Quantum of Solace (2008)

We've finally come to the end of my look back at the entire James Bond franchise. This was quite the undertaking, and while there were some occasions when I wished I was doing something else, mainly when Roger Moore was involved, man was this a blast overall. I learned some things about myself as a Bond fan, and discovered some great movies that I would have in all likeliness overlooked. I even had some movies which I previously had written off come back and surprise me with how much I enjoyed them years later. Meanwhile others were bad before and continued to be so. But I've made it through those high peaks and abyssal trenches and emerged in one piece on the other side, a more savvy film enthusiast for it. This was fun. Now maybe next time I'll have to choose a series that doesn't have over twenty entries in it.

According to my recollection whilst thinking back on it after only seeing it once in the theater the day it came out, "Quantum of Solace" struck me as pretty bad. I remember how I hated the fact that it was nothing like a usual James Bond movie at all, eschewing any hint of fun whatsoever and being a very bleak and dour journey. True, "License To Kill" and even "Casino Royale" had their war-faces on, so to speak, but those still felt like Bond movies. He had gadgets and over-the-top villains to deal with, and as pissed as he got he still was able to pull off a good one-liner after wasting a dude. But in "Quantum of Solace" he's not really even doing any real spy work. He's just killing people. I believe at the time that I summed it up by saying that "Quantum of Solace" basically put The Punisher in a tuxedo and told him to make sure he never did anything to entertain us.

But after seeing it again, "Quantum of Solace" is even worse than I remembered. In fact, this movie isn't just bad. It's terrible. It's wretched. This is a legitimate piece of garbage. And I don't mean that from simply a story or script level, even though those aspects are crap, too. I'm saying that on a filmmaking level, talking pure tradecraft here, this is the most pathetic excuse for an action movie the Bond series has ever produced. I...I can't believe I'm saying this but...Crom help me this is a worse movie than "Moonraker."

Oh god.

If you had told me Clint Eastwood was actually an overgrown hedgehog I would have been less surprised than the revelation that I could hate a Bond movie more than I hate "Moonraker." I've nearly broken molars grinding my teeth over watching that piece of septic backwash. It represents everything I loathe about the Bond series when it got stupid. My DNA code would spell out S-C-R-E-W-R-O-G-E-R-M-O-O-R-E if you looked hard enough. Gazing at that film is like staring into the black, dead, blasphemous eyes of Cthulhu himself.

And I would still watch it over "Quantum of Solace." That blows my damn mind all over the walls.

Don't you be getting smug with me, though. You're not off the hook. You're better by technicality.

Having been forced to go on Wikipedia to find out just what in the hell was happening since this movie is ludicrously difficult to follow, I've determined that I don't care. It's got something to do with an ousted general in Bolivia who's trying to take the government over with the help of an evil environmentalist, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric). Greene is mildly playing the general for a sucker because he's caused a drought and has set it up so he gets the monopoly on the water supply in that area and will charge more than the dude was paying before. That's right. The villain's evil plot in this movie is to cause some jumped up South American dictator's water bill to double.

Oh no he d'in't.

The only reason Bond is there is because Greene is a member of Quantum, the Not-SPECTRE organization which briefly showed up in "Casino Royale" to do very bad things, and Bond is simply going around trying to kill as many of those people as he can. He doesn't care about Bolivia or the drought. He doesn't care about anything going on around him past "Who can I kill next?" He doesn't even address Greene's underground dam that is still there at the end of the movie. You know? The thing that shouldn't be there that was causing the drought? Sean Connery would have blown that thing sky-high and made sure the Number Two henchman was on top of the dam when it went. The movie would have ended with all seventeen citizens of Bolivia cheering as their water pumps turned on again while Bond had sex in one of the newly made lakes. But Daniel Craig doesn't care. He just wants to kill since he's James Bond and in no way ever saves the day, right?

Daniel Craig is barely recognizable as James Bond in this. Like the tone of the film, he's so mean spirited and dour that he looks depressed. I'm sure they were going for "badass" here, and true he does wreck plenty of people's collective faces, but he's doing it with such disdain for any thought of fun that it comes across more like we're watching a psychopath during one of his manic lows going on a killing spree. He doesn't seem like James Bond at any point besides jumping out of a plane and impossibly surviving when his parachute doesn't deploy until he's twenty feet above the ground. His actions may evoke images of Bond, but the attitude that defined him is nowhere to be found. I'm not sure how he's supposed to properly convey that attitude when he's got barely any dialogue in this film as it is, but that's besides the point.

The sole expression permanently locked on Craig's face is the same one you would have if you caught someone keying your car.

Besides Craig playing "an angry person" instead of 007, the rest of the cast is frankly pathetic. We've got Camille (Olga Kurylenko) who has a real beef with the general and wants to kill him. We don't learn until more than halfway though what her actual deal is, which is that she's some kind of Bolivian...agent (does Bolivia have agents?), but her character doesn't do a damn thing that matters at any point. She's just a link in the chain to get to Greene since she's his girlfriend (or something, I don't have any idea).

"Quantum of Solace" also features one of my "favorite" (see also: I can't stand them) actresses, Gemma Arterton as a useless character named Ms. Fields. She's an MI-6 agent that exists only to get killed off in an homage to "Goldfinger," and also to act really snooty and hostile towards James upon meeting him before having sex with him five minutes later for no reason at all. Bond nailing her is such an out of nowhere development that it's actually quite jarring.
  

 "Can I at least get a one liner in somewhere? Maybe something when I take White out of my trunk?"

"We'll allow you to say "Time to get out.""

"That's it?"

"That's it."

"They know I'm the same man who said "That last hand nearly killed me" in the film before, right?"

"Don't push it, Bond. We're trying to be serious. You can't be likable and serious at the same time."

"But Timothy Dalton-"

"SERIOUS ISN'T LIKABLE."

I wouldn't have minded so much expect for the fact that the entire premise of this movie is that he's supposed to be enraged at the loss of Vesper. And it's not even like he's angrily having sex with her to purge some demons. He just takes off his clothes and is casual about it. So that kind of makes his sorrow at her loss (ie. his entire motivation) ring a little hollow. I know it's a Bond movie, but you know you don't have to force him to get laid. Nothing would have changed if he hadn't had sex with her. Whatever. I don't care.

Yeah. Pro-tip: Don't reference a great movie in your crap movie.

The absolute worst, though, is our villain. You know, there have been some bad Bond villains in the past, but Mathieu Amalric as Dominic Greene is a special case, holding the distinction of being not only having the lamest plan, but he also gives the worst performance of any actor to portray a Bond nemesis. At no point is he intimidating. He just meekly slithers about looking like if you cloned Gary Oldman and turned him into the 98 lb. weakling who gets sand kicked in his face at the beach. And when Greene actually fights at the end, ineffectively flailing about as he swings an axe at Bond while shrieking like a howler monkey on fire, it's just embarrassing. This was a conscious choice, by the way. Director Marc Forester said that he specifically chose Amalric because he gave Greene "a pathetic quality." The stupidity of that logic makes me question if Forester has ever seen a Bond film in his life.

