CommanderBond.net
  1. Martin Campbell Moves Into 'Casino Royale'

    By Matt Weston on 2005-09-13

    As his second Zorro film edges its way towards its October release date, director Martin Campbell has finally started full-time work on James Bond’s next adventure, Casino Royale.

    Martin Campbell

    Martin Campbell

    Since agreeing to direct the new 007 movie, Campbell’s involvement has been somewhat limited due to post-production on The Legend of Zorro. However, CBn has learnt that post-production on Zorro is largely complete, and Campbell has now stopped dividing his time between the two productions and is working exclusively on Casino Royale.

    For fans, this will come as welcome news, as Casino Royale nears the start of principle photography amidst rumours of a turbulant pre-production period, including the ongoing lack of James Bond #6 (recent reports suggest Campbell would favour an unknown for the role). Campbell has so far brought with him cinematographer Phil Meheux (whom he worked with on his first Bond film, GoldenEye), whilst CBn learnt in July that Stuart Baird was the top candidate to serve as editor.

    News of Campbell’s committed involvement with the film comes on the heels of Million Dollar Baby screenwriter Paul Haggis signing on to do a three-week script polish ahead of Casino Royale‘s January start date.

    As CBn reported last week, a new series of screentests for the role of James Bond are being conducted this month. Amongst those being tested is Layer Cake star, Daniel Craig.

    In related news, Variety reports Craig was recently spotted thumbing through a £25,000 mint first edition of Ian Fleming’s Casino Royale in a bookstore in London. Whilst Craig left without purchasing the novel, CBn has learnt Eon is not distributing copies of the script, but rather advising potential Bonds to read the book.

    Casino Royale is scheduled for release in late 2006.

    Related stories

  2. More Screentests Planned For New 007

    By johncox on 2005-09-05

    It looks like the excitement generated over the “final four” may have been premature.

    MKKBB and CBn’s own sources have confirmed that Martin Campbell will head back to England to conduct yet another series of screentests in search of a new James Bond for Casino Royale, the 21st James Bond film due for release in late 2006.

    Campbell is now dividing his time between final post-production work on The Legend of Zorro in L.A. and pre-production work on Casino Royale in England. Preparations for these new tests began last month.

    Bond candidate Daniel Craig

    Bond candidate
    Daniel Craig

    So who will be tested?

    As first reported in the CBn podcast, one person who is back in serious contention is Layer Cake star Daniel Craig.

    Craig’s Bond candidacy has been somewhat mysterious. Craig was “announced” as Bond by the worldwide news media in April of this year. Even CNN reported this as fact. But when CBn tried to investigate the Craig question, we were told Craig was not in the running. Craig later said he was offered the part by the studio (then MGM) but not Eon. Last week the Hollywood Reporter wrote that Barbara Broccoli liked Craig, but Michael G. Wilson did not.

    But now reliable sources are telling CBn that Craig is very much back in the Bond #6 race and will be screentested. Despite Craig being 37, Eon is still committed to the concept of Casino Royale portraying an early mission in 007’s career. Screenwriter Robert Wade confirmed this last week by saying, “It is the story that shows what formed his character.”

    Fresh rumours that Eon may go back to Pierce Brosnan were shot down by the actor himself. “I won’t be part of the next James Bond,” said Pierce at a press conference for his new film, The Madator. “All the rumours that have been going around for the last few months about me being part of Casino Royale or not are just rumours, nothing more.”

    Reports that the difficulty in finding a new 007 might delay the production of Casino Royale are, as yet, only speculation. While it’s true that some aspects of the production are lagging behind, other departments are moving forward on schedule, with the possibility of Italy substituting for the problematic South African locations.

    Keep watching CBn for all the latest news on Casino Royale.

    Related Articles:

  3. CBn Reviews 'The Spy Who Loved Me'

    By Devin Zydel on 2005-09-04

    Over the last several months, members of the CBn Forum have been reviewing all the James Bond 007 films in the “Countdown Threads“. If you wish to join in on the forum discussion all you have to do is register. Now here are some selected reviews, varying in opinion, of The Spy Who Loved Me

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by Turn

    'The Spy Who Loved Me' litho by Jeff Marshall

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ litho by Jeff Marshall

    Yup, another film considered a “classic” by Bond fandom I just don’t enjoy as much as others. I’ve tried. I think part of my lack of enthusiasm for this film was I never saw it in the cinema, but caught it when it premiered on television. Moonraker, which is the same film in a lot of ways, I saw before and thoroughly enjoyed.

    I agree with author John Brosnan (James Bond in the Cinema) who said The Spy Who Loved Me is basically a greatest hits package of past Bond films. Not that this is the first time things have been repeated, just nothing any better than before. I could go a step further and call it a remake of You Only Live Twice, but no real need to. Everything is big, there’s some great stunts and a few interesting characters. But it just doesn’t hook my interest that well for whatever reason.

    Stromberg gets my vote for least interesting/threatening villain of the series. He has a cool voice, but all he does is push buttons, give orders and make threats. Jaws is okay, but no Oddjob. It would have been better if they’d taken time to develop Naomi, Stromberg’s pilot. That wink she gives Bond is one of the film’s highlights. Anya is okay, pretty middling on my scale of Bond women.

    If only I’d seen this on that summer day in 1977 rather than seeing a Cincinnati Reds baseball game. I remember absolutely nothing about that game.

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by Hrabb04

    After the failure of The Man With The Golden Gun, the Bond people were scared. With Sean Connery threatening to come onto the scene and show them how it was supposed to be done with Warhead, they had to come up with something fast.

    So, they remade You Only Live Twice. Not a bad idea, really, since it’s one of the better ones, so you have to give them credit for ripping off a good one.

    Roger has some decent moments where he actually acts. It’s like they put a gun to his head and made him take things seriously. His scene with Sandor on the roof and then where he confesses to Anya that he killed her lover are good. His overkill of Stromberg is not. They tried too hard with that one. There are only a few actors who can get away with scenes like that, and Roger Moore is not one of them. This one is also the one where the stuntmen really start stepping in for the little things. Spot Martin Grace as Bond in the fight at the Pyramids.

    This is the first of the Herman Munster movies–ie, Jaws–and he ruins every scene he is in. If I want the Roadrunner and Wiley E Coyote, I’ll watch them. This is Bond. There is no reality for this character here. You don’t care about him, you don’t believe in him. He’s an embarrassment.

    Plusses: Stromberg, Anya, the title song.

    I really do like Bond. I just don’t like Roger Moore as Bond.

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by tdalton

    Roger Moore’s first “true” Bond film after the decent Live and Let Die and the downright awful The Man With The Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me is a great Bond film with great set pieces and interesting characters. Roger Moore finally comes into his own as Bond here, and it’s just in time as the producers and writers have finally handed him a decent script with which to work.

    Unfortunately, though, the script could have been much better had Cubby Broccoli and MGM not had to battle longtime nemesis Kevin McClory over the rights to the SPECTRE organization and the Blofeld character. SPECTRE and Blofeld were originally scheduled to appear as the main villian(s) in this film, and this would have brought closure to the Blofeld saga, and not have reduced our “closure” to a teaser sequence in For Your Eyes Only where Bond drops “Blofeld” down a smokestack.

