Search
Search results
Awix (3310 KP) rated Licence To Kill (1989) in Movies
May 24, 2019
Probably nobody's favourite Bond film, but it doesn't deserve the stick it gets for supposedly putting the franchise on hiatus for half a decade (behind the scenes issues at MGM/UA were responsible for the delay). A gritty tale of drug-dealing and vengeance, rather closer to the tone of Ian Fleming than any Bond film in twenty years; not that different in tone from some parts of the Daniel Craig era.
The complaint that it just doesn't feel like a Bond movie - too much crunch, not enough glitter - has some truth to it, and Dalton is arguably playing it all just a bit too straight, but the action sequences are well-mounted and it moves along pacily enough. Also has a scene where Benicio del Toro gets squelched by giant spiked wheels, so much to enjoy here on many levels (only joking, Benny).
The complaint that it just doesn't feel like a Bond movie - too much crunch, not enough glitter - has some truth to it, and Dalton is arguably playing it all just a bit too straight, but the action sequences are well-mounted and it moves along pacily enough. Also has a scene where Benicio del Toro gets squelched by giant spiked wheels, so much to enjoy here on many levels (only joking, Benny).
David McK (3422 KP) rated Northlight in Books
Jan 30, 2019
I think I read one of these Adam Hall (Elleston Trevor's pen name) Quiller books years ago and wasn't really that impressed, but things (and tastes) change. When this one was recommended to me as being 'better than Ian Fleming' I thought I would give it a second chance. Unfortunately, I now remember why - generally speaking - I don't really read spy novels.
Written and set during the mid 80s, this is the time of the Cold War, when the Iron Curtain was still up and when the Iron lady (Margaret Thatcher) was still in power. In this, Quiller has to go undercover into Soviet Russia to investigate the sinking of a US submarine. Told in first person as Quiller remembering the mission, I found this hard to get into, slow moving and - unfortunately - not really that exciting.
Doubt I'll read any more anytime soon.
Written and set during the mid 80s, this is the time of the Cold War, when the Iron Curtain was still up and when the Iron lady (Margaret Thatcher) was still in power. In this, Quiller has to go undercover into Soviet Russia to investigate the sinking of a US submarine. Told in first person as Quiller remembering the mission, I found this hard to get into, slow moving and - unfortunately - not really that exciting.
Doubt I'll read any more anytime soon.
Shaun Collins (3 KP) rated James Bond, Vol. 1: VARGR in Books
Jan 12, 2018
Confession time... I've never read an Ian Fleming James Bond novel.
Don't hate me. They're on the list.
But I have seen all the films, so when Dynamite announced they were doing a Bond comic, I figured I'd give it a go. All in all, not to bad. An enjoyable, if pedestrian Bond plot, with all the trappings to make it Bond. Brutal deaths, sly jokes, cool weapons, sexual innuendo, and everything blows up at the end. What more could you want?
I liked the art work, although it was a bit graphic for a Bond film, this is obviously a "dark and gritty" reboot style telling. And that's fine, just expect that when you go in. Bond looks more like Sterling Archer than Daniel Craig, and that's also fine, since Craig isn't at the top of my Bond list anyway. In fact, none of the characters are drawn to represent anyone specific, so separate continuity and all that.
I hoped for more, but wasn't disappointed.
Don't hate me. They're on the list.
But I have seen all the films, so when Dynamite announced they were doing a Bond comic, I figured I'd give it a go. All in all, not to bad. An enjoyable, if pedestrian Bond plot, with all the trappings to make it Bond. Brutal deaths, sly jokes, cool weapons, sexual innuendo, and everything blows up at the end. What more could you want?
I liked the art work, although it was a bit graphic for a Bond film, this is obviously a "dark and gritty" reboot style telling. And that's fine, just expect that when you go in. Bond looks more like Sterling Archer than Daniel Craig, and that's also fine, since Craig isn't at the top of my Bond list anyway. In fact, none of the characters are drawn to represent anyone specific, so separate continuity and all that.
I hoped for more, but wasn't disappointed.
David McK (3422 KP) rated Live and Let Die (James Bond, #2) in Books
Jan 30, 2019
"When you were young, and your heart was an open book,
You used to say live and let live
(you know you did you know you die you know you did)
But in this ever changing world in which we live in
Makes you give in and cry ...
