Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I know lots of ppl hated this movie and I a bond fan loved it, what did you think ?

I HATED it

that vanishing thing was over the top
unfortunatly no Q (I still miss him *sighs*)
Halle Berry was BAD, also her character which is suppossed to be a good ass-kicking agent, but gets locked up pretty easily!

want me to continue?

Not a classic Bond flick that's for sure!

and will never be one

redundant but true...

now we have to make sure it will never be!

It was a little OTT with the disappearing car umong other things but it was still good. and Q was in it John Cleese=Q=Quartermaster but I agree he's still no Desmond Llewelyn, but Halle Berry was fit in it

i think the film was great and in my eyes pierce brosnan is THE BEST bond after Sean connery but he is not that far behind he is so cool and die another day was a great film it has taken bond into the 21st century safely and it had a bangin soundtrack great women and great gadgets

she perhaps was to some, but her character on the other hand

john cleese is the new Q not the old and the REAL DEAL Q.. john cleese should not of been called Q, because Q retired in the last one and i thought they introduced him as R.. either way there should of only been the original Q.. i liked the movie but they are going down hill unfortunatly

yeah the character was

Well...i still liked the movie!

no! haha!

it went like:
JB: "So, ... if you're Q, does that make him R?"
(Cleese, forgot his characters name): "Ah, yes, the legendary 007-humor, Q told me about this."

good work.. still Q (old) was the man.. i think (new) Q should of got a different letter... after all if james bond DIED or quit (not got a new actor)the numbers 007 wouldnt be used again

are you sure?

they got 003 (I think) killed once, and in a JB movie, all the 00s were there and seat three was taken...

(ok, should really start watching the movies again!)

This is the worst bond movie ever. Nothing about it was good. LEt's start with that song!! I loved the song and iloved that Madonna did it but it is is now way a BON song. That opening sucked along with the opening titles. That was the worst ever. Taht dissapering car was the low point of the movie. tah was way too impsoble. I know we expect a bit imposability but that was tyoo much. The camera effects were also stupid and nothing for the Bond movies. That scene wherer the camera flies over some iceberg or moutains they use a dusturbing camera effect that sucked. And also one of the worst is ofcourse Halle BErry. Everyone know i love this girl (HOT AS HELL) BUT!! they made her do the worst JOb ever (and now she is akewning a fool of hersef with catwoman) I thought i would see a great woman when she walked out f the ocean but what i saw was just pathetic. Does anyone really walk like that. Ikcan't believe that Entertainmaet Weekly gave this movie a A-. They also said that it wasn't a complicated movie and that it was one of the best bond movies ever. THis move was just horrible. A piece of advice. We love to see new things in th bond mOvies but bond fans love it when the movie is made traditionally.

I thought the movie was ok. but it's not my favorite, they could of done better. I like the old movies better

Better than the last two, worse than the rest. Its the same ol formula all over again. Bond, good girl, bad girl, baddie who will take over the world, baddie's hardass sidekick.. same ol dumb plot.

It was completely different to all the other bond movies. It was more
sci-fi then action for me, vanishing cars, soil burning space magnifying
glass plastic surgery from another world(if it existed cher would look
much better), virtua glasses that creates movie scenes, come on.

Worst of all Bond is captured for months and nearly gets killed by North
Koreans after having infiltrated criminal organizations, Soviet facilities ect...
For me, this film should not be a Bond movie, otherwise it would be quite good. But this being a Bond movie, i hate it.

wo hoo someone who isnt a new movie freak.. i like you vader

yeah, I had a problem too with him being captioned and then exchanged

hopefully the next one will be better!

