Guest: Bond, James Bond (2006)

2006 - Casino Royale - I imagine the Bond series flat-lining on a slab, Barbara Brocolli holding two smoking defibrillators above its chest, screaming “Don’t you dare die on me!” Richard Maibaum pulling her back and pleading “It’s too late. There’s nothing we can do.” Just before the doctor calls the time of death, Martin Campbell walks in, apparently lost. He is about to ask for directions when sees the Bond series bein all dead. He nonchalantly walks over, applies one strike to the chest, gets the heart beating again, and struts out of there like he owns the place.

So maybe it didn’t happen exactly like that. The Bond series wasn’t exactly flat-lining, per se, but I would definitely call it brain dead. So, if nothing else, Campbell has returned to show us that 1) his genitals must be huge, and 2) if anybody does it better than Bond, it’s him.

Get over the blonde Bond thing quick (and remind yourself that Roger Moore was also blonde) and get ready for the movie to break about twenty-seven conventions that have been set in stone for the past 40+ years. First, there’s the pre-credits sequence, in black and & white, only teasing you with shades of 007’s suave attitude while he kicks you in the chest with his boot because all he wants to do is kill you hard. After some brief glimpses of the sinister-as-hell asthmatic-villain-with-a-bleeding-eye and what will later be the setup for the plot (not the plot itself, mind), the movie decides to top itself a foot chase that would normally be spread across the entire film but gets crammed into one quick-paced dash across four locations, subsequently followed by an investigation sequence which culminates in a fight at an airport. And you might be thinking ‘Wow, that was a good movie,’ but then I’d have to inform you that this occurs within the first thirty minutes and shit hasn’t even begun to get real.

Speaking of which, at some point, the movie’s like ‘You love poker? Cuz it’s time for some fuckin poker’ and doesn’t stop for most of the film. If you’re worried this won’t be suspenseful, you’re wrong, dead fucking wrong. It shoved those irritating explosions out of the way for the spine of the film: espionage w/ cards, and it gets your blood pumping at 200 mph.

Watching this go down is an utter delight. Here, Bond is called a blunt instrument yet again, but only now is it apparent to the naked eye. Daniel Craig is the perfect casting choice for a secret agent fresh into his 00 status, balancing a youthful brashness with a weathered demeanor. Nothing refined at this point, he is just extremely pissed and will off you for looking at him wrong. But by no means is he not cool. Slightly psychopathic, yes, and he loses sometimes. WHO IS THIS NEW CHARACTER YOU’RE PRESENTING TO ME, MOVIE?!

Casino Royale is the best entry. I’ll stand by that statement and defend it to the death. Others come close, but this is it, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And it’s worth it. Campbell, you have saved the series twice, and you made an entry that will likely be the closest the series will get to making me cry. I love you, you’re great, come back again.

“Will you yield… in time?” (7.5/10)
d. Martin Campbell

[this is kinda neat]

Guest OLR: Raising Arizona (1987)

I'm not sure if it is a family film, but if it is, it should be the blueprint from which all others are drawn. (7/10)

d. Joel Coen & Ethan Coen

Guest OLR: Blood Simple. (1984)

A mean, brooding vision illustrated through various scene-stealing set pieces which, unfortunately, make apparent the unbearable pacing upon repeat viewings. (6/10)

d. Joel Coen & Ethan Coen

OLR: Deadly Daphne's Revenge (1987)

The scumbucket brother of the main character was entertaining to watch, but it's way too serious of a legal drama to be a good Troma movie. (4/10)

d. Richard Gardner

Guest: Bond, James Bond (1999-2002)

1999 - The World is Not Enough - Who would have thought that the guy who directed Nell would be a marginally better bet for the series than the guy who directed Turner & Hooch.

Only a one film gap and I sorely missed me some pissed off Bond. Not only that, it’s refreshing to see him doing actual legwork, figuring out the plot for us all. Nice chap. And it feels like it’s been forever since Bond has been tortured to the edge of madness.

I think this film where my ruing of Q-Branch gadgets came from. Seeing how InstaBall jacket works before it is utilized in the field doesn’t work too well. It’s Brosnan’s Goldfinger - a lot of ridiculousness that is more or less all in good fun, balanced out with some sudden serious moments.