Live and let die ..."
(cue guitar riff)
With that out of the way - Paul McCartney and Wings, later covered by Guns 'N Roses - Live and Let Die is the second James Bond book by Ian Fleming, but the eighth film in the series, and the first to star Roger Moore in the lead role.
And reading it with contemporary eyes, boy has it aged. Quite different than the movie - although the key elements (vodoo, Baron Samedi, Solitaire, American southwest setting) are intact, it can also be quite uncomfortable reading this with modern sensibilities, particularly in how Flemings (and Bond) treats the female characters, and in how the Harlem culture and denizens are portrayed.
Allowances must be made, I suppose, for the time period in which it was written ...
You used to say live and let live
(you know you did you know you die you know you did)
But in this ever changing world in which we live in
Makes you give in and cry ...
Live and let die ..."
(cue guitar riff)
With that out of the way - Paul McCartney and Wings, later covered by Guns 'N Roses - Live and Let Die is the second James Bond book by Ian Fleming, but the eighth film in the series, and the first to star Roger Moore in the lead role.
And reading it with contemporary eyes, boy has it aged. Quite different than the movie - although the key elements (vodoo, Baron Samedi, Solitaire, American southwest setting) are intact, it can also be quite uncomfortable reading this with modern sensibilities, particularly in how Flemings (and Bond) treats the female characters, and in how the Harlem culture and denizens are portrayed.
Allowances must be made, I suppose, for the time period in which it was written ...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Quantum of Solace (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
With the success of “Casino Royale” featuring new Bond Daniel Craig, the world has waiting eagerly for the follow up, “Quantum of Solace” which continues the historic spy franchise.
Picking up exactly where the last film ended, Bond is walking a fine line between revenge and doing his duty after being betrayed by Vesper at the end of the last film. While interrogating a suspect with M (Judy Densch), it is learned that there is an organization that is very dangerous and influential that even has influence in the C.I.A. and MI6.
Before they can learn any further information, a shocking betrayal happens and Bond is in hot pursuit of the suspect across the rooftops of Italy and soon locked in a deadly confrontation with the traitor.
The recent events have M concerned and Bond is dispatched to Haiti to follow on a lead which thanks to a case of mistaken identity leads Bond to a woman named Camille (Olga Kurylenko). Olga is involved in a deadly game with a corrupt businessman named Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), and a Bolivian General named Medrano (Joaquin Cosio).
Unsure of their involvement, Bond follows Greene, and learns that he heads an environmental group and has designs on a track of desert in Bolivia. Unsure if Greene’s interest in the area is related to diamonds, oil, or something else, M tasks Bond with finding out what is going on, as her superiors are betting that it is related to oil, and with the C.I. A. involved, it is reasoned that the England cannot be left out of an already dwindling oil supply.
It is at this point that the film lost much of its steam for me as the final revelation seemed to be much ado about nothing as this sort of thing happens, and has happened the world over for years and is hardly worthy of involving the MI6, much less the worlds must dangerous spy.
What follows is a series of betrayals and a few action scenes leading up to a fiery climax which almost redeems the film.
Let me say at the outset that I am a Bond fan and a traditionalist. I understand change happens over time and I am not one who thinks that the role began and ended with Sean Connery. I enjoyed Roger Moore though found him a bit camp. Timothy Dalton did not work for me, and George Lazenby was only Bond for one film so it is hard to judge him fairly. That being said, I found Pierce Brosnan to have been the best Bond since Connery as his interpretation of the character is dead on.
Sir Ian Fleming created the character and has said that he was influenced by people he knew. Bond is a well educated and cultured individual who was educated at the top schools, was an officer in the Royal Navy, and is a suave and charming individual as well as a cold and deadly killer when needed. He is scarred by events in his past, as such he relies on alcohol, duty, and woman to get by, but never once allows himself to get to close to anyone.
When they rebooted the franchise with Craig, much of the 40 years of Bond as well as the essence of the character have been lost. Craig’s Bond is not a cultured blue blood, he is a common thug. In my review of “Casino Royale” I mentioned that the new Bond passed up spending a night with a woman in order to pursue a lead, and how Connery would have found time to do both with style.