Oh good. It's Stansfield meets George McFly. Gaze upon your doom, humanity.

This brings me to what is the absolute death of this film. More than anything else - the script, the bad villain, Bond not acting like Bond at any point - there is one thing that makes "Quantum of Solace" the most mind-bendingly aggravating movie in this series to suffer through: Director Marc Forester and his steadfast refusal to film action scenes in a clear, comprehensible manner. This man is a perpetrator of hate crimes against cinema for his desecration of action films.

I don't know why they thought that the director of "The Kite Runner" and "Finding Neverland" was an ideal choice to make a Bond film, but it's clear that it was a mistake considering the results. As is his apparent style considering that he repeated this nausea-inducing method in "World War Z," another piece of crap, the camerawork is so jittery that a good recreation of the effect could be made by trying to read a book while flying down a dirt road at 80 mph in a car with no shocks. However, even if you could make out what you were seeing, it doesn't matter because a typical single shot during an action sequence doesn't last more than a second before cutting to another wildly shaky image that has no meaning because your eyes can't adjust to what you're seeing before it cuts again.

Well, I guess since he's shooting up, the bad guy is above him. I guess?

So because of all that, essentially what happens is that nearly every single action sequence in this film (of which there are a lot) is incomprehensible - a jumble of random pictures that might as well be a Rorschach test for all the meaning that I get out of them. I don't know what's happening. I don't know who I'm looking at half the time. I have no idea where people are in relation to each other. When they show up someplace else I have no idea how they got there. It's enough to make me want to fast forward through the action to save myself the migraine I get from trying to follow it. Why they thought this looked good I'll never know, but I am starting to remember the splitting headache I had leaving the theater after watching it.

What happens when a Bond movie's action is unwatchable? Well, we're left with watching Bond's charm and likability. What happens when he's completely unlikable? Well, then we're left with following the plot and listening to the characters talk. What happens when the plot sucks and you can't understand anything anybody is talking about anyway? Well, then you have no reason to watch, which sums up "Quantum of Solace" rather nicely. About all that's left is an opening theme song at that point, and you can look that up on Youtube. Why would you suffer for nearly two hours with garbage when the best part of the movie is over after the ten minute mark?

It's amusing to me how those annoying quick cuts in trailer are actually slower paced and easier to follow than the actual film is.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Quantum of Solace" is the worst Bond film I've ever seen. It's a nightmare of impossible to follow, overly shaky action, incomprehensible plot, pathetic or anonymous villains you don't care about, and no fun or amusement to be found at any point. It's horrifyingly bad, in fact it's one of the worst action movies I've ever suffered through, let alone Bond films. This is "A Good Day To Die Hard" level of awful. On the plus side, the next movie completely disregards it, so it's easy to just go into denial and pretend this skidmark on the underpants of the series never happened.

JAMES BOND

WILL RETURN IN

SKYFALL

Casino Royale (2006)

When discussing which entries should be considered as "the best Bond films," the qualifications can sometimes get a little murky. A film could conceivably be effective and full of suspense and pulse pounding action, but still not really be considered a good Bond movie. For instance, you couldn't slap the name James Bond on a Jason Bourne film and call it a solid 007 outing. It wouldn't fit. It's too serious. At this point there's been enough of a pedigree established in the franchise so that you expect certain campy things, and their absence is occasionally sorely felt when they are not present.

On the other hand, there's also been enough wacky crap in the series that sometimes when a film comes around to smack it down to terra firma, it's such a relief and a refreshing change of pace that it is akin to a religious experience. I'm immediately reminded of "The Living Daylights," "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and to a lesser extent "Octopussy" after the outrageous antics of "A View To A Kill," "You Only Live Twice" and "Moonraker," respectively. These films took what was too over-the-top and brought the series back to its senses and made it act a bit like a grown up, even if it was only a temporary maturation. But were they good Bond movies? Well, that depends on who you talk to. For me personally I've found that the occasions when the franchise put on its serious face often provided some of the best entries, and crossed the threshold between "good movie" and "good Bond flick" - two things that do not necessarily go hand-in-hand.

With that troublesome balancing act in mind, I shall put forward this hypothesis: Daniel Craig's debut feature "Casino Royale" is not the "Best Bond Movie." It's damn good, though. In fact it's close to the top. But there are other Bond films that do "Bond" better, if that makes any sense. It's not a film I would show to a complete newcomer and say "This is what a James Bond movie is like."

No, seriously. Seldom is the card game they're playing this comprehensible.

That being said, I shall add on to my hypothesis and say that while it's not the best at being Bond, "Casino Royale" is the best movie the franchise has made up to this point. I say that without a doubt in my mind. In terms of being an action packed spy thriller full of intrigue, double crosses and surprisingly deep character development, no film in the franchise did it better than "Casino Royale." They got really close with "Skyfall," and that one is a better "Bond movie," but it's not as well structured as "Casino Royale" is, nor is it quite as effective in terms of characterization. It's really close, and you could probably argue against that viewpoint pretty effectively, but for my money "Casino Royale" is the best movie they've made up to this point.

A reboot of the series after 20 films, "Casino Royale" finds James Bond (Daniel Craig), a newly made 00 agent, earning his stripes. "Rough around the edges" is an applicable term to use for him, as he's not exactly the suave, flawless superhero that he became famous as under the likes of Roger Moore or even Sean Connery (although Connery's Bond was known to make an occasional blunder). Here Bond is a blunt instrument, an impetuous wrecking ball whose ego leads him to consider himself above making mistakes, a viewpoint which is as we see on a number of occasions to be demonstrably incorrect.

Like shooting up an embassy. That situation could have been better handled, really.

It's fascinating to watch Bond be a rookie. We're so used to him being invincible that it's quite the shock to see him screw up. And he screws up quite a bit in "Casino Royale." It's not to the point where he's coming across as some kind of idiot or anything. He is a trained spy, so he's very smart and an incredibly dangerous man, but he's not a superhero. He's still just a guy. It humanizes him and makes him an actual character who makes mistakes, is affected and occasionally deeply scarred by them, and then learns from and changes because of them. There's an actual arc for the character of James Bond in this film - something I would argue we've never gotten before. Yeah, his wife was murdered at the end of "OHMSS," but they barely acknowledged that past the opening 10 minutes of "Diamonds Are Forever" and the occasional vague reference that doesn't amount to anything. Hell, it's somewhat debatable how canon that whole thing even is.

