I grew up with my dad taking me to each Bond movie, and by this point I’d finished college and was beyond the point having my dad take me to a movie! This is a movie I know I saw, but can’t remember when/how I saw it. Your review does such a good job of pointing out the positives and negatives, that it makes me regret not appreciating my first experience with this movie! I’m anxious to watch it again now!
My favourite Brosnan Bond, there I´ve said it. Not perfect but just amazing fun. Never fail to have a good time with this one and yes, it was way ahead of it´s time in it´s depiction of the mainstream media.
Definitely feels like a sequel to goldeneye. I guess the story and characters is up to one's interpretation...many would probably argue that goldeneye did it 100x better but...tomorrow never dies certainly is much slicker and action packed as a lot of big hollywood sequels tend to be.
Tomorrow Never Dies is a rather underrated Bond film, and a perfect comfort film. Brosnan is great, Michelle Yeoh is good, Johnathan Pryce hams up the villain role perfectly, M, Q & Moneypenny get great little moments, and the film shows off David Arnold's composing talent well (Backseat Driver is my favourite and the car chase it plays over is one of my favourite action scenes in the series). I'm also a big fan of the Sheryl Crow title song, and I'm glad it chosen.
This movie was prophetic in a way. There is a scene where Carver blackmails the US president by threatening to release a video of him with a cheerleader. About a month or so after the release of the movie, the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal went public.
There are some Bonds that are better than others. But all Bonds have one thing in common: I enjoy them all and I like to rewatch them every few years and obviously I have watched every movie several times - together with the original Star Wars trilogy by far the movies I watched the most often. Well, one exception, No Time To Die I won't touch ever again. Watching it once was more than enough.
Brilliant run through and I agree with you 100% I really enjoy this. Brosnan is class, the action scenes are fantastic (BMW Chase a highlight and Brosnan's flourishes during that are so much fun). Looks and sounds great too!
"The Empire Will Strike Back" will forever be ingrained into my mind after seeing this movie. Plus, since the movie is meant to take place in the nineties, it would be around the time that the prequel trilogy would've been coming out. So, I can definitely imagine Carver at one point in his life, sitting down to watch Star Wars whilst thinking about his master plan which could've been stirring in the back of his head for years. I don't blame him for wanting the line in the paper, it'll catch people's attention, The Empire Strikes Back is a great film.
TND is a solid second outing as Bond after Goldeneye. Great Gadgets and a Q scene, A fantastic remote car sequence and motorbike chase Michelle Yeoh is a welcome Bond equal in a modern 90s world, the biggest highlight for me is Jonathan Pryce’s performance as Elliot Carver, he chews the scenery, he’s plays a great over the top Bond villain. David Arnold’s score really shines in this film and is my second favourite composer behind John Barry. I agree KD Lang’s “Survivor “ is a better Bond song over Sheryl Crow’s version. This Bond film was my childhood and my first one at the Cinema, (I was 8 😂), I played the PS1 game to death when it came out.
I’ve always preferred this to goldeneye. Brosnan is amazing throughout and seems a little more settled here. I read somewhere also that John Barry almost came back for this movie and that he basically annointed Arnold.
@@ricardocantoral7672 I think I heard the same thing. He also was a bit disparaging to the more recent bond films so he fell out of favor. Would have been great!
The scenes with Moneypenny are always a highlight. ‘You just have to decide how much pumping is needed” “If only that were true of you and I Moneypenny”…. classic. I’, not sure one could even make that joke these days.
So yes, well written. Good analysis. Superb editing and scoring. You know ... the usual quality stuff. If a topic is not listed below, it's because I totally agreed with you. I found myself having a lot of "I was not aware of that!" moments. I did not know how many production issues this film had. I think I gave the movie more of a pass than it deserved because of that pre-credits sequence. I had the same reaction to David Arnold's score that you had. Oh, my! The action was simply what I wanted. This was what I hoped Bond would be as interpreted by Brosnan. I was also swayed by the casting. Seeing Geoffrey Palmer and Judi Dench mollified me immediately. Call it American Public Television conditioning at work. Rewatching the movie now is a great "Spot the Actor" drinking game. We have Michael Byrne and Gerard Butler, for example. Hugh Bonneville makes an appearance. Colin Salmon is always going to be the guy who could have been a fellow Double 0 in another universe. I can dream, dammit. I agree with you about the villains. I think Stamper is old hat - serviceable but completely uninteresting. (Think video game boss.) Ricky Jay is underutilized - so sad. Vincent Schiavelli was always the spice in eighties and nineties movie so he's understood as simply awesome. I find it amusing that you can be so eloquent and craft these watertight arguments because of your rigorous analysis, but you gleefully admit that you are turning off your brain to enjoy the movie because having fun needs no analysis. That's the point of intelligence - it doesn't run you when you possess it. The ending felt a little ponderous at times, but that's mostly because the remaining baddies were not coming across as terribly threatening. I need to rewatch this film to make a better assessment. Thanks again, Stephen.
One issue I have with your point on Wai Lin finding the Devonshire. The Chinese MiGs that tagged the ship and started the whole confrontation would have known where the ship sank. Only one of the MiGs was blown up by the missile, so the other pilot would know precisely where it sank.