Carlyle as villain was a good choice, but where’s the payoff of his master torture techniques? Sure, his right-hand man knows all about it, but when the main threat does nothing but throw punches at Bond, I am a bit disappointed. Bored. Bored is the word. The simultaneous strength and weakness is in the dynamic between the characters and not so much the action set pieces or the dialogue. It is cute that the film tries so hard - it is a shame that it fails.

The movie misses the boat on some opportunities to exploit their villain’s state of mind. The revelation that he can longer feel should have come right as we saw his inability to live up to Bond’s standards of sex with his partner in crime. The film also seems to forget this information during the climactic battle, having him flinch constantly with each punch. And then Wet Shirt (or whatever her real name is, who cares) says another poorly delivered line about nuclear stuff and then they save the goddamn day, only to have images of them having sex patched in to the British government. JAMES BOND WILL RETURN. Easy money.

This was the first Bond film I ever saw, and I do remember hating it a lot more. The chalk line gets pushed back with every hundred films. Uh, hooray?

“Welcome to my nuclear family.” (5.5/10)
d. Michael Apted


2002 - Die Another Day - After about ten million shots of Bond and his expendable partners surfing to the shoreline filmed on a studio backlot, we get to Brosnan’s last outing as 007, which would preferably be his opus, 20th film on the 40th anniversary and all, but keeping with tradition of actors sticking with the series one film too far, it befalls this one to be the soul-sucking entry.

Perhaps the biggest sign that the series is going downhill: diamond smuggling. Honestly with the diamond smuggling. It has never worked in the series, ever, and yet the writers keep revisiting it because they hate us. Coolest villain scar ever, though.

What a squandered story idea, 007 captured and tortured (to the edge of madness) for over a year, only to return to the outside world where everyone hates him and nobody will sleep with him. Why didn’t this work? Well, the short answer is that the torture scene is more effective in the Madonna music video. The longer answer becomes clear very soon, after it is revealed that Bond can stop and start his heart-rate at will, and then there’s a character with the actual name of Peaceful Fountains of Desire. I thought I had taken that ninja knife out…

Really, more time needed to pass, given M’s line “The world has changed while you were away.” A kind of broad statement there. Bond should have probably been captured for five years at least. Twenty would have been much better. You could have cast Connery in the role, he loves acting! Why aren’t I watching that hypothetical film?!

Bond has well-earned the right for his superiors to believe him, especially after the previous film. Hating him doesn’t make for compelling drama, it only makes for a useless side-note on a quest for revenge he is going to take anyway, and it also predicts the idea that he is being double-crossed by the most obvious character not played by the Oscar winner.

“First, we kill off your bone marrow.” You lost me. I get to be beautiful… with no bone marrow? Don’t I need that to, um, live? Is that what you guys did to Walken in A View to a Kill? Shouldn’t this have been over a half hour ago? Michael Madsen, what’s with you never helping the situation with your presence? You were great in Free Willy, why can’t you be good anymore?

Maybe it was the overly extensive use of special effects as opposed to real locations and real stunt-work, but perhaps Tamahori could try pulling the camera out of his ass. That could improve his “technique.” Except for Q-Branch’s scene, there are no cool moments in this entry. Even the chase in the ice palace, falling under neat set-piece category, fails to illicit any feeling of danger. The movie did have a cool glass-destroying ring, I’ll give it that.

Well, g’bye, Brosny. On your commentary, you sounded gung-ho for another outing, but sadly, your time is done. At least you managed to swing on a rope in every one of your Bond films.

“An hour in the Dream Machine keeps me sane.” (4.0/10)
d. Lee Tamahori

[Addendum: feeling a bit depressed that Brosnan wasn’t awesome more often, I fired up the ol’ Gamecube machine and played a bit of Everything or Nothing, a great emulation of the Bond series complete with highly impressive opening credits. You get to train in a virtual reality matrix superior to the one in Die Another Day, free-fall off of a cliff, pilot a mini-copter, get Bond Points, and save Shannon Elizabeth. And Jaws is back! What more could you want?! WHAT MORE COULD YOU WANT?!]

Guest: Bond, James Bond (1995-1997)

1995 - GoldenEye - Six years later. Most of the original Bond pioneers have either died or moved on to other projects. It’s now up to a younger group to restart the series with a new actor, a new director, and an entirely original script with little-to-no direct lift from any of Fleming’s novels.

How to pull it off: go back to square one. Quick and mean.

As customary when introducing a new Bond, his face isn’t revealed until the last possible second, and shortly thereafter, the camera doesn’t stop moving, the edits don’t stop coming, and the film quickly builds momentum until the hip, deeply detailed images of women doin stuff cause a kind of cathartic release upon the realization that Bond… is back. And damn is he cool.