His first mission involves a banker to terrorists by the name of Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen). After gambling with his investor's money and losing a whole hell of a lot of it, Le Chiffre holds a high-stakes poker game with a payoff of $150,000,000, hoping to get his money back and pay off the people who will kill him if he doesn't. Bond is sent to beat Le Chiffre so that he will have nowhere left to run, so that MI6 can offer him asylum in exchange for giving up his clients, eg. The world's biggest terrorists. Assisting him is Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), a treasury agent who functions as our Bond girl, but also as his legitimate love interest as opposed to some dink who throws herself at him just because he's there.

I know poker doesn't sound like the most exciting idea for the main thrust of a plot, but in between the scenes of guys staring intensely at each other whilst flinging chips are scenes of hard hitting action and spy shenanigans of the highest caliber, including vehicle chases, a shockingly hard hitting scene of torture, lots of shootouts and hand to hand combat, and what is arguably the best opening twenty minutes in any Bond film ever. For all the card playing going on during the second act (and really there's only so much time spent with it), it's punctuated and bookended by some explosive goings on. The bits where they're playing cards is almost like the deep breaths before the plunge as the tension mounts - because you know that every time they stop for a break things are going to go down, and usually somebody ends up dead.

And less than five minutes after the game is over they literally set a world record by rolling a car on screen seven times. Wasn't that nice of them?

While this film isn't as lighthearted as previous entries (in fact it's downright dour on occasion), it still possesses enough of the trademark Bond charm to make it feel familiar. Some of that comes from Craig providing fantastic moments of classic Bond snark and badassery, but more is conveyed through the phenomenally good dialogue between him and Vesper, who have the best chemistry of any two characters we've seen from the series. Vesper is such a real person that I hesitate even calling her a "Bond Girl" since she's so atypical of what we're used to. They completely threw away the mold of what we should expect from that kind of character. And the ultimate fate of Vesper is the most tragic, heartbreaking thing I've seen a Bond film pull off.

That's a...shockingly tender moment.

That's the core of "Casino Royale." It's about a spy who learns to his sorrow that you can't trust anyone, and that to survive in that job, your soul is simply a moot point that you must learn to ignore. And it doesn't flinch away from that aspect. Because the film's script and the direction took a mature stance when conveying that story (while keeping it exciting and full of explosive, well-filmed action), I find it to be the most sophisticated Bond film from a filmmaking and writing perspective.

Bond has always been a hardass, but we've never gotten a handle on why until now. Before, he was simply an action movie hero. Now thanks to Daniel Craig's powerhouse performance and a smart script, when at the climax Bond, with gun in hand, stands over the orchestrator of his sorrow as he slithers away bleeding while croaking "Who are you," we finally hear the immortal words "The name's Bond. James Bond," we can get an extra charge out of it for reasons besides the obvious. Those words mean something now. It's not just a phrase. This is him saying: "I have arrived. I am now who you've known for all these years, and now you know my story. Now come and watch me be awesome."

Isn't it amazing to see a trailer for a Bond flick that looks like an actual movie?

THE BOTTOM LINE - I freaking love "Casino Royale." It's objectively the best movie the franchise has produced, although there are better examples of what a prototypical Bond film is like. It's exciting, it's full of action, intrigue, twists and great repartee, and Craig rocks it all hardcore. Phenomenal movie, and I never get tired of it.

JAMES BOND

WILL RETURN IN

QUANTUM OF SOLACE

Die Another Day (2002)

As another era of James Bond films came to an end, most were quick to dismiss the final contribution of Pierce Brosnan to the series. "Die Another Day" received lukewarm reviews when it came out, and years later it's still dismissed by many as the last straw to a tired franchise that had gotten stale and moldy enough to start making penicillin out of it - clearly only being salvageable by scraping everything and rebooting it, which four years later they would do. Even at the time I remember walking out of the theater thinking it was trash.

But here's the crazy thing, and it's something I honestly didn't expect: Upon seeing it again after a decade, I actually don't think "Die Another Day" is that bad. I won't lie to you and say it's a great movie, because trust me it has issues to spare, and when it's dumb it's really dumb. And maybe I was in a bad mood that day in 2002, or maybe I was expecting too much from it. Or perhaps it was because I hadn't yet seen the true lows of the series that I couldn't appreciate it when a Bond movie managed to be merely "alright." While absolving the film of its faults due to other films before it being worse isn't what I'm setting out to do here, I do have to take the big picture into account and offer a moderate defense of "Die Another Day." It's really not anywhere close to as horrible as its reputation suggests.

They're molding him into Ernest P. Worrell. The devious bastards.

The opening finds Bond in North Korea going under cover to disrupt a diamond-trading-for-weapons deal run by Colonel Moon (Will Yun Lee) and his partner Zao (Rick Yune). When, after being betrayed by an unknown source, Bond's cover is blown (along with Zao's face after an explosion imbeds diamonds in it) he attempts to escape but fails, and Moon is presumed dead after Bond drives him off a waterfall. Being disavowed by MI-6, Bond spends the next 14 months in prison being tortured before he is exchanged for Zao, who had been captured elsewhere in the meantime. M (Judi Dench) revokes his 00 status because she thinks he may have squealed under torture, but Bond is too pissed to let Zao run loose on account of him, and there's still a traitor to find. So, like in "License To Kill," he goes off the grid to settle some accounts. In my opinion it's one of the better setups the series has had.

That leads us to one of the weirder plots of the franchise, involving a satellite that can serve as a second sun, a hotel made from ice, weird neon headsets out of "Tron," a billionaire entrepreneur/professional thrill seeker named Gustav Graves (Toby Stephens), and gene reassignment therapy, a truly absurd concept that takes the relatively simple process of plastic surgery and makes it a thousand times more complicated and physically impossible. It's kind of a wild ride while it lasts, and while it could be called many things ("silly" being a notable option) it's seldom dull.

Oh, and there's an invisible car, too. Most people will remember that.

As you can see, the gadgets in "Die Another Day" have made a prevalent and clamorous comeback. It's possible that Bond has more toys in this movie than he's had in quite some time, although I have yet to make an official count. Whether or not you like that is up to you. Some people don't care for that aspect of the franchise, but personally I enjoy the gadgets. I always have a good time watching him get good use out of them, which he most certainly does here.

Unlike "GoldenEye" or "The World Is Not Enough" which brought out this sweet car to basically do nothing but drive around, the car in "Die Another Day" gets put through the freaking gauntlet. This car must have gotten more use than any other car since maybe "The Spy Who Loved Me." And the car in that one doubled as a submarine. And yeah, here it's invisible. And yeah, that's dumb. The way they explain the tech is just slightly plausible enough to make you almost buy it, but I'd almost prefer it if Q had admitted that they had found a wizard in the London subway system and had hired him.

