Most Underrated Bond Films

BuilderPlumber

I was just thinking about James Bond films and there are some which are recognised universally as the best of the series. From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Casino Royale and Skyfall being among these. But there are also many underrated films too I feel. For me, the 10 most underrated in no particular order Bond films are:

1. Thunderball.
2. You Only Live Twice.
3. Quantum of Solace.
4. The Living Daylights
5. Licence To Kill.
6. Live And Let Die.
7. Octopussy.
8. Dr No.
9. On Her Majesty's Secret Service.
10. Never Say Never Again.

All of the above are imo excellent films but have often either been compared to an even better predecessor, were ahead of their time, are remembered for some of the more negative/humorous scenes in them, etc. and this has clouded people's recall about them.

Why these 10? 1 and 2 are classic Connery at his best. Every bit as good as FRWL and Goldfinger imo. 3 is a good solid outing from Craig whose imo one of the best Bonds ever too. 4 and 5 are great films of the mould of Craig and Connery from Dalton, my other favourite Bond. 6 and 7 are Moore's best films along with the more rated The Spy Who Loved Me in my view. Moore's films were often good and up there with the best and this is not remembered. 8 was the first ever and was solid. 9 is also a lot better than many remember and all the critical attacks on Lazenby are very unfair imo. 10 gave many people what they wanted: one more Connery film and it is a very good effort produced outside of the Eon.

What 10 Bond films do you think are underrated and why?

Simon2015

A View To A kill , Moonraker and Tomorrow Never Dies are all very underrated IMO.

Wedwood

A View to a Kill hardly ever gets a decent word said about it, which is a pity. It's definitely a slow burner compared to other Bond movies, but Bond actually behaves more like an undercover agent in this one, albeit low key compared to previous movies.

Another plus is John Barry's score, which is magnificent. The instrumental versions of the theme tune in particular are poignant and somewhat melancholy reminders throughout the movie that this is Roger Moore's final outing as Bond.

A View to a Kill is arguably a better send off for Roger Moore than Octopussy otherwise would have been. It grounds Bond again after the larger than life Octopussy in much the same way For Your Eyes Only did after Moonraker.

Iranoutofideas

There can really only be one answer to this and that is On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

The ski scene alone is one of the very best action sequences of any Bond movie, especially in choreography and the accompanying score by John Barry. I'd love to see a modern director tackle this again to see what they could do. Keep the music though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwYpX3JwMu0

And they had the balls to end it like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJfk-tIuVFg

Magnificent.

TerrorFirmer

On Her Majesty's Secret Service definitely gets a raw deal.

I always thought Dalton's The Living Daylights and License to Kill were very under-rated also.

It would have been interesting to see Dalton in Goldeneye but to be honest, while I dislike every other Pierce Brosnan bond film, I consider Goldeneye one of the finest Bond films.

I think Brosnan got a raw deal of his own with the follow up movies.

BuilderPlumber

Agree with most of the above too. The worst thing is that many get a reputation of being bad just because a few did not speak highly of them and it stuck.

A View To A Kill is an obvious example. A lot of people spoke poorly of it inclusive of Roger Moore himself. But it actually is quite a good film. Comparing it to Octopussy and expected a similar film perhaps did it harm too. But AVTAK has a lot to offer. The pretitle is one of the best in the series (possibly the best from Moore's films?). Also, the climaxes are different and inventive. The Golden Gate showdown is very good and Zorin machine gunning down his own men added to his evil. Speaking of Zorin, he was probably the best Bond villain in years. Maybe even the best of the entire series.

Moonraker also gets a raw deal. Often accused of being a copy of The Spy Who Loved Me and a cash in to take adv of the space craze of the late 1970s, it is a much better film and is different to its predecessor and is not like Star Wars or Star Trek either. There is great action sequences with the fight in Venice and the boat chase being particularly good.

Tomorrow Never Dies I have always liked. Many do not warm to it at all but it is a great action film with a great climax of the type seen in films like You Only Live Twice and The Spy Who Loved Me. Brosnan's last 2 films were very poor, especially Die Another Day but Tomorrow Never Dies was put together nicely. If this was from the 1960s or 1970s, I feel it would be praised more! For some reason, this style of Bond film (which would have been regarded as classic 15-30 years earlier) was out of sync with the 1997 generation and beyond.