Craig’s Bond is very light on womanizing and the film has zero sexual tension and only a very brief romance seen that seems tacked on. The underlying themes of Bond has been guns, gadgets, girls, and action, and this film has chosen to pretty much eschew almost all of this as there are zero gadgets in the film and to be honest, I found the plot to be uninspired.
I think that in many ways the people behind the film have tried to get as far away from the past Bond films as possible especially the maniacal villains who were bent on destroying the world.
As an action film, the movie does have its moments and if it was not a Bond film would be a passable action thriller. As a Bond film, it promises the world and will likely disappoint much long term Bond fans and appeal mainly to those who do not have a longstanding history with the character from book to film. I have to wonder if Sir Ian Fleming is spinning in his grave over what they have done to his gentleman spy in the name of progress.
Picking up exactly where the last film ended, Bond is walking a fine line between revenge and doing his duty after being betrayed by Vesper at the end of the last film. While interrogating a suspect with M (Judy Densch), it is learned that there is an organization that is very dangerous and influential that even has influence in the C.I.A. and MI6.
Before they can learn any further information, a shocking betrayal happens and Bond is in hot pursuit of the suspect across the rooftops of Italy and soon locked in a deadly confrontation with the traitor.
The recent events have M concerned and Bond is dispatched to Haiti to follow on a lead which thanks to a case of mistaken identity leads Bond to a woman named Camille (Olga Kurylenko). Olga is involved in a deadly game with a corrupt businessman named Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), and a Bolivian General named Medrano (Joaquin Cosio).
Unsure of their involvement, Bond follows Greene, and learns that he heads an environmental group and has designs on a track of desert in Bolivia. Unsure if Greene’s interest in the area is related to diamonds, oil, or something else, M tasks Bond with finding out what is going on, as her superiors are betting that it is related to oil, and with the C.I. A. involved, it is reasoned that the England cannot be left out of an already dwindling oil supply.
It is at this point that the film lost much of its steam for me as the final revelation seemed to be much ado about nothing as this sort of thing happens, and has happened the world over for years and is hardly worthy of involving the MI6, much less the worlds must dangerous spy.
What follows is a series of betrayals and a few action scenes leading up to a fiery climax which almost redeems the film.
Let me say at the outset that I am a Bond fan and a traditionalist. I understand change happens over time and I am not one who thinks that the role began and ended with Sean Connery. I enjoyed Roger Moore though found him a bit camp. Timothy Dalton did not work for me, and George Lazenby was only Bond for one film so it is hard to judge him fairly. That being said, I found Pierce Brosnan to have been the best Bond since Connery as his interpretation of the character is dead on.
Sir Ian Fleming created the character and has said that he was influenced by people he knew. Bond is a well educated and cultured individual who was educated at the top schools, was an officer in the Royal Navy, and is a suave and charming individual as well as a cold and deadly killer when needed. He is scarred by events in his past, as such he relies on alcohol, duty, and woman to get by, but never once allows himself to get to close to anyone.
When they rebooted the franchise with Craig, much of the 40 years of Bond as well as the essence of the character have been lost. Craig’s Bond is not a cultured blue blood, he is a common thug. In my review of “Casino Royale” I mentioned that the new Bond passed up spending a night with a woman in order to pursue a lead, and how Connery would have found time to do both with style.
Craig’s Bond is very light on womanizing and the film has zero sexual tension and only a very brief romance seen that seems tacked on. The underlying themes of Bond has been guns, gadgets, girls, and action, and this film has chosen to pretty much eschew almost all of this as there are zero gadgets in the film and to be honest, I found the plot to be uninspired.
I think that in many ways the people behind the film have tried to get as far away from the past Bond films as possible especially the maniacal villains who were bent on destroying the world.
As an action film, the movie does have its moments and if it was not a Bond film would be a passable action thriller. As a Bond film, it promises the world and will likely disappoint much long term Bond fans and appeal mainly to those who do not have a longstanding history with the character from book to film. I have to wonder if Sir Ian Fleming is spinning in his grave over what they have done to his gentleman spy in the name of progress.