I am a huge bond fan too and have seen all of them, even never say never again (which isn't classified as one of the bond films)
And on my list QoS is one of the worst bond movies ever, right next to licence to kill and the world is not enough.
#1 is goldfinger
2. tomorrow never dies.
Casino Royale is part way down the list like 5th or 6th.
The CGI in all the action movies this year was good and on par with other shows, the only thing that stood out for me in GI JOE was the cow catcher on the hummer when they turned it on.
I've seen NSNA. It's shit. TWINE sucks as most of Brosnan's do, yes, but LTK is in my top 5.
1. Casino Royale
2. Quantum of Solace
3. From Russia With Love
4. Thunderball
5. License to Kill
I didn't care that much for Goldfinger. The plot is meh and besides the great first half, once they get on Goldfinger's farm it goes dull. The beggining is good though. Tomorrow Never Dies? Not in my opinion. The only Brosnan that was decent was Golden Eye and that wasn't a good one so.............
G.I. Joe and Wolverine's CGI was horrible for me. All of the helicopters in both films looked fake. The helicopters in Terminator Salvation looked legit. The transforming in TFs2 was quite impressive. Of course Watchmen and Star Trek were straight gold all around. Still have to see District 9.
That scene you refer to in G.I. Joe with the Hummer was exactly what kind of quality I thought I was witnessing throughout the whole picture involving the CGI. The underwater battle scenes looked a mess. The Eiffel Tower falling? Cloverfield did it better. Seriously, Roger Ebert wasn't lying when he stated in his review something along the effect that the movie was animated. At some points it did look so. 2012 looks like a shitload of impressive, but excessive CGI. That trailer did blow me away though.
The T-800 in Terminator Salvation was just as impressive as the Transformers were. Nothing in G.I. Joe compares CGI-wise.
Last edited by Darth Martin on Aug 14th, 2009 at 01:59 AM
yeah the CGI in GI Joe wasn't that impressive but it didn't really need to be. I don't think the makers were going for a gritty realistic District 9 look. And I was amazed that the budget was 170 million, especially since Transformers was 300
On a side note "Tommorrow Never Dies" is a fun Bond flick... but for it to be #2 on your list. Come on
While I understand where your coming from with the District 9 point, I can't say I agree. It does matter solely because the movie was marketed as an mindless action/superhero film. This genre is cemented by CGI. Iron Man and the Spiderman had this. G.I. Joe looked like The Incrdeible Hulk did. Those both films looked cartoony. Just watch the fight scene with Abomination at the end and tell me with a straight face the CGI was legit. The helicopter and buildings were all fake. Transformers atleast looks real when the they're crushing the ground as they run or when Optimus and Bonecrusher fell off the highway in the first film.
For got about thunderball and you only live twice so it would be those 2 then TND
actually almost all the bond films are great and have a lot of rewatchability, depending on what you feel like watching, but the worst ones are QoS, LTK, TWINE, octopussy, and just to thow in a sean connery, diamonds are forever.
WOW darthmartin you put LTK in your top 5?? well thats your opinion and your entitled to it. That is why some people hate GI JOE like you and others love it like me.
Yes, I'm entitled to my own, and in mine TND or any other Brosnan flick isn't in the top ten.
What's wrong with License to Kill? It has one of the best villains in the series. Good lair, stunts, story, and action. You know every now and then when you have so much Goldfinger's, The Spy Who Loved Me's, Transformers, and G.I. Joe's it's refreshing to have a somewhat simple and down to earth action flick like LTK or QOS.
Bond films are fun and have repeat value, yes, but I wouldn't call them great. Some are, like Casino Royale and From Russia With Love. Most others are average at best. I love them because I'm a huge fan of the character and series. But that's that.
When Bond went into space it started to get stupid and outlandish. That's where you have your Brosnan's. I prefer the simple, gritty, but charming Bond in a young Connery or Craig. Moore is fun for camp. I don't care much for Dalton but I do like LTK. 1-4 Connery and Craig are what defines Bond for me though.
Just the whole revenge thing in LTK same as QoS i didn't like it. I agree that moonraker when they went into space it wasn't good, but he was still trying to stop world domination, and you also need humor in the bond movies which CR had but QoS didn't. Are they ever going to make another austin powers movie?
QOS did have humour but it was clever, subtle, and mature. The drinking on the jet, scenes with Mathis and Felix, Bond pwning dude on motorcycle, M, etc. It wasn't forced, immature, or spoonfed like TFs2 and G.I. Joe's attempted humour was.
I liked some of TFs2 jokes. None of G.I. Joe's.
I understand it's Bond but sometimes world domination is boring and too much.
I can't remember much from QoS, including the humor cause i felt it was that bad.
I didn't like any of the humor in TF2, now if it was an austin powers movie then i would find it funny to see balls on a robot, but that would be expected in that type of movie. i like the humor in GI JOE and found it quite funny.
Just a question but what did you think about the balls of fury movie?
i will see it again on sunday so i can let you know in more detail but for now, obviously wayans was funny but not over the top as i was worried he would be. when storm shadow says" he never gives up" and then the hummer was hit by the train and the goes reaction to it.
KMC Community Forums
Aug 14th, 2009 12:32 AM