The series was deciding what it would be in the 1980s it would seem. Moore's last 3 mixed elements of humor, action and taut current affairs related issues. The Living Daylights continued on this tradition with less emphasis on the humor. Licence to Kill gave us a completely new style of Bond where superpowers, world domination and egocentric megalomaniacs were replaced by drug dealers and revenge missions. Because it was so different to what one had come to expect in the 6 predecessors (The West and USSR collaborating against common enemies threatening to break down detente and cause problems), it may have alienated some. It also was by far the most violent to date. So, Brosnan's first 2 films reverted back to the world domination and superpower formats. His last 2 ???? They made way for Craig and for serious, often revenge focused Bond again. Dalton though was doing this in the late 1980s but I guess the world was not ready then.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service is an excellent film that was a way ahead of its time. The ending was sad, poignant and completely different to other films. It is exactly the kind of ending one now sees in Love/Hate and the like. I think a revenge focused movie sequel to it should have happened that's the great pity. The action was excellent: the ski chase and the climax was one of the best too. Why it is panned is totally unclear. Again, it was perhaps the world was not ready for a more serious Bond. It was a departure from You Only Live Twice in some ways and maybe just maybe Lazenby suffered from comparison to Connery. I'd have liked to have seen Lazenby do 2 films (maybe called OHMSS part 1 and OHMSS part 2 as the revenge movie from Fleming was You Only Live Twice) where Bond gets revenge on Blofeld discovering he is once more threatening the world. Diamonds Are Forever needs the diamond theme obviously and would follow up this 2 part series and would be more or less as it is except the baddie would not be Blofeld).

BuilderPlumber

Iranoutofideas wrote: »

There can really only be one answer to this and that is On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

The ski scene alone is one of the very best action sequences of any Bond movie, especially in choreography and the accompanying score by John Barry. I'd love to see a modern director tackle this again to see what they could do. Keep the music though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwYpX3JwMu0

And they had the balls to end it like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJfk-tIuVFg

Magnificent.

Yes. It would be great to do it as a 2 part story. A remake of OHMSS and the You Only Live Twice book. And do it with Craig. Perhaps this is the intention: SPECTRE will introduce Blofeld with the next few films focusing on Bond doing battle with Blofeld.

Perhaps the new OHMSS would be set in Africa and would be focused on Blofeld trying to spread Ebola. It could have another part set in Europe with Bond's mission to stop Blofeld's bases in Africa and in Switzerland. Bond meets Tracy somewhere along the way after a mission to investigate his father, who happens to share a common enemy in Blofeld. Bond and Tracy fall in love and get married, Bond stops Blofeld and Blofeld gets his girlfriend to kill Tracy.

The second part sees an alcoholic and depressed Bond unemployed and down and out refusing all work despite coaxing from M and others. Then, he clicks out of this and researches Blofeld and locates him in the Middle East trying to cause a war between Iran and Israel. Bond follows him from Tehran to Chechnya where he is trying to smuggle a nuclear bomb and launch pad he acquired from a pro-Chechnya/anti-Iran Russian ex-general. Bond contacts Tracy's father who organises an army and they take down Blofeld and foil his plot. Bond and Draco deliver the ultimate violent revenge to both Blofeld and his girlfriend at the end.

BuilderPlumber

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

On Her Majesty's Secret Service definitely gets a raw deal.

I always thought Dalton's The Living Daylights and License to Kill were very under-rated also.

It would have been interesting to see Dalton in Goldeneye but to be honest, while I dislike every other Pierce Brosnan bond film, I consider Goldeneye one of the finest Bond films.

I think Brosnan got a raw deal of his own with the follow up movies.

I agree here. While I would like Tomorrow Never Dies myself (it had good action and a good climax), I would not like The World Is Not Enough or Die Another Day. Brosnan got a raw deal indeed and the early promise slipped completely in his last 2.