@@ems10824 As I commented elsewhere, the MiG pilots stated that the Devonshire was in Chinese territorial waters, though the GPS expert said that it was in waters belonging to Vietnam. This led me to think that both sides were tricked by Gupta. I'm sure there may be a plausible explanation for this, but it doesn't make sense at face value to me, and since the movie doesn't make it clear, I'm still crying foul on Wai Lin knowing where the ship was.
9:30 the Chinese government know where the boat is because their MiGs had accurate GPS signals - Carver was only spoofing the location for the Devonshire. I do agree she came out of nowhere a bit, would have been nice to have an establishing scene a la Spy Who Loved Me earlier on. (Also what on earth is she wearing in the Hamburg scene? High heels are the worst kind of footwear for stealth)
@Buzzardonic So here's a follow-up. The GPS guy says that the waters where the Devonshire sank belong to Vietnam. But the MiG pilot earlier warned that the ship was in Chinese territorial waters. So, I assumed the GPS signal was being tampered for both. Is there a way to reconcile this if the Chinese signal was fine?
@@stephenjarvis534 good point. I'd assume this was a case of the waters being internationally considered Vietnamese, but the Chinese considering it theirs - if I remember correctly China basically claims everything that isn't within about 10 miles of another country. That said, the MiGs say something about them being within 11 miles of China I think? From memory (I rewatched TND yesterday) the ship sunk just south of Hainan Island, so it may have been on the border between Vietnamese and Chinese waters.
My favorite Brosnan (Bond) movie of all time is Goldeneye. But I loved Tommorow never dies and the World is not enough for them too were real Bond movies with the feel, action and all..last 2 I owned the Playstation 1 games adaptations from and they were fantastic. Tommorow never dies was a perfect and original followup to Goldeneye ...it has everything a fan could wish..The saw kinda torpedo eats a ship reminds a lot like You only live twice (wich was my alltime favorite movie as a kid) and perhaps "The spy who ...." you know..And the Bond girl (Michelle Yeoh) was amazing and the chemistry with Brosnan worked out..on a motorcycle chase..great stuff
Ah, TND. My #5 favorite film in the franchise, and one that I’m always happy to watch. Yes, the production was messy. Yes, it’s got a lot more action than other Bond films. Yes, it’s got a lot of plot parts that don’t work great. However, it’s really, really fun. I love the major plot, and really think that most of the actors give a great performance. Hatcher is a bit flat in her performance, but that’s about the worst that I think it gets for the film. The action, man. I agree that the martial arts scene after the bike chase is a bit too much, but everything else is just fantastic. The garage action scene might be my favorite vehicular scene in the franchise, up there with the Lotus chase in TSWLM, and the boat chase from TWINE. Now, the soundtrack. David Arnold killed it. I’m torn between this and Casino Royale for my favorite OST from him. He’s easily my favorite composer for the franchise, and this is one of two soundtracks I own on physical media (got the Zimmer NTTD OST on vinyl). As another commenter said, this film is evergreen. It has lasting power that I think supersedes the next Brosnan films. It doesn’t hurt that this film also just looks so good. When it comes to my “Bond Pile” of memorabilia, TND is the biggest chunk of my stash. A framed movie poster, an old magazine advert for the PS1 game, a model of the 750i, and a few stills of film from the original reels. Hell, I bought an Omega SMP300 because of my love for this film (and the Brosnan era as a whole). Total sidenote, it's impressive that the director of "Stop Or My Mom Will Shoot" brought us one of the most fun Bond films yet. As always, thanks for the review Stephen!
I mainly remember feeling like they'd upped the violence level AGAIN, and tend to think of this as the most violent Bond film ever made. (Or at least, it feels that way.) Elliot Carver, and Kauffman, and some of the other baddies, DO feel like Ian Fleming might have created them. They have a level of SICKNESS and depravity about them that sets them apart from being mere "bad guys". Kauffman especially impressed me that way. "It was not personal! I'm just doing a JOB!" "Same here." "BLAM!" My favorite moment in the film. It was interesting how conning 2 countries into starting a war once again borrows from YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, yet, here, the whole motivation is to sell newspapers. How sick is that? (The real motive in YOLT tends to get lost in the high-speed plot; that Red China PAID Blofeld to start a war between US and USSR so they could step in after; and then he upped his price. "But-- this is blackmail!" "Blackmail is my business.") This was the 4th and final film in a row to have 2 theme songs, one at each end. "Tomorrow Never Dies" is the romantic song, usually put at the end, but, it fits here because it's so downbeat and depressing and TRAGIC, reflecting Paris' murder. "Surrender" is the VILLAIN's theme! Usuaully that goes at the start, but here's it's such a TRIUMPHANT piece of music, it gives you something thrilling to walk away at the end of the movie with. I rate it as not only one of the BEST theme songs ever, but the LAST truly GREAT Bond theme TO DATE. Nothing-- NOTHING-- since then has grabbed me AT ALL. The quality of the songwriting just fell off a cliff after this. What's sad is how movies get run on commercial TV these days. They tend to turn off the sound on the end credits for promos, or, they start the next movie WHILE the end credits of the previous film is running! Either way, K.D. Lang's song-- to me-- THE BEST THING about the film-- NEVER gets played on commercial TV! Thank God for RUclips. You can hear it there in all its glory. This was the last Bond film I wound up getting the soundtrack album for... and the first that-- TO DATE-- I have still not gotten a copy of at all. Maybe one of these days. (But I have SO MUCH else I'm in a hurry to get more.) The next film, they went back to ONE theme song-- and the end credits they just played "The James Bond Theme". And if memory serves, they've been doing that ever since. If they'd done that here, "Surrender" absolutely should have been at the start.