    Curt Jergens plays Stromberg, the criminal mastermind who replaces Blofeld in the main story. While Stromberg’s scheme is quite unrealistic, as is his undersea lair, it still makes for a very captivating Bond film, even though it’s not a “classic” in the sense of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service or Moore’s much better For You Eyes Only.

    Jurgens plays Stromberg very well, although the character seems to be lacking a certain something. He doesn’t seem quite as menacing as he should be. He does, however, leave some of the menace to his henchman, Jaws, who is portrayed perfectly by Richard Kiel.

    Barbara Bach’s Agent Anya Amasova is a very respectable Bond girl, and one of the few Bond girls that has ever been able to truly hold her own alongside Bond. She is beautiful as well and is probably the second best Bond girl up to this point in the series (behind Tracy in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service).

    Marvin Hamlische’s score is not as good as the John Barry scores of the past, but it is serviceable and does not take anything away from the film. Carly Simon’s “Nobody Does It Better” is the perfect Bond theme, enough said.

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by Genrewriter

    Like the rest of my top ten, this is very subjective. Moore is terrific as Bond, maybe his most balanced performance as the character and Barbara Bach is a great Bond Girl. Curt Jurgerns has always been a favorite of mine and Richard Kiel is spot-on as Jaws. The sets and acvtion are amazing but really the only demerit I can give this one is the strong sense of deja vu one gets while watching it. Still, an excellent Bond film in every way imaginable.

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by Janus Assassin

    First of all… this is Roger’s best film. After The Man With the Golden Gun, the Bond series needed a boost and boy did it ever.

    Roger gives his best performance in this film. It starts out with an awesome ski chase scene down some mountains in Austria. Roger looked just the right age in this film.

    The storyline is one of the series best. Bond and Anya going after the submarines, tracking them from Egypt to Sardinia. The big gun fight towards the end in the Liparus was the first actual gunfight in the Moore era.

    Why this is in my top 5. Simple, it is an excellent Bond film. But it would be higher. The only part I didn’t like was Stromberg’s demise. Bond went right up and shot him. It would have been cool to see Stromberg get eaten by the shark.

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by DLibrasnow

    The top 4 of my Bond rankings are a very fluid thing, Depending on my mood, the mix of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, A View To A Kill, The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only can fall in any order. It’s particularly hard to distinguish between On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and The Spy Who Loved Me, not because they are very similar, but that they are so different with elements I love about both of them. They have the two most beautiful (in my opinion anyway) Bond girls in Barbara Bach and Diana Rigg and involving and intriguing plots with a solid villain. That really is where comparisons end because Lazenby’s entry is firmly placed in reality whereas the 1977 Moore entry is a fantasy adventure across continents.

    So, sliding into the number two spot today is The Spy Who Loved Me. My favorite 007 actor Roger Moore saving the world for the first (but not the last) time. The movie really has it all and we learn before the main titles that this is going to be a very different 007 movie from the ones that preceded it. In 1977 audiences rose to their feet to cheer what is still one of the most amazing stunts in motion picture history. Accompanied by a disco beat (that I like) Bond leaves the cabin of one of the EON series’ sexiest femme fatales, is pursued by Russian assassins and then ski’s off a mountain-top, apparently to his death. But no a parachute opens and our hero glides effortlessly across our screen and into the waiting hands of the main titles – perfect.

    I’ve never been a fan of Bond in the main titles and this is unfortunately the one that started this trend. My favorite main title sequences are those in which 007 does not appear.

    The sequence at the submarine base introduces us to a couple of recurring characters, first is Minster Frederick Gray and then Admiral Hargreaves (who would later be promoted to the position of M). These are two welcome additions and Gray’s appearance in particular would help the series four years later when the series lost Bernard Lee.

    We also are introduced to Gen. Gogol as head of the KGB. Gogol would return in each of the successive movies until 1987’s The Living Daylights when actor Walter Gotell’s health had deteriorated to such an extent that his part was rewritten to a mere cameo, while the chunk of his scenes went to John Rhys-Davies.

    What follows is a mix of action (the car chase, battle inside the Liparus and train fight stand out), drama (confrontation in the hotel room in particular) and Moore getting to be ruthless (dispatching Sandor from the rooftop – “What a helpful chap.”) Of course any review of the movie would be remiss not to mention the introduction of Jaws.

    A character destroyed two years later, here Jaws is a killing machine who, although clumsy, does not think twice about murdering his prey.

    Many fans are admirers of Caroline Munro in this picture. For me, the main thing I like about her appearances are the looks it illicits from Bach’s Amasova – are those flickers of jealousy?

    Really, everything comes together perfectly, the perfect girl, some of the best action and drama, great locations and all the while Moore’s great humor, it is in this movie that he delivers one of my all-time favorite 007 lines – “All those feathers and he still couldn’t fly!”

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by Qwerty

    “It’s Bond and Beyond!”

    You don’t get any better than The Spy Who Loved Me in my opinion when it comes to James Bond films. It pretty much has it all. Roger Moore is on top of his game as British agent James Bond, the bond girl Anya Amasova is a terrific ally and partner to Bond along the assignment, there is a collection of interesting villains, plus great locations, witty lines, a magnificent plot, and just an overall feel that makes this film a standout in the series.

    It’s often that this is the Roger Moore film singled out as being the best, and is the actor’s favorite also as many fans know.

    If Roger Moore was getting settled into the role in Live And Let Die and The Man With The Golden Gun, then The Spy Who Loved Me is where he is in his prime. His age matches well with the character and the performance is very, very engaging. He really seems to be enjoying the film and it works well in the end.

    Barbara Bach’s Anya Amasova was a change from some Bond girl’s in that she took more of an active role as being a partner alongside Bond. The chemistry between both characters is good, and having Bond kill her lover, Sergei, in the pre-credits sequence was an inspired idea, as it leads to a good conclusion for Bond and Anya.

    Jaws, Karl Stromberg, and Naomi make up an all around good collection of villains for the film. Jaws is simply one of the most well known villains to Bond fans and non-Bond fans alike. I remember rewinding the scene where he uses his teeth to undo a lock in the first half of The Spy Who Loved Me the first time I saw the film. Naomi’s playful wink to Bond before attempting to gun him down is also one of the best moments in the series. Period.

    Carly Simon’s Nobody Does It Better is also one of those songs that both Bond fans and non-Bond fans know of well. It just works. And who can forget Bond 77?

    It’s two hours of pure excitement, adventure and just everything James Bond. It really is the best.

    ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ by Scottlee

    A mammoth, big-budget, well filmed, well cast Bond extravaganza that never ceases to entertain. This one has it all and more. From the opening ski jump to the sheer laughter invoked by Bond and Anya being caught in bed at the end, this film is a timeless gem. It has a classic, intriguing villain in Jaws, some absolutely gorgeous women (Bach and Munro), a great Bond car, a catchy soundtrack, beautiful locations (Epypt? Italy? Swoon), tense moments (Bond and Anya tailing Jaws on foot), great comedy that really comes off (“When one is in Egypt….”), and a peak-of-his-career performance from Roger Moore, who proved many people wrong with this film.

  4. Robert Wade Talks Haggis' 'Royale' Rewrite

    By Matt Weston on 2005-08-31

    In an interview with James Bond screenwriter Robert Wade, screendaily.com today confirmed Oscar nominee Paul Haggis has joined Casino Royale‘s crew to rewrite the film’s script. The trade revealed Haggis will do a three-week script polish on the second draft of the script before the January 2006 shoot.