I mention this because I think that's one of the things that made "Die Another Day" work for me, at least a little bit. It's so packed to the brim with wild stuff going on and crazy gadgets and locations and action segments that it's a fun ride despite the stupidity. Even when there are scenes like Bond and Graves sword-fighting through a posh mansion like Inigo Montoya and the Six-Fingered Man, it's still a possessing of just enough of a flippant attitude about the whole thing while refraining from being overly goofy about it that I actually found myself having a good amount of fun. They could have made this really silly and did the Roger Moore thing of winking to the camera, but they didn't. And that, to me, made all the difference. It's stupid. It knows it's stupid, but it's not treating YOU like you're stupid. Does that make sense?

Aww! The hovercraft is smiling! He's so happy to be helping James out!

Before you get the wrong idea and think that I'm heaping wild praise upon "Die Another Day," allow me to clear the air a bit: This is still not a very good movie. There are things about it which are bad enough to nearly ruin the experience. It's just that the good things in it are good enough to still make it watchable. It's akin to an argument given by Christopher Hitchens but written down by a dyslexic 4th grader. The grammar, spelling and penmanship is horrid, but man is it full of rock-solid ideas.

I've mentioned the good, mainly being the abundance of action and gadgets, but it's also worth mentioning Brosnan again, since he's just too awesome as James Bond. I can't help it, I love the guy. Toby Stephens is also fun to watch as a Bond villain. He's kind of like what you would get if Hugh Grant and Eric Stoltz screwed. I dug it. I wasn't as big of a fan of Rick Yune, though. He was scary I suppose, but I don't know. I couldn't understand why he never took the diamonds out of his face.

 He'll tell you it's from an explosion a British spy set off in his face, but the real story was that his older brother got really mad at him while they were playing that board game Forbidden Bridge and slammed his head in the box that held all the jewels.

But here's the bad, and it's bad. We'll start with the slightly less awful, being that that the editing in this film is pretty janky. Being the first millennial Bond film, I guess we had to go really stylized with it. And by stylized I mean ""The Matrix" happened." Much like nearly every other action film after Neo said "Whoa," there are some truly bizarre random slow downs and frame-rate sputterings that pop up very often that would look more at home in a music video. In fact the entire movie kind of looks like a car commercial. That's the only way I can describe it. Although in its defense I'm sure it would have aired during the Superbowl. It doesn't go full blown Paul W.S. Anderson, but it's close.

And as much as I actually like Madonna as an artist and am a fan of her music, the opening theme is terrible. It bleeps and bloops at us like a laptop starting up, completely devoid of the style and swagger the best of what came before possessed. You gotta have sleaze and swing in a Bond opening. It's not something you're supposed to rave to, it's something you smoke a carton of cigarettes while playing cards to. But I don't even think this would cut it as a song to play in a club, let alone at the front of a Bond movie. It doesn't put me to sleep or anything, but it does set a tone of things being slightly off.

"Ah yes, Mr. Bond. After this drink, we shall fight to the death in a good-natured fashion. By the way, why is Madonna here? And why is she the only one who gets to wear black?"

However, the most egregious fault the film has can be summed up in four syllables: Halle Berry. Good. Grief. I ragged on Christmas Jones for being insufferable, which she was, but at the same time Denise Richards really can't be blamed for being a terrible actress in it because she's Denise Richards. What did you expect? But Halle Berry has been accused of being good at her craft. Apparently they even saw fit to give her an Oscar for it at one point. I have no idea what her excuse was here.

Here's the thing: Jinx isn't a bad character. In fact she's kind of awesome. She's a CIA Agent who is pretty lethal in her own right, and doesn't always need Bond to save her. She does occasionally, but there are moments where she handles herself just fine, and is pretty useful overall. She's not the kind of whimpering bimbo we're used to. And I liked that. But here's where it starts to go south. Fast.

SHOOP DA WHOOP!!!

You see, I see what they were attempting to do with Jinx. They were trying to make a female James Bond. And I suppose that's an...alright idea. They've done the "Bond meets his equal" schtick before, but that was simply involving skill levels. And Jinx is tough and savvy and is a decent spy, so there they've essentially succeeded. But when I say they were trying to make a female James Bond in this movie, I mean they were trying to clone him. And even if that was a good idea, which it isn't, she's less Pierce Brosnan and more Roger Moore. Oh dear.

The issue comes from the dialogue. That's where you can tell they weren't interested in Jinx as a character at all. They just wanted another mouth to put rejected Bond quips into after they'd been determined too dumb for him to say, so they switched the pronouns and gave them to her. Every line of hers...EVERY SINGLE LINE out of her mouth is some cringe inducing pun or innuendo, oftentimes flying in the face of whatever the situation is and coming across as irritatingly childish at best and horrifyingly distracting at worst. For the love of Sean Connery's toupee, even Bond picked the moments to bust out the one-liners. He wasn't always on. There is a time and a place for snark. If I wanted unfunny crap spewed out constantly no matter the situation, I'd watch something Joss Whedon wrote.

"Switch them off or I'll be half the girl I used to be!" Somebody got paid to write that. Halle Berry got paid to say it.

But for all that is good in this world, I don't think anyone could have given a worse performance than Halle Berry did. It's shocking how bad she is here. Don't get me wrong, the dialogue would have made the character always suck no matter what, but I can envision a scenario in my head that features an actress not making Tanya Roberts look like Meryl Streep in comparison. At least Denise Richards looked like she was trying. It's really stunning how much Halle Berry looks like she does not give one single crap, simply flying by on an eternal smirk saying "Hey look at me! I'm Halle Berry! I'm a Bond girl! Yay! I don't have to act today! This is fun! Penis joke!" All the meanwhile Brosnan is playing it relatively straight and Rosamund Pike is over there completely showing Berry up every step of the way. Where's the justice?

Literally every line of hers can be followed up with the phrase "SHUT UP, HALLE BERRY."

If there was one thing that utterly guts this film, it's her. Everything else is actually not that bad. Like I mentioned before, it's a lot of fun, it's pretty looking despite some weird CGI going on, Brosnan is still the mack daddy, and it calls back to A LOT of older Bond films. A decent drinking game could be made if the players all had good enough knowledge of the series. In fact it seems a bit like an over-caffeinated version of one of the older Connery flicks like "You Only Live Twice" or "Diamonds Are Forever." I kind of liked it.

So with that we bid farewell to Pierce Brosnan. With the exception of one film, I had quite the fun journey with him. With a 75%, he had one of the better records as far as veteran Bond actors go. But once again the series would sit silently in the wings for a brief hibernation once again, as Hollywood broke out their new favorite toy: The Reboot. After this we got a new start along with another new Bond. Nobody was exactly sure what we would get, but it's pretty clear that no matter what it was, it would have a substantial coating of grit.