Its an okay James Bond movie. Not bad, but not great as well. Middle of the road in terms of plot, great in action set pieces. The score by David Arnold is great although I think his best work comes in the next movie. Glad to see that the soundtrack got an official release recently.
I think this movie doesn’t get the credit it deserves…it looks great even though it was a delayed rushed nightmare to make, and it’s still fun as hell to watch! Plus it’s one of the few later ones that gets the job done in slightly under two hours
The Bad: Little time to absorb the locales. This is a well photographed movie so it's such a shame so much of it takes places indoors in locations that aren't that special. A bit too much gunplay and 'splosions. Because General Chang and his men have such little screentime, it robs Carver's plot of substance. We really need to see more of them together. Paris Carver was meh, yet another secondary Bond girl buying the farm. Monica Bellucci should have been the producers choice. Also, rumor has it that Carver was going to be Sylvia Trench! What could have been! 😭 The Sea Drill? Huh? Why? The Good: A fine villain. For me, Jonathan Pryce as Carver is the best villain a Bond film has had in many years. There's an element of insecurity and a need for attention in him that makes him vulnerable and interesting. Pryce sometimes plays him too over the top but thankfully, it doesn't happen often. He is also rather charming. By the way, glad you mentioned the shot of Carver in the dark possibly regretting his actions. That was an excellent moment. The Plot exposes the unfortunate, real life union between government and big media in the past and present. As Carver said, he was basically Hearst going one step further! As mentioned before, this is well shot Bond movie. Not surprising since the man behind the camera was one Paul Thomas Anderson's favorite cinematographers. Wai Lin was a good ally and I think Brosnan had some great chemistry with her. Pierce Brosnan wisely decided to put on weight and he looked much better than he did in GoldenEye. He was way too skinny before. So overall, I think this movie is a bit uneven but it's easily one of the better Bond adventures.
There's a hilarious bit of incidental comedy to listen to. I am speaking of the scene when Bond is being beaten in the sound proof room. Listen the sound of the third kick, it was hilariously awful. Like something out of a Looney Tunes cartoon. 😂
@ricardocantoral7672 Bond unfortunately had a checkered history with sound editing and choices. Films like Goldfinger have exaggerated sound effects for a reason, and thus it feel more cohesive. GoldenEye uses sound as more of a definitive statement, so each gun shot, explosion, crash, etc. feels hard hitting. Tomorrow Never Dies goes for something similar, so that particular crunch (which I believe is a vegetable being torn apart) stands out. Another example is the No Time to Die gunshot. It works OK, but if you spend any time paying attention to sound effects libraries that are shared across various movies, that particular sound is used so often it has been described as "stock". Heck, I've used it in some of my grad school projects.
@@stephenjarvis534 Yes, you are right. There have been questionable sound effects in the series for years. Like in Thunderball, Bond pulls back a curtain which sounds a cat screaming! 😂 Also, odd vocal sounds. In OHMSS, when Bond beats up that guy in the hotel room there's an odd "Ummm" sound. I wasn't sure if it was Bond or the other guy. Either way, it's something that always made me chuckle.
I want to like this one, but I just can't due to many factors from the cringey dialogue to the hurried sense of pacing and more importantly the films half baking its potentially interesting ideas. "Tomorrow Never Dies" is NOT this film that some claim is "ahead of its time" as some fans claim it is. Even during the 90s people even were picking up on the media bullshit long before this film. An episode of “The Simpsons” called "Homer Badman" explored that very issue as well as having a lot more to say on the subject matter despite the episode being almost 100 minutes shorter than this film. People were picking up on the Rupert Murdoch similarities with Elliot Carver or more specifically the writer Feirstein based the character on Robert Maxwell. You know why the media manipulation theme worked in that episode of "The Simpsons" and it doesn't with "Tomorrow Never Dies"? "Homer Badman" actually explores its the concept through having characters actually having conversations on the topic, actually has lasting consequences within the films narrative and the theme actually informing the characters whether it is through its character whether it is through backstory, actions or worldview. This is hardly the case with "Tomorrow Never Dies" with the one exception being Elliot Carver himself who is absolutely my favourite thing within the film. Shame he doesn't really get enough screentime for it to matter since the film kind of shafts him to make room for Wai Lin........ And I know this a unpopular opinion, but I HATE Wai Lin as a Bond girl. Many would label her as "wasted potential", but I disagree because I describe her as a parasitic vacuum who sucks out the potentially interesting ideas and concepts of this film dry as soon as she is on screen. Like what does she actually add to the story exactly as far as the theme of mass media manipulation or even the concept of a past lover of Bond coming to his present? If one of your main characters takes away from your interesting concepts rather than add to them....then guess what? YOU HAVE FAILED AS STORYTELLERS!!!!! Whenever most fans talk about Wai Lin it's always built upon the extremely bad faith arguments surrounding Bond girls as being mostly useless bimbos or like fans of Zack Snyder just them talking WHAT she is, not WHO she is. But even the media comes off as superficial lip-service to me as well as having an ending with VERY mixed messages. Rather than expose Carver for his crimes and leave him publicly disgraced, the more poetic ending by far, they instead have M quietly hush up his death and cover it up with false reports. So what's the message here? The government is just as bad as the media at telling lies? Nah, this Bond film isn't written nearly cleverly enough for me to give them this much credit. They haven't earned anything more than a failing grade here. It's like running the ball all the way to the goal line and fumbling it at the last moment.