    What I can say on behalf of me and [co-writer] Neal [Purvis] is that we completed all the work we were contracted to do on Casino Royale,” Wade said. “It has taken us a year-and-a-half.”

    Everything is written, including the structure – it just needs a polish. If you can bring in a hot talented writer to polish it then great; it is normal on this size of movie. I am sure Paul Haggis will do a great job.”

    Wade also spoke about adapting Fleming’s first James Bond novel (the writing duo’s previous two Bond scripts have been original storylines). “It’s been different really. There is good solid material but it is set around a game of cards and very contained. We are writing it as he has grown to be now and there are expectations we have to meet. A lot of it is our own material.

    It is quite different: it is the story that shows what formed his character. It’s great to be asked to adapt that and show it in a modern context.”

    Asked whether the writing team would return for the 22nd Bond film, Wade responded, “As usual we are not allowed to talk about it.”

    Casino Royale is set to be released in 2006.

    Related stories

  5. 'Casino Royale' Casting Clues

    By Matt Weston on 2005-08-31

    Fresh off their scoop linking Million Dollar Baby screenwriter Paul Haggis to Casino Royale, The Hollywood Reporter today sheds light on who we may expect on-screen in the next James Bond flick.

    According to the trade, key stakeholders met in London in November to discuss who will slip into 007’s tux, but reached an impassé. Nine months on, a Sony spokesperson has said, “there is no pending announcement”.

    According to the trade’s sources, Bond producers and four-time 007 Pierce Brosnan reached a stalemate when it came to Brosnan’s salary demands (which one Sony executive reportedly described as “usurious”). Thus, producers were left with the hunt for a new James Bond.

    Bond candidate Daniel Craig

    Bond candidate
    Daniel Craig

    The trade writes of differences of opinion between Bond producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli concerning the casting of the sixth actor to play the superspy. Broccoli reportedly liked Layer Cake star Daniel Craig, but Wilson did not. Broccoli thought X-Men‘s Hugh Jackman was not masculine enough. Phone Booth‘s Colin Farrell was “too much of a bad boy”, Ewan McGregor was deemed too short and Eric Bana simply wasn’t good-looking enough.

    Layer Cake director Matthew Vaughn was also approached to direct Casino Royale, possibly with Craig as Bond. “They loved him more than me,” Vaughn said. “I would have nailed Bond.”

    Director Martin Campbell, meanwhile, has his own opinions on reinventing the series, and is reportedly on the hunt for an unknown. That, however, did not stop him from approaching Clive Owen (whom he directed in Beyond Borders), who, with offers currently flying in, was not interested in playing Bond. Campbell was also keen on Nip/Tuck‘s Julian McMahon, whose representatives requested he turn down a screentest.

    A Sony spokesperson also denied 47-year-old Ewan Stewart had ever tested for the role. Stewart, along with Henry Cavill, Alex O’Lachlan and Goran Visnjic, was touted by the media as one of the so-called “final four” candidates. The other three, however, have all screentested for the role (Visnjic spent 10 days in London with a dialogue coach prior to his test).

    Bend It Like Beckham‘s Jonathan Rhys Meyers also denied ever being approached. “It’s not reality for me at the moment.”

    Former 007 Pierce Brosnan

    Former 007
    Pierce Brosnan

    And in light of all that, industry insiders such as casting agent, Debra Zane and The Complete James Bond Encyclopedia author Steven Jay Rubin feel Pierce Brosnan should have never been dropped in the first place.

    One unnamed former Bond marketer said although the franchise needs to be updated, “the danger of going too young to broaden the appeal is that you alienate the core, which is males over 25. He has to wear the suit well, as Brosnan did. You can’t lose sight of the core.”

    Be sure to read the full article for all the industry opinion on Bond #6.

    The article also sheds new light on the supporting cast for Casino Royale. Whilst Dame Judi Dench has always been set to reprise her role as M, John Cleese is reportedly also tied to the film. Cleese has been quoted in the past as saying the character of Q was not in early drafts of Casino Royale. The search for a new Miss Moneypenny is also underway.

    Keep watching CBn for all the latest news on Casino Royale.

    Related stories

  6. Paul Haggis to Rewrite 'Casino Royale'

    By Matt Weston on 2005-08-30

    The Hollywood Reporter today writes Oscar-nominated screenwriter Paul Haggis has been tapped to revise the script for the upcoming James Bond film, Casino Royale.

    Paul Haggis

    Paul Haggis

    Haggis, who was nominated for an Academy Award for his work on the screenplay for Million Dollar Baby, has been reportedly recruited to rewrite the film’s script, which was penned by Neal Purvis and Robert Wade (and based on Ian Fleming’s first 007 novel of the same name). Haggis’ credits also include the critically-acclaimed 2005 flick, Crash, which he wrote and directed.

    Haggis has no fewer than four films currently in development (not counting Casino Royale), including the Clint Eastwood-directed Flags of our Fathers.

    The writing duo of Purvis and Wade previously penned the scripts for The World Is Not Enough (which was rewritten by Bruce Feirstein), Die Another Day and the ill-fated Jinx spin-off film.

    With Casino Royale scheduled to lens in January 2006, only director Martin Campbell and cinematographer Phil Meheux signed on, and an unfilled tuxedo hanging in the offices of Eon Productions, the clock is ticking.

    Keep watching CBn for all the latest news on Casino Royale.

    UPDATE (31 Aug, 2005): screendaily.com today confirmed Paul Haggis will do a three-week script polish before Casino Royale‘s January 2006 shoot. Robert Wade has also spoken out about the script changes. Read the full story here.

    Related stories

  7. CBn Reviews 'The Man With The Golden Gun'

    By Devin Zydel on 2005-08-22

    Over the last several months, members of the CBn Forum have been reviewing all the James Bond 007 films in the “Countdown Threads“. If you wish to join in on the forum discussion all you have to do is register. Now here are some selected reviews, varying in opinion, of The Man With The Golden Gun

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Turn

    'The Man With The Golden Gun' litho by Jeff Marshall

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ litho by Jeff Marshall

    Along with Moonraker, The Man With The Golden Gun is often considered the least of the James Bond films. Ironically, both rank above such “classics” as For Your Eyes Only and The Spy Who Loved Me on my list. I’m not sure what it is about The Man With The Golden Gun that people dislike. I’m guessing the rather forced comedy and lack of huge action. But look past that and you have a James Bond movie that author John Brosnan said was “out of step with the other films of the ‘70s.” I find that a good thing. It doesn’t try so hard to slam you over the head all that and entertains in a different way.

    The Man With The Golden Gun was made during a period where the films were somewhat scaled back. I believe the film benefits from this. Instead of worrying what big stunt or special effects sequence would dominate the next scene, it allows the film to concentrate on other things. The world’s greatest secret agent against the world’s greatest assassin is a hell of a concept. The film reminds me a little of Dr. No in the sense that Scaramanga really doesn’t show up until the final third of the picture. But his presence hangs over the first two thirds. Christopher Lee is perfectly cast as Scaramanga, a major improvement over the character from the Fleming novel, who was basically just a hood who was a talented shot.