The movie has a keen sense of danger and fun, throwing Bond into sudden situations and matching the breakneck pace and style of, yep, Dr. No, with much more backbone. Bond at the offset seems to be very much on his own, at odds with an agency that doesn’t know what to do with him. It’s a nice bit of subtle continuity carried over from Licence to Kill; Bond has to work to reclaim the status he once had.

Of course, the intelligence of the script isn’t bottomless. There are moments of shameless exposition, i.e. explanation of electromagnetic pulse yes yes we all know what it is GET ON WITH IT. And it takes some effort to forgive the rare moments where the villains keep the heroes alive.

What holds it all together is the attention given to the smallest elements, and not treating the viewers like brainless apes. One specific moment stands out in my mind: Bond and Natalya are running through a library, dodging bursts of gunfire and looking for an escape route. They find a brief reprieve and 007 takes the opportunity to rip off his belt and ready his grappling line. He doesn’t explain what it is, nor does he attempt to deflect the look she’s giving him with a glib remark; he simply smirks and says “Trust me.” Epitome of cool.

There are only two directors who have the ability to make the camera completely disappear. Martin Campbell is the one of them, making a series of static shots look interesting and putting together the film like a symphony. He appears to get Bond, the first time a director has since Terence Young. Not only does Campbell has excellent control of the medium, but he avoids sinking into the haphazard ‘let’s shoot the action handheld and hope the shakiness covers our tracks’ nonsense that seems to be popular nowadays. I would expect nothing less from the man who made Vertical Limit watchable.

GoldenEye is an asset to the franchise. After three attempts to reinvent the series, it is finally done correctly.

"This time, Mr. Bond, the pleasure will be all mine.” (7.5/10)
d. Martin Campbell


1997 - Tomorrow Never Dies - And then this happens.

“Well, we brought the series back once more. Now what?”

“Let’s screw it up again!”

“Er?”

No… it’s no GoldenEye, and Roger Spottiswoode is no Martin Campbell, insomuch that every shot is evidence of his vast under-qualification of directing job. He shoots as many angles as possible, explosions in slow-motion of course, and glues it together in the editing room, displaying a narrative but not a love for the material. Do we really need to see ten million different shots of Bond ripping a giant poster just because you filmed it that way? Thanks?

Far too much time is spent reminding us that Bond is cooler than anyone. This was well-established in the last film, yet we are treated to “He can drive a car by remote! He can be charming! He can get M on his side! He can make a cuckold of the military!” not to mention a sad waste of an opening sequence. “Seriously, Admiral, let’s be rational about this-” “NO THAT’S RIDICULOUS M LET’S CHARGE AHEAD FULL SPEED!!!” *Bond does something good* “OH NO EGG IS SURE ON MY FACE I’M NOT LEARNING FROM THIS THOUGH!!”

And Bond doesn’t really behave much like a super-spy, opting to disregard his suave skill and instead barreling into the enemy lair and showing all the cards immediately, endangering the lives of every inept supporting character around him. Jonathan Pryce then eats loads of scenery for breakfast, creates a stupid looking show that nobody would ever take seriously, and decides to be 100% sadistic with no hint of charisma, something that his character would surely possess if he were that high up in the social chain. Oh well, someone had to act like they wanted to be there. I sure didn’t.

“He’s my new anchorman.” (5.0/10)
d. Roger Spottiswoode


[Addendum: Commentary tracks have become this: "Here’s why I think my image of Bond works, blah blah blah blah, my entry is so good, I didn’t shoot this in slow-motion but made it that way in the editing room by blurring each frame, and it looks excellent." I fear for my sanity.
A note to DVD producers: If you can’t get the editor/assistant director/director of photography/any kind of producer in the same room as the director/writer/any of the stars, don’t bother recording an audio track specifically for them. "Here’s why I lit this scene this way" gets old really, really fast, and I don’t want to slice my wrists watching your film, unless your film is Waking Life.]