Of the two, World is probably the better. It has a poor plot and has a poor finish but at least it had some coherency about it. Die Another Day was much much worse, a ridiculous outing with invisible cars, silly swordfights and Koreans turning English. The plot and climax was poor. The start was interesting and showed promised and I remember feeling after the pretitle that will be at least better than The World Is Not Enough! But 20 more minutes into it, I knew it was heading to be the poorest Bond film ever made. But if they had developed along the lines of the pretitle focusing on Bond as a POW and escaping it would have been more interesting. I would have settled for a Bond meets Rambo type film rather than the mess we got!

The Strawman Argument

I thought On Her Majesty's Secret Service is usually regarded as the last of the classic period of Bond films?

As a kid I thought Tomorrow Never Dies was class, enjoyed it heaps more than Goldeneye*, remember thinking the villain was one of the best (I believe my favourite was Zorin)


* Had more fun playing with the laughably bad buggy TND videogame far more than I ever did with Goldeneye too.

the_monkey

Licence to kill for me, great great Bond film - and ironically the most "unbond" of them all .

FloatingVoter

^ License to Kill - its the only one that highlights Bond as what he actually is - not a spy but a professional killer. It owes a lot to The Bourne Identity (the book). Robert Davi is in fine form as a believable villain (very much modelled on the then world famous Pablo Escobar, a man that Forbes magazine had to classify as involved in pharmaceuticals because he did make the World Top 20 Richest or whatever).

BuilderPlumber

FloatingVoter wrote: »

^ License to Kill - its the only one that highlights Bond as what he actually is - not a spy but a professional killer. It owes a lot to The Bourne Identity (the book). Robert Davi is in fine form as a believable villain (very much modelled on the then world famous Pablo Escobar, a man that Forbes magazine had to classify as involved in pharmaceuticals because he did make the World Top 20 Richest or whatever).

the_monkey wrote: »

Licence to kill for me, great great Bond film - and ironically the most "unbond" of them all .

Yes. Licence to Kill was the most different of the Bond films. The mission is revenge pure and simple. He goes undercover and takes down an apolitical drug dealer who hurt his friend very badly.

More influenced by Miami Vice, Lethal Weapon, Robert Ludlum's books and even Mad Max and Westerns in many ways than Bond, the film was brave to depart from a format that more or less had been in place since the start of the series. No joint UK-USSR-USA missions to take out common enemies, no world domination schemes, no General Gogol, not as much humour and not too much OTT gadgets. If it was to be compared to any Bond film, it was most like On Her Majesty's Secret Service especially the theme were Bond falls out with the secret service.

I think the audience were at the time not ready for this. They were so used to Moore's era that anything other than that would feel alien to them. Even Dalton's first film The Living Daylights played safe and kept many elements of Moore's films in place so Licence to Kill even came as a surprise to those who saw The Living Daylights. Both films though were excellent and showed Dalton's versatility to do a straightforward classic Bond film and a revenge focused film.

BuilderPlumber

The Strawman Argument wrote: »

I thought On Her Majesty's Secret Service is usually regarded as the last of the classic period of Bond films?

As a kid I thought Tomorrow Never Dies was class, enjoyed it heaps more than Goldeneye*, remember thinking the villain was one of the best (I believe my favourite was Zorin)


* Had more fun playing with the laughably bad buggy TND videogame far more than I ever did with Goldeneye too.

I guess that Up until and including OHMSS, the focus was on a serious Bond who was tough and got the job done with little humour. From 1971 until 1985, each film contained humorous distractions that amused some and p1ssed off others. Some of it was overdone: by the 1980s, even into Dalton's stint, a Bond film could not be complete without some joking with the Q character. It was always in it since Goldfinger but got more and more exposure as the years went on. Then other scence started coming into what were otherwise good films:

eg. Bond taking a fish out of his car. Bond yodelling like Tarzan when dodging bullets and swinging through trees. Bond's tut tutting with his undercover 'servant' in Zorin's horsey place. Relating to this was the scenes were crowds of passerby's (incl. pigeons!) would marvel at whatever gadget vehicle Bond was driving. This was all out of kilter with the action man type of the time: Stallone and Swartzenneger were the dominant heroes of the times and the Lethal Weapon series was combining action with humour in a more believable and less corny way.

