Rate The World is Not Enough

[Kevin Roegele]

Having watched TWINE today, my opinion of it is thus...

1. It's one of the few movies in the series which places plot and character first, and action secondary.

2. Some of it is very atmospheric, such as Renard's introduction at the Devil's Breath.

3. Renard is a superb character. He's both pathetic and pitiful, yet vicious and unstable. More 3D than any other Bond villain.

4. Despite the action itself being mediocre, and sometimes awful, there are some really exciting moments, such as Renard leaving Bond in the soon-to-explode missile silo ("No offence Mr Bond, but we're evil, and soon you'll feel nothing at all."), and Bond and Christmas escaping the explosion literally at the very last second. Die Another Day may have cooler looking action, but it has absolutely not tension or excitement.

5. In terms of character, Elektra is by far the best Bond girl ever.

6. Zukovsky is wasted. In GoldenEye, he had a genuine menace and was a serious character. In TWINE, he's comic relief.

7. David Arnold's best score. Although there is too much techno, the score perfectly encorporates the sweeping John Barry style to the present.

8. The theme tune by garbage is perfectly Bondian.

 

[DACrowe]

Kev. outside of saying you didn't like Coltrane in this one I agree pretty much with all you said. Denise Richards is a bad actress but she is an average Bond girl (very few Bond actresses are any damn good) and better than berry was. The rest of hte cast was top notch though and it was just a good movie.

On Goldeneye however, I just will have to disagree. I think Brosnan wasn't as comfortable in the role as he was in later installments, but for GE it worked. Because the world he was used to was gone and he had to adapt and had to prove he was still worthy and Brosnan had to prove he was worthy to be Bond. I thought he still exuded charisma and charm though and especially after the growling Dalton years it was a breath of fresh air. Take his scenes with M, Xenia and Q. All top notch.

As for the "dry spell" between the theft of the Tiger and Bond Xenia's "sex scene." Well I felt the movie worked here quite well. You had a very vicous brutal massacre of the people at Siberia. It was the first trully graphic serious-violent Bond scene in a real long time (the ones in LTK don't count as it was a terrible movie). Brosnan and his chemistry with M by Dench was great. I feel even if Craig surpasses Brosnan (which is quite possible) from the two clips I've seen, he will not have the same chemistry Brosnan had with Dench in their scenes and this was their best one.

I liked Jack Wade replacing Felix and showing modern day cyncism and the Valentine scenes were some of my favorite in the movie. Humorous but they had a bit of menace about them (like the whole movie, which it should) and reminded me of the old days when Bond movies would have that figure and they would help James and push the story along well (best used in FRWL obviously).

It was from this point on James controls the story. A carefully laid out exposition and plotline was built and it was time James threw a monkey wrench into it. He broke rules, he killed Soviet soldiers (innocent or not), stole tanks, ran over city areas, shot lied and stole his way through. Sure Natalya yelled at him but it was the series trying something different than the girl who just falls into his arms (I thought it worked as opposed to Jinx and the Chinese agent in TND for later attempts at this type of character). Bbond still ran the show.

And well I just love the tank chase. The only chase in the series that tops it is probably the original DB5 Aston Martin chase in Goldfinger because it is so classic. All other car chases in the series get dated and have been well since topped over the years (though TSWLM having one go under water was a nice trick). But in GE it was played for cool comedic effect instead of slick "badass" effect. It worked. The whole movie everyone ahs been talking **** about how Bond is dated and uneeded. When the girl is in trouble though he comes busting through a wall in a tank. It goes through all the cliches including a fruit stand of sorts and is the only time the Bond theme is in full drive during the movie. It is just so entertaining.


As for TWINE. Brosnan was better and Elektra and Renard were great characters to add to the Bond series. Both fully developed and with dichotemies and real motivations. Combine with Bond feeling used but still doing his mission in the cold blooded tone was great to see. And I still think the Bablo/river Thames opening and missile silo sequence were very good old school action scenes. When they started trying to "compete" with the Matrix and Star Wars we got the bull**** that was the climax to DAD. So I'll take a retro (if ackwardly paced) fight on a sub then.

 

[DACrowe]

P.S. If I were to place TWINE in my ranking it'd be here:

1. Goldfinger
2. Goldeneye
3. From Russia With Love
4. The Spy Who Loved Me
5. Dr. No
6. The World is Not Enough
7. For Your Eyes Only

Those to me are the top of the Bond franchise though.