OLR: Blade Runner: The Final Cut (1982)

The 21st century additions were done with care and subtlety, improving an already excellent film. (9/10)

d. Ridley Scott

OLR: Trancers (1985)

Only tough-talkin' Tim Thomerson can possibly save us from that trancer Santa Claus. (7/10)

d. Charles Band

OLR: The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause (2006)

I wish it were a wee funnier, but it was an entertaining enough Christmas fantasy (Kara's very first movie, though she ate and slept through it and can't focus far enough away to see the screen anyway). (6/10)

d. Michael Lembeck

Guest: Bond, James Bond (1987-1989)

1987 - The Living Daylights - Rather than crack wise about 007’s inability to fit into modern times with his obsolete sophistication, Eon Productions finally decides to force that mother into modern times, updating him with new execution styles, new technology, and a new cynical attitude. Even new Moneypenny. They even go as far as kinda-sorta-not-really creating an origins story, showing off Bond’s skill during a training exercise gone wrong, which ends up being… pretty damn cool.

Timothy Dalton injects much needed youth into the role and as such, the movie feels dangerous. Or maybe it’s the change in cameraman, whatever gets John Glen’s heart back into things. I was struck by how dark everything looked, especially coming from the guy who compromised his style and directed Octopussy. Things behind the iron curtain haven’t looked this bleak since From Russia With Love.

Smacking of a more epic For Your Eyes Only, the relationship with the female lead plays a large role in the decisions 007 makes. There’s a tremendous amount of suspense because of their chemistry, and since the series is once again taking a step back and reexamining its formula, it feels like anything can happen to her.

There still exists the series’ “patented” brand of humor, but this is the first time a Bond film has felt like a spy film in at least a decade. I ask once more: why aren’t more of them like this?

“Eh, you’ve had your eight. Now I’ll have my eighty!” (7.0/10)
d. John Glen


1989 - Licence to Kill - Ever wondered what Bond would look like in an 80’s action film again? WHY?!

Wins the award for most depressing decline for any given actor’s series of Bond films. Forgetting that they already brought Bond up to speed to reflect the audience’s taste, the filmmakers go even further by reflecting the action films of the decade, possibly the biggest mistake they could make. An hour passes before the movie finally feels like a Bond adventure; it takes showing Dalton betting at a casino in a tux, and it’s so brief that I can almost feel the movie climbing off of me and saying ‘Was it good for you?’

Licence to Kill is about ¼ of a Bond film and ¾ of three other films, meshed awkwardly together. Why not get the motivation for the mission out of the way in the escape sequence, instead of introducing the characters, the villains, the methods, and taking forever to do all of it? Got me. Yes, Nassau is very beautiful, but does that have to be the setting every fucking time scuba diving is involved? DOES IT REALLY?

Felix Leiter, his new wife, and Bond’s useless first-act sidekick Sharky (guess what he knows a lot about) share loads of scenes with the star, but in this decade, that’s a mark of impending death. At least my question is finally answered: there’s dark (GOOD) and there’s sadistic (BAD) and here, they clearly tipped it too far towards the latter. Dismemberment-by-shark, implosion-by-decompression, and killed-by-rock-crusher are cool, but they all belong in a film with better characterization.

It’s in the final half hour where the love of making this film shows, and elevates the movie back into average territory. 007 nearly jackknifes himself to get his vengeance, going head-to-knife with scene-saving Benicio del Toro, who isn’t the main villain but hell he should have been. Trucks, explosions, Wayne Newton, closing credits soon follow.

Farewell, Timothy Dalton. The next role I see of yours will be the one where you take a steeple to the chin.

You may proceed to wow me, Pierce Brosnan.

“Launder it.” (5.0/10)
d. John Glen

Guest: Bond, James Bond (1983-1985)

1983 - Octopussy - Let’s go back to bein all wacky! Why the hell not?

The series has basically earned the right to be anything it wants, no longer reinventing the wheel but cycling through the methods it has pioneered, alternating to keep up with the mood of the audience, what they think those anonymous bastards want to see, which apparently is bland India espionage. Jewel smuggling: still not interesting.

Here goes my vote for most one-dimensional Bond girl, so bland that the same attributes go to two different characters. “I collect memories.” Uh… okay, significance? Somebody? Anybody?

If you want to see what is basically a bunch of other Bond films jammed into one, this would be it. Most of the ideas appear to come from Goldfinger (an acrobatic army consisting entirely of women, plot to blow something up, intimidating henchman crushing objects with their bare hands, Bond spending much of the late second act at the villain’s villa, learning the plot via surveillance, spotting danger in a reflective surface, climax on a plane).

Probably the most forgettable Bond of the entire series. Nothing new here except for the occasional well-filmed action sequence and totally neato gadget. Buzz-saw yo-yo?! I want seven.

