The official James Bond Movie Tournament Thread

[Mr. Earle]

Well there are a bunch of good ideas for another tournaments:

There are Bond theme songs,
Bond villains,
Bond girls,
which one do you think should be next?

What about "Best Bond"? Or do we already know that its gonna be Connery?

I'd go with Bond villains. The girls will be a tough one...

 

[The Joker]

Villains would be great. There's so many great ones. Dr No, Red Grant, Auric Goldfinger, Oddjob, Blofeld, Baron Samedi, Scaramanga, Max Zorin etc.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

What about "Best Bond"? Or do we already know that its gonna be Connery?

I'd go with Bond villains. The girls will be a tough one...

I actually had a whole separate thread for Best Bond in which went overwhelmingly in Bond's favor.

I think the problem is that there are multiple Bond girls in several of them which makes it harder. I may lean towards Bond toons.

And I like Craig, but he's not better than Brosnan or Connery imo. I have no doubt that's the way he's written in the books, but people overlook that both Connery and Brosnan were also had the qualities of Fleming's Bond. They were cold, and scarred characters too. The difference was that they were more subtle about it, like a real agent, and that's what makes their performances better.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I actually had a whole separate thread for Best Bond in which went overwhelmingly in Bond's favor.

You probably meant to write the name of an actor.

people overlook that both Connery and Brosnan were also had the qualities of Fleming's Bond. They were cold, and scarred characters too. The difference was that they were more subtle about it, like a real agent, and that's what makes their performances better.

I agree.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Haha I mean Connery, and i also meant Bond tunes. I think Villains would be a good idea too. I don't usually make those grammatical errors.

 

[Ajendo]

Dang, i missed the tournament!

If i may comment though, i wasnt surprised by the results. The Connery movies were great but they also had novelty and nostalgia going for them. Even if ever make a Bond film better than Citizen Cane, it will always lose to some Connery movie. I mean, all of Connery's movies are considered great. How can this be?

Personally, i like the Connery movies but i think that people overestimate some of them just because of Connery and the nostalgia. I have no objection to Goldfinger winning though. It was great.

However, my favourite Bond movie will always be Goldeneye. The best Brosnan bond film, with great themes, great action, a great M and of course 006. I also liked Tomorrow Never Dies. For me both films did fun, explosions and character development really well and showed us what's underneath Bond's armor without overdoing it.

And this is why i hate Casino Royale. It was BORING and overly dramatic with all that "i have no armour". Like Nolan in Begins, they were hitting us over the head with the plot and how Bond was scarred. And if i want to watch a Poker tournament, i'll watch a poker tournament. Maybe that's how Flemming wrote Bond, but it was boring, bland, and lacked any sense of fun or excitement that we've come to associate Bond films with. It was a lecture on why Bond became an arrogant womanizer.

Other Bond films that i love are "The Man with the Golden gun" (which no surprise lost to a Connery film even though it was a mediocre one) and "The living daylights". The latter had the tough luck to go against Goldeneye. It could have gone a bit further up.

Your post is very telling. You clearly know very little about Bond and the fact that you believe Connery's movies are only great because of Nostalgia is a joke and yet you praise Brosnan and his movies who and which are arguably some of the worst in the series.

Connery's movies are highly regarded simply because they were and are THAT good. Nostalgia has nothing to do with it. YOLT and DAF both which are Connery films are lacklustre. CR on the other hand is a fantastic Bond movie and don't ever mention Nolan or BB in the same breath, please. CR was written in the 50s and the film did a more than adequate job adapting the story. I suggest you stick to your embarrassing Brosnan movies while the rest of us get to enjoy real cinema.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Your post is very telling. You clearly know very little about Bond and the fact that you believe Connery's movies are only great because of Nostalgia is a joke and yet you praise Brosnan and his movies who and which are arguably some of the worst in the series.

Connery's movies are highly regarded simply because they were and are THAT good. Nostalgia has nothing to do with it. YOLT and DAF both which are Connery films are lacklustre. CR on the other hand is a fantastic Bond movie and don't ever mention Nolan or BB in the same breath, please. CR was written in the 50s and the film did a more than adequate job adapting the story. I suggest you stick to your embarrassing Brosnan movies while the rest of us get to enjoy real cinema.

I disagree that Earle doesn't know a lot about Bond. Just because he doesn't share your opinion doesn't mean you can question whether he's seen the films.

He thinks Connery's films are great and i agree that people will hold it in high regards because of Nostalgia (even though my most favorite Bond film is From Russia with Love) even if the next Bond film ends up winning an oscar. I do like Casino Royale , however. Its the best Poker film Ever! But seriously there have been sequences in other Bond films which Bond does this stuff, like play poker, or backgammon, or golf. Its always a part of the mission.

And Brosnan is up there with Connery. Connery's first, but Brosnan isn't as far behind as people think. Goldeneye actually is my 2nd favorite Bond of all time behind FRWL. That was a film that had it all, and was pretty exciting to watch. Its sad that none of the other Brosnan films could live up to the expectations of the other films, especially DAD, which Pierce himself didn't even want to be in (you can tell when you watch this film and his performances in other Bond films).

I believe you had take the route with Casino Royale. Like B&R, the series got a little too ridiculous for its own good and for people to keep interested in Bond, its better to strip many of the more "out there" elements to add later (I hope they do).

 

[Ajendo]

It's ridiculous to even mention Brosnan in the same breath as Connery. Brosnan was nothing more than a poser and not a very good one at that. Imo Lazenby was a far superior Bond simply because by comparison Lazenby had better material to work with, had a much better supporting cast and to his own credit was simply better and more convincing in the role.

