire Casino Royale 1967 Never Say Never Again 1983
Also my vote for OHMSS seems to have disappeared?
A little bump so I don't have to keep searching for next Bond film i am due to watchWhy is a bump necessary? I don't mind, but isn't it easier to look up the very first post of this thread instead of searching a post hidden on page 9? ;)
Already done ;D
Bond get married in On Her Majesty's Secret Service no? Don't see that for quite some time (when I was really young on tv), but I'm certain that he married the Diana Riggs characters
Now, I keep hearing that this is building up to be a trilogy. But how...? What's missing? I don't see it :bag:; I didn't really find any big loose ends when the credits rolled. What am I missing.
I read somewhere recently that they are planning to bring Blofeld back for the next movie. No idea if he is supposed to be involved with the Quantum group from this one or if they are also bringing back SPECTRE.
I think if they bring back Blofeld, then they should bring back Miss Moneypenny and Q. It's just...odd for them not to be around.
I felt it would be a trilogy because this was the first continuing sequel to a Bond film, yet it is still unresolved. Both villains feel like soldiers; we haven't had the Big Bad yet! Casino Royale was about getting control of the economy, while Quantum was about them trying to control energy (IIRC). A good part three might be the head of Quantum breaking cover to attack MI6 head on.I didn't find the main story unresolved (Bond's bit) but you are right, the villain side feels a little open, as the guys we saw so far are clearly only mid-level henchmen rather than the leader of the pack. BTW, Quantum was trying to control water in this film; although in some scenes it is shown that their actual range of business is much broader.
I read somewhere recently that they are planning to bring Blofeld back for the next movie. No idea if he is supposed to be involved with the Quantum group from this one or if they are also bringing back SPECTRE.
I think if they bring back Blofeld, then they should bring back Miss Moneypenny and Q. It's just...odd for them not to be around.
There was a rumour that Michael Sheen was lined up for Blofeld, but Empire are claiming it only started because they said he could be good (the writer for the new Bond also did a couple of Sheen's other films).Well, he is listed at IMDb as cast memeber for "Bond 23 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/)". But he is shown as "Blofeld (rumored)", so that could meamn that the role is rumored based on Empire or his entire attachment to the film is rumored.
There was a rumour that Michael Sheen was lined up for Blofeld, but Empire are claiming it only started because they said he could be good (the writer for the new Bond also did a couple of Sheen's other films).Well, he is listed at IMDb as cast memeber for "Bond 23 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/)". But he is shown as "Blofeld (rumored)", so that could meamn that the role is rumored based on Empire or his entire attachment to the film is rumored.
I reckon the latter. I don't think he's said anything...Yes.
I enjoyed the second outing more than Casino Royale. Funny though, as I remember it being the other way around when I first saw them.
I didn't like the villain though.
Rating:
The World is Not Enough (http://www.invelos.com/mpimages/I5/I52EA9F06C7A1FE40f.jpg) The World Is Not Enough is an exhilarating but sophisticated, action-packed adventure. With insight and intelligence, the producers, writers, director and star Pierce Brosnan reveal a new and exciting dimension to a character that has been in the public consciousness for 40 years – and the film further establishes Ian Fleming's legendary creation as one of the most popular literary and cinematic characters of all time. Pierce Brosnan returns as Bond, charged to protect a gorgeous billionaire heiress (Sophie Marceau) from the ruthless hands of nuclear-obsessed terrorist Renard (Robert Carlyle), who wants control of the world's petroleum supply. My Thoughts I actually watched this one at the beginning of the month, but I only just though checking out the extras. I was waiting to post about the movie until I got through them. The plot is interesting for the most and having oil be involved works well. Things end up being a bit more complicated than they seem at first. Some of what happens is a bit predictable, but there are also a few things that happen that I thought were surprising the first time I saw the movie. There is a little bit of mystery to what is going on, though it doesn't take long for James to figure out that Renard is involved. There is enough mystery to keep things interesting, though the mystery could have been stronger. Once again, there is a good amount of action throughout the movie. The action scenes are done well and do help to keep things interesting as well as keep the pace moving. One of the gadgets is rather silly even though it does end up being very useful at one point. The violence isn't too extreme, though one or two things are a little more disturbing. James has his way with a few women again, starting with a female doctor he seduces to get cleared to go back on active duty after an injury. Elektra is one of the stronger Bond women and a very intriguing character. Unfortunately, the movie also has one of the worst Bond women ever in the form of Dr. Christmas Jones, a nuclear physicist. I have no problem with beautiful women also being smart. She just doesn't seem believable at all as a physicist. And Denise Richards definitely isn't a good enough actress to pull that off. She is horribly miscast and the character is is an undeveloped mess. I still like Brosnan as Bond and think he handles the part well. The DVD has all sorts of extras on it about the making of the movie that are interesting. A few of them seem a bit long, but they are interesting. There is a nice tribute to Desmond Llewyn, the man who played Q. This movie has some issues - mostly Denise Richards - but I still enjoy it overall. I did get a review posted on Epinions if anyone wants to take a look. The World is Not Enough (http://www.epinions.com/review/mvie_mu-1087968/content_516513631876) |