    One of the more maligned characters in The Man With The Golden Gun is Nick Nack. Some people dislike him because he is seen as non-threatening and no challenge to Bond. I like the character. He’s not some Odd Job or Red Grant clone. He’s not threatening in the conventional way, but he helps Scaramanga become the million-dollar success he is in less obvious ways, making him as dangerous as if he were 6-4 and 250 pounds. When he tells Bond “If you kill him, all this be mine,” you really have to wonder if he’s being sincere or not, which makes more sense than the big guy who will defend his master’s honor even when he knows all is lost. This way, it puts Scaramanga as the focus of the dangerous villain. Most villains in the series are big talkers who only fight to the finish when their henchmen are dead.

    Mary Goodnight is also very disliked. While she is sometimes awfully stupid, she isn’t Stacy Sutton, either. That character will always rank at the bottom for me. Unlike Goodnight, who is basically a secretary, Sutton is supposed to be a trained geologist and somebody who is supposedly level-headed but comes across as a bimbo. Since Goodnight isn’t presented to be someone with a high education, she may be bound to make mistakes.

    Better is Maud Adams. I remember finding her incredibly attractive just by her pictures on the movie edition of the novel when I was a kid. She makes a nice damsel in distress. The scene of Scaramanga stroking her with the golden gun and her reaction is one of my favorites from the film. J.W. Pepper is a distraction, but doesn’t kill the film for me. What’s funnier is seeing James Bond driving an AMC Javelin instead of an Aston Martin or BMW. Now that’s an amazing feat.

    As for Roger, he’s in fine form with a nice combination of a bit more seriousness without being too far overboard on the wisecracks. There’s none of the forced toughness imposed in For Your Eyes Only.

    While The Man With The Golden Gun may not rival its follow-up in terms of interesting action scenes, it doesn’t underachieve there either, like The World Is Not Enough. And it’s not one continuous chase like in Live And Let Die. The whole Scaramanga thing is enough to distract from the lack of big action for me. And you actually have a feel for the location as opposed to many recent movies. For instance, does anything really feel like Die Another Day is taking place in Korea? Hi Fat’s garden is one of the more interesting locations used in the series.

    The Man With The Golden Gun is, admittedly, filled with flaws. It seems most stem from Guy Hamilton, who was revealing his limitations as a Bond director and coasting on his success with Goldfinger by this point. Probably the biggest offender, for me at least, is the scene where Hip drives off without Bond. What the hell were they thinking there? The karate battle itself could have been so much better. Some amusing scenes for sure, but Chula is one of those smirking villains who deserved much more than just a roundhouse punch to wipe that look off his face. Repeating the fun house thing at the climax probably wasn’t a good thing, either. And Hamilton reportedly told the actors to play things lightly when it could have had more edge in certain scenes.

    John Barry’s score also adds a lot to this one. I find it strange so many don’t like it much. Knowing he had only 2 weeks to compose it makes it that much more of an achievement. Especially in light of David Arnold having 2 years to work out his scores and yet still repeats things from previous scores.

    So, while it’s not one of the highest profile films, The Man With The Golden Gun is a nice, off-beat film that works in its own way. Taking a break from the please-at-all-costs attitude works for it and people should give it a second look and try to enjoy it in that way. I just hope nobody takes that it wasn’t a massive box office success as criteria it’s a bad film.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Moonraker

    It’s not that bad really, but it’s flaws outshine the highlights. The Bond girl gives Bond girls a bad name, and the plot doesn’t make complete sense, the music isn’t jawdropping, and Bond isn’t at the top of his game. But Christopher Lee is the perfect villian and is a treat to watch in this film. The car stunt was fantastic but utterly ruined by the wistle effect. An entertaining film, not the best but not the worst.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Hrabb04

    Another slap in the face to the estate of Ian Fleming and Ian Fleming’s James Bond. Not even bothering to adapt the damned novel, the creators instead come up with an ultra-stupid plot sending Roger Moore on to the Far East, where it’s not You Only Live Twice anymore. With lame direction from Guy Hamilton, the people behind this travesty show they just don’t get Bond. Hamilton definitely did not. Britt Ekland proves she was nothing more than just Peter Sellers’ girlfriend, while Maud Adams shows she should have been the Bond girl for the whole movie. There is no chemistry among the regular players.

    Best things: Chris Lee as the villain and the score by John Barry
    In an alternate realty, Sean Connery, a full partner with Broccoli and Saltzman, is 007 in this one, with Jack Palance as the villain. It’s just like the book with the shoot out in the Jamaican swamp. It would be a nice way to bring Connery back to Jamaica over 10 years after Dr. No, bringing him back on top after getting amnesia in Japan.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Skudor

    The scenery is probably the one thing that keeps The Man With The Golden Gun off the bottom of my list. The film is dragged down by Britt Ekland’s appalling acting, the annoying (although quite amusing) appearance of J.W. Pepper, the flying car… Scaramanga’s hall of mirrors (a case of taking Scaramanga’s circus background too far) and his silly private nuclear plant (oh dear). The last cut to the movie is Roger Moore as Bond – never my favourite and therefore unable to drag the film up in a way that Sean Connery could have.

    Christopher Lee is usually very good, and doesn’t disappoint here.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by tdalton

    This is just simply a turkey of a movie. Poor acting, poor direction, and a poor storyline keep this movie from even getting off the ground.

    Roger Moore, who was decent in his first go around as Bond in Live And Let Die seems to have lost his way in The Man With The Golden Gun. He just seems to sleepwalk through the role, as if there is no purpose of him even being there. He is not helped, though, by the horrible script that tries to throw in some nonsense about a solar agitator to give the villian a huge scheme for Bond to destroy.

    Sometimes, low-key is what is needed in a Bond film, and if there were ever a film that this was true for, it’s The Man With The Golden Gun. Instead of Bond having to track down who has the solar agitator, why didn’t the writers just keep the plot to Scaramanga trying to assassinate Bond. It could have been much better this way, with Bond and Scaramanga playing a cat and mouse game throughout the film. Unfortunately, this is not the case and the film becomes a tangled mess.

    Christopher Lee is well cast in the role of Scaramanga, but he’s not given anything to do. Britt Ekland is one of the worst Bond girls ever, only in front of Halle Berry’s Jinx. Goodnight could have been such a good character, but Brit reduces her to a complete moron. The only reason that she beats out Jinx as a Bond girl is that she’s easier on the eyes. Both of their performances, though, were just dreadful.

    Maud Adams is terrible in her role as Andrea Anders. She is much better a few years later in Octopussy. Even M and Q are made to look like incompetent fools in this film. It’s just a downright awful film that the producers should consider withdrawing from the official 007 series and consider going back and remaking.

    The musical score is okay, but LuLu’s title track is flat out awful. If they wanted someone to sound like Shirley Bassey, as LuLu has claimed that she was forced to do when recording the track, then John Barry should have just gone out and gotten Shirley Bassey to do another Bond theme. Just let the performers perform it the way that they would normally, that’s why you picked them instead of Shirley Bassey!

    It’s good to see that they recovered from this one to make one of the finer entries, The Spy Who Loved Me, but The Man With The Golden Gun leaves an unnecessary black-eye on the Bond franchise. It could have been so much better, yet it self-destructs on practically every level.

    On the whole, a solid film.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by trumanlodge89

    I must admit, for everything wrong with this film, its one of my guilty pleasures. Moore does his job in this one, and he has some of his best one liners in The Man With The Golden Gun. (“I shoooooore am, boooooy!”) Maud Adams is underused in this movie. Her chemistry with Moore is outstanding, and I’m sure that is why she returned for Octopussy. Britt Eckland as Goodnight is easy on the eyes, but completely pointless.