“And this… for my brother.” (5.0/10)
d. John Glen


1983 - Never Say Never Again - Ever wondered what Bond would look like in an 80’s action movie? … Why? Well, here you go anyway, a crazy alternate universe where jokes about Connery Bond’s total lack of being able to fit into modern times bombard him constantly from all angles while he looks too old for this shit. The film is actually a welcome change of pace. Moore has done a bang-up job so far, but I am a bit tired of him, and the official films are in their typical state of decline. And it's Thunderball. Thunderball! Mostly.

It’s ten years later and Connery looks better here than he did in Diamonds Are Forever, even with all of the makeup. That’s fine, though, because this makes up for the mistake that was returning to the role last time. It looks like he's actually fighting people!

Bad casting for Blofeld. Sorry, I can only see Max von Sydow as a seasoned priest or the creator of Precrime. Maybe a chess-playing knight. His role amounts to nothing, as the real villain of the story is Largo, played excellently by Klaus Maria Brandauer.

Good special effects, save for a shitty looking dive off of a castle via horse. Eon Productions should get up on this. The only formula the movie doesn’t get right is the gadgets. Whenever a hairy situation arises, it is quite obvious as to how Bond will escape.

This had great potential to be awful, as the 80’s is basically a holocaust for action films. This turned out to be quite good, and would have made a fine addition to the official series.

Later, Connery. I’d say goodbye, but who knows, you might return once more. We all know you love acting almost as much as you love smacking women around, admit it.

“Heavy, Mr. Bond?” (6.5/10)
d. Irvine Kershner
[will Rowan Atkinson ever look different?]


1985 - A View to a Kill - Always with the skiing. Why with the skiing?

Like You Only Live Twice, it’s a slow build to realization that this is going to suck, and suck it hard. The screenwriters must have thought that an illegal horse drugs ring would provide for many double entendres about sex. Kudos to them. Too bad roiding equines is about as interesting as smuggling jewels, and a bigger scheme which is basically plot-stolen from the first Superman film.

Christopher Walken can be menacing in anything. His back story: what the hell? If you’re going to bring up a KGB past with slight implications of genetic manipulation, you damn well follow through with it.

Within the context of the series, ie being in the mood for it and/or knowing that there are lower points than this, the film isn’t so terrible. It lacks love, passion, and a good script is all.

You’d think that British Secret Service would know by now not to look for Bond after a successful mission, as he is likely banging the hell out of the female costar, but no, they keep patching his image in to all government higher ups. What the hell is the matter with them?

Every aspect of the “winning” Bond formula loses here. Not only is it blithely executed, it is simply lazy, with the worst titular line ever. “Wow, what a view… to a kill!” DUN DUN DUNNNNN. Well I’m pumped, I wonder if that’s where the climax is going to be!

Both Moore and Connery’s worst outing as 007 have the same line, “But of course you are,” delivered under the same circumstances. COINCIDENCE?!!! Uh... probably.

Filmmakers at this point have confused ‘tongue-in-cheek’ with ‘cartoony bullshit.’ A somewhat triumphant rescue from a burning building is marred by reaction shot after reaction shot and an immediate clash with local law enforcement, again. More comic-relief ruining what could have been a kickass chase involving a fire engine with an unlocked ladder.

Sadly, this is the exit. Farewell, Roger Moore, you were a good Bond. Can’t say I’m going to miss your commentary, though.

Bring on Tim Dalty.

“This will hurt him more than me. Hahaha.” (4.5/10)
d. John Glen

OLR: Supergirl (1984)

Supergirl herself and the SFX are great, but they're trapped in a movie not quite goofy enough to be a camp classic and not plotted well enough to be taken seriously. (5/10)

d. Jeannot Szwarc

OLR: Superman III (1983)

This is the most fun of the Reeve Superman movies to watch, with great comic book-style action (vs. a chemical fire! vs. a tornado! vs. a super computer! vs. his evil twin!) and a Richard Pryor performance that never fails to crack me up. (8/10)

d. Richard Lester

OLR: Superman II (1980)

Despite significant flaws and some parts I plain dislike, it remains one of the most entertaining of super-hero movies. (7/10)

d. Richard Donner & Richard Lester

OLR: Superman: The Movie (1978)

There'll never be a better portrayer of Superman, a better Superman score, or a better Krypton sequence than seen here. (8/10)

d. Richard Donner