4 ms·
Moreover, there are almost zero examples of Eon films where the Eon ideas were good. The films are pretty straight-ahead adaptations of Fleming novels through
by ubermonkey 2y ago
Moreover, there are almost zero examples of Eon films where the Eon ideas were good.
The films are pretty straight-ahead adaptations of Fleming novels through _Live and Let Die_. After that, they were out of books they had rights to, and the films take a serious plunge in terms of actual quality. For my money, the only genuinely watchable non-adaptation example after LALD is _Goldeneye_.
I mean, note the huge jump in quality when Craig came on when they finally DID have a Fleming novel they could work from again, right?
- cjpearson 2y agoNo love for _The Spy Who Loved Me_? Maybe Dalton isn't your favorite Bond, but his entries are at least par for the course rather than a serious plunge. I'd agree that the last 25 years has given us a lot of duds and _Casino Royale_ is the main exception. However, I think it's more likely that Purvis and Wade are the issue here, as the 1977-1997 era showed that Eon could make a decent original Bond.
- ubermonkey 2y agoNot really, no. It was pretty weak sauce aside from the skiing intro. I found both Dalton outings pretty silly, though one of us gave us an early appearance by Benicio Del Toro. Dalton deserved better, as did Brosnan modulo _Goldeneye_, which is for me a top-5 entry. I disagree on your conclusion re: "decent original Bond" between '77 and '97, but I'd argue that the success of _Skyfall_ and _No Time To Die_ does show they got around to it.
- mrob 2y agoI found Casino Royal to be a huge disappointment. As far as I'm concerned, the whole concept of "spy action thriller" is inherently ridiculous, so you might as well go all in on the wacky cartoon hijinks and have some fun with it. The franchise peaked with Die Another Day.
- ubermonkey 2y agoThat's definitely a take, but it's not a terribly popular or interesting one.