Die Another Day?

[SeriousDuke]

Does anybody like the Bond film Die Another Day? I've heard a lot of negative responses to this film... and this is my favorite Bond film. I have seen close to all of the films... missed a few Roger Moore's and Liscense to Kill... but, out of all the Bond's I have seen, including Casino Royale, Die Another Day is my favorite Bond film. It is the most fast moving, it is beautifull to look at, Brosnan's my favorite Bond, and the action is terrific. Is this anybody elses favorite?... and, if you don't like the film, why don't you like it?

~SD

 

[The Chairman]

It is far from being one of my favorites, but I enjoyed it. Definitely one of the weakest entries, but it's still a fun movie. I'm able to find something enjoyable with all the Bond movies, except for maybe Moonraker. Me and my friends saw DAD for my 12th birthday,and we all enjoyed it. It's not great by any means, but I don't think it deserves a lot of the hate it gets.

 

[Agentsands77]

DIE ANOTHER DAY. Hmm.

Well, I recently re-watched this and was pretty appalled. It's pretty terrible. And since you want me to explain why:

-The story. Ultimately, the story is a mess. It's just a hodge-podge of ideas thrown together without any real coherency. Bond's captivity gets thrown in there, but nothing gets done with it and it's all but forgotten later in the movie. And then there's tons of unexplained plot points and random ideas that don't add anything.

-The dialogue. Absolutely the worst dialogue in the entire franchise. "Now there's a mouthful" or "Leave it in" - just vulgar, vulgar stuff without any wit or class. Bond's wit is supposed to be... well, witty. This stuff isn't. It's juvenile.

-Some of the action. The laser fight and that darn para-surfing thing are two of the worst scenes to be featured in a Bond film. Ever. And even some of the decent action scenes (the car chase) are hurt by that MTV-style editing.

-This film is too action-driven. There's not enough character building or actual story. It just leaps from action sequence to action sequence. Where are the Bondian conversation scenes? Wouldn't a nice dinner sequence with Graves and Bond in the Ice Palace have been welcome? I know I would have liked it.

-The visual look. Something about this film just looks, well, unclassy. It looks closer to XXX than the class a Bond film should have. Sure, the Ice Palace is great. But then you get places like Graves' airplane, which is just a crappy set. And then you get the absolutely craptacular electroglove, which again, is one of the worst ideas in the franchise.

 

[SeriousDuke]

DIE ANOTHER DAY. Hmm.

Well, I recently re-watched this and was pretty appalled. It's pretty terrible. And since you want me to explain why:

-The story. Ultimately, the story is a mess. It's just a hodge-podge of ideas thrown together without any real coherency. Bond's captivity gets thrown in there, but nothing gets done with it and it's all but forgotten later in the movie. And then there's tons of unexplained plot points and random ideas that don't add anything.

-The dialogue. Absolutely the worst dialogue in the entire franchise. "Now there's a mouthful" or "Leave it in" - just vulgar, vulgar stuff without any wit or class. Bond's wit is supposed to be... well, witty. This stuff isn't. It's juvenile.

-Some of the action. The laser fight and that darn para-surfing thing are two of the worst scenes to be featured in a Bond film. Ever. And even some of the decent action scenes (the car chase) are hurt by that MTV-style editing.

-This film is too action-driven. There's not enough character building or actual story. It just leaps from action sequence to action sequence. Where are the Bondian conversation scenes? Wouldn't a nice dinner sequence with Graves and Bond in the Ice Palace have been welcome? I know I would have liked it.

-The visual look. Something about this film just looks, well, unclassy. It looks closer to XXX than the class a Bond film should have. Sure, the Ice Palace is great. But then you get places like Graves' airplane, which is just a crappy set. And then you get the absolutely craptacular electroglove, which again, is one of the worst ideas in the franchise.

I tend to disagree with you... however, some of the editing does feel very MTVy which I hate... it still seemed to work for those fast tracking shots. And, maybe all of this explains why the director than moved on to XXX 2 which was absolutely god-awful in every way shape and form(I just saw it for the Begins trailer).

I however felt like I knew the characters, there was reasoning behind all that happened... and it just felt like a fun popcorn flick which I love... and it was the most fast moving of all of the Bonds. And, everything happened for a reason. I loved all of the gadgets... where was that in Royale??? I know it's realistic and all, but that is the major key element that Royale was lacking, which every Bond film has.

I admit that this film has a lot of action(beautiful action sequences, IMO), and IMO they seemed to fit well with the story. If any thing, I thought the ice palace looked a little 50's cheesy style, but everything in the film just seemed to sit well and work for me.