    Christopher Lee is really the only thing that makes this movie stand out. He is perfect for Scaramanga. The scene where he caresses Anders with the golden gun is particularly chilling, as is the murder of Hai Fat.

    The movie as a whole looks poorly put together. The editing is somewhat sloppy, and it seems may shortcuts were taken. Why is Roger Moore a cowboy in the funhouse scene. Couldn’t they make a wax replica of Bond for the funhouse as well? The “wax” Moore is clearly moving in the PTS. The flying car is pointless (and looks horrible), and what is with that SLIDE WHISTLE?

    Lulu’s theme song is particularly annoying. Someone recently suggested this movie be remade with Eric Clapton singing the theme. This version sounds so much better in my head.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Freemo

    Not flawless by any means, but not near as flawed as people suggest, colosally underrated, and perhaps the last “real” Bond film, before the series got diluted by actions scenes, gadgets, and the dreaded “formula”. Bask in the travelogue flavor, revel in the fact that we’re seeing the series’ best villain in Scaramanga, the real dark side of Bond, and probably Moore’s best performance as 007.

    What about Bond’s visit to Lazar’s shop, Bond smacking Andrea around, and Bond’s lunch with Scaramanga? Three wonderful scenes, the latter of which I’m putting in as a late entry for best scene in the series. These are where we really get to see “James Bond”.

    People point out many flaws in this movie and I won’t deny the slide whistle during the spiral jump, and JW Peppers return, but Mary Goodnight? A wonderful, light character. A bit of a bumbler, but so what? Wonderfully played, and the film is richer rather than poorer for her inclusion. The title song cops an undeserved hiding too. What’s wrong with it? I think it’s catchy and kinda cool.

    Not perfect, but very, very good.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by ACE

    ROGER MOORE

    Firstly, Roger Moore’s performance is excellent. There are three scenes where he is better than Sean Connery.

    1) After the much vaunted slapping of Andrea (Moore flinches!), 007 tells her that he would inform Scaramanga of this meeting if she double-crosses him. The line about the bullets being very expensive is funny and cruel and the scene is played with a genteel sadism which Moore excels at.

    2) This quality is prevalent throughout Bond’s toying of Lazar (“…or forever hold your piece!” – again funny, yet cruel)

    3) Bond’s luncheon with Scaramanga at the end. This last scene is particularly well-written and acted evoking genuine dramatic tension. In all these scenes, Moore is cold and professional and conveys the capability of his licence to kill. Even throwing the canal-urchin off his boat is a consistent choice in performance – something that might not happen in these days of “protecting the star.”

    The release of the Solex at the end is also gripping, again through Moore’s performance – he’s actually acting; desparate and concerned.

    PRODUCTION DESIGN

    Peter Murton’s designs, obviously influenced by Ken Adam, have immense creativity (the capsized HQ, Scaramanga’s junk and island). The notion that the sets weren’t adequately used because there were not thousands of extras milling about misses some points. The entire island, because of its power source and labour-saving devices, is capable of being run by few staff.

    STORY AND CHARACTERS

    The story is Bondian and has new relevance in these eco-friendly times (see “Sahara”). It is fresh because there are no nuclear weapons or Russians or SPECTRE. Thankfully, it didn’t end up as “Shane” reworked! The Andrea sub-plot is clever (re-worked in Licence To Kill with Lupe) and the scene of her being caressed by the golden gun is potent. Hai Fat, Nick Nack and Scaramanga are well-played and written. Christopher Lee was a break from the starchy villain and there was a classy, other-worldliness about him that worked so well.

    LOCATIONS

    The locations are terrific, refreshing, visual stunning and relevant. I know this film has been criticized for being built around the locations but remember the days when Bonds were actually shot where they were set? The photography is crisp and a testimony to Ted Moore and Oswald Morris.

    MUSIC

    Barry’s main theme is a energetic experiment with Lulu singing her heart out (and the inspiration for Duran Duran) while the instrumental version has a menacing yet romantic gravitas.

    FLAWS AND WHAT IF?

    There are many problems with the film, granted. Certain characters could have been cut. Mary Goodnight as written and performed is not good. Had there only been one girl, a more romantic, sexy relationship could have been established (Barry’s theme is haunting and romantic). No bedroom farce, Bond could have “rescued” Andrea, freeing her from sexual slavery thereby besting Scaramanga yet again. Sheriff Pepper need not have returned – Bond just steals the Hornet car on his own. Finally, of course, Hip’s kung-fu nieces could have been dispensed with. Bond should have had a real tough dukeroo with Chula and then dived through the wall and runs straight to the klong.

    A NEW PRE-TITLE SEQUENCE?

    I have never been a fan of the the pre-title fun house sequence. Perhaps this, too, could have been reworked. Bond fails to protect Bill Fairbanks. Fairbanks was to meet with Prof. Gibson regarding the Solex Agitator and Bond was to accompany them. Failing to save Fairbanks from Scaramanga (scene ends with him finding remains of the bullet, thereby cutting the awful “Beirut” sequence), which together with the delivery of a golden bullet after the titles, gives 007 a greater impetus to find his man.

    BOND’S MOTIVATION

    Furthermore, Bond’s motivation is sharply refined. He feels guilt for Fairbanks’ death – was the bullet meant for him? Bond must find his man. However, the delivery of the golden bullet to Bond signifies Scaramanga’s determination. Introduce Scaramanga in the body of the film with a shorter Fun-House sequence culminating in the shooting of Bond’s dummy.

    HAI FAT’S GARDEN

    The Sumo-wrestler garden fight could have been tougher. I can imagine a garden full of “statues” coming to life menacingly to apprehend Bond when touched by moonlight.

    FLAT ON HIS COUP DE GRACE

    The end could be a cat-and-mouse chase throughout the entire island (and junk) with Andrea breaking free and helping Bond since she knows the place. Bond replacing his dummy could still be retained as it is a great touch (thus retaining the great Cockney rhyming slang quip, “Flat on his coup de grace”).

    AN EXPLANATION

    I know it is silly to “re-imagineer” a Bond film. Many people have placed the blame for the (relative financial) failure of The Man With The Golden Gun on a variety of things including its poster artwork! I think the reasons are a little more complex. The Man With The Golden Gun was released less than 18 months after Live And Let Die, a shorter time span than normal, which suggests a rushed pre-production schedule. The curiosity factor for Moore had gone as this was his second Bond film (a common cause for less-than-expected results). Eon Productions was in a state of flux (Cubby vs Harry/Mankiewicz vs Hamilton/Thailand vs them all!) and the budget for the film was, in real terms, lower than the recent entries. This was because UA, who were recovering from a major re-organization at the start of the 1970s (which would lead to mutiny in 1978), were reluctant to fully back any project. Marketing and competition factors in the Xmas of 1974 would also have reduced box office for the film. Despite all this, The Man With The Golden Gun was still one of only the small percentage of studio films that would make any profit whatsoever. The film’s success was such that the same people responsible for it were scheduled to make The Spy Who Loved Me. Artistically, its huge flaws accepted, The Man With The Golden Gun ranks way up there.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Genrewriter

    Easily the worst of the series, this takes a good premise-Bond and Scaramanga as opposite sides of the same coin, and needlessly tacks on a “relevant” subplot that just gets in the way. Christopher Lee and Roger Moore are good but the rest of the actors play characters that are either badly written (Goodnight), annoying (Nick Nack) or just plain out of place (J.W. Pepper). Humor is also used very badly with the slide whistle over the bridge jump being the worst offender. Worst of all, the film is simply quite dull. A very disappointing misstep.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Bond111

    Completely underwhelming and tepid Bond “misadventure”. It doesn’t really contain any notable action scenes, the locations seem bland and uninteresting (aside from James Bond island), the Bond girl is stupid and doesn’t serve any purpose, and John Barry’s score isn’t quite up to par. The film’s only commendable point is Christopher Lee’s presence. It’s a pity he couldn’t have starred in a much better Bond production.