Interesting observations, as most wouldn't expect that much from a Bond film. I will agree that the media manipulation angle doesn't really inform the characters, and so would fail at any point it tries to make. The question then is why do so many Bond films get a pass then when there is a significant lack of thematic cohesion with many of them? The desire for wealth and power for a villain's motivation rarely influences any other aspect of the film. Could something have been done here? Absolutely. Does the film try to make a point about the media manipulation instead of just using it within the plot? Not really, which means it doesn't make the mistake of missing the point entirely, which to me can be an even bigger blunder. Is the lesson Wonder Woman learns in her first movie really about how love will save the world? Is Jordan Belfort's financial fraud supposed to be condemned or glorified? Does it really make sense that the Madrigal family has their powers restored to them because of the actions of the non-magical member? I do think the film isn't taking full advantage of the great concepts within its story. But I must admit, I never really thought about the ramifications of M covering up Carver's death, beyond the reference to Maxwell's death. But that may also be because I never expected the film to make any real commentary about it. That may be naivety on my part, as I never expect Bond to be more than a sweet distraction for an hour or two, and I'm always surprised when the films try for something more. But to your point, most of the films that do try that tend to fail because the supposed goals of the story clash with the producer's desires. Melina doesn't learn anything about vengeance and why that may be a bad thing, Bond isn't condemned for making it personal in Licence to Kill when the very next film decides to declare doing so would be a bad idea, Judi Dench's M has a real flip-floppy relationship with Craig's Bond and trusting him, and so on. Should I be more critical about this series because it so often misses the chance to make something everlasting that stands apart from the action adventure genre? Probably, as so many of the films commit egregious mistakes that would bring down so many other films for me. But the series is so generally entertaining for me that I struggle not to have a double standard about it. Anyway, thanks for your insights. I enjoyed having a brainstorming session this morning. :) Also, great point about Wai Lin.
@@stephenjarvis534 It really depends on the film. Personally I dislike the whole "it's a Bond film" comment as some sort of get out of jail free card. But the Brosnan films in particular have this issue of bringing up ideas and teasing us that we're getting a Bond film that's going to take chances, but always feel like checklists to me rather than films that follow a formula. The Roger Moore films mostly don't face such scrutiny for me because those films mostly know what they want to be, have more wit to their jokes and actually give most of their characters define and distinct personalities in ways the Brosnan films severely lack in which makes most of his films such boring, bland and tacky slogs to me.
Greatness of amazing awesome video reviews James Bond one my favorite James Bond movies adventure TND 18 James Bond movies adventure tomorrow never dies one of the most entertaining enjoyable action pack excitement Bond movies of fun TND tomorrow never dies amazing awesome fun movies 😊😊😊 Pierce brosnan James Bond he is amazing in this movie I really do love the main villain Jonathan Pryce media Mogul Elliott Carver campy fun villains Michelle yeoh an amazing sidekick agent Bond girl Teri Hatcher Paris Carver I love the storyline in the movie David Arnold music soundtrack it is amazing I love the Sheryl Crow theme song and I love the surrender theme song tomorrow never dies one of my favorites in in the Pierce brosnan James Bond era great review an amazing review TND 18 James Bond movies tomorrow never dies tomorrow never dies my childhood favorite James Bond movies that made me love the franchise even more as a kid back in the day and I still love it till this day Tomorrow never dies is one of my go-to favorite James Bond movies Tomorrow never dies in the world is not enough of one of my important favorite James Bond movies I love TND tomorrow never dies it is fun movies in the series I love the movies 😎😎😎
17:27 I love Tomorrow Never Dies by Sheryl Crow. Had it been used for any other Bond movie it would have regarded as one of the best. It just so happens that Surrender by K.D. Lang is a better song. And the way it was so expertly used in the score makes it quite jarring as to how that song is not the title song.
Well, I never liked it. Some really good action sequences but the plot is rubbish as far as I'm concerned. That's not the fault of the actors (except Pryce whom you rightly cite as "camp"). I rank it 17th, better than TMWTGG and DAF but below TLD and DrN. As for the title song, I do wish all you reviewers would quit it with the championing of "Surrender". I really, really prefer the Sheryl Crow song. BTW congratulations on having this video up for (so far) 7 hours without being blocked.
@darcyj19 Glad to see someone who prefers Sheryl Crow. I can promise you that until I do a video covering the rejected theme songs, this will be the last time you hear me talk about that song.