 

[Agentsands77]

You had a very vicous brutal massacre of the people at Siberia.

We sure did. But that whole Severnaya business went on too long, as did Bond's arrival in Russia, all that Natalya wandering in Russia nonsense, as did Bond's meetings with Wade and Zukovsky. Too talky, not a lot of plot moving forward.

I feel even if Craig surpasses Brosnan (which is quite possible) from the two clips I've seen, he will not have the same chemistry Brosnan had with Dench in their scenes and this was their best one.

Have you seen the Craig/Dench clip that's come onto the internet? Dench is freaking amazing (and I've never particularly liked Dench's M and I never thought I'd ever give her M tons of praise). It seems like she's giving one hell of a performance opposite Craig in CASINO ROYALE, and while I was hesitant about them keeping her, now I'm very grateful they did.

P.S. If I were to place TWINE in my ranking it'd be here:

1. Goldfinger
2. Goldeneye
3. From Russia With Love
4. The Spy Who Loved Me
5. Dr. No
6. The World is Not Enough
7. For Your Eyes Only

Those to me are the top of the Bond franchise though.

If I were to place TWINE in a ranking, I'd place it here:

1. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
2. YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE
3. GOLDFINGER
4. THUNDERBALL
5, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
6. THE SPY WHO LOVED ME
7. THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS
8. DR. NO
9. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY
10. OCTOPUSSY
11. NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN
12. LICENCE TO KILL
13. GOLDENEYE
14. DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER
15. DIE ANOTHER DAY
16. MOONRAKER
17. LIVE AND LET DIE
18. TOMORROW NEVER DIES
19. THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN
20. A VIEW TO A KILL
21. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH

 

[DACrowe]

A) You Count NSNA?

B) YOU PUT THUNDERBALL AND YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE IN YOUR TOP 5?! Thunderball is average at best but most likely mediocre but YOLT was as dull to watch as Connery was playing the role in that film!

 

[Agentsands77]

A) You Count NSNA?

Sure. It may not be EON-made, but it's a Bond film nonetheless, and is as legitimate a take on the character as the majority of EON's ventures.

B) YOU PUT THUNDERBALL AND YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE IN YOUR TOP 5?! Thunderball is average at best but most likely mediocre but YOLT was as dull to watch as Connery was playing the role in that film!

THUNDERBALL is absolutely classic. It has some minor flaws (namely the underwater sequences drag a bit), but that's about it. Otherwise, it's just one classic and cool moment after another.

And YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE is, IMO, magnificent entertainment. The first truly "epic" Bond film, and it's really the one that all the "epic" Bond films follow after. Not only is it arguably the most iconic Bond film of all time (yes, I think it defined who Bond is even more than GOLDFINGER), it's always fun, not to mention beautiful. Throw in some of the best set-pieces in the franchise and you've got a winner. Sure, Connery's not as good as he could be, but a bored Connery still has more charisma and magnetism than most actors could hope to muster.

 

[DACrowe]

Thunderball I find incredbily boring. All the action is too tongue and cheek for me and is the beginning of the Moore days and problems in many respects. Bond beating up a woman before getting on a jetpack was too far gone from the glory days of FRWL Bond. His seductions were cheesy and despite two great Bond girls there was no tension or suspense in this very boring movie. Every action scene lacked any excitement and was boring to watch, as was the plot.

Albeit Connery trying harder with two of the best Bond girls puts it above NSNA, which was TERRIBLE.

As for YOLT I view it as the beginning of the drop in quality for Bond movies. Thunderball while disappointing was still in line with the first three Connery movies. The plot was ridiculous and while it was iconic, it was iconic in all the bad spots of Bond movies. If Dr. No and FRWL influenced CR then YOLT influenced DAD. DAF, Moonraker, A View to a Kill and DAD are all modeled after YOLT and all of those are bottom barrell Bond movies.

It was cheesy, a self-parody and again very boring. The first act of DAD felt like Goldfinger and it worked and then the next two felt like YOLT and htat is why it failed. The fake death, becoming Japnese, carved out volcano....this is the crap that Aston Powers spoofed (brilliantly). The movie has no energy and is a bore to watch. All the action is over the top and campy and outside of Plescence as Blofeld no one tried and the overall movie was a B-joke.