Over the years, a lot of this is dropped and such scenes are uncommon and nonexistent in Craig's films.

Wedwood

License to Kill was certainly ahead of it's time, still is in some ways.

The scene where Felix Leiter is fed to the shark, losing his leg in the process, along with his wife being murdered on her wedding day was completely shocking watching it back in 1989. In fact, I cant think of a similarly violent scene in any Bond movie since, Craig's movies included. The climax of the movie where Bond burns Sanchez alive was equally violent.

License to Kill was really the first (and only so far) truly adult Bond movie. Ok, there's a few comic 'Bond' moments in it, but in the main its played straight. Even the soundtrack departs from the usual 'Barry-esque' themes, preferring a contemporary Miami Vice like score, with very few references to the Bond theme.

You can see why it was disliked at the time given the then current expectation for a Bond movie was Moore's 'wink to the audience' type movies, even the Living Daylights was laced with Moore-ish bits like outrunning an army truck down a hill on a cello case.

Simon2015

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

From 1971 until 1985, each film contained humorous distractions t action with humour in a more believable and less corny way.

I don't remember any humorous distractions in live and let die ? I thought that was a serious film compared with diamonds are forever.

BuilderPlumber

Simon2015 wrote: »

I don't remember any humorous distractions in live and let die ? I thought that was a serious film compared with diamonds are forever.

Live And Let Die was generally a serious film. The boat chase comments by the sheriff character is the humorous part but it is kept here mainly. It was by far Moore's most serious outings and arguably his best. Diamonds Are Forever indeed had a lot more humorous distractions in it.

BuilderPlumber

Wedwood wrote: »

License to Kill was certainly ahead of it's time, still is in some ways.

The scene where Felix Leiter is fed to the shark, losing his leg in the process, along with his wife being murdered on her wedding day was completely shocking watching it back in 1989. In fact, I cant think of a similarly violent scene in any Bond movie since, Craig's movies included. The climax of the movie where Bond burns Sanchez alive was equally violent.

License to Kill was really the first (and only so far) truly adult Bond movie. Ok, there's a few comic 'Bond' moments in it, but in the main its played straight. Even the soundtrack departs from the usual 'Barry-esque' themes, preferring a contemporary Miami Vice like score, with very few references to the Bond theme.

You can see why it was disliked at the time given the then current expectation for a Bond movie was Moore's 'wink to the audience' type movies, even the Living Daylights was laced with Moore-ish bits like outrunning an army truck down a hill on a cello case.

Exactly. I think Licence To Kill tick all the boxes for contemporary action thriller and was Bond at his most inventive. The Bond films of the 1980s were getting increasingly more violent but this took it to a new level. Previously, we had seen half dead stabbed 00 agents smashing through doors, innocent workers machine gunned down by a madman, and a violent prison fight with a violent jailer in Afghanistan among other things. In Moore's time, violent scenes were followed up with humorous remarks or even a complete bit of comedy. But now LTK took things to a new level with violent drug dealers getting revenge. It is what audiences enjoy today on Love/Hate and Breaking Bad. And it was what the very same audience were watching on Miami Vice then (but I guess they expected with Bond more the Moore style stuff).

The Living Daylights in many ways feels like the last of the sequence of films that began with The Spy Who Loved Me. It is most like Octopussy in that it has a dissident Russian villain teamed up with another villain with the Russians dealing with theirs and Bond with the non-Russians. The theme was cooperation against common enemies. It had many of the same humorous elements but it was overall a serious film. I could imagine Moore in it but I could not see Moore do Licence To Kill!!

That is how the series progressed though! Each decade brought about trends. The Bond series became lighter as the 1970s wore onwards. The 1980s seemed to have a desire to combine taut thrillers with lots of action with a humorous element as well. LTK reinvented this.

But the series did not seem to plan a continuation of the LTK-style film. The original followup was supposed to be called Warhead 2000 which was never made. It was supposed to be yet another variant of Thunderball. What came eventually was Goldeneye, a Moore-style action movie very much in the tradition of the standard secret agent movie. Then, Tomorrow Never Dies is basically the same story as and almost a remake of The Spy Who Loved Me. The truly serious Bond had to wait until Craig came along with Casino Royale certainly being the most violent Bond film since LTK.