I grew up with my dad taking me to each Bond movie, and by this point I’d finished college and was beyond the point having my dad take me to a movie! This is a movie I know I saw, but can’t remember when/how I saw it. Your review does such a good job of pointing out the positives and negatives, that it makes me regret not appreciating my first experience with this movie! I’m anxious to watch it again now!
My favourite Brosnan Bond, there I´ve said it. Not perfect but just amazing fun. Never fail to have a good time with this one and yes, it was way ahead of it´s time in it´s depiction of the mainstream media.
Definitely feels like a sequel to goldeneye. I guess the story and characters is up to one's interpretation...many would probably argue that goldeneye did it 100x better but...tomorrow never dies certainly is much slicker and action packed as a lot of big hollywood sequels tend to be.
This is such an evergreen Bond film that I can watch anytime. It has its flaws, yet it’s so fun that I can overlook them.
@@astrosquirrel5038 Evergreen is a very good word to describe it.
Tomorrow Never Dies is a rather underrated Bond film, and a perfect comfort film. Brosnan is great, Michelle Yeoh is good, Johnathan Pryce hams up the villain role perfectly, M, Q & Moneypenny get great little moments, and the film shows off David Arnold's composing talent well (Backseat Driver is my favourite and the car chase it plays over is one of my favourite action scenes in the series). I'm also a big fan of the Sheryl Crow title song, and I'm glad it chosen.
You do really good work with these, Mr. Jarvis. Thanks for the time and thought you invest.
Tomorrow Never Dies has the distinction of being a straightforward action flick...in a series of detective spy stories.
This movie was prophetic in a way. There is a scene where Carver blackmails the US president by threatening to release a video of him with a cheerleader. About a month or so after the release of the movie, the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal went public.
There are some Bonds that are better than others.
But all Bonds have one thing in common: I enjoy them all and I like to rewatch them every few years and obviously I have watched every movie several times - together with the original Star Wars trilogy by far the movies I watched the most often.
Well, one exception, No Time To Die I won't touch ever again. Watching it once was more than enough.
Yeah, it kinda crapped the bed something fierce, didnt it?!
A great lazy Sunday type of Bond film. One where you can just kick your feet up and have fun watching without having to think too much.
Brilliant run through and I agree with you 100% I really enjoy this. Brosnan is class, the action scenes are fantastic (BMW Chase a highlight and Brosnan's flourishes during that are so much fun). Looks and sounds great too!
"The Empire Will Strike Back" will forever be ingrained into my mind after seeing this movie. Plus, since the movie is meant to take place in the nineties, it would be around the time that the prequel trilogy would've been coming out. So, I can definitely imagine Carver at one point in his life, sitting down to watch Star Wars whilst thinking about his master plan which could've been stirring in the back of his head for years. I don't blame him for wanting the line in the paper, it'll catch people's attention, The Empire Strikes Back is a great film.
I don't know what paper crated that headline but I do know it was from the report of the British invading the Falkland Islands.
This is such an easy film to digest, when I just want a few hours of Bond fun this is often what I'll turn to
TND is a solid second outing as Bond after Goldeneye. Great Gadgets and a Q scene, A fantastic remote car sequence and motorbike chase
Michelle Yeoh is a welcome Bond equal in a modern 90s world, the biggest highlight for me is Jonathan Pryce’s performance as Elliot Carver, he chews the scenery, he’s plays a great over the top Bond villain.
David Arnold’s score really shines in this film and is my second favourite composer behind John Barry. I agree KD Lang’s “Survivor “ is a better Bond song over Sheryl Crow’s version.
This Bond film was my childhood and my first one at the Cinema, (I was 8 😂), I played the PS1 game to death when it came out.
I’ve always preferred this to goldeneye. Brosnan is amazing throughout and seems a little more settled here. I read somewhere also that John Barry almost came back for this movie and that he basically annointed Arnold.
Barry didn't return because the Producers wouldn't give into his salary demands. Shame, I would have loved to have heard his score.
@@ricardocantoral7672 I think I heard the same thing. He also was a bit disparaging to the more recent bond films so he fell out of favor. Would have been great!
@@ShelterCats I got that info from an article that was written by Barry's former agent.
The scenes with Moneypenny are always a highlight. ‘You just have to decide how much pumping is needed” “If only that were true of you and I Moneypenny”…. classic. I’, not sure one could even make that joke these days.
I hated that.
So yes, well written. Good analysis. Superb editing and scoring. You know ... the usual quality stuff. If a topic is not listed below, it's because I totally agreed with you.
I found myself having a lot of "I was not aware of that!" moments. I did not know how many production issues this film had. I think I gave the movie more of a pass than it deserved because of that pre-credits sequence. I had the same reaction to David Arnold's score that you had. Oh, my! The action was simply what I wanted. This was what I hoped Bond would be as interpreted by Brosnan.
I was also swayed by the casting. Seeing Geoffrey Palmer and Judi Dench mollified me immediately. Call it American Public Television conditioning at work. Rewatching the movie now is a great "Spot the Actor" drinking game. We have Michael Byrne and Gerard Butler, for example. Hugh Bonneville makes an appearance. Colin Salmon is always going to be the guy who could have been a fellow Double 0 in another universe. I can dream, dammit.
