The definitive James Bond film ?

Don’t think much of the new ones, not sexy enough.

 

You're missing the point. Yes, he does these underhanded sneaky things to M,
and M is hostile, suspicious, abrasive and condescending. He is shown being
inherently dishonest and too stupid to be a spy. He blows his own cover when he
registers at the hotel -- "Bond, traveling as Somerset" -- an act so stupid Vesper
can't believe it. She excoriates him like M excoriates him. They've rewritten Bond
into some other character then given him the same name and cast an utterly
clueless actor with the wrong looks to play him. Them they changed his parentage
and background. For all intents and purposes the character of James Bond is not
present in Casino Royale.

Daniel Clueless fans can justify anything.

 

He can't openly request information because he knows he'll be denied, but he has good skills/instincts as an agent so he feels compelled to "do these underhanded sneaky things" in pursuit of his mission.

That's not what the film shows. It shows him repeatedly thwarting the terrorists' efforts, first by saving the plane and then by winning all Le Chiffre's money to begin infiltrating the Spectre organization, starting with Mr. White.

They were trading insults before this, and Bond replies that Le Chiffre already knows his identity. We have no reason to think otherwise as Le Chiffre is connected and would have done his homework on each player in the game. It strikes me that you're strongly identifying with the females who are set up to alternate between tension/release with Bond. They spend half the time hating Bond and half the time loving him.

The character was heavily modified in each incarnation, and was badly outdated by the digital revolution. At least the Craig films go a long way in modernizing Bond and doing away with the campy elements that turned off a lot of us.

There's no need to be nasty about it. We have plenty of Bond films to enjoy. If you prefer Moore or Connery in the role, that's great. I have major criticisms of Craig's films--primarily Munich--but he's just an actor. He doesn't write the lines or choose the plot.

 

Every point you make only proves what a bad movie Casino Royale is. It may
be a terrific action film, but as James Bond, it's risible.

Nobody liked the camp, and many fans, critics and moviegoers complained
about it back in the day, but the Broccoli's have always operated in their own
private world.

The Craig films have invented a whole new catalog of campy elements which
will become more obvious as they age. His films, with their heavy burden of
political correctness, will age quickly and prove laughable to future generations.

Craig is the only actor to utterly fail the character and the legacy. He has a Joe
Dellasandro quality about him; if they had cast Dellasandro instead of Craig
the films would be exactly the same. As time goes by Craig's failure will become
more apparent. On the bright side, his last Bond film is cause to celebrate.
No Time To Die will be good riddance to bad rubbish. Unfortunately the
same family will be in creative control of the next one. Nobody has yet figured
out how to rescue James Bond from the Broccoli's.

 

Read that No Time To Die has been pushed to November

 

Begs the question re-edited / tweaked / new stuff added .. another theme tune. 8 months ahead .. long time.

 

I like very much, Craig as Bond, but his movies aren't timeless like Sean Connery's or Roger Moore's.

 

As much as I like DC CR think the rock score dates it, hard to beat the classy John Barry.

 

Goldfinger comes out on top for me as well. It's just a fun film and really the beginning of the classic Bond formula.

 

Beginning?
Or e n d.

 

Yes!

 

I am going to go with You Only Live Twice. You have gadgets, a plot that would be reused at least 3 more times, an awesome villainous lair, the ultimate Blofeld, great scenery, multiple conquests, my fave Bond car, ninjas, outer space, and fantastic theme song. Goldfinger is lacking because we spend too much time in captivity in awe inspiring Kentucky.

 

The "essence" of a James Bond film was captured and defined in Dr. No.
From Russia With Love and OHMSS built on what Dr. No achieved.
Goldfinger was a plodding mediocrity with a few outstanding moments.

 

Why would you say that is?

 

Who would?

 

I love Bond,actually-The World Is Not Enough was pretty good.

 

How can you leave David Niven and Woody Allen, possibly the greatest Bonds of all time out of that equation...???

 

You can definitely make a case for YOLT. It's definitely one of the Bond films that's been copied and parodied the most.

 

Connery 5 films in a about 5 years
Moore 7 films in 12 years
Daniel Craig like 3 or 4 films in 15 years just estimating.
Lots of the Moore movies could remade.
British tv could redo YOLT and golden gun actually following the books. I liked casino royale but they are running out of ideas.
Nothing tops the first 5 Connery movies imo
But it was a different time.
YOLT ending with volcano and spaceships really stray from good storylines in the books.
Goldfinger is ultimate Bond film to me.

 

They say a customer is always right.

 

Hey I liked the camp! I think different Bonds are like the Time Lord character Dr Who. It would be absurd and creepy for each new actor to assume the persona of the original actor. They are different people and should as they feel comfortable act the part as a new personality.

 

Except for the non actor playing Bond. Dreadful.

 

He wasn't bad but he wasn't great. Connery never did a Bond film in a cold climate. In YOLT i think the volcano stuff was one of the largest indoor sets created then they use model helicopters for little nellie. I still like the first part of that movie . People complain about Connery trying to look Japanese , but that was part of the book.

 

I've re-watched every Bond movie within the last couple of months. From Russia With Love was always my favorite, but after watching them all again, I came away with a different opinion. I have two favorites; GoldenEye and Casino Royale.