FloatingVoter

Wedwood wrote: »

The scene where Felix Leiter is fed to the shark, losing his leg in the process, along with his wife being murdered on her wedding day was completely shocking watching it back in 1989. In fact, I cant think of a similarly violent scene in any Bond movie since, Craig's movies included. The climax of the movie where Bond burns Sanchez alive was equally violent.

That scene in particular was a nod to the chainsaw shower scence in Scarface. We'll see similar again 20 years later with the decapitated head on a turtle in Breaking Bad. All three were and are straight-from-the-newspaper cartel punishments. Quentin Tarantino was working in a video shop at the time but I'm betting this gave him ideas for what you can get away with on a multiplex screen.

BuilderPlumber

FloatingVoter wrote: »

That scene in particular was a nod to the chainsaw shower scence in Scarface. We'll see similar again 20 years later with the decapitated head on a turtle in Breaking Bad. All three were and are straight-from-the-newspaper cartel punishments. Quentin Tarantino was working in a video shop at the time but I'm betting this gave him ideas for what you can get away with on a multiplex screen.

This was clearly what this film was all about. A Bond film that would also be a contemporary action film. With all the violence that goes with that.

For the first 6 films, a generally serious approach predominated. Dr No, FRWL, Thunderball and OHMSS were generally serious films with for the times lots of violence. Goldfinger and YOLT combined this with a little humour. The next 3 films expanded on the humour. DAF had the feel of Goldfinger. LALT kept the humour in one place (the boat chase) and was generally a serious film. TMWTGG was lighter and more humorous.

The next set of films were what I call the larger than life era. Big budgets and a return to the Blofeld-type enemy. TSWLM was a classic of its time and the franchise seemed to find its niche: able to satisfy teenagers and adults alike. Great action, no extreme violence. Moonraker followed the same format as did Octopussy. FYEO was an attempt to get back on the ground with a taut thriller but even here the humour remained. AVTAK was somewhere between the taut, minimalistic Bond and the big budget adventurous Bond.

For many, it was a 2 horse show then with Connery v Moore. Connery's return in the unofficial NSNA contrasted the serious, direct, violent style of Connery's Bond v the comedy meets action of Moore's Bond.

Director John Glen of the 1980s Eon films wanted to change the emphasis away from the comedy and towards real world gritty stories. In the 3 last Moore films, we can see this coming to the surface BUT Moore's comedy had to be written in as well. This is where Dalton came in and Glen had an actor now who could play a serious Bond. TLD played it safe and produced a more serious, violent Bond film but one which kept many of the Moore aspects. LTK completely ditched everything and is unlike anything before it or even since. It can be compared to Miami Vice, Lethal Weapon, Love/Hate, Breaking Bad and The Sopranos arguably more than to Bond. This is the only film where Bond works for himself and closes out the classic era of the Bond films quite well.

Goldeneye and TND were the relaunch of the series after a long wait. Two films were to be made in the early 1990s called The Property of a Lady (title from Ian Fleming and about Bond bidding at a Sotherbys auction: this was used already in Octopussy) and another called Warhead 2000 (another remake of Thunderball). Neither was made and apparently elements of Property found their way into Goldeneye. Goldeneye went right back to the Moore era and TND did the same: the aim here was more for TSWLM than LTK or TLD obviously. Brosnan's last 2 TWINE and DAD were the arrival of a worry the series had for years: that all sanity and believability would abandon the series at some stage!

LTK was considered a failure when it was released in 1989. It was the most un-Bond and therefore has been underrated with years. A 6 year gap and a rush back to making Moore-style films eventually proved a dead end. By 2006, Casino Royale with Craig reignited a series than had become poor and stale in its last 2 films. CR was the best Bond film since LTK and like that, took Bond as a serious agent and not a suave womanising playboy type. QOS was also good and while not as good as CR it was still better than all 4 of Brosnan's films even his better 2. Skyfall was as good as CR arguably and it shows that we are getting a set of quality Bond films at the moment and long may this last. SPECTRE I am sure will be another good one.