I agree with you about the villains. I think Stamper is old hat - serviceable but completely uninteresting. (Think video game boss.) Ricky Jay is underutilized - so sad. Vincent Schiavelli was always the spice in eighties and nineties movie so he's understood as simply awesome.
I find it amusing that you can be so eloquent and craft these watertight arguments because of your rigorous analysis, but you gleefully admit that you are turning off your brain to enjoy the movie because having fun needs no analysis. That's the point of intelligence - it doesn't run you when you possess it.
The ending felt a little ponderous at times, but that's mostly because the remaining baddies were not coming across as terribly threatening. I need to rewatch this film to make a better assessment.
Thanks again, Stephen.
A high octane Bond film breathless action Pryce chewing the scenery Michelle Yeoh kicking butt great Arnold score
One issue I have with your point on Wai Lin finding the Devonshire. The Chinese MiGs that tagged the ship and started the whole confrontation would have known where the ship sank. Only one of the MiGs was blown up by the missile, so the other pilot would know precisely where it sank.
@@ems10824 As I commented elsewhere, the MiG pilots stated that the Devonshire was in Chinese territorial waters, though the GPS expert said that it was in waters belonging to Vietnam. This led me to think that both sides were tricked by Gupta. I'm sure there may be a plausible explanation for this, but it doesn't make sense at face value to me, and since the movie doesn't make it clear, I'm still crying foul on Wai Lin knowing where the ship was.
@@stephenjarvis534 Ohh. Interesting, I never made that connection! Love your channel btw, it deserves more recognition
9:30 the Chinese government know where the boat is because their MiGs had accurate GPS signals - Carver was only spoofing the location for the Devonshire. I do agree she came out of nowhere a bit, would have been nice to have an establishing scene a la Spy Who Loved Me earlier on. (Also what on earth is she wearing in the Hamburg scene? High heels are the worst kind of footwear for stealth)
@Buzzardonic So here's a follow-up. The GPS guy says that the waters where the Devonshire sank belong to Vietnam. But the MiG pilot earlier warned that the ship was in Chinese territorial waters. So, I assumed the GPS signal was being tampered for both. Is there a way to reconcile this if the Chinese signal was fine?
@@stephenjarvis534 good point. I'd assume this was a case of the waters being internationally considered Vietnamese, but the Chinese considering it theirs - if I remember correctly China basically claims everything that isn't within about 10 miles of another country. That said, the MiGs say something about them being within 11 miles of China I think? From memory (I rewatched TND yesterday) the ship sunk just south of Hainan Island, so it may have been on the border between Vietnamese and Chinese waters.
@@Buzzardonic Fair point. Still, it probably could have been explained more succinctly.
My favorite Brosnan (Bond) movie of all time is Goldeneye. But I loved Tommorow never dies and the World is not enough for them too were real Bond movies with the feel, action and all..last 2 I owned the Playstation 1 games adaptations from and they were fantastic. Tommorow never dies was a perfect and original followup to Goldeneye ...it has everything a fan could wish..The saw kinda torpedo eats a ship reminds a lot like You only live twice (wich was my alltime favorite movie as a kid) and perhaps "The spy who ...." you know..And the Bond girl (Michelle Yeoh) was amazing and the chemistry with Brosnan worked out..on a motorcycle chase..great stuff
Ah, TND. My #5 favorite film in the franchise, and one that I’m always happy to watch.
Yes, the production was messy. Yes, it’s got a lot more action than other Bond films. Yes, it’s got a lot of plot parts that don’t work great. However, it’s really, really fun.
I love the major plot, and really think that most of the actors give a great performance. Hatcher is a bit flat in her performance, but that’s about the worst that I think it gets for the film.
The action, man. I agree that the martial arts scene after the bike chase is a bit too much, but everything else is just fantastic. The garage action scene might be my favorite vehicular scene in the franchise, up there with the Lotus chase in TSWLM, and the boat chase from TWINE.
Now, the soundtrack. David Arnold killed it. I’m torn between this and Casino Royale for my favorite OST from him. He’s easily my favorite composer for the franchise, and this is one of two soundtracks I own on physical media (got the Zimmer NTTD OST on vinyl).
As another commenter said, this film is evergreen. It has lasting power that I think supersedes the next Brosnan films. It doesn’t hurt that this film also just looks so good.
When it comes to my “Bond Pile” of memorabilia, TND is the biggest chunk of my stash. A framed movie poster, an old magazine advert for the PS1 game, a model of the 750i, and a few stills of film from the original reels. Hell, I bought an Omega SMP300 because of my love for this film (and the Brosnan era as a whole).
Total sidenote, it's impressive that the director of "Stop Or My Mom Will Shoot" brought us one of the most fun Bond films yet.
As always, thanks for the review Stephen!
I mainly remember feeling like they'd upped the violence level AGAIN, and tend to think of this as the most violent Bond film ever made. (Or at least, it feels that way.) Elliot Carver, and Kauffman, and some of the other baddies, DO feel like Ian Fleming might have created them. They have a level of SICKNESS and depravity about them that sets them apart from being mere "bad guys". Kauffman especially impressed me that way. "It was not personal! I'm just doing a JOB!" "Same here." "BLAM!" My favorite moment in the film.