    It was released just one year after the previous film, and it shows.

    ‘The Man With The Golden Gun’ by Qwerty

    It’s not a horrible film really, it’s just not a good one. I suppose an exception to the theory that a Bond film is usually as good as it’s villain is this film. Francisco Scaramanga is an inspired villain, going for the dark side of James Bond or the mirrored image – completely opposite. His lines are well crafted and he’s probably the best character in the film.

    Mary Goodnight however, is not so good. She’s not really horrendous, but she’s just nothing special. Her sometimes blunderous actions: cutting Bond off, getting herself and the Solex locked in Scaramanga’s car, knocking Craw into the liquid helium, hitting the button to open the shutter, etc… detract from her character. Andrea Anders is a somewhat more interesting girl, but her lack of screentime prevents her from leaving a real big impact in the film.

    The plot would have worked better had they spent more time developing it and deciding where they really wanted to go with things.

    That said, the locations are pretty nice at times.

  8. The Michael Di Leo CBn Interview

    By Devin Zydel on 2005-08-17

    Devin Zydel

    There are an abundance of James Bond books in the world today. They cover many aspects of the series ranging from the popular films to the literary 007. However, Michael Di Leo’s book, The Spy Who Thrilled Us: A Guide To The Best Of Cinematic James Bond is different. This isn’t a book that gives an overview of the series and proceeds to give information about a variety of topics such as the films, Bond girls and more, but it’s essentially a book that reviews and ranks many aspects of the cinematic James Bond in lists. Some of these include Bond Girl Names, Villain Deaths and many more.

    While this is not the typical Bond book to collect, what makes it all the more an interesting read is the very reason that it is different from many others. It sparks discussion among fans when they compare their own choices with those the author has written in this book. CBn had a chance to speak with Michael Di Leo about his book, The Spy Who Thrilled Us: A Guide To The Best Of Cinematic James Bond.

    The Michael Di Leo CBn Interview

    Q:Thank you for agreeing to the interview. First, tell us a little bit about yourself. How did you become a Bond fan?

    MDL:007 was the obvious subject for me to take on.My parents were big movie buffs and Bond fans, so we were always going to the movies on the weekends when I was a kid. I saw Diamonds Are Forever upon its original release in 1971 (I was only 4 years old) and have been hooked on Bond ever since.

    Q:What inspired you to create the book?

    MDL:Well I had always dabbled in writing and finally decided that it was time that I try my hand at writing a book. Naturally, since I’ve been obsessed with Bond since the age of four, 007 was the obvious subject for me to take on.

    Q:Why did you decide to go with ranking certain elements of the James Bond films as opposed to the approach of giving information about the films?

    MDL:I just felt that books like Benson’s Bedside Companion and Rubin’s The James Bond Films had already done that (superbly), so I didn’t feel I could bring anything to the table that they hadn’t already done so well in their books. However, with 19 films in the can (at the time of writing), no one had ever done a book that ranked all of the elements of a Bond film and I though it would be alot of fun to do so.

    The Spy Who Thrilled Us coverQ:What did the research for this book consist of? How long did it take you
    to write it?

    MDL:Not much research was needed at all. Just watching the films. And since I have seen each one over and over again since I was a child, I did not have to watch the films again to create my rankings. Once I chose a scene for ranking on one of the lists in the book, I would then watch that scene before writng about it. The book took me two and a half years to write—not that it should have, but in the course of writing it I got engaged, married, switched jobs, etc. There were so many things going on in my personal life at the time that kept getting in the way, but I kept plugging away until it was finished.

    Q:Did you watch the James Bond films multiple times while writing? Were there any specific Bond films you focused on more than others?

    MDL:I didn’t have to watch the films multiple times, just the particular scenes I was writing about. I can run the films in my head (as I am sure many Bond fans can) like videotape, just from having seen them so many times.

    Q:Did you devise a certain system for picking the Top 5 of the elements
    listed? Were there any specific “rules” you had?

    MDL:Once I chose a topic, I would literally just start in my head with Dr. No and run straight through to The World Is Not Enough and jot down all of the instances that a particular “subject” (i.e. “villain deaths&edquo;) ocurred. Then I would look at that list and wittle it down, crossing out the ones that I wasn’t particularly fond of until I got the list down to the five best. Of course sometimes I might get it down to seven that I really liked, and then I would just mull it over and force myself to get it down to five. That’s why on some of my lists I have an “honorable mention“ list. Those are the ones that finished 6th or 7th on my list.

    Q:What decided which list categories would make it into the book? Were there any lists you originally had in mind, but dropped?

    MDL:I think in doing a book like this, some of the categories are obvious (best villains, best henchmen, best girls, etc.). The fun for me was coming with categories that were not so obvious. So I really enjoyed categories like “Helicopter Explosions” and “Why Don’t They Just Shoot Him?” Plus I wanted the book to be somewhat lighthearted in tone, so categories like those helped me achieve that goal. Where else but the Bond series can you come with a category entitled “Helicopter Explosions”? There were not categories that were dropped. In fact when I signed my deal with my publisher, he asked me to put more categories in the book than were in my manuscript. So I actually had to rack my brain to come up with a few new ones before publication.

    Q:Were there any goals you set while writing the book?

    MDL:Nothing more that finishing it and getting it published. Any sale numbers or money made was just going to be gravy for me.

    Q:What was your favorite part in writing this book, and do you have a favorite section?

    MDL:Definitely chapter 1, where I rank and review each film. I know that any serious Bond fan has their favorites and their not so favorites and has probably at one point or another ranked the films from best to worst, but to do it in writing, for the world to see, well that was a challenge but it was great fun at the same time.

    Q:Which listing has proved to be the most controversial among Bond fans?

    MDL:Chapter 1 again. I mean think of it, if you are a Bond fan and your favorite film is near the bottom of my list, not only are you going to be unhappy with that, but you’re probably not going to even want to read the rest of the book! So I really enjoyed categories like Helicopter ExplosionsI had one fan who was considerably younger than me and whose first Bond film was GoldenEye. GoldenEye is to him what Goldfinger is to older fans like me. He was quite miffed that GoldenEye was not that high on my list and that Tomorrow Never Dies (which he didn’t like) was. And for him, he couldn’t get past that and even read the rest of the book. But other Bond fans, especially ones my age (I’m 37) and older, who were around back in the Connery days, very much agreed with my rankings of the films. So I found that age certainly plays a factor in how Bond fans perceive certain films.

    Q:How did you decide which photos to use?