This is actually a really good trailer, but man it's like reliving my hatred for Halle Berry all over again. Watch at your own risk.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Die Another Day" is not nearly as bad as its reputation suggests. No, it's not that great, but that's mostly due to weird stylized editing and a legendarily bad performance by Halle Berry. But if you can grit your teeth and suffer through her wretchedness, this isn't a bad little action flick. This is middle of the road Bond. Not one of Brosnan's best, but still far from the worst.

JAMES BOND

WILL RETURN IN

CASINO ROYALE

The World Is Not Enough (1999)

Remember that cliff I talked about earlier? You know, the one that the Brosnan Bond series took a nose dive off of after "Tomorrow Never Dies?" Yeah. Yeah, this is the cliff. It's a pretty steep one, too. And as much as I thought myself "Perhaps it's not as bad as I remembered" before rewatching it, as I'm pretty sure I hadn't seen it since it was in theaters, there was always that little voice in the back of my head recalling all the things about it that made me remember yes, it really was that bad. And as I watched it, all that terribleness came flooding back like water into the submarine sinking at the end of the film. This was the first truly, unmistakably bad Bond film since 1985's "A View To A Kill." And that hurts. I was enjoying the streak we had going.

"The World Is Not Enough" is about an oil baron being assassinated, and his daughter, Elektra (Sophie Marceau) taking over his business and completing his dream of building a massive pipeline. Bond is sent to protect her from the people trying to kill her, led by Renard (Robert Carlyle), a terrorist with a bullet in his brain that prevents him from feeling any pain. As Bond investigates, it's clear that Elektra, who had previously been kidnapped by Renard, isn't quite as innocent as she appears. With the help of a nuclear scientist, Christmas Jones (Denise Richards), Bond sets off to get to the bottom of what's going on, and prevent the terrorists from taking out Istanbul in a nuclear explosion.

Oh. Good. Skiing. That's a new one. Thanks, Bond series.

That's the official story, but to be honest I found this to be one of the most confusing, nonsensical entries the series has ever produced. Yeah, "Octopussy" was kind of confusing, but that's because there was a lot going on in it. In "The World Is Not Enough," it's more of a matter of things not being explained very clearly. It's hard to explain, but for example that whole plot with Elektra being kidnapped by Renard is not told to us until about 25 minutes into the film. That's after 25 minutes of things going on during which that information would have been relevant. Because of that not being mentioned, not only did I have no idea as to why the opening scene (as admittedly fun as it is) was going on, but when the whole kidnapping thing is revealed I thought that was a new development that occurred suddenly off screen. Suddenly she's kidnapped and I'm asking "When the hell did that happen? Just now? She was in the last scene!" It's very confusing, and the film has a tendency to do stuff like that fairly often. It's a rather poorly told story, and it's hard to care about anything happening since little of it makes any sense.

It's also boring. This film makes the mistake of having far too much talking going on, which isn't helped by the fact that, like I mentioned earlier, the dialogue is confusing at the same time. When the action does happen it's of the over-the-top zany kind more akin to a Roger Moore entry. Too much wackiness is brought in, be it the parachuting ski-mobiles or the helicopters with giant saws on them. Now it's true that outlandish, impractical things trying to kill Bond is nothing new to the series, but there comes a point when you've got to ask "On what planet would anyone be trying to kill him with saws on a helicopter?"

Keep in mind: This was Plan A.

Like the rest of the lesser Bond entries, "The World Is Not Enough" also suffers from weak villains. Sophie Marceau as Elektra is difficult to pin down, for a couple of reasons. The first is that we don't know she's a villain until the movie is more than halfway over. We have our suspicions, but it's nothing concrete. Secondly, it's hard to tell what exactly her motivations are since the film gives us a number of them to choose from. First they say she's suffering Stockholm Syndrome and under Renard's control. Then they tell us she's enraged at M and wants revenge on her and her father for suggesting to not pay Renard off when she had been kidnapped. Then she wants a monopoly on the oil, so that leads her to blow up Istanbul. Then she's just kind of insane. It's like we're pulling motivations out of a hat until we get one that we like.

And Renard is as bland of a bad guy as you could find. Yeah he's got a bullet in his head, and that's pretty hardcore, but it doesn't mean jack squat. His inability to feel pain never amounts to anything. There's a scene were he picks up a hot rock and is all "whatevs" about it. That's roughly the extent to which he displays his "superhuman" powers. Oh no. Truly I'm terrified of this man. He's going to take a pie out of the oven quicker than Bond because he won't need to put on oven mitts first! The suspense!

In all reality Renard would be an incredibly pathetic villain to go up against, especially in combat. The fact that he has no feeling anywhere in his body means that he would constantly have to be vigilant to not sustain any kind of injury. He would be running away from a fight faster than you could blink. Do you know why? Because of infection. If you don't know, pain is the body's way of telling you you're hurt. If you don't know you're hurt, you don't take care of the wound. It becomes infected. The body part rots and falls off. You die. It's called leprosy. That's who James Bond is up against in this film: A dude who got shot in the head and became a leper. Take that, Scaramanga.

I think we're confusing "Not feeling any pain" with "Being invincible." There is a difference.

Brosnan is still great as Bond, though. Nothing much changed in that regard, and he seems very comfortable in the role. I did like the fact that we get to see him angry and rather more cold-blooded on occasion than usual here, although he does do some really, really stupid things that make me want to smack him. Like that one time he had Renard at gunpoint and could have easily taken him out but was duped by a horrendously transparent lie that made no sense in any context? Yeah, oops on that one, James. Idiot.

Yeah, I've got this same rig in my house. They have to use it on me every time I watch another "Resident Evil" movie.

And finally, it has to be addressed. Denise Richards. Oh boy. The words escape me somewhat, but I'll try my best to convey my thoughts without descending into a frothing, spit-filled spasm: She is not very good. In fact she is quite terrible. Not only her character, who is as helpful as knees on a fish, but also her as an actress. She is awful. Arguably the worst Bond girl ever.

Huh. That was easier than I expected it to be. I'm not even going to get into the fact that all this accused brilliant scientist does when she's in danger is to stand around gape-mouthed until James grabs her and pulls her to safety over and over again like she's a cardboard cutout. It's not worth it because all you have to do is look at her name and it's clearly obvious that this whole thing was a mistake. Denise Richards as Doctor Chri...no, you know what? You don't even have to say the whole name. "Doctor Denise Richards" is far enough.

Here's the thing. I'm not saying that Denise Richards can't portray someone who is smart. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying pretty women can't be smart. That would be laughably ridiculous. But if you're going to cast someone who is supposed to have a doctorate in nuclear physics, the very least you could do is to get an actress who can at least give the appearance of not being two seconds away from having a stroke at the effort of pronouncing a word like "plutonium."

Lots of nuclear physicists wear hot pants, do they? Is that standard lab equipment?