It was interesting how conning 2 countries into starting a war once again borrows from YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, yet, here, the whole motivation is to sell newspapers. How sick is that? (The real motive in YOLT tends to get lost in the high-speed plot; that Red China PAID Blofeld to start a war between US and USSR so they could step in after; and then he upped his price. "But-- this is blackmail!" "Blackmail is my business.")
This was the 4th and final film in a row to have 2 theme songs, one at each end. "Tomorrow Never Dies" is the romantic song, usually put at the end, but, it fits here because it's so downbeat and depressing and TRAGIC, reflecting Paris' murder. "Surrender" is the VILLAIN's theme! Usuaully that goes at the start, but here's it's such a TRIUMPHANT piece of music, it gives you something thrilling to walk away at the end of the movie with. I rate it as not only one of the BEST theme songs ever, but the LAST truly GREAT Bond theme TO DATE. Nothing-- NOTHING-- since then has grabbed me AT ALL. The quality of the songwriting just fell off a cliff after this. What's sad is how movies get run on commercial TV these days. They tend to turn off the sound on the end credits for promos, or, they start the next movie WHILE the end credits of the previous film is running! Either way, K.D. Lang's song-- to me-- THE BEST THING about the film-- NEVER gets played on commercial TV! Thank God for RUclips. You can hear it there in all its glory. This was the last Bond film I wound up getting the soundtrack album for... and the first that-- TO DATE-- I have still not gotten a copy of at all. Maybe one of these days. (But I have SO MUCH else I'm in a hurry to get more.)
The next film, they went back to ONE theme song-- and the end credits they just played "The James Bond Theme". And if memory serves, they've been doing that ever since. If they'd done that here, "Surrender" absolutely should have been at the start.
Regarding The World is Not Enough, there was going to be an original song. For some reason, it was rejected and the Bond theme was used instead.
This was the first Bond movie I saw in the movie theater because of that it’s one of my favorites
For me it's just an enjoyable romp, if I just want to hear the Bond theme, cool car and Brosnan being cool, I'll watch it.
Its an okay James Bond movie. Not bad, but not great as well. Middle of the road in terms of plot, great in action set pieces. The score by David Arnold is great although I think his best work comes in the next movie. Glad to see that the soundtrack got an official release recently.
I think this movie doesn’t get the credit it deserves…it looks great even though it was a delayed rushed nightmare to make, and it’s still fun as hell to watch! Plus it’s one of the few later ones that gets the job done in slightly under two hours
The Bad:
Little time to absorb the locales. This is a well photographed movie so it's such a shame so much of it takes places indoors in locations that aren't that special.
A bit too much gunplay and 'splosions.
Because General Chang and his men have such little screentime, it robs Carver's plot of substance. We really need to see more of them together.
Paris Carver was meh, yet another secondary Bond girl buying the farm. Monica Bellucci should have been the producers choice. Also, rumor has it that Carver was going to be Sylvia Trench! What could have been! 😭
The Sea Drill? Huh? Why?
The Good:
A fine villain. For me, Jonathan Pryce as Carver is the best villain a Bond film has had in many years. There's an element of insecurity and a need for attention in him that makes him vulnerable and interesting. Pryce sometimes plays him too over the top but thankfully, it doesn't happen often. He is also rather charming. By the way, glad you mentioned the shot of Carver in the dark possibly regretting his actions. That was an excellent moment.
The Plot exposes the unfortunate, real life union between government and big media in the past and present. As Carver said, he was basically Hearst going one step further!
As mentioned before, this is well shot Bond movie. Not surprising since the man behind the camera was one Paul Thomas Anderson's favorite cinematographers.
Wai Lin was a good ally and I think Brosnan had some great chemistry with her.
Pierce Brosnan wisely decided to put on weight and he looked much better than he did in GoldenEye. He was way too skinny before.
So overall, I think this movie is a bit uneven but it's easily one of the better Bond adventures.
Man, has this one aged so perfectly when you think about things… maybe aged too perfectly… 😬
There's a hilarious bit of incidental comedy to listen to. I am speaking of the scene when Bond is being beaten in the sound proof room. Listen the sound of the third kick, it was hilariously awful. Like something out of a Looney Tunes cartoon. 😂
@ricardocantoral7672 Bond unfortunately had a checkered history with sound editing and choices. Films like Goldfinger have exaggerated sound effects for a reason, and thus it feel more cohesive. GoldenEye uses sound as more of a definitive statement, so each gun shot, explosion, crash, etc. feels hard hitting. Tomorrow Never Dies goes for something similar, so that particular crunch (which I believe is a vegetable being torn apart) stands out. Another example is the No Time to Die gunshot. It works OK, but if you spend any time paying attention to sound effects libraries that are shared across various movies, that particular sound is used so often it has been described as "stock". Heck, I've used it in some of my grad school projects.
@@stephenjarvis534 Yes, you are right. There have been questionable sound effects in the series for years. Like in Thunderball, Bond pulls back a curtain which sounds a cat screaming! 😂 Also, odd vocal sounds. In OHMSS, when Bond beats up that guy in the hotel room there's an odd "Ummm" sound. I wasn't sure if it was Bond or the other guy. Either way, it's something that always made me chuckle.