Those are both far and below TWINE not to mention Goldeneye, really.

 

[Agentsands77]

Thunderball I find incredbily boring. All the action is too tongue and cheek for me and is the beginning of the Moore days and problems in many respects.

GOLDFINGER is much sillier than THUNDERBALL. Aside from the pre-title sequence use of a jetpack, THUNDERBALL really isn't all that silly at all - it's very down-to-earth.

Bond beating up a woman before getting on a jetpack was too far gone from the glory days of FRWL Bond.

How so? I've always thought the jetpack was too much, but aside from that, I find the pre-title sequence amazing. Bond fighting a woman is no more bizarre than the FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE pre-titles, or GOLDFINGER's "Bond wears a duck on his head" or anything like that.

His seductions were cheesy and despite two great Bond girls there was no tension or suspense in this very boring movie.

His seductions were cheesy? How are they any different from the other Connery seductions (in GOLDFINGER, for instance?). GOLDFINGER actually asks us to believe that a single encounter with Bond can convert a lesbian. THUNDERBALL makes no such claim in any of its seductions.

Every action scene lacked any excitement and was boring to watch, as was the plot.

Really? I didn't think so. Bond's fistfight with Colonel Jacques Bouvier? Stunning. The foot chase through the junkanoo? Very suspenseful. Bond's break-in on Palmyra? Very tense.

As for YOLT I view it as the beginning of the drop in quality for Bond movies. Thunderball while disappointing was still in line with the first three Connery movies. The plot was ridiculous and while it was iconic, it was iconic in all the bad spots of Bond movies. If Dr. No and FRWL influenced CR then YOLT influenced DAD. DAF, Moonraker, A View to a Kill and DAD are all modeled after YOLT and all of those are bottom barrell Bond movies.

Well, THE SPY WHO LOVED ME was very much modeled after YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, and you seem to love that.

There's nothing wrong with the larger-than-life, absolutely out-of-this-world Bond. There are two Bonds in the franchise - the darker spy of thrillers like FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, and then there's the big superhero of films like GOLDFINGER (yes, GOLDFINGER is where the superhero Bond first appeared on the scene and things started to get more knowingly silly and humorous). YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, THE SPY WHO LOVED ME and so on only carry on the superhero Bond tradition. Both grounded Bond and superhero Bond are allowed to stand side-by-side, and I see no reason why one is innately superior to the other.

And honestly, DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER and MOONRAKER have very little in common with YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER and MOONRAKER are campfests; YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, while ludicrous, doesn't have the constant winking at the camera those two have. Again, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE plays it straight.

And furthermore, A VIEW TO A KILL was modeled after GOLDFINGER. So take that for what it's worth.

It was cheesy, a self-parody and again very boring.

YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE is not self-parody. THE SPY WHO LOVED ME and MOONRAKER are, but YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE never acts like it's in on the joke. Aside from having an outlandish story and larger-than-life settings, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE plays itself fairly straight.

The fake death, becoming Japnese, carved out volcano....this is the crap that Aston Powers spoofed (brilliantly).

Austin Powers only spoofed it because Mike Myers loved it. Austin Powers was a tribute to Bond - not an attack on it.

Those are both far and below TWINE not to mention Goldeneye, really.

Since when did these become an objective decision? And furthermore, I think any token scene in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE has more energy and entertainment value than almost anything THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH has to serve up.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

JuSst to kinda respond to Agentsands.....I think you kinda have a point on the Videogame thing.

Really....I was sorta a Bond fan before Goldeneye. Kinda. I'd seen some of the Timothy Dalton ones......didn't really dig them as a kid.....but, I mean....I was like 11 or something when I caught those. I'd also seen a bit of Connery, my Dad loved and still does his Bond.

But, I guess I'm a part of that Brosnan era. I grew up with Brosnan as my Bond. I got into the character, and I actually think ALOT of younger fans today have as well, b/c of the videogame. Once I played the game, which kicked ass, I watched the movie, which kicked ass....and became a Bond freak. I remember even renting each Bond film every weekend out of Blockbusters too. And, even though I didn't really "get" all of them....I still watched them all. Except for ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE. For some reason....I could never find that one in stock.