~SD

 

[Kevin Roegele]

DIE ANOTHER DAY. Hmm.

Well, I recently re-watched this and was pretty appalled. It's pretty terrible. And since you want me to explain why:

-The story. Ultimately, the story is a mess. It's just a hodge-podge of ideas thrown together without any real coherency. Bond's captivity gets thrown in there, but nothing gets done with it and it's all but forgotten later in the movie. And then there's tons of unexplained plot points and random ideas that don't add anything.

-The dialogue. Absolutely the worst dialogue in the entire franchise. "Now there's a mouthful" or "Leave it in" - just vulgar, vulgar stuff without any wit or class. Bond's wit is supposed to be... well, witty. This stuff isn't. It's juvenile.

-Some of the action. The laser fight and that darn para-surfing thing are two of the worst scenes to be featured in a Bond film. Ever. And even some of the decent action scenes (the car chase) are hurt by that MTV-style editing.

-This film is too action-driven. There's not enough character building or actual story. It just leaps from action sequence to action sequence. Where are the Bondian conversation scenes? Wouldn't a nice dinner sequence with Graves and Bond in the Ice Palace have been welcome? I know I would have liked it.

-The visual look. Something about this film just looks, well, unclassy. It looks closer to XXX than the class a Bond film should have. Sure, the Ice Palace is great. But then you get places like Graves' airplane, which is just a crappy set. And then you get the absolutely craptacular electroglove, which again, is one of the worst ideas in the franchise.

Abso-bloody-exactly.

The worst thing is, it starts off very well. The pre-credits sequence seems like it's taken from Tomorrow Never Dies, it has the same smokey look and exciting action. But as soon as the credits are over, it's one long live-action cartoon that ends with Bond fighting RoboCop (with purple electricity no less) on a CGI plane.

 

[TheVileOne]

The dialogue in this movie was so f'n forced.

Unlike the dialogue in Casino Royale which felt very natural.

The worst thing about this movie is that Bond had fully descended into self-parody. The movie itself was just a joke.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

The dialogue in this movie was so f'n forced.

Unlike the dialogue in Casino Royale which felt very natural.

The worst thing about this movie is that Bond had fully descended into self-parody. The movie itself was just a joke.

Without doubt, the worst Bond movie.

 

[Goldeneye]

Much better than Casino - DAD had all the things that make a bond movie, wasnt the greatest by far but still really enjoyable.

 

[Agentsands77]

I however felt like I knew the characters, there was reasoning behind all that happened...

I felt like the characters, Bond included, were nothing more than giant cardboard cut-outs that spouted what passes for "witticisms". It wouldn't have been so bad if they were interesting cardboard cut-outs, but they weren't.

and it was the most fast moving of all of the Bonds.

See, I would never count that as a positive. What made the earlier Bond films great is they would take the time to breathe, to have conversations, to build characters and story. Not just leap from action sequence to action sequence.

I loved all of the gadgets... where was that in Royale??? I know it's realistic and all, but that is the major key element that Royale was lacking, which every Bond film has.

CASINO ROYALE had a few gadgets - the tracking bug, Bond's defibrillator in his Aston Martin, which was equipped with a gun rack.

Many Bond films have had a very few number of gadgets. Gadgets do *not* make a Bond movie, and at this point in time, they're always laughable rather than genuinely cool. DR. NO had no gadgets. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE had less gadgets than CASINO ROYALE. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, and A VIEW TO A KILL had barely any gadgets.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Much better than Casino - DAD had all the things that make a bond movie, wasnt the greatest by far but still really enjoyable.

DAD had all the elements the general public associate with Bond movies, but that doesn't count for anything if they're badly crafted, as in Die Another Day.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I don't think it's the worst Bond film. I think it was weak.....but not the worse.

I think what saves it from being the worse are Brosnan and the first half of the film. I think the first half was decent enough, and tried hard enough, to be different and freash...but the latter half....I'd say once Bond is welcomed back by M......it just takes a downward nose dive from there on out. The ice palace was just stupid. And having the Vietnam guy actually transform into the blonde Brit......it was just too much for me to swallow.

But...I think it was okay enough to enjoy.

 

[SeriousDuke]

I felt like the characters, Bond included, were nothing more than giant cardboard cut-outs that spouted what passes for "witticisms". It wouldn't have been so bad if they were interesting cardboard cut-outs, but they weren't.