Die Another Day (http://www.invelos.com/mpimages/I0/I08001AACF9C9506Bf.jpg) James Bond (Pierce Brosnan) pulls out all the stops to take you on an unforgettable, adrenaline-pumping ride across the globe in this action-filled adventure! From a dark cell in a North Korean prison to the beautiful beaches of Cuba, 007 is on the trail of a diabolical genius who's hellbent on slicing up the earth...literally. Now, it's up to Bond, with the help from a sultry American agent (Halle Berry), to put the evil mastermind's plan on ice. My Thoughts I first saw this one in the theater when it came out. I know the movie has gotten a lot of flack, but I enjoy it. I think it works as a fun, entertaining movie, like most of the Bond movies. Things are different from fairly early in the movie with James being captured and tortured for 14 months. Even after he is released, things aren't back to normal with him since it is believed that he gave up secrets while being held. M is planning to send him off and basically retire him and she even tells him that he's not needed anymore. Obviously that changes as the movie progresses. James goes off by himself to try to track down a bad guy. The plot is interesting, though the main bad guy using a satellite is kind of similar to Goldeneye. It would have been nice if the plot had been a bit more original. Lots of action turns up throughout the movie, which I expected. The action scenes are done fine for the most part, though certain things do go over the top. The idea of an invisible car is kind of cool, but it ends up being more cheesy. James has always had a car with a lot of unique features and some weapons, but the weapons are way over the top this time, especially for the car the one bad guy drives later in the movie. The Bond movies have usually featured some more...cutting edge gadget stuff. Some virtual reality stuff turns up in a few scenes and that does seem kind of...odd. The DNA stuff being done at the clinic is Cuba seems really bizarre, though the explanation at least sounds somewhat plausible. The violence isn't too bad, though some things, like the torture stuff, are a bit more extreme. The characters are fine, though they really don't stand out as memorable additions to the Bond world for the most part. Jinx is fine, though she really just seems like a female version of James, jumping into bed at a moment's notice. She is able to take care of herself in dangerous situations though. Miranda is an interesting character and Roasmund Pike does well with the part. John Cleese does ok as the new Q, though I do miss Desmond Llewellyn in the part. The movie does have issues, but it is enjoyable overall and worth seeing at least once. I did post a review on Epinions back in 2002 after seeing the movie in the theater. Die Another Day (http://www.epinions.com/review/mvie_mu-1118332/content_83691081348) |
Casino Royale (http://www.invelos.com/mpimages/04/043396148598f.jpg) CASINO ROYALE introduces JAMES BOND before he holds his license to kill. But Bond is no less dangerous, and with two professional assassinations in quick succession, he is elevated to "00" status. "M" (Judi Dench), head of the British Secret Service, sends the newly-promoted 007 on his first mission that takes him to Madagascar, the Bahamas and eventually leads him to Montenegro to face Le Chiffre, a ruthless financier under threat from his terrorist clientele, who is attempting to restore his funds in a high-stakes poker game at the Casino Royale. "M" places Bond under the watchful eye of the Treasury official Vesper Lynd. At first skeptical of what value Vesper can provide, Bond's interest in her deepens as they brave danger together. Le Chiffre's cunning and cruelty come to bear on them both in a way Bond could never imagine, and he learns his most important lesson: Trust no one. My Thoughts I saw this one in the theater when it first came out. I did have some doubts about Daniel Craig as the new Bond, but I was willing to give him a chance. I think he does fine with the part, though I'm not as happy with some of the other changes made to the franchise. Seeing James at the start of his career as a 00 agent is interesting. James is focused on his mission, but he is a bit unsure of his new status. He does mess up a few times. It is odd to see a Bond movie without Q and Miss Moneypenny. The plot gets slightly complicated and it isn't always clear why some things are happening at first. The story works, though some scenes do drag out a bit. The movie was based on the book by Ian Flemming, but since I haven't read it, I don't know how close to the book the movie stays. I did see at least some of the first movie version and from what I remember, it was more of a spoof. The story is more serious, and a lot of what happens helps to explain why James is the way he is later in his career. It seems clear, especially after seeing the movie again this time, that a decision was made to try to make the Bond movies more like the