But, yeah....I think the games also count for something. I mean.....have any of you played EVERYTHING OR NOTHING? I think that game might be no. 2 (behind Goldeneye) as Brosnan's best 007 work.

I think Goldeneye is great b/c it had to update and bring back 007 in a world that no longer needed him really.......but, in the end...we basically see that we do need him. I dig some of the stuff that kinda took swipes at Bond's rep, calling him a Dinosaur was something that was a looooonnnnggg time coming, and introducing a new M, this time a woman was pretty monumental I thought.

And, yeah....kinda like what someone mentioned before....I think Goldeneye did deliver on those "memorable characters" that we seem to look for in Bond films. Xenia was ****ing awesome. A woman who kills men. With sex. holy ****. I know it's impossible, it's insane....but....it's ****ing cool.

I did think there were falws though......I mean, personally...I thought the entire film up to the final act was great, but the final act....when Bond heads to Cuba and they enter the base and all that.....it was kinda meh really. Didn't really get good until the final fight scene with Janus. But, pretty meh up until then.

And, really.....I dug the Tank chase......but seemed odd that they had introduced the new Bond car.....and all they managed to do with it was have it alert Bond of an aircraft nearby. That was a letdown for me.

But....other than that....I think it's a great Bond film, certainly the best Brosnan 007 film.

I wonder....anyone think that if the follow up to Goldeneye had been atleast up to par with that film....maybe, just mayebe....Goldeneye or even Brosnan would be seen in a different light? The only thing that holds Brosnan from being considered one of the greatest Bonds is that he really had ****ty scripts to work with......

 

[Agentsands77]

JuSst to kinda respond to Agentsands.....I think you kinda have a point on the Videogame thing.

I think so. I think it captivated the youth. Young 'uns were introduced to Bond *through* that game. I love the game, I think it's brilliant. But I also think it's far greater than the movie is. The movie GOLDENEYE is decent, it's just not so bloomin' fantastic that it blows the rest of the Bond franchise out of the water.

But....other than that....I think it's a great Bond film, certainly the best Brosnan 007 film.

As far as quality goes, yeah, it's the best Brosnan effort. But honestly, I don't think that means so much to say that, just because all of the subsequent Brosnan efforts were rather dire (even in spite of Brosnan turning out some fairly good performances in TOMORROW NEVER DIES and DIE ANOTHER DAY).

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I dunno......I just thought Goldeneye managed to mix blend in the action, with a story and the romance well enough. Compared to the game, the movie has alot less action.....but that's b/c the game was all about shooting people.

Do you think it does speak some sort of volumes on how good Brosnan had to have been that he managed to make his character work on some level on films like.....TND? I thought DAD had enough different stuff in the first half giving him something good to work with......the torture scene, for example had to have been a delight for him as an actor.

 

[Agentsands77]

Do you think it does speak some sort of volumes on how good Brosnan had to have been that he managed to make his character work on some level on films like.....TND?

Well, firstly, I don't think he's that good. I give him credit for being "fairly good" in those films, but I still don't find him exceptional. I'd take any of Connery, most of Moore, and all of Dalton over him in a heartbeat. But I do give him the benefit of acknowledging that I would probably like him a little more if his films had actually been quality vehicles as well.

I don't think it was really much of an obstacle for him to be decent in TOMORROW NEVER DIES, anyway. It's somewhat shoddy, but it's not like he's leaping hurdles in that film to come across okay. The problems with that Bond film are story and action and direction and other characters, not its portrayal of 007. If anything, the general direction for Brosnan's Bond was something both TOMORROW NEVER DIES and DIE ANOTHER DAY got right in that they both portray a superhero that plays something like a grounded Roger Moore. I think that's where Brosnan is his strongest, with Bond as a clearly fantasy icon with entertainment as its primary goal.

When you get down to it, I don't think his acting talent is that great. He certainly didn't do all that he could with the material he was given, even if it was crappy. His delivery in DIE ANOTHER DAY makes a lot of the awful dialogue stay awful, rather than improving it. Awful dialogue can be improved with the right delivery (just look at Roger Moore, who often had worse dialogue that DAD offered up, but managed to make it work without sounding as vulgar as it was), but I don't think Brosnan does that.

