James Bond Appreciation Thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Who is the best James bond

  • Daniel Craig

    Votes: 5 3.4%

  • Pierce Brosnon

    Votes: 31 21.2%

  • Timothy Dalton

    Votes: 26 17.8%

  • Sir Roger Moore

    Votes: 26 17.8%

  • George lazenby

    Votes: 4 2.7%

  • Sean Connery

    Votes: 54 37.0%
  • Total voters
    146
The spy who loved me is still Moore best bond movie.
It is super 70s but in a good way.
Good direction and Jaws is an iconic villain for a reason.
I always found the death scene of Max Kalba to be really intense.
The music, the quick cuts.
Just excellent.
 
Before the Craig films I always considered Bond a single character played by multiple actors. We see Lazenby looking over mementos from the Connery films in OHMSS. Felix Leiter mentions Bond’s late wife in LTK. I always had the imagination to think that Bond did encounter a Dr. No or Hugo Drax at some point. The details might change but the basic adventure occurs.

Craig’s origin story and ultimate death kind of screws things up, but the new Bond should just make Craig’s run self contained or we get a “he got better” hand wave. Imagination seems in short supply in Hollywood.

I never understood the code name theory for Bond. Does the code name come with the need to drink shaken martinis and a love for DB5s?
 
It's a shame they went full Marvel with Craig because we finally see Bond with Vesper and it turns out it's now some alternate universe. I really do hope they forget the Craig films though; Bond doesn't need a daughter out there or still be related to Blofeld.

As for Halle, she was riding high because she started getting naked (she used a body double in the '90s) and won an Oscar for banging Billy Bob Thornton on camera. Not a real Oscar though; it was the same year where Denzel won for Training Day - lol - because Hollywood was trying to right racial injustice.
 
Foltest said:
For yours eyes only have always been one of my favorites.
after the insainty of Moonraker, it was nice to have a lowkey Roger Moore film.
Click to expand...
It does feel like a proper sequel to OHMSS, and also fully wallows in its setting a little like Dr No or Thunderball. The amount of small setups and payoffs are all enjoyable.

I suspect the lack of explosive climax or cartoonish villain is to explain for much of the apathetic response, although the Bond girl isn't top-tier either.
 
Last edited:
Doublepost but fuck it.
If you are interesting in other spy films, i recommend "the tailor from panama" from 2001 by John Boorman (Excalibur, Deliverance and..... Zardoz)
It has our boy Pierce Brosnan in the role and the character he play is "what if James Bond had no morals at all".
He is such a sleazebag in that movie and Brosnan plays it perfectly. I would say it is one of his best performance alongside the highly underrated "The Matador"
Combine it with an excellent performance from Geoffrey Rush (who is always good), a tight script and excellent directorns, I highly recommend it.
 
Very underrated film, it's not great but it hits the spot if you want some of that genre. The sweaty tropical aspect is very immersive.

I like some of the regional Bond ripoffs, S.O.S. Operation Bikini doesn't collapse completely under slapstick (most are parodies) but can't escape a certain dullness. Le Magnifique is a high production value parody in which a delusional writer gets lost in his spy novels with great setpieces. That Man Bolt is great fun. "Charming!"

 
Screenshot 2025-12-30 at 8.50.04 AM.png
Screenshot 2025-12-30 at 8.50.37 AM.png

And that's a good thing, chud.
 
I read the longer quote and it seemed more reasonable than the click bait headlines I have seen, the thing is, how do they not know to avoid falling into this media trap?

My intial thoughts were how do they not know to say this, but then it seems how do they not know to fall into this media trap.

"Bond is a terrible character how do you address that?"

The answer shouldn't be, "oh yes he is terrible but we've modernised him."

It should be something more along the lines of, "a lot of the criticisms are about the era of those novels and films. Not to the core character of who James Bond is and why the character has endured. As with the film, he is contemporary to the time it takes place but is still James Bond."
 
It's almost meaningless to try to discern whether it's ragebaiting, pandering, or a lack of media training. You can really tell the difference between a coward and a person who cares about the property.

You see it when interviewers try to get actors or artists to confirm that there's some queer element to their creation, the weak ones play along, the strong ones shut them down because they know how harmful that insinuation always has been, but only recently have they been allowed by their corporate handlers to push back against this.

The entire discourse is poison and should be avoided. Obviously anything being made today is a "modern version" of the property, but that term has come to mean a lot more than its face reading.
 
Screamer_2 said:
I read the longer quote and it seemed more reasonable than the click bait headlines I have seen
Click to expand...
(Doublepost)
Yeah those article titles are clickbait and people are unfortunately running with it.
Anyone who is an actual Bond fan can tell this game seems to be faithful to the character.
 
Haven't seen any Bond movies before, decided to start tonight with Dr. No.

It was much slower than I anticipated. Felt like everything happened in the last 20 minutes. I'm sure it's a nod to previous book details but the scene of Bond reluctantly switching from a Beretta to a PPK felt pointless. The Dragon was also unintentionally hilarious. Drugging Bond and Ryder when they were already fully at his mercy within the "prison" also seems pointless.

It was the first one and did some things that later became iconic, I know it deserves slack. I'm assuming they get better.
 
I like Dr. No a lot, but that's going into it knowing how slow it is beforehand. It still has the DNA of "serious" adventure thrillers and hadn't yet constructed a repeatable formula, which after watching the later films to death can be refreshing. The next one is much better paced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom