James Bond Week: The World is Not Enough Film Review

Directed by Michael Apted

Starring: Pierce Brosnan, Sophie Marceau, Robert Carlyle

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of action violence, some sexuality and innuendo

The World is Not Enough is the 19th Bond film starring Pierce Brosnan as the role of 007. In this film, Bond is sent to protect a oil tycoon’s daughter, who was recently killed in an explosion. While protecting the Electra King (played by Sophie Marceau), Bond discovers that King actually suffers from Stockholm Syndrome and is in love with her former kidnapper (played by Robert Carlyle), as they plan to destroy Istanbul.

It’s unfortunate that Brosnan wasn’t given stronger films as his tenure as Bond because he certainly tries to give it his best in these films. Brosnan gives a performance that embodies the work of Sean Connery. He’s charismatic and menacing, he brought something to the role that was missed with Dalton’s Bond. In addition, Judi Dench as M certainly brings something to the table we haven’t seen before. Dench as yalways gives a strong performance and this film is no exception.

But with performances being mentioned, there is one performance that sticks out like a sore thumb. Denise Richards as Dr. Christmas Jones was and still is a horrible miscast role. It’s understandable wanting to have a pretty face in the film, but this character was supposed to give lines that dealt with nuclear radiation. Not only does it sound like she has no idea what she is talking about, but as an actress, Richards does not convince the audience she is a doctor. It’s almost cringey hearing Richards pretend her way to be a nuclear physicist. It would have been right to give this role to another actress who can handle the type of dialogue that was given to the character.

The best way to describe The World is Not Enough is that its a film with missed opportunities. In the beginning of the film, Bond gets injured when he takes a fall. Seeing Bond injured is something we don’t see too often. While we are lead to believe the injury would have an effect on the film, its only relevant for the first act and only mentioned a couple times afterwards. This seems to have no effect on the film and instead should have been left in the cutting room floor. Also, M’s past has come back to haunt her when King kidnaps her. This is the first time we have ever seen anything like this as M is usually placed in an office and give Bond orders. While its interesting to see M in danger, its not a concept explored too much. It would finally take until Skyfall where these concepts are fully fleshed out and placed in the forefront of the story.

Overall, the film is somewhat enjoyable. While there are some strong performances in the film, there are some aspects of the film that not explored and only touch the surface of the film. This is not the best Brosnan Bond film, but there are some redeemable qualities of the film that makes it worth a view on a Sunday afternoon.

2.5/4

James Bond Week: The Living Daylights Film Review

Directed by John Glen

Starring: Timothy Dalton, Maryam d’Abo, Jeroen Krabbé

Rated PG

After 12 years of having Roger Moore play the role of James Bond, it was finally time to have a new actor step into the role. Timothy Dalton stepped into the Bond in the mid to late 80’s with critical success. The Living Daylights centers around Bond who is tasked with finding out why someone is killing spies. In a complicated plot, Bond faces off against an arms dealer (played by Joe Don Baker) who is also tied to the Soviet-Afghan War and a Soviet defector (played by Jeroen Krabbé).

Re-watching The Living Daylights was enjoyable to say the least. Although still having some humor in the film, it was interesting watching Dalton bring his own interpretation of Bond to the big screen. There are some elements of dark moments in the film, but it wouldn’t be until Licence to Kill where these malarial would be fully fleshed out. It was a nice change of pace to not see jokes after jokes in the film, but considering the screenplay was written with Moore in mind, it still has the feeling of a lighthearted film.

Along with the tone, the story is finally brought back to reality. I know it is custom to have these types of story lines be about a manic wanting to destroy the world. While it is enjoyable to view those types of plots, it can be a bit tiring to watch film after film. The Living Daylights stepped away from the outlandish plots we’ve seen in the Moore era to a more grounded one. The story of an arms dealer wanting to sell weapons is not the most exciting, but a nice change of pace. It’s almost as if the series saw itself speeding ahead and decided to slow down once Dalton came on board.

While the film is enjoyable to view, unfortunately, the main villain of the film is dull and forgettable. At first, it is hard to distinguishing who the main villain is. But once we know who the main villain is, there is nothing memorable about him. The only memorable thing about him is that he plays with historical wax figures and that’s about it. He poses no threat to anyone in the film and doesn’t even seem menacing at all. Over the years, Bond villains are known to be memorable, whether its good or bad, and this one doesn’t bring anything to the table. It’s unfortunate to say that Joe Don Baker as Whitaker is probably one of the worst Bond villains.

But with that being said, the film is a decent telling of a spy story that is based in reality. The film finally moved away from Moore era jokes and focused on telling a story with humor as an after thought. While the film does have a terrible villain, this is not an element that drags the film entirely down. Overall, its a nice entry in the Bond series that has some redeemable qualities that is worth a watch.