When Brosnan's trying to be darker, I don't think it ever worked for him. He's not good at doing a really dramatic 007, at least judging from THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH and to a lesser extent, GOLDENEYE. Sure, people will quick to be point out that he had brief "dramatic" scenes in TOMORROW NEVER DIES and DIE ANOTHER DAY, but they weren't really played up with the whole character-searching feel that seemed to be the object of TWINE and GE and neither really demanded anything exceptional from a performance standpoint.

I thought DAD had enough different stuff in the first half giving him something good to work with......the torture scene, for example had to have been a delight for him as an actor.

He's pretty decent there, but nothing that remarkable. I don't think the torture sequence required all that much of him, anyway, just aside from doing his standard gasps and moans and looking scruffy.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

LOL......You make good points.

So, do you think Daniel Craig will be more up your alley?

 

[Kevin Roegele]

P.S. If I were to place TWINE in my ranking it'd be here:

1. Goldfinger
2. Goldeneye
3. From Russia With Love
4. The Spy Who Loved Me
5. Dr. No
6. The World is Not Enough
7. For Your Eyes Only

Those to me are the top of the Bond franchise though.

I'd put TWINE in my top ten, I think.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

YOLT was as dull to watch as Connery was playing the role in that film!

I agree totally! Dull as ditch water.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

THUNDERBALL is absolutely classic. It has some minor flaws (namely the underwater sequences drag a bit), but that's about it. Otherwise, it's just one classic and cool moment after another.

Agreed, I love Thunderball.

And YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE is, IMO, magnificent entertainment. The first truly "epic" Bond film, and it's really the one that all the "epic" Bond films follow after. Not only is it arguably the most iconic Bond film of all time (yes, I think it defined who Bond is even more than GOLDFINGER), it's always fun, not to mention beautiful. Throw in some of the best set-pieces in the franchise and you've got a winner. Sure, Connery's not as good as he could be, but a bored Connery still has more charisma and magnetism than most actors could hope to muster.

But YOLT reduces Bond basically to the role of button-pusher. The Bond girl is so forgetable she isn't even named during the film. Whilst I would agree that YOLT is iconic, it also took the focus of the film away from 007 and onto spectacle and toys. Connery just tours a series of impressive sets. And, just when it should be working up to the climax, YOLT stops for a deadly-dull, ridiculously overlong wedding sequence.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Bond beating up a woman before getting on a jetpack was too far gone from the glory days of FRWL Bond.

He doesn't fight a woman, he fights a man dressed as a woman.

 

[Agentsands77]

But YOLT reduces Bond basically to the role of button-pusher. The Bond girl is so forgetable she isn't even named during the film.

Both Bond girls are named during the film, Aki and Kissy.

Whilst I would agree that YOLT is iconic, it also took the focus of the film away from 007 and onto spectacle and toys.

Nothing wrong with a Bond film that does that. THE SPY WHO LOVED ME did this, and I love that for doing it to. Even in Fleming, Bond has often been a sort of tour guide to other places and cool action scenes and interesting characters.

And I do think the story of YOLT is engaging enough. It's got a drive to it, and sure, while it sometimes takes a back seat to some detours, at the end of the day, it boils down to Bond following a trail. James Bond as a character and how cool *he* is is still very much the focus of this film.

And, just when it should be working up to the climax, YOLT stops for a deadly-dull, ridiculously overlong wedding sequence.

I've always liked that scene - a good example of integrating culture into it. And it's actually fairly brief.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Of course.....that's where the Austin Powers "that's not a woman....it's a Maaannn, baby" thing comes from.

Sean Connery's James Bond beating the **** out of a crossdrsssing assassin. Cooler than it sounds, for sure.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Both Bond girls are named during the film, Aki and Kissy.

That's odd, I've always missed the part where 'Kissy' is named. When is that?

 

[Agentsands77]

That's odd, I've always missed the part where 'Kissy' is named. When is that?

Well, maybe she never does get officially named. I'm shocked if that's the case - the character's name is Kissy Suzuki, but maybe that's never officially stated in dialogue. Hmm. I'll have to watch YOLT and get back to you.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Well, maybe she never does get officially named. I'm shocked if that's the case - the character's name is Kissy Suzuki, but maybe that's never officially stated in dialogue. Hmm. I'll have to watch YOLT and get back to you.

I know she's called Kissy, but I don't ever recall anyone calling her as such.

 

[DACrowe]

Thanks Kev. I forgot to mention that, he was fighting a man at drag who was supposed to be buried....MAKES IT MUCH BETTER.

Seriously, YOLT doesn't work. It is boring. All the action lacks suspense because it is said with such tongue and cheek and Connery is so bored. The story is forgettable, the sets while pretty are ridiculous and the action scenes fall flat as does Connery's very bored performance.

I agree TSWLM followed the mold but innovated it with firstly a captivating performance from Moore, who while inferior to Connery as Bond was at least trying. It actually had a Bond girl and the action scenes were highly entertaining and suspensful. Not to mention Bond actually gets his hands dirty on a number of occasions and isn't just pushing buttons. In fact, Bond goes almost commando for a portion of the movie. And while tongue and cheek it was never camp, but YLT like the wretched Moonraker was very much so though.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Thanks Kev. I forgot to mention that, he was fighting a man at drag who was supposed to be buried....MAKES IT MUCH BETTER.

LOL

Seriously, YOLT doesn't work. It is boring. All the action lacks suspense because it is said with such tongue and cheek and Connery is so bored. The story is forgettable, the sets while pretty are ridiculous and the action scenes fall flat as does Connery's very bored performance.

I agree TSWLM followed the mold but innovated it with firstly a captivating performance from Moore, who while inferior to Connery as Bond was at least trying. It actually had a Bond girl and the action scenes were highly entertaining and suspensful. Not to mention Bond actually gets his hands dirty on a number of occasions and isn't just pushing buttons. In fact, Bond goes almost commando for a portion of the movie. And while tongue and cheek it was never camp, but YLT like the wretched Moonraker was very much so though.

Plus, in YOLT, the bad guys are completely forgettable apart from Blofeld, and he only appears at the climax.

 

[Agentsands77]

Thanks Kev. I forgot to mention that, he was fighting a man at drag who was supposed to be buried....MAKES IT MUCH BETTER.

Sure it does. It's a cool as hell scene that's really quite brutal, all things considered. Sure, the jetpack is ridiculous, but before that, it's a tense, taut, and fun fighting sequence.

But the concept of the villain-in-drag is no more ridiculous than Bond appearing out of the water with a duck on his head then stripping off his wetsuit to reveal a tux, complete with carnation, only to head into a local club.

Seriously, YOLT doesn't work. It is boring.

I must have missed when this became fact.

All the action lacks suspense because it is said with such tongue and cheek and Connery is so bored.

How is the action done with such tongue-and-cheek in relation to, say, most of the Bond films? I think the action is great - we get a fight with a big sumo wrestler, we get Little Nellie, we get an assault on a base with tons of ninjas... wonderful stuff.

I agree TSWLM followed the mold but innovated it with firstly a captivating performance from Moore, who while inferior to Connery as Bond was at least trying.

Moore's very good in THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, but I don't think Connery's anywhere near as bad as you suggest he is. He's not his sparkling best like he was in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and GOLDFINGER, but he's not painful to watch, and he's still always charismatic, funny, and cool.

It actually had a Bond girl and the action scenes were highly entertaining and suspensful.

Last time I checked, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE had a Bond girl. Three, in fact (four, if you count Ling).

Not to mention Bond actually gets his hands dirty on a number of occasions and isn't just pushing buttons. In fact, Bond goes almost commando for a portion of the movie.

Hey, Bond fights plenty of people hand-to-hand and shoots plenty of people in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. It's hardly just button-pushing.

And while tongue and cheek it was never camp, but YLT like the wretched Moonraker was very much so though.

Oh, so the guy's chorus version of "Nobody Does It Better" isn't camp, then? That's campier than *anything* in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. I'm getting the impression you don't understand what camp is. Camp is defined as: "Having deliberately artificial, vulgar, banal, or affectedly humorous qualities or style; i.e. played up the silliness of their roles for camp effect." All "camp" means is that it knows it's artificial, and isn't trying to make any attempt to pretend it's anything else. That would be THE SPY WHO LOVED ME (hell, it's most of the Bond franchise, but some of it more than others, and THE SPY WHO LOVED ME is right up there).

But really extreme examples of camp are double-taking pigeon or big, bold march music as a van rushes through the desert. That's camp. If you can tell me where YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE has stuff like that, please, go on ahead. As far as I can tell, despite the outlandish plot elements, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE plays itself pretty straight.