    MDL:I had in my head the photos that I wanted for each section and category. So I made a list of what I wanted to find and then went to a store in Greenwich Village in New York (I’m a native New Yorker) called “Jerry Ohlinger’s Movie Material Store” (a place I have gone to since I was a kid to buy Bond posters and memorabilia), which has one of the largest collections of movie stills in the world, and basically spent the day there, sifting through large binders of photos (the store has a large binder of stills from each film) until I found the ones that I wanted. I tried to find pictures that we Bond fans hadn’t seen before, but that was a tough chore. It was more important that the photo matched what I was writing about.

    Q:You mention that your book covers the official 19 Bond films; but would any of the aspects of 1967’s Casino Royale or 1983’s Never Say Never Again have made it into your lists? Any idea where you would place them in your Rank the Bond Films list?

    MDL:Well, being that Casino Royale was a spoof, I never considered including it, but if I did, it would rank near the bottom. I was never a big fan of Never Say Never Again. I remember being very disappointed by it when it came out in 1983, especially since I, like all Bond fans, were so ecstatic over Connery’s return. But I always felt the film was too light and comical and lacked the panache and style of an Eon film. I would probably rank it in my bottom third.

    Q:With that, what about Die Another Day? Where would you place that film in your ranking? Are there any lists in the book that it would have definitely made?

    MDL:My top five films are rock solid...I haven’t thought about it too much. I think the Vanquish would make the “Best Car” list. Miranda Frost might make the “Femmes Fatales” list. I think the fencing match between Bond and Graves would definetely make the best “One-on-One Fights” category. I love that scene. As for the film, I liked it. I thought the weakest parts were the PTS and the finale, but I thought everything in between (minus the CGI stunt) was very good. I’m not sure what number I would rank it—it wouldn’t be near my top 5—but it would probably be in the top half of the list.

    Q:What was the most difficult part in writing the book?

    MDL:Ranking the films and trying to explain in a short review why the film ranked where it did.

    Q:Has your view on the book changed over time? Have any passionate
    arguments lately caused you to change your rankings?

    MDL:Well, my top five films are rock solid and no amount of arguing would sway my position on those. Same with my bottom four. It’s the middle ten films (now 11) that you could sway me on, because I consider those middle 11 films to be pretty close in quality. So if I reviewed the list today I might flip-flop some of those middle films. Looking back now, I think I like Tomorrow Never Dies better than The World Is Not Enough, but in the book, The World Is Not Enough is higher. I’m sure over time, I might start to appreciate one of the films more than I did at the time of writing, but again I’m talking about the middle films. Nothing is going to dissuade me that Goldfinger isn’t the best or that A View To A Kill isn’t the worst.

    Related Articles:

    Purchase The Spy Who Thrilled Us:

  9. Brosnan Burns Bond Bridges

    By Matt Weston on 2005-08-14

    Despite constant rumours suggesting he will still be cast in the next James Bond flick, Casino Royale, Pierce Brosnan has participated in a surprisingly candid interview with Entertainment Weekly, reiterating more firmly than ever that his 007 days are behind him – and he’s never felt better for it.

    Pierce Brosnan

    Pierce Brosnan

    In Joshua Rich’s five-page interview, conducted at an undisclosed island hideaway, Brosnan spoke at length about the now-infamous phone call he received while filming After The Sunset, informing him that his contract would not be renewed for the new Bond pic. “After that kind of titanic jolt to the system, there was a great sense of calm,” Brosnan said. “I thought, f*** it! I can do anything I want now. I’m not beholden to them or anyone. I’m not shackled by some contracted image. So there was a sense of liberation.” Brosnan’s Bond associations caused costuming issues on The Thomas Crown Affair, whilst he reportedly angered producers by parodying his 007 image in The Tailor of Panama.

    Brosnan acknowledges the fame and fortune James Bond has brought him, but also has misgivings about his time in the role. “It never felt real to me,” he said. “I never had complete ownership over Bond. Because you’d have these stupid one-liners – which I loathed – and I always felt phony doing them. I’d look at myself in the suit and tie and think, ‘What the heck am I doing here?’.”

    The actor also lashed out at producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson. “That was always the most frustrating thing about the role: [the producers] play it so safe. The pomposity and rigamarole that they put directors through is astounding.”

    However, Brosnan praised the work of New Zealand director Lee Tamahori on what proved to be his final Bond pic, Die Another Day. “It was great to have Lee Tamahori directing, and I was amazed by how much the producers let him get in there and rock the cage. I thought we made inroads there,” he said.

    Unfortunately for Brosnan, who was looking forward to slipping on the Bond tux for a fifth time following Die Another Day‘s shaking-up of the formula, the producers revoked the actor’s licence to kill. “I thought, ‘Well, this will be great: they’ve actually done something on the last one, they didn’t play it safe with the director, with the script, with the breaking the character down’.” It is also worth noting the filmic adaption of Ian Fleming’s Casino Royale – which is now the basis for the new movie – had long been a hopeful project for Brosnan.

    But it’s not my problem anymore!” Brosnan said, laughing. “One phone call, that’s all it took!

    So what’s next for Brosnan? Following huge critical acclaim for Brosnan in the indie film, The Matador at the Sundance Film Festival, Miramax picked up the distribution rights and the movie will see a release later this year. For Brosnan, it could not have come at a better time. “To come on the heels of my departure from the world of Bond is a sweet grace, to play this one as a farewell to that chapter in time,” Brosnan said.

    Brosnan’s production company, Irish Dreamtime, has two more pictures currently in development. The first is a thriller titled Butterfly on a Wheel, which has been scripting for several months. Brosnan will also reprise his role as Thomas Crown in The Topkapi Affair, based on the Oscar-winning heist film, Topkapi.

    Acknowledging his movie career really began with GoldenEye, Brosnan is looking forward to his future in film. However for many Bond fans, the manner in which the actor departed the role will forever be a stain on the franchise.

    Be sure to pick up a copy of Entertainment Weekly for the full interview.

    Related Articles:

  10. CBn Reviews 'Live And Let Die'

    By Devin Zydel on 2005-08-12

    Over the last several months, members of the CBn Forum have been reviewing all the James Bond films in the “Countdown Threads“. If you wish to join in on the forum discussion all you have to do is register. Now here are some select reviews, varying in opinions, of Live And Let Die

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by 00-FAN008

    'Live And Let Die' litho by Jeff Marshall

    ‘Live And Let Die’ litho by Jeff Marshall

    Another big-time favourite of mine starring Roger. I seem to remember that I watched the film several times over in my youth; I guess I enjoyed it that much!

    One of the best things about Live And Let Die, for me, was the villians. Specifically, Tee-Hee and Baron Samedi, who had their own unique and interesting traits; Tee-Hee with his silver claw, and Baron Samedi: “the man who cannot die”. Yaphet Kotto was also an enjoyable villian onscreen as Mr. Big; a very plausible villian. However, I thought his death was very ridiculous to a certain degree.

    Another great thing about Live And Let Die was the 70’s. Bond was a very adaptable character who could blend in well with the times without aging a bit, and I thought it was really cool to see Roger Moore in a 1970’s setting.

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by DLibrasnow

    The initial Bond movie by Roger Moore is a mixed bag in my book. Whereas the supporting villains are excellent, the main villain is underwhelming and his plot (flooding the US with drugs) is rather ho-hum compared to bigger plots like destruction of the world (Moonraker) or the nuclear attack of British cities (For Your Eyes Only).