I enjoyed Die Another Day although it lacked some of the charm of Pierce Brosnans earlier ventures as 007 in particular Goldeneye - which i personally maintain is one of the best of the entire James Bond series,why i feel DaD (Die Another Day) is often deemed by Bond fans as one of the weaker installments of the series is that it seemed to lack classic traits that make a Bond film so distinctive from your average 'run of the mill' action movie,for a start the film lacked a decent bad guy that did not even match up to the later Bond baddies (such as Alec Trevelyan,Renard or even a Elliot Carver),of course DaD was the first Bond film to be made after the tragic death of Desmond Lllwelyn (alias Q) and although a replacement in the legend that is John Cleese,the absence of Q was a major loss particuarly the classic encounters between Bond and Q which gave the Bond films that now classic trait be it between Llwellyn's Q & Brosnans Bond or Llwellyn's Q & Connerys Brosnan. DaD also lacked a good henchmen and i feel they tended to concentrate too much on the Halle 'Jinx' Berry character. Even the opening scene lacked the excitement of Goldeneyes 'Dam Dive' or TWINE's 'Boat chase',the theme song was not one of the best in the series and was not a patch on installments by the likes of Paul McCarteny (and Wings),Bono and The Edge,Gun 'N' Roses and of course Shirley Bassey. Lets hope Bond 21 will put the series back to its roots which we last saw in Goldeneye.

I thought it was a discras (or however you spell it) to the old bond films

perfectly put khalla

Agreed

yup, yup!

Absolutely, compared to the classic bond movies it was poultry.

Bump!

Erm, agreed. It's no patch on the originals {or even "GE"}. Why did they have to look to "Moonraker" to capture the style of the film?!

or even GE???? what do you mean

Well, IMHO, "DAD" is no way near as good as "GE". Perhaps I shouldn't have said "or even", though; "GE" is certainly up with the best of 'em.

that's better

it's not!

DaD still rocks

it ever started rocking?

Let's not get into this DAD bashing again ...

Why not???

cause he's afraid of evy

Die Another Day was stupid.

It was more Action Man: The Movie than James Bond 007.

Goldeneye was spot on. It brought James Bond into a realistic setting, with REAL politics and stuff that we'd expect a guy like James Bond to be doing in this day and age. His gadgets were cool, yet in-line with the franchise and believable.

Die Another Day's concept was to turn the franchise into a CGI fest of stupid proportions. Halle Berry wasn't even that attractive in it. She's seen better days. The car was ridiculous. The remote control car from Tomorrow Never Dies was on the limits of Bond-ness but never took it to such stupid lengths as this latest one.

Die Another Day should have made an equal rather than trying to 1-Up the last "Bond car". How does the NEXT movie make it's car look impressive? Have a car that transforms into Optimus Prime and fires nukes out of it's arse? Actually, I wouldn't want to give them any ideas, they'd probably think about doing it.

The only good thing about DaD was the intro. I liked how the intro kept the story going, and made Bond look human. Ironic how they went to such bother to humanise Bond only to undo all that by having him swan around a palace made of ice in an invisible car later on. Wasteful.

And the theme was by far the most non-Bond theme I've ever heard.

I wouldn't say that Goldeneye was 100% in a realistic setting, though RS... I mean, they did had a laser in that one. Though the ending of the Cold War and the discussion with the minister of Foreign Affairs was quite good to see.

Now that you mention it, I have to agree that on second thought that the remote control car is perhaps on the limit, but then again, did many pay much attention to it? It got more consumed into a carchase... the only different thing of it is that he fired a missle and such, but for the rest it was "pretty standard", while there was more attention in DaD about the concept of the car disappearing...

about the car, the latest rumors indicated that the Broccolis want to return to the origins of Bond, so I hope that doesn't mean we get any more over-the-top gadgets.

The music was ment to be different from the rest with lots of dissonant sounds, which she accomplished... but took it over the top ending up into something that takes a lot of time to be listenable to...

and RS, great post hope to see you stick around here

Oh yeah, definitely, with Bond, there always has to be that fantastical element. It's that "other life" he leads that we can only dream of. His gadgets and toys help in creating that persona, but there are limits.

Goldeneye had fantastical elements, such as the laser watch as you say - but they were far more believable. His laser watch he uses to escape the train is, in my opinion, highly believable. It's a close range, functional gadget. His remote mines detonated/disabled by his watch are also believable, as is the exploding pen. They were weapons and everything a secret agent should need.