Bourne movies. While I like the Bourne movies overall - though I hate the jerky camera work - I don't see the need to turn Bond into a Bourne clone. They are two different types of characters and movies and should stay that way. Yes some of the Bond movies get a bit silly at times, but overall, they have been really good. Some of that silliness is part of what makes the other movies more enjoyable for me. Too much of what makes Bond Bond is missing from this one. Seeing James at the beginning of his 00 career is fine..I just don't completely like the way things are handled. I do enjoy this movie, but it isn't one of my favorite Bond movies. I think I actually liked it less after watching it this time than when I first saw it in the theater. I think I have more appreciation for the other Bond movies now. When I originally reviewed the movie on Epinions, I gave it 4 stars...I'll stick with that now, though I think my feeling for the rating is closer to 3.5 or even 3 stars now. I did post a review of this one on Epinions after seeing the movie in the theater. Casino Royale (http://www99.epinions.com/review/mvie_mu-1159328/content_284477066884) |
Quantum of Solace (http://www.invelos.com/mpimages/88/883904134787f.jpg) Daniel Craig returns as James Bond! On a nonstop quest for justice that crisscrosses the globe, Bond meets the beautiful but feisty Camille (Olga Kurylenko), who leads him to Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a ruthless businessman and major force within the mysterious Quantum organization. When Bond uncovers a conspiracy to take control of one of the world's most important natural resources, he must navigate a minefield of treachery, deception and murder to neutralize Quantum before it's too late! My Thoughts I saw this one in the theater when it first came out. This is the first time I've watched it since then. I enjoy the movie, but I don't love it and it isn't one of my favorite Bond movies. I do like that the story ties back into what was going on in Casino Royale and gives that left over situation a sense of closure that was missing after the last movie. At times there doesn't seem to be as much of a connection back, but it keeps turning up. The plot is interesting and once again there is a lot going on. This one is shorter than a lot of Bond movies, but that works for the plot and keeps things from dragging out longer than necessary. Much about Quantum remains a mystery by the end of the movie, so I could see the organization being used in future movies. It does seem like SPECTRE to me. Greene is alright as a villain, but he isn't as memorable as a lot of other Bond villains. There is tons of action throughout the movie, almost nonstop at times. Unfortunately, the movie is firmly emulating the style of the action scenes from the last two Bourne movies with the quick cuts and extremely jerky camera work. I hate that. Because of how they were filmed, the action scenes are only ok for me. There is a lot of violence in the movie, though I don't think any of it was as extreme as the one part in Casino Royale - I forgot to mention that before.. The torture scene is downright brutal and that sort of brutality doesn't have a place in the Bond movies I like. Things are still a bit brutal at times in this one - James is more likely to shoot first in this one - though it slightly less brutal than the last one. James is still developing throughout this movie, which makes sense since the series has been rebooted. Little bits of things that have been established about the character make appearances..like James having his shaken martini. James seems to be starting on the path of sleeping with all available women with how he had his way with Miss Fields - her first name is supposed to be Strawberry. Pity it wasn't used in the movie. He isn't completely there yet since he is only with her, but the beginning is there..and he is still dealing with with what happened with Vesper. This James is a James I don't like that well. It isn't Daniel Craig..he's fine. It is just the direction the character is going. He's cold and detached at times and, like I mentioned before, downright brutal. He's practically a killing machine with all the people he kills in this one. The previous versions of James killed too, but he seemed to be more...selective in his killing before instead of using it as a first option. I just don't like James this violent all the time. He is showing some signs of being suave and charming, but the violent nature is more present. I hope that violent nature gets toned down a bit in the next movie...though with the mess with MGM, who knows when that will be. I read tonight that the next Bond has been canceled for now because of that. I am disappointed that this movie is trying to hard to be like a Bourne movie. Bond is not Bourne and I don't think that style works for Bond. Of course, I don't care for some of that in Bourne either - the quick cuts and jerky camera work. I hate things being so shaky that I can't tell who is who. Bond is a very successful series of movies and the character deserves better than to be turned into a Bourne clone. I did enjoy the movie overall, though, like Casino Royale, I think I liked it less this time than I did when I originally saw it. I did post a review on Epinions after seeing the movie in the theater. And I posted here about it before too. Jimmy, you can decide if you want to change the link for the review or not. Quantum of Solace (http://www99.epinions.com/review/Bond_22_Marc_Forster/content_452081520260) |
I am now officially finished with the James Bond Marathon.