See, I would never count that as a positive. What made the earlier Bond films great is they would take the time to breathe, to have conversations, to build characters and story. Not just leap from action sequence to action sequence.


CASINO ROYALE had a few gadgets - the tracking bug, Bond's defibrillator in his Aston Martin, which was equipped with a gun rack.

Many Bond films have had a very few number of gadgets. Gadgets do *not* make a Bond movie, and at this point in time, they're always laughable rather than genuinely cool. DR. NO had no gadgets. ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE had less gadgets than CASINO ROYALE. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, and A VIEW TO A KILL had barely any gadgets.

lol, I see where you are coming from... but... I like Bond movies that move, which is why they are called movies. Quite a few of them have... many of the Connery's, Goldeneye, DAD, and a few of the early Moore films.

I also work at a movie theater. I've gotten a lot of people that were going to see CR, and they ask if it's any good. I say, yeah... it's a lot of fun, but there aren't any gadgets(and for me the tracking device and the defibrillator weren't enough)... they go, what? You're joking... lol.

Don't get me wrong, I liked CR and all... but DAD was much better crafted(IMO)... I'm going to watch it again now... I'll let you all know if my opinion changes... I haven't seen it for quite a while.

~SD

 

[Agentsands77]

lol, I see where you are coming from... but... I like Bond movies that move, which is why they are called movies. Quite a few of them have... many of the Connery's, Goldeneye, DAD, and a few of the early Moore films.

Actually, most of the Connery's had very little action and mostly story/suspense, preferring to build character and story rather than putting the action first. For example, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE or GOLDFINGER (GOLDFINGER is a film that is primarily conversational... there's very little action in it, overall). You can have a film that moves along without leaping from overblown action sequence to overblown action sequence.

Don't get me wrong, I liked CR and all... but DAD was much better crafted(IMO)... I'm going to watch it again now... I'll let you all know if my opinion changes... I haven't seen it for quite a while.

There's nothing crafted particularly well about DIE ANOTHER DAY, IMO. It's a film nobody would really want on their resume. It's written very poorly, there's terrible dialogue, muddled story (ideas like the "dream machine" are just thrown about for no real purpose), mediocre acting, and mediocre action. It's the difference between what makes a good movie good, and what makes a bad movie bad.

You have yet to comment on a lot of the specific criticisms. Do you honestly think the dialogue in DIE ANOTHER DAY was well-written? That lines like "Now there's a mouthful" deserve praise? Ugh. That's just terrible, juvenile writing. Innuendo, when present in Bond films, should at least have a ring of class to it ("What sharp little eyes you've got." "Wait till you get to my teeth.").

Or what about how inconsistent the story is? The story is set up to be about Bond's revenge for being captured, but ultimately drops that idea entirely. Bond never gets revenge on the person who betrayed him (that being Miranda Frost).

Furthermore, random ideas like dream machines, a fake mine for diamonds with thousands of lasers, and a totally unnecessary Robocop suit get thrown into the mix. Other ideas are totally ignored (Colonel Moon, when referring to Bond's delivery of diamonds, says "I have special plans for this consignment" - what plans were they?).

 

[Catman]

Actually, most of the Connery's had very little action.

That's actually not very true. They seem that way NOW but at the time they were very action-packed films. Look at Thunderball for example. Some of those underwater scenes seem a little slow now but at the time it blew audiences away since it was like the first film to actually shoot underwater.

 

[Agentsands77]

They may have had a lot of action for the time, but we're not talking in time-specific terms. I'm looking at them as if GOLDFINGER and DIE ANOTHER DAY came out today - which one had a lot of action and which didn't.

I think it would be better for Bond to get back to the days when it was less action driven. Heck, I wish that with most action films these days, which tend to have too much action to really let the film breathe and have some character developed.

Oh, and BTW, THUNDERBALL was not the first film to shoot underwater. It was the first film to shoot underwater that extensively, but shooting underwater had been done long before THUNDERBALL.

 

[StrainedEyes]

lol, I see where you are coming from... but... I like Bond movies that move, which is why they are called movies. Quite a few of them have... many of the Connery's, Goldeneye, DAD, and a few of the early Moore films.

I also work at a movie theater. I've gotten a lot of people that were going to see CR, and they ask if it's any good. I say, yeah... it's a lot of fun, but there aren't any gadgets(and for me the tracking device and the defibrillator weren't enough)... they go, what? You're joking... lol.

Don't get me wrong, I liked CR and all... but DAD was much better crafted(IMO)... I'm going to watch it again now... I'll let you all know if my opinion changes... I haven't seen it for quite a while.