There are a total of three good things I can say about "The World Is Not Enough." First, I like the opening 15 minutes. That was really good. Second, I like Pierce Brosnan. Third, Sophie Marceau is really hot. And that's all I've got. Now bring on Halle Berry. I'm...not looking forward to this.

"Larry. I'm so scared, man. Would you please hold me?"

Well, at least the trailer makes it look interesting.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "The World Is Not Enough" would be forgettable if it weren't so bad. It's still forgettable, but the crap factor makes it memorable simply for things like Denise Richards saying her lines with the practiced skill of a stand-in for a middle school play. It tends to overshadow any of the small amount of good contained within, which was merely standard random 90's action movie stock to begin with. I'd seriously watch *certain* Roger Moore films over this one. This sucked.

JAMES BOND

WILL RETURN IN

DIE ANOTHER DAY

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)

Pierce Brosnan's second outing as James Bond is a particularly notable one for me, because it marked the first time I saw a Bond film in the theater, way back when I was 14. To this day "Tomorrow Never Dies" brings with it a rush of nostalgic feelings for me: The padded theater seats, the smell of stale popcorn on the floor, the sugary buzz in my head after slamming a half pound box of Mike & Ikes. I distinctly remember sitting there watching the opening montage with the sexy silhouettes dancing on multicolored see-through guns as Sheryl Crow wails "Until the world falls away" and whatnot. It was not the first Bond movie I saw, but this time it felt official. Seeing it larger than life on the big screen was a special thing, and since then I've always greatly looked forward to doing it again for the next installment.

"Tomorrow Never Dies" has gotten something of a lukewarm reputation over the years. I think there are two reasons for that. The first is that, quite frankly, after "GoldenEye" the chances of it being a step down is significant on the basis of "GoldenEye" kicking out the freaking jams all over the place. And the Bond series had at that point had three fantastic films in a row with Dalton's powerhouse pairing of "The Living Daylights" and "License to Kill" coming before it. The streak had to end sometime I guess.

Still looks damn good while doing it, though.

The second reason is that was the start of the downward trajectory that the Brosnan series unfortunately took. Now, don't get me wrong: "Tomorrow Never Dies" is not a bad film. In fact I find it to be a damn solid Bond flick, and it's a lot of fun. But facts are facts, and despite "Tomorrow Never Dies" being a respectable Mt. McKinley, "GoldenEye" is still K2. You can't argue with numbers, and the Brosnan movies did consistently go downhill, starting with "Tomorrow Never Dies." But that first step down was not a huge one. It was more like a slip before taking a header off a pier.

The film finds Bond investigating a news mogul named Elliot Carver (Jonathan Pryce), a Steve Jobs meets Rupert Murdoch type who wants to start a war between Britain and China for the sole purpose of having exclusive broadcasting rights, a concept I'm sure made more sense back in 1997, before the Internet was as it is now. Using his own satellites to screw with navigation and his own stealth ship to attack, he orchestrates the sinking of a British frigate while making it look like the work of the Chinese, then steals a missile from ship to launch into Beijing when the British fleet arrives to provoke a retaliation, and officially kick off a war.

Holy crap! The car actually gets to DO stuff in this movie!

Having only 48 hours before the British fleet arrives in the China Sea, Bond gets to work, going to Germany and then to China as he follows the clues to expose Carver and prevent the conflict. Along the way he teams up with Wai Lin (Michelle Yeoh), a Chinese spy whom I suppose functions as the Bond girl this time out, although she's a bit too competent to easily fit into that category. Together they track down Carver and his stealth ship, infiltrating it in a climax that is oddly similar to the end of "The Spy Who Loved Me" only on a much smaller scale.

I found this to be a fun, fun movie despite its faults. Brosnan is, as always, charming as all holy hell in this. In "GoldenEye" he was more stone-faced, playing it fantastically but still a little safe, most likely because it was his first outing as Bond and he wanted to be taken seriously. In "Tomorrow Never Dies" however, he seems a bit more comfortable in the role and brings a contagious sense of glee with him. Both he and the character are having a blast, and when he smirks while messing with Q or gives a laugh at the awesomeness of his car's gadgets or delivers a one-liner like it's the most profound thing anybody has ever said in the history of the world, it's impossible to not give a mental high-five to the dude.

This little two second reaction shot is seriously one of my favorite Bond moments ever. It's so fun to see him having fun.

I mentioned previously that I thought Natalya from "GoldenEye" was the best Bond girl ever, and I stand by that still, but Michelle Yeoh also deserves special mention as she is one of the only ones capable of handling herself in a fight. But not only that, she is one of the only characters who could probably straight up kick 007's ass. He wouldn't stand a chance. And yeah, Grace Jones was tough, but she didn't have close to the moves that Michelle has. There's a couple of sequences with her that are ripped straight out of a martial arts movie, and the sight of a powerful woman like Michelle flipping around and smacking punks with her kung-fu is such a shock that it almost seems like we've put in the wrong DVD. In a series where the most a girl is likely to do in an action scene is to scream "JAMES!" over and over until he saves her, seeing that was borderline cathartic.

Ah! Megaman grew a hand! And became kind of hot! D:>

The supporting cast is also a lot of fun. Götz Otto is a decently despicable hulking henchman in the most classic Bond tradition. Joe Don Baker makes a return as Jack Wade, injecting a little comedic foil that's actually pretty funny. Vincent Schiavelli (you know, the subway ghost from "Ghost") is hysterical in a small part as a German torturer and provides some of the best lines in the movie. And it also has the second best bit of repartee between Bond and Q that they ever had, as Desmond Llewelyn goes down a checklist asking which kinds of insurance Bond will be needing for his car. It's all fantastic.

All of this goes on in front of a backdrop of constant action that doesn't slow down. From a motorcycle chase though Chinese city streets, to Bond remote controlling his car from the backseat and shooting rockets everywhere, to a HALO jump, to Michelle Yeoh kung-fuing people and Brosnan stealing jets and sneaking through numerous buildings before tearing them the hell up with gunfire, "Tomorrow Never Dies" is the farthest thing from dull you can imagine. Is it ridiculous sometimes? Of course it is. It's Bond. But unlike some other Bond films that made the mistake of talking too damn much, it's never boring. And the plentiful action is well filmed and exciting, with a sense of fun that allows it to be over-the-top without becoming goofy. Honestly it's one of the most efficient entries in the entire series as far as all that goes.

ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?

The film one-ups "GoldenEye" in one respect, actually. The music is back to its original style from the experimental, out of place, synth-heavy soundtrack from earlier. The music here is much more classic Bond, full of swagger and sleaze and bombast. So much is added to the film because of the music that it really can't be understated. I also would feel remiss not to mention the opening theme, which is hands down one of my favorite songs from the franchise. It's...just perfect. I can't sum it up better than that.