A grand old thread! :laugh:
20/01/2009 -
07/07/2010
Well done. Now chop chop, because a certain Mr. Hitchcock thread will be even older soon. :tease:
I have updated the list in the first post (http://www.dvdcollectorsonline.com/index.php/topic,5200.msg85170.html#msg85170).So going by that Goldfinger and The Spy Who Loved Me seem to be the two best-received Bond movies on this forum.
Saddest part though was about Mexican actor Pedro Armendariz, who played Kerim. He had cancer and became gravely ill during filming, but he insisted on finishing the film. They concentrated on his scenes and by the end were literally propping him up on set. After filming he checked into hospital. Rather than suffer any longer he shot himself with a gun he smuggled in. :(
Wow I'd never heard that before
:o
Thanks, Achim.
Wow I'd never heard that before
:o
Thanks, Achim.
You're welcome RossRoy :tease: :laugh:
Wow I'd never heard that before
:o
Thanks, Achim.
You're welcome RossRoy :tease: :laugh:
For a moment there, I thought I'd lost a beat! Then I figured out what happened :laugh:
And Sean Connery as Mr.Bond, also perfect. I think he might be my favourite James Bond actor.
And Sean Connery as Mr.Bond, also perfect. I think he might be my favourite James Bond actor.
No doubt about it, Connery is an awesome Bond. I will say something a little controversial though! I honestly think that Pierce Brosnan was the best Bond - he just happened to not get given the best Bond movies (apart from Goldeneye). Brosnan really got shorted IMO and is certainly the most underrated Bond so far.
(http://images.static-bluray.com/movies/covers/1592_large.jpg)I saw this one when it first came out. I think my mom turned me onto the books and man was I excited. I remember the train scene very well .. and at the time it seemed very intense .. what was going to happen etc.
Title: James Bond - From Russia with Love
Year: 1963
Director: Terence Young
Rating: 15 år
Length: 110 Min.
Video: Anamorphic Widescreen 1.66:1
Audio: Engelsk: Dolby Digital: 5.1, Engelsk: DTS: 5.1, Kommentar: Dolby Digital: 2-Channel Stereo
Subtitles: Dansk, Engelsk, Finsk, Greek, Hindu, Hollandsk, Norsk, Svensk, Kommentar
Stars:
Sean Connery
Daniela Bianchi
Pedro Armendariz
Lotte Lenya
Robert Shaw
Bernard Lee (1908)
Plot:
James Bond 007 is on the search for a Russian decoding machine, known as Lektor. Bond needs to find this machine, before the evil SPECTRE organization discovers it first. Whilst being romantically linked with Russian girl, Tatiana Romanova, Bond sneaks his way around Istanbul, whilst each SPECTRE agent tries to pick him off, including the over powering Donald 'Red' Grant and ex-KGB agent Rosa Klebb who knows all the tricks in the books and even possesses an incredible poison tipped shoe!
Extras:
Scenevalg
Audio Commentary
Feature Trailers
Dokumentar
Gallery
Booklet, Radio Spots
My Review:
Well, this one has some of the same elements as the first movie. They are starting of strong with this franchise, and here too they have done a great job with both the picture quality and the sound. Very good! The story was an ok story, but the movie was a bit slow at times. The train ride, nothing much happend really, until the end of the train ride. Could done alot more there IMO. But Mr.Connery does a great job again as the special agent! Still a solid peformance by all involved! Cant wait to start on the number 3 :)
Hopefully i'll get some James Bond in tomorrow aswell!
Its soon October, and then its a month break from James Bond! :o
My Rating:
:D
I will say something a little controversial though! I honestly think that Pierce Brosnan was the best Bond - he just happened to not get given the best Bond movies (apart from Goldeneye). Brosnan really got shorted IMO and is certainly the most underrated Bond so far.If I remember correctly then Simon Mayo, the radio presenter whose contributor is Mark Kermode (Hello to Jason Isaacs!) agrees with you on this.