~SD

"I'm Mr. Kill"
"Well there's a name to die for."

"I Think I got the... thrust of it."

"Saved by the bell"

"Your Momma, she wants me to tell you she's real dissapointed in you."

The writting in DAD is completely laughable. Even the Q scene was horribly unfunny. Don't get me started on the final scene.

But the worst part about DAD is the cgi. Bond films, even the Brosnan films, had very very little cgi if any. And then DAD comes along and it's nothing but cgi and bad green screen.

DAD is a Bond movie, and I don't hate it, but it completely pales in comparison to the greats of the series. Even Moonraker has more charm than DAD.

 

[Mr.LethalWeapon]

Zao: "Who sent you to kill me?"
Jinx: "Your Momma, and she wants me to tell you she's real dissapointed in you."

That one wasn't so bad.

 

[Agentsands77]

Zao: "Who sent you to kill me?"
Jinx: "Your Momma, and she wants me to tell you she's real dissapointed in you."

That one wasn't so bad.

That one was bloomin' awful.

 

[StrainedEyes]

Anyone who thinks DAD is not only good, but the best Bond movie ever, is too young to know better.

 

[Catman]

Oh, and BTW, THUNDERBALL was not the first film to shoot underwater. It was the first film to shoot underwater that extensively, but shooting underwater had been done long before THUNDERBALL.

I guess. But, they actually shot in the middle of the ocean. A lot of previous films used tanks and camera tricks and what-not. Also, those underwater battle scenes were unique for it's time.

 

[Goldeneye]

DAD had all the elements the general public associate with Bond movies, but that doesn't count for anything if they're badly crafted, as in Die Another Day.

Id prefere a badly crafted Bond than a non existant one as in CR

 

[Everyman]

Well, nothing that I will say is new here, but anyway, DAD is the WORST Bond movie, bare none, it's a Bond spoof more than a Bond.

And like Agentsands77 said before, the best Bond movies had A LOT of quiet moments between the action. Something they understood with CR. The action has to make the plot move forward, not be an end in itself.

 

[SeriousDuke]

I watched Die Another Day again last night.

I loved the first half of the film... everything up until the ice palace was grand and great... and then... it hit me. I was insulted with action from then on... and it didn't stop. I wanted it to... for just a bit... but, no...

The first half of the film is spectacular... the action works, the lines are great. Yes, I actually enjoyed the "Saved By The Bell" and "You should be able to shoot through that in a couple hours..." lines, but... the action was too much toward the end.

It is still the only Bond movie on DVD that I own, and I plan on keeping it that way. I still enjoyed this film, more than any Bond... but, I honestly see what is being said here, and it is fact in the film. The lines did get vulgar and gross and childish toward the end. "He did you too?"... dumb. "I'm gonna be half the girl I used to be..." equally dumb, "I keep my tip up"........ and the terrible diamond scene at the end. The sound effects in the chase scene were awfull, they were those generic sound effects you hear in every movie... The plane fight sequence was awful, they overused the slow motion and the fast motion... the plane fight was the worst sequence in the film.

I would say, that... this film, in no means, is a parody of James Bond. This is a James Bond film... however poorly executed in some parts.

Oh well, this Bond still has it's charm with me... and I like everything that happens in it. For me... there is no perfect Bond film... as of yet.

~SD

 

[Goldeneye]

Well, nothing that I will say is new here, but anyway, DAD is the WORST Bond movie, bare none, it's a Bond spoof more than a Bond.

And like Agentsands77 said before, the best Bond movies had A LOT of quiet moments between the action. Something they understood with CR. The action has to make the plot move forward, not be an end in itself.

Thats all it mostly was - quiet bits.

 

[Agentsands77]

Id prefere a badly crafted Bond than a non existant one as in CR

Bond in CASINO ROYALE had all the features of 007:

-He is a secret agent with the number 007, employed by MI6.
-He has a taste for the finer things in life (fine clothing, has a love for Bollinger champagne and caviar, has a specific recipe for his martini, knows the year of the Aston Martin's make).
-He has a sense of wit.
-He has a bit of arrogance that he carries with him.
-He is a womanizer.
-He is dedicated to his job at all costs.
-He is a coldhearted killer, but can also be charming and romantic.

What, exactly, was Bond missing in CASINO ROYALE?

Thats all it mostly was - quiet bits.

Now you're just talking nonsense. CASINO ROYALE was full of action. It just wasn't overloaded with it.