3/4

James Bond Week: Moonraker Film Review

Directed by Lewis Gilbert

Starring: Roger Moore, Lois Chiles, Michael Lonsdale

Rated PG

In the late 70’s, Roger Moore played the role of James Bond and continued to do so until the mid 80’s. In Moonraker, Bond faces off against Hugo Drax (played by Michael Lonsdale) , a millionaire who steals his own space shuttle. Bond is sent to investigate Drax, only to find out that Drax is playing to send a select few to space so he can destroy the Earth, only to have his select few repopulate the Earth. Bond is assisted by CIA agent, Dr. Holly Goodhead (played by Lois Chiles), as they go around the world to places such as Venice, Rio de Janeiro, and even outer space.

If the plot of the film sounds familiar, that is because it is a carbon copy of the previous film in this series, The Spy Who Loved Me. Both films deal with a millionaire who want to destroy the world and create a new one. They both have a female spy from another country that is assisting Bond in his adventures. I can only figure that the film producers like the story of the previous film so much, they decided to use the same one for the next film. But with that in mind, it almost feels lazy to keep the same plot points of the previous film, with some notable exceptions. I know the story isn’t the selling point in these types of films, but it almost feels unoriginal when the film doesn’t come up with its own story. To add insult to injury, the film can get dull at a few moments. There are multiple enjoyable moments, but the ones that are slow are painfully slow.

In my previous Bond review, I mentioned Goldfinger was a lighthearted film that was enjoyable. While Moonraker is both of those things, the film is almost laughable at how camp it is. While it is fun to watch Bond say a funny one liner, its feels different when there’s an entire scene dedicated to humor. For example, there’s scene where Bond is on a gondola in Venice that was specifically made to be humorous. Bond is driving the gondola on land and it shows that this is supposed to be humorous. This is an unnecessary scene that adds no value to the film and is only there because the film wanted to be funny. The difference between the humor in Goldfinger and Moonraker is that the humor in Goldfinger felt like an afterthought, while the humor in this film feels like it should be on the main stage.

But with all those gripes, Roger Moore still brings his charm to the role as Bond. The late actor played the role as a ladies man who threw in jokes often. Connery also played the ladies man, but also was tough. Meanwhile, Moore doesn’t play the role as a tough agent, mostly because his puns get in the way of that. As the role of Drax, Michael Lonsdale plays the villain almost like a cartoon character. Lonsdale certainly seems to have fun with the role as he probably knows this is a ridiculous film to begin with. Finally Lois Chiles plays the Bond girl, Dr. Goodhead. Unfortunately, she makes a forgettable Bond girl as she gives a wooden performance in a role that doesn’t give her much to do.

Overall, Moonraker has its moments, but its a slow film that has too many jokes. Roger Moore gives a performance filled with charm but unfortunately his role cannot save the film. Moonraker is not one of the best Bond’s films and is film best viewed as background noise as the story and the humor won’t certainly draw your typical audience in.

2/4

James Bond Week: Goldfinger Film Review

Directed by Guy Hamilton

Starring: Sean Connery, Gert Fröbe, Honor Blackman

Rated PG

This week, I thought it would be fun to explore one of my favorite film series, the James Bond series. For the next five days, it will be interesting to dig deep one Bond film per decade, played by a different actor. Today we start off the first Bond actor, Sean Connery.

In 1964, Sean Connery returned to the role as James Bond with Goldfinger with great success. Often praised as one of the best Bond films, the film centers around 007 facing against Auric Goldfinger (played by Gert Fröbe) a villain who is in love with gold. Goldfinger is plotting to break into Fort Knox and poison its gold with radioactive material in order to increase his personal worth of gold. Now its up to 007 to stop Goldfinger before the villain achieves his plans.

The film is one of the first 007 films to be lighthearted and use the same tropes future Bond films would use. The contemporary artist singing over the credits, Bond and Q scene, and the use of the Aston Martin. The film almost feels relaxed and knows what its doing, in part because this is the third film in the series. By then, the producers knew what worked and what didn’t. While excellent films, the first two films almost felt like they were trying to embody the works of Alfred Hitchcock. Goldfinger is finally where the series becomes its own and became the spy series everyone tried to copy.

One of the reasons why Goldfinger feels different is due to the stellar performance of Sean Connery. Connery is often praised as one of the best Bond, and Goldfinger proves why he should get that title. Connery finally feels comfortable as the role, as he did have two films to see what works best. Connery can charm a women and win a fight at once, as proven by the cold open of the film. Connery is only as good as Bond because he is perfectly fitted with the villain Goldfinger. Fröbe plays the titular character as a calm and collective villain who doesn’t have to prove his is evil. He doesn’t have to yell or kill people directly to get his point across, just a smug look on his face does the job.

Accompanying the film is John Barry’s beautiful score that compliments the film well. The score features a multitude of instruments including a lush harp. Listening to the score not only enhances the film, but almost makes the film feel like its in a time most of us will never live. As mentioned before, elements of Goldfinger set the standard for future films in this series and the score is one of those elements.

Goldfinger is fun, energetic, and entertaining overall. Sean Connery gives a great performance as Bond as he finally feels at home with the character. If anyone were to start watching the Bond series, Goldfinger would be a great start. Its an iconic film that is certainly fun all around.

4/4