If there was fault to be found in "Tomorrow Never Dies," it's probably that Elliot Carver isn't a very good villain. His plan is nefarious, and he is sufficiently insane, but like Julian Glover, Michael Lonsdale and Curd Jürgens, they just don't do enough to make me afraid of them specifically. They're just some dude who surrounds themselves with henchmen. I like a Bond villain to be like Alec Trevelyan, Scaramanga or Silva, meaning that they themselves pose a physical threat to Bond. Otherwise the ending fight is never as satisfying as it could be. Although Carver does get one of the most gruesome death scenes I've seen a Bond villain get, perhaps not in terms of how graphic it is, but in the idea. At least it was probably quicker than what Benico Del Toro got in "License To Kill."

Probably about as messy, though.

Besides the admitted problem of having a relatively weak villain, I really don't think "Tomorrow Never Dies" deserves the "meh" reputation it has. Not at all. It had been a very long time since I'd last seen it, but watching it again I can safely say that it's a damn good movie, particularly when compared to some of the other schlock I've had to sit through in this series. And more than nearly any of the rest of them, it puts me in a good mood. I had a smile on my face nearly the whole time, and when you have a smile on your face while watching Bond, it's difficult to think of a better time at the movies.

Oh my god this trailer makes me want to watch it again.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Tomorrow Never Dies" is a fun movie. Everyone on screen is having a great time, the action is flying at you non-stop, and it's got some wonderfully fun moments. It's a fine example of 90's action done right. While it's not as good as its predecessor, it's still a solid flick. I had a blast.

JAMES BOND

WILL RETURN IN

THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH

GoldenEye (1995)

Common consensus dictates that your favorite Bond is the one you grew up with. Older generations will only acknowledge Connery, Gen X-ers have a soft spot for Moore, people my age are supposed to like Brosnan, the kids like their Craig, and nobody remembers Lazenby or Dalton. Of course that's subject to change depending on the person, and Connery usually gets reverence placed upon him even by people who prefer the other guys. But while the theory is not 100 percent true for myself, as I enjoy all the Bond actors with the exception of Moore, there is a part of me that will always have a special place for Pierce Brosnan.

The reason I have an affection for Brosnan's portrayal of James Bond is because to this day he remains the closest representation of the image I have in my head of the character. That's not only referring to his physical presence, but also his voice, the cadence with which he speaks, the way he carries himself, the way his hair looks, the way he shoots a gun, the way he delivers a quip, the way he wears a suit and even the way he drinks a martini. Everything about this guy is spot-on the way he would look if you pulled him out of my head and put him on screen. And I say this while having first seen Bond played by Sean Connery, although I can't for sure recall when I was first exposed to 007. The important thing is that even though I can't remember the first Bond movie I saw, I know for a fact it was pre-Brosnan since there's no way it took till I was 12 years old to see a Bond flick. So even with another actor establishing the character in my mind, even as a kid I took one look at Brosnan and said "Yes. That's what James Bond looks like."

In 1995, after a six year hiatus during which Timothy Dalton got fed up with waiting and quit, the world was introduced to a new, sleeker, shinier and, if I may be so bold, sexier James Bond with the casting of Pierce Brosnan.With him the modern Bond film was introduced, starting with "GoldenEye." This new style of 007 films had a faster paced, very 90's feel to them. Everything was very glossy and slick, and they didn't take their time getting going. And as far as look goes, this was about as far away from the grit of the Dalton films as you could get. They do still harken back to the 60's with their sense of fun, however, and in many ways they are delightfully retro, albeit with a much more expensive and polished appearance.

FANCY.

When talking about the Bond series, often "GoldenEye" is listed as one of the greatest movies the franchise has produced, and while it does have its issues it's difficult to find much reason to not include it among the best of the best. It has arguably the most instantly likeable Bond actor giving a fantastic performance, the villain was the first memorable main antagonist the series had seen since 1974, the action is plentiful and exciting, the stunts in it are jaw-dropping on occasion, the Bond girl is, in my humble opinion, the best one the franchise has ever seen, and it's legitimately fun and even funny when it needs to be. "GoldenEye" has, quite frankly, all the ingredients to make it the best Bond movie ever made. Unfortunately it's not the best, due to some odd bunglings, but that's not to say it's not a fantastically strong showing, and in my opinion it's the best debut any of the Bond actors have had.

The story begins with 007 infiltrating a chemical weapons plant in Russia with the help of 006, Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean). During the mission, an alarm gets tripped, and Alec gets taken out. Blowing up the facility and jumping off a cliff to catch a plane (Oh my god so awesome), Bond escapes, completing his mission but losing his friend in the process. Cut to 9 years later and we find him investigating Xenia Onatopp (Famke Janssen), a woman with a name so absurd that Pierce had to slightly break the forth wall when he first hears it, much like Connery did upon meeting Pussy Galore. Xenia is a suspected member of a shadowy group known as the Janus Crime Syndicate, and Bond has been sent to check her out in order to hopefully find leads to bring him to Janus, the head of the organization. All this ends with Xenia killing a dude with her thighs and then stealing a prototype helicopter.

BOOM.

Meanwhile at a satellite control station in Russia, computer programmer Natalya Simonova (Izabella Scorupco) is the lone survivor when her complex is attacked by a rogue Russian general, Ourumov (Gottfried John). Ourumov then destroys the place using a secret Soviet space weapon code named GoldenEye, which emits a powerful EMP, causing all electric circuitry to be destroyed in the blast radius. Making her way to St. Petersburg, Natalya goes on the run until Bond, following the trail of the stolen helicopter, finds her, hoping to use her knowledge to stop any further use of the weapon.

And who is behind all of this? Why, of course it's Janus, and unless you're very unobservant you'd rightly guess that it's Alec Trevelyan, who is not only alive but also is the villain of the film. One could easily anticipate that since Sean Bean is nearly always a villain, but hey, the man is damn good at what he does. So by all means, make him a bad guy. Far be it for me to ever complain about that.

Sean Bean is, naturally, dynamite as Trevelyan, and I really like his character a lot as the bad guy. He's the closest match Bond has ever gone up against. He's a 00 agent with the same training, and he's able to guess Bond's moves since he knows him intimately. It's to the point where, were this not a Bond movie, there would be a good chance that Alec could beat him. It's a great match-up, and Bean plays Trevelyan with the same smug confidence and swagger that Bond himself possesses - a mirror image of himself he has to battle. So the name Janus, referencing the two-faced Roman god of change, functions on multiple levels here, both as references to Alec's scarred face, to his betrayal and hidden identity, and to the dualistic nature between him and Bond.

It doesn't mean anything, true, but it's a nice touch of cleverness from a series that gave us such intellectual powerhouse ideas such as naming a character "Holly Goodhead."