The only actors that really come close are Dalton and Craig. I grew up with the Brosnan era but I know quality when I see it. Brosnan's movies were underwhelming and that goes for the horrendously scored GE.

Honestly, go back and watch the classics and you'll be amazed at how the film hijacks you and takes you on an adventure and that's primarilly because those films have so many factors that contribute to a distinguishable atmosphere which sadly the Brosnan movies were void of.

I don't know how anyone can watch Dr.No up to Thunderball, hell I'll even take it as far as YOLT and honestly believe Brosnan comes anywhere near close. Everything about Brosnan felt forced and unnatural. Sure, he had his good moments but there was nothing particularly worthy of note that he did.

Also, I didn't question if Earle had seen all the films, I just have a feeling that he knows very little or at the very least has very little understanding of the Bond mythos, particularly with the comment he made about CR. I know for a fact that Earle has never read the novels because he's made it pretty obvious with his comments.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Your post is very telling. You clearly know very little about Bond and the fact that you believe Connery's movies are only great because of Nostalgia is a joke and yet you praise Brosnan and his movies who and which are arguably some of the worst in the series.

Connery's movies are highly regarded simply because they were and are THAT good. Nostalgia has nothing to do with it. YOLT and DAF both which are Connery films are lacklustre. CR on the other hand is a fantastic Bond movie and don't ever mention Nolan or BB in the same breath, please. CR was written in the 50s and the film did a more than adequate job adapting the story. I suggest you stick to your embarrassing Brosnan movies while the rest of us get to enjoy real cinema.

I disagree that Earle doesn't know a lot about Bond. Just because he doesn't share your opinion doesn't mean you can question whether he's seen the films.

Thank you!

He thinks Connery's films are great and i agree that people will hold it in high regards because of Nostalgia (even though my most favorite Bond film is From Russia with Love) even if the next Bond film ends up winning an oscar.

That's exactly what i meant. Connery and his movies were great, but even when one of them is mediocre, fans choose it over any other subsequent Bond film.

But seriously there have been sequences in other Bond films which Bond does this stuff, like play poker, or backgammon, or golf. Its always a part of the mission.

Yeah but not so extensively. Worse than Dalton's Bond, Craig's is no fun. Like Heath's Joker would say: Why so serious?

And Brosnan is up there with Connery. Connery's first, but Brosnan isn't as far behind as people think.

I agree.

Goldeneye actually is my 2nd favorite Bond of all time behind FRWL. That was a film that had it all, and was pretty exciting to watch. Its sad that none of the other Brosnan films could live up to the expectations of the other films, especially DAD, which Pierce himself didn't even want to be in (you can tell when you watch this film and his performances in other Bond films).

I loved Goldeneye. It had it all. Tomorrow never dies was good too, but something about the villain didnt click with me. The story with Teri Hatcher's character and the insight into their past, the locations, the car scene and bike scenes , the movie had almost everything.
Die another die was bad imho and DAD was the equivalent of Batman and Robin. I gotta say though that i loved the start where Bond is captured and we see him as a survivor. Long beard, exhausted body and yet he manages to escape, swim in the HK harbour and enter the best hotel in town all naked and wet like a homeless man. That part was great!

I believe you had take the route with Casino Royale. Like B&R, the series got a little too ridiculous for its own good and for people to keep interested in Bond, its better to strip many of the more "out there" elements to add later (I hope they do).

They could still have made good films like Connery's and Brosnan's. They didnt have to strip everything out.

 

[Ajendo]

Lol jeez.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

It isn't nostalgia. Dr. No came out almost 50 years ago. I doubt there are many 60 year olds hanging around this board. Timothy Dalton was the Bond that I grew up, if anything I should be feeling nostalgic about that era. People view Connery as the best Bond because he really was the best Bond.

That's exactly what i meant. Connery and his movies were great, but even when one of them is mediocre, fans choose it over any other subsequent Bond film.

No they don't. See Diamonds Are Forever or Never Say Never Again for examples. People hate those two for the most part.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I think he's talking about the first 3 a little more exclusively. Don't mistake this as an excuse, because I love Connery's Bond and Connery's Bond films. He was the best Bond imo with Brosnan second but a closer second than you think.

But at the same times, I don't think a Bond film will ever surpass the popularity of Connery's first 3 films. I don't have a problem with that though, and don' take this the wrong way but I hope a Bond film is made that knock off Connery's Bond.

The closest imo was Goldeneye and I do believe that that's up there with Connery's Bond films.

 

[Kurosawa]

Only Goldeneye even belongs in a discussion of top Bond movies among Pierces movies. TND was fun but nothing special, although Michelle Yeoh was great. TWINE could have been great but was ruined by Denise Richards. DAD was just awful, Moonraker level bad. Pierce's movies remind me of Roger's movies, but not as good as Roger's two great Bonds, TSWLM and FYEO, both great movies, very close to the hallowed ground of FRWL/GF.

Best non-Connery movie is OHMSS for me. If Sean had played Bond in it it would have easily been the best in the series.

 

[Ajendo]

There will never be a Bond film that gets made that will come close to the popularity of Connery's first 4 or 5 Bond movies simply because the era of Bond mania has come and gone and the fantasy essence the films projected are no longer much of a novelty. The best we can hope for now is, that Bond movies that get made tun out to be good and enjoyable and imo in the last 23 years there have only been 3 very good Bond movies, TLD, GE and CR.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I like License to Kill also. I think its better than The Living Daylights imo.