Since when does James Bond need an invisible car? It was totally for show-off value because it served no purpose in the movie. Bond was still discoverred.

Goldeneye was good because it focussed on a threat that could actually happen. DaD's villain was seriously rediculous, as was his megalomaniac sheme.

DaD was a case of bigger, rather than better.

but how do you define what is too fantastical and what not? because they are close range and being functional? almost all gadgets are functional because they first record the story and then go back to the Q department for the shots there.

An example to what I'm blabbering about is i.e. that in Goldeneye, you have this laser that can destroy an entire city if it pleases, but when you reach DaD you have Icarus who burns down what it pleases. And for some reason, not many complain about the weapon in Goldeneye, but find Icarus highly disturbing. Why? it does the same thing but is featured more here.
Does it depend on how much screen time it gets too? cause the mono-digit-something-ring Bond has in DaD looks more close to reality then his watch that contains a laser.

I do agree with the car, he barely needed it... twas there for the intro (Vanquish/Vanish) and to get in his car later on, but he got discovered a minute later so they easily could have let it out...
But then... did they need the place for 6 cupholders in the car in TWINE? Some things are just mentioned cause they are fun but don't get (or much) screentime...

What is the threat in Goldeneye? what could happen there? a laser that could destroy cities, operated by a disgruntled ex-Mi6 agent in co-operation with a russian general? What is that different from DaD where the same happens, only here the villain is a North Korean with genetherapy.
I believe that if they could have get rid of the genetherapy part, that DaD could have been more realistic (if they let out the cgi too).
Why was the villain exactly rediculous? cause of the therapy?
You can ask the same about TND... why did Elliot Carver not form a threat in the movie to most? cause he looked weak, old and scared.
They could have done more of an effort to show that Graves/Moon was a good fighter as shown at the start and make a decent fight out of it with Bond but was that needed?

Dude, Goldeneye was not a laser. It was a disc that enabled an EMP nuke in space. It would send London back to the stone age, as Trevellyan said. There would be no physical damage such as buildings blowing up and stuff.

It didn't fire down and destroy anything. It would effectively wipe the power out of the UK and destroy all electronics, sending the place into chaos.

EMP is real, has been used before in real life and is in general more realistic, as it used nukes to magnify it's power.

A laser in space being built is getting a bit too Dr Evil for my liking..

I do think the visual style has a lot to do with it. In Goldeneye and other movies the locations were functional, and seemed realistic.

Some of the gadgets and stupid glowing futuristic thingies in DaD wouldn't look out of place in a Star Trek convention.

Also, the ice palace was really lame. This isn't Never Never Land.

well, in the end... Severnaja DID end up in ruins with some nice romantic fires around it, so there IS physical damage to the building... if they nuked London, it would have the same effect then.

well, lasers have already been used a few times in Bond, not to the extend that these "lasers" would be a superweapon. (I had to do the Dr Evil joke here)

But they said alread a few times that DaD was also a parodie on itself, in their blind vision of moneygreed they forgot that bond doesn't parody himself

I will always hate any bond movie with Pierce Brosnan in it.He is by far the worst bond they ever had except for maybe George Lazenby but this one sucked even worse than any of his others that he has been in because thay had that ugly looking dog Halle Berry as his girl.

so you haveall Pierce Brosnan Bond movies cause in the last one Halle was in it?

Ugly looking dog = Halle Berry? Where have you been living? In a cave???

perhaps she barks ?

I suggest people to see the DaD DVD, it gave me a new respect about the movie

you realised it's the best

yay! so there IS someone sane, other than me, in this forum

I thought it was okay.

yet a new one is lured into the darkness

I thought that DAD, was not the best. I thought the whole story line was just stupid. I was disgusted when I was watching it in theatre on Nov. 20, 2002. It was just devestating for me, and most other Bond fans out there. God, it was just stupid. TMWTGG is much better than DAD... eww...

what made you dislike it? was it the car?

You don't like the car? Is because you barely see it?
I like the movie, but not that much... I didn't like the end

it's cause it disappers, that's so silly