The second villain that 007 must contend with is Xenia, and I have to say that of all the bad guys in the Bond series, she is arguably the most depraved of the bunch. She's obviously a psychopath, as is any action movie villain, but she actually gets off on killing people. And I mean that in the most biblical sense. Watching her face as she mows down a dozen people with a machine gun, you'd swear she was ready to start filming a porno right then and there. In fact her preferred method of killing involves crushing people with her thighs until they suffocate while she's having sex with them. We see this. It's disturbing. And yes, killing put Scaramanga in the mood so to speak, but it's really far more creepy to see Xenia in action since you actually see her do it instead of the depravities simply being vaguely implied, and Famke Janssen is really playing it completely unhinged, perhaps more so than any other Bond villain I can remember. Frankly I greatly enjoyed her character because she is so off-the-wall insane. And also because Famke Janssen is absurdly hot.

Is it inappropriate to get aroused by this? I'm so conflicted right now.

But as awesome as Xenia is, I absolutely loved Izabella Scorupco as Natalya. She is, and I stand by this, the best Bond girl they've ever had. For one, she's not stupid. As a computer programmer of some respectable skill, she manages to save the day on numerous occasions, including figuring out Trevelyan's location and stopping the GoldenEye from firing - two things that Bond wouldn't have been able to do jack about otherwise. Second, she can handle herself, or at least attempts to. She's not picking up a gun and going John Rambo on anybody, but she doesn't just stand there and wait for James to save her while she does nothing. True she does get captured a couple of times, and Bond does rescue her, but trust me - the mere fact that she's fighting the whole way and moving her ass when she needs to puts her LEAGUES above the rest of the useless bimbos who would simply stand there and shriek "JAMES!" over and over again like they're a basket full of helpless kittens incapable of even attempting to preserve themselves. At least Natalya's trying.

And lastly, she's the only Bond girl to completely give James a hard time. She comes across less as a lustful, helpless, doe-eyed treasure and more like an angry Russian bear whose cave you just made the mistake of camping in. She doesn't take any level of crap from Bond, not falling for his charms and treating him like the jerk he rightly would be treated like if that character existed in anything like the real world. She yells at him, she calls him on his crap, tells him he's a heartless bastard, kicks him in the shins - it's actually very entertaining to see a women give James the business. I was actually pissed when she decided to lock lips with him since it was out of absolutely nowhere. It seemed like the writers forget they were writing a Bond girl and were writing an actual person there for a minute. Oh well. But that's what a Bond girl is there for I suppose. At least she's pretty badass while she's doing it.

I hated you so hard in the N64 game, though. Nightmare fuel hatred.

The rest of the supporting cast is also quite fun. Joe Don Baker pulls a Charles Grey and returns in a completely different role, this time playing a CIA agent named Jack Wade, who I guess is supposed to be our Felix Leitner equivalent. And Jon Don Baker is always fun to have around. Robbie Coltrane is also entertaining as an eccentric Russian mobster, and provides one of my favorite bits in the film - a scene where he identifies Bond by the sound of the hammer of his Walther PPK cocking back. That's so badass. And naturally it would be remiss to not mention the introduction of Dame Judi Dench taking over as M, a role she would play a commendable seven times. In fact, and this is maybe because I kind of grew up with her as M, it's difficult for me to think of anyone other than her in the part, despite Bernard Lee being the reigning heavyweight champion. I think it's because her role was given far more room for characterization.

So why don't I consider "GoldenEye" the best Bond? Well, the main reason is what would appear to be rather trite: The music. I'm not exactly sure what composer Eric Serra was thinking when he wrote it, in fact he's a great composer who did the soundtrack to "The Professional" and one of my favorite movies, "Wasabi," but his synth-heavy score simply doesn't work for a Bond movie. It's not enough to kill the mood or anything, in fact sometimes it works just fine, but more often than not it kind of beeps and boops in the background, very unassuming and easily neglected. More often than not it's so forgettable that you almost forget it's even there, which makes it seem like there's no soundtrack at all. And that's a real problem because the music of the Bond franchise has always been like another character in of itself, and its absence is sorely felt.

Imagine if Sigor Rios did the soundtrack to this. It would be 007 shooting people to the sound of whales singing. Then only wind and a single note on a keyboard held for half an hour.

The best example of why this works can be found in the only scene from "GoldenEye" when you hear the Bond Theme in its fully glory (for all of twenty seconds). When Bond is in Russia, escaping from a bunch of soldiers, he jumps out a window and into a parking lot full of tanks. Up to this point the action has been great, but the score has been enough to put you to sleep, making it feel about 75% of the way there. Then Bond steals a tank and blasts through a concrete wall with it, chasing the bad guys down the streets of St. Petersburg like a armor plated monster. At that moment, the John Barry score flares up in all its glory, and you suddenly realize what it was that was missing the whole time. It's the best single music cue, and one of the best moments in the film. If the rest of "GoldenEye" had followed suit, I would safely call it a serious contender for best Bond film.

Also, as much as I loved Sean Bean here, and as great of a job as he does, he's not really given enough screen time. Part of this is because his reveal as the villain doesn't happen until probably an hour or so into the film. And that's far too long. The parts leading up to that are fine, but up until then it's dealing with Xenia and Ourumov, who aren't our main antagonists. It's clear they're sidekicks, and we're waiting for the Big Bad to show up for quite some time. While Bean kills it in the time he has and the dialogue he provides, giving a lot of characterization with very little, the fact that he had to be jammed in there so quickly due to time spent with everyone else makes him feel not as fleshed out as he should have been. Trevelyan has a great story, but it's clear we're only getting the novel's synopses written on a post-it note. It makes him seem stock when he's really the most interesting villain 007 has ever gone up against.

Best. Reveal. Ever.

On a side note, I'm not sure why I got such a kick out of Boris (Alan Cumming) when I was a kid. Me and everyone else used to think he was the best character in the movie, and shouted "I am in-VIN-sible!" all the damn time. Watching him again all those years later, I'm not sure the of the reason why. He's kind of obnoxious, honestly.

The Brosnan movies did a great thing by modernizing Bond. If anything, they provided a balancing act between the silliness of the 70's and the more gritty tone of the (very) early 60's and the late 80's. They did go downhill rather quickly, to be honest. But man did it start from high heights.

NICE.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "GoldenEye" is damn near one of the best Bond films ever made. It's not the best, but it's at the very least in the Top 4. Easily. Taking an old-school vibe of fun and over-the-top adventure from the Connery era, a sprinkling of grit from Dalton, keeping the humor of the Moore era while actually being funny and not stupid, and then giving it all a sleek makeover and a fantastic new actor to play 007, "GoldenEye" created the modern Bond film. It's action packed, it's fun, it's sexy, it's everything a Bond movie should be. One of the greats.

JAMES BOND

WILL RETURN IN

TOMORROW NEVER DIES