[quote=“scherpschutter, post:38, topic:544”]The first Bond I saw in cinema was, oddly enough, Casino Royale … but not the Craig movie, but the one with a multitude of Bonds. It was awful (and not a real Bond of course), but shortly after I saw On her Majesty’s Secret Service, which made up for it. I remember it was pulvarized by critics, mainly because of Lazenby, but I thought everything in it was huge and wonderful: the stunts, the locations, the women … I still had a boy’s crush on Emma Peel by the way … Later it was called by some one of the very best Bonds instead, but when I rewatched it some time ago, I noticed I did no longer like it: a lot of stunts were fake, Lazenby was awful, Savalas was awful, and the women … well, Diana was sexier in The Avengers and some Bonds had better girls
I only saw Live and Let Die in cinema afterwards, the rest I watched on VHS and DVD (and A View to Kill on a plane)
Like Man with a Name I didn’t really like Dr. No, it doesn’t have the real Bond feel. The same goes, as far as I’m concerned, for From Russia with Love. I know to many this is one of the great Bonds, but I never could understand why. To me the series really picked up with Goldfinger and You only live twice. Bond movies are about style and atmosphere, watching a Bond movie puts me in a kind of mood, an inner voice is saying: this is it, you’re a boy and you’re having a good time. These two movies touched the right chord. Although films like Thunderball, Diamonds are forever, The Spy who loved me and For your eyes only are largely okay, it took quite some time before Bond put me in the mood again, but Timothy Dalton finally did it. It had something to do with the movies, they were far meaner than the Moores, but also with Dalton: he has this determined look, a sort of repressed anger, that I identify with the character, maybe because I read most of the novels too: in Fleming’s books, 007 is a bit of a cruel, nasty person, a womanizing sunnovabitch who cares about himself and little else (A self-obsessed boy, so to speak). To me Dalton and Connery seem to transmit that idea best, and Dalton maybe even a bit better than Connery.
The Brosnan movies didn’t impress me, although most of them offered okay lite entertainment. I liked the one with Femke best, but For Femke’s Thighs only.
And then there was Daniel. Casino Royale touched the right chord once again. This felt good, this was Bond, I was a boy again. Go get them James (the women as well as the villauins) ![/quote][quote=“scherpschutter, post:38, topic:544”]The first Bond I saw in cinema was, oddly enough, Casino Royale … but not the Craig movie, but the one with a multitude of Bonds. It was awful (and not a real Bond of course), but shortly after I saw On her Majesty’s Secret Service, which made up for it. I remember it was pulvarized by critics, mainly because of Lazenby, but I thought everything in it was huge and wonderful: the stunts, the locations, the women … I still had a boy’s crush on Emma Peel by the way … Later it was called by some one of the very best Bonds instead, but when I rewatched it some time ago, I noticed I did no longer like it: a lot of stunts were fake, Lazenby was awful, Savalas was awful, and the women … well, Diana was sexier in The Avengers and some Bonds had better girls
I only saw Live and Let Die in cinema afterwards, the rest I watched on VHS and DVD (and A View to Kill on a plane)
Like Man with a Name I didn’t really like Dr. No, it doesn’t have the real Bond feel. The same goes, as far as I’m concerned, for From Russia with Love. I know to many this is one of the great Bonds, but I never could understand why. To me the series really picked up with Goldfinger and You only live twice. Bond movies are about style and atmosphere, watching a Bond movie puts me in a kind of mood, an inner voice is saying: this is it, you’re a boy and you’re having a good time. These two movies touched the right chord. Although films like Thunderball, Diamonds are forever, The Spy who loved me and For your eyes only are largely okay, it took quite some time before Bond put me in the mood again, but Timothy Dalton finally did it. It had something to do with the movies, they were far meaner than the Moores, but also with Dalton: he has this determined look, a sort of repressed anger, that I identify with the character, maybe because I read most of the novels too: in Fleming’s books, 007 is a bit of a cruel, nasty person, a womanizing sunnovabitch who cares about himself and little else (A self-obsessed boy, so to speak). To me Dalton and Connery seem to transmit that idea best, and Dalton maybe even a bit better than Connery.
The Brosnan movies didn’t impress me, although most of them offered okay lite entertainment. I liked the one with Femke best, but For Femke’s Thighs only.
And then there was Daniel. Casino Royale touched the right chord once again. This felt good, this was Bond, I was a boy again. Go get them James (the women as well as the villauins) ![/quote]i agree with a lot of what you say here scherp, apart from from russia with love which i thought was a much better effort than the first. i never took to the brosnan films particularly nor the roger moore ones ( he has the most of the lesser efforts eg moonraker, man with the golden gun)and yes OHMSS does look fake in a lot of it’s action scenes today but still think it’s a decent effort and the music is among the best.with the appointment of daniel craig i thought it might be the beginning of the end for the franchise but he has given it a new lease of life, despite not being anyone’s idea of what james bond would look like.