Agentsands77
Sidekick
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
I'll buy that.The Living Daylights is a better Bond film, but Licence to Kill is a better film.
I'll buy that.The Living Daylights is a better Bond film, but Licence to Kill is a better film.
The ending of Licence to Kill is as good as any Bond finale.Meanwhile, I can't stop raving about the ending of LTK. Villian discovers Bond, Bond escapes certain death, building/drug plant explodes, chaos ensues, giant oil tanker chase, awesome action scene AKA Bond flips tanker onto one wheel to avoid missile, throw in an airplane chasing after Bond chasing after Sanchez (another great shot), more explosions, Bond faces Sanchez one final time*Furious Styles smiles fondly*
I liked how Sanchez had all the one liners, which could be in direct response to Dalton's more serious take on the role which would not allow for that kind of humour.Actually, I think Sanchez was a great villain. What was nice about him as well is that he managed to be very menacing without being the typical Bondian meglomaniac.
Well, up until the actual ending, that is. Bond jumping into the pool and that damned winking fish statue = awful.The ending of Licence to Kill is as good as any Bond finale.
Well, up until the actual ending, that is. Bond jumping into the pool and that damned winking fish statue = awful.
Agreed 100%.
I pick The Living Daylights. As others have said, it's far more of a Bond film, with an espionage feel. License to Kill seems like a generic '80s action movie, happening to revolve around James Bond.
It's interesting to think whether or not Dalton's third film would have been able to find the right blend. Historically, it's the third film where the actor finds his stride and gives his most well rounded performance (ie. Connery in Goldfinger, Moore in TSWLM and Brosnan in TWINE) and the filmmakers know where to take the film.