    Roger Moore also seems to still be finding his way in the part and apart from a few glimmers of what he would eventually deliver the movie and his performance seems to be on remote control.

    Some of the definite highlights include the crocodile farm sequence and the boat chase in the bayous and some of the drawbacks include Sheriff J.W. Pepper and Jane Seymour’s lackluster performance.

    I did like the whole voodoo thing though, I thought that was an interesting element and very unusual for a Bond movie.

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by Freemo

    Meh. Good, but hard to get really excited about. Ever seen two people have a passionate debate regarding the merits of Live And Let Die? No, it’s just “sort of good”. Has a certain flavor to it though, with the voodoo themes and the 70’s style. I guess whether or not you like this film comes down to whether or not you like those things.

    I like Bond tricking Solitarie with the cards, and the crocodile farm, and the title song ofcourse, but apart from that I don’t think the film ever really rises above “middle of the pack”. Good, but not great.

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by Genrewriter

    A great debut for Moore and a stellar cast of villains make this a wonderful 007 outing, but the film is marred slightly by the incredibly bad death of Kananga. Still, the music, action and set design are all top notch with the main title theme standing out from pretty much everything else as the best part of the movie.

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by Qwerty

    Live And Let Die is a good James Bond film on pretty much all merits. It’s just not one that has enough spectacle, or plot, or whatever else, to make it count in my top five for instance. I’m sure it floats around near the #10 borderline often though. With Live And Let Die, we get a very solid performance from Roger Moore as James Bond. It’s his opening film, and it’s very much like Dr. No in a way — opening films for the two best Bond’s (in my opinion), and both are solid flicks for both of them.

    Live And Let Die does have some very good, and very underrated villains in it though. I always look at the villains as being alongside, with the main star in James Bond, to be the most important aspect of the film. The villains provide the mission for Bond (often enough) and need to be a good challenge. I liked Yaphet Kotto’s quiet menace against Moore’s Bond, and Tee Hee proves to be a well used henchman who doesn’t get too comical that he becomes unbelievable. I liked Jane Seymour’s Solitaire as well – nothing brilliant, but a very good Bond girl.

    The locations are fair, Harlem looks…well like some of the tougher parts of New York, it’s expected. The plot in this film, I thought, could have been fleshed out more and perhaps better explained or further crafted in the screenplay, but it is serviceable.

    On the whole, a solid film.

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by Scottlee

    Despite the cool New Olreans jazz band sequence (the short, black guy with the knife still creeps me out), the pre-credits wimps out by not including the new Bond in it, and there are other faults to the film. Gloria Hendry is dreadful, chase sequences are slightly over-used (more so the bus sequence than the boat chase), and baddie’s end hideout looks small and cheap. Oh, and main title track aside, George Martin is not a good ‘scorer’ of films, a statement I make knowing full well the guy shares the exact name of my father. Sorry, dad. Finally, where the hell is Q? Criminal omission.

    Good points? There are a few more than there are bad. Moore gives a credible effort, although he wouldn’t really reach his peak until his third Bond. Jane Seymour is lovely to look at, and her character has a likeable personality. The villains are all great. Kananga is well put across, TeeHee delightful, Baron Samedi just a legend both character wise and in the history of movies full stop. Whisper and Adam are less impressive, but provide decent back-up when needed. It’s also curious to note that 3 of those aforementioned ruffians could be both argued to be dead/not dead come the end of the picture.

    Did I beg the question, though, up until now, of how Bond ‘got away’ from Adam and company at the flying school? He (007) ended up in practically the same place he started in! And whether or not you liked Sheriff Pepper is a matter of opinion and mood. The crocodile sequence is classic Bond, by the way.

    Live And Let Die is a good Bond, but rough around the edges.

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by Skudor

    The best thing here is the gorgeous young Jane Seymour. What really brings it down is the supernatural mumbo jumbo, the tarot card reading etc. What it does have is an edgy, dangerous feel that so many other Bond movies fail to give – but this comes at the expense of including the irritating voodoo. As usual for me, Roger Moore’s Bond isn’t enough to bring up the rating, and the villain played by Yaphet Kotto is very wooden. Tee Hee is a good henchman, and in the Oddjob tradition he is a credible threat to Bond. The fight on the train is good.

    The title song rocks!

    ‘Live And Let Die’ by Turn

    A lot of people look at Live And Let Die as dated and a victim of giving into the blaxploitation wave of the early 1970s. I’m sure there’s some deeper meaning article about what it all means (Zencat may have some angle on this, much like his Goldfinger article). But I just find it a pretty entertaining movie. To borrow something DLibrasnow said in one of his reviews, this is the point where I will start to really show my enthusiasm for the higher-ranking films of the series.

    While pretty far down my list, there’s a lot going on in Live And Let Die to keep involved in. The whole voodoo theme is a natural for a Bond film, and a somewhat sad reminder that we don’t get anything like that anymore. It’s like a SPECTRE watching over the whole film.

    While Moore had yet to hit his stride as Bond, he does well in his debut. I’ve always considered Jane Seymour to be one of the most attractive Bond women, although over the years the Solitare character has really slipped down my list. In some scenes she seems strong, especially those with the cards, but those seem less effective when she turns into a simpering damsel in distress. And we finally get a decent Felix after the disappointing Norman Burton in Diamonds Are Forever. Hedison was a natural and actually gets to take part in the action, although I can’t figure out why he didn’t aid Bond on the island.

    I really like the villainous network in Live And Let Die. Richard Maibaum complained that he would have come up with something better than “cooking up drugs in the jungle” caper. But I don’t think that aspect of it overwhelms Kananga isn’t a great Bond villain, but an interesting one. When he gets angry, such as when he belts Solitare, it’s frightening. Then when he does a 360 and acts all charming at the climax, it’s unsettling because you know he’s losing his mind. Tee Hee is an intersting Jaws/Odd Job variation; Whisper is off-beat; the cab driver is one of those characters we also don’t get to see anymore. He’s not dangerous, but he lends to it; Adam doesn’t get much development, but he’s still dangerous.

    Then we get Baron Samedi, whose presence just looms over the film. The scene in the graveyard as Bond and Solitare escape is one of the series’ finest examples of the bizzare (another thing we don’t get anymore). And the final image of him on the train is second only to the last shot of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service as far as endings go. And it’s one of the best images of the series.

    The George Martin score has divided a lot of fans. I love it and feel it’s appropriate for the era. It was one of the first two remastered scores I bought. McCartney’s theme song is my favorite, and the credits are among the most memorable. I also liked the marketing for this one. The poster is one of the best with a ton of imagery (compare it to the Die Another Day poster and see what I mean).

    I enjoy the Tom Mankiewicz script and feel he is one of the more underappreciated members of the creative team. The confrontation scene in Kananga’s office in the Filet of Soul is one of the better scenes of its type in the series. Sheriff Pepper really didn’t bother me although he does make the boat chase seem dragged out. And Q’s absence didn’t hurt it, really.

    One of Live And Let Die‘s faults is it seems like one long chase movie as Bond is pursued by car, motorcycle, helicopter, plane, boat, etc. He just always seems in danger and never has the upper hand. Of course, you could say that about a lot of films, but here I really enjoyed it for the most part. Live And Let Die is a unique film in the Bond series.