I want to like this one, but I just can't due to many factors from the cringey dialogue to the hurried sense of pacing and more importantly the films half baking its potentially interesting ideas.
"Tomorrow Never Dies" is NOT this film that some claim is "ahead of its time" as some fans claim it is. Even during the 90s people even were picking up on the media bullshit long before this film. An episode of “The Simpsons” called "Homer Badman" explored that very issue as well as having a lot more to say on the subject matter despite the episode being almost 100 minutes shorter than this film. People were picking up on the Rupert Murdoch similarities with Elliot Carver or more specifically the writer Feirstein based the character on Robert Maxwell.
You know why the media manipulation theme worked in that episode of "The Simpsons" and it doesn't with "Tomorrow Never Dies"? "Homer Badman" actually explores its the concept through having characters actually having conversations on the topic, actually has lasting consequences within the films narrative and the theme actually informing the characters whether it is through its character whether it is through backstory, actions or worldview. This is hardly the case with "Tomorrow Never Dies" with the one exception being Elliot Carver himself who is absolutely my favourite thing within the film. Shame he doesn't really get enough screentime for it to matter since the film kind of shafts him to make room for Wai Lin........
And I know this a unpopular opinion, but I HATE Wai Lin as a Bond girl. Many would label her as "wasted potential", but I disagree because I describe her as a parasitic vacuum who sucks out the potentially interesting ideas and concepts of this film dry as soon as she is on screen. Like what does she actually add to the story exactly as far as the theme of mass media manipulation or even the concept of a past lover of Bond coming to his present? If one of your main characters takes away from your interesting concepts rather than add to them....then guess what? YOU HAVE FAILED AS STORYTELLERS!!!!! Whenever most fans talk about Wai Lin it's always built upon the extremely bad faith arguments surrounding Bond girls as being mostly useless bimbos or like fans of Zack Snyder just them talking WHAT she is, not WHO she is. But even the media comes off as superficial lip-service to me as well as having an ending with VERY mixed messages.
Rather than expose Carver for his crimes and leave him publicly disgraced, the more poetic ending by far, they instead have M quietly hush up his death and cover it up with false reports. So what's the message here? The government is just as bad as the media at telling lies? Nah, this Bond film isn't written nearly cleverly enough for me to give them this much credit. They haven't earned anything more than a failing grade here. It's like running the ball all the way to the goal line and fumbling it at the last moment.
Interesting observations, as most wouldn't expect that much from a Bond film. I will agree that the media manipulation angle doesn't really inform the characters, and so would fail at any point it tries to make. The question then is why do so many Bond films get a pass then when there is a significant lack of thematic cohesion with many of them? The desire for wealth and power for a villain's motivation rarely influences any other aspect of the film. Could something have been done here? Absolutely. Does the film try to make a point about the media manipulation instead of just using it within the plot? Not really, which means it doesn't make the mistake of missing the point entirely, which to me can be an even bigger blunder. Is the lesson Wonder Woman learns in her first movie really about how love will save the world? Is Jordan Belfort's financial fraud supposed to be condemned or glorified? Does it really make sense that the Madrigal family has their powers restored to them because of the actions of the non-magical member?
I do think the film isn't taking full advantage of the great concepts within its story. But I must admit, I never really thought about the ramifications of M covering up Carver's death, beyond the reference to Maxwell's death. But that may also be because I never expected the film to make any real commentary about it. That may be naivety on my part, as I never expect Bond to be more than a sweet distraction for an hour or two, and I'm always surprised when the films try for something more. But to your point, most of the films that do try that tend to fail because the supposed goals of the story clash with the producer's desires. Melina doesn't learn anything about vengeance and why that may be a bad thing, Bond isn't condemned for making it personal in Licence to Kill when the very next film decides to declare doing so would be a bad idea, Judi Dench's M has a real flip-floppy relationship with Craig's Bond and trusting him, and so on.
Should I be more critical about this series because it so often misses the chance to make something everlasting that stands apart from the action adventure genre? Probably, as so many of the films commit egregious mistakes that would bring down so many other films for me. But the series is so generally entertaining for me that I struggle not to have a double standard about it.
Anyway, thanks for your insights. I enjoyed having a brainstorming session this morning. :) Also, great point about Wai Lin.
You're right, It's not ahead of it's time but it's just as relevant as it was.
@@stephenjarvis534 It really depends on the film.
Personally I dislike the whole "it's a Bond film" comment as some sort of get out of jail free card. But the Brosnan films in particular have this issue of bringing up ideas and teasing us that we're getting a Bond film that's going to take chances, but always feel like checklists to me rather than films that follow a formula.
The Roger Moore films mostly don't face such scrutiny for me because those films mostly know what they want to be, have more wit to their jokes and actually give most of their characters define and distinct personalities in ways the Brosnan films severely lack in which makes most of his films such boring, bland and tacky slogs to me.
@@ricardocantoral7672 Shame the film barely explores the topic.
@@callummoore6962 Fair enough.
There always needs to be 'that one' guy who disagrees and this time it's me. I prefer Sheryl Crow's song over 'Surrender'.
Um... Is it bad that I prefer this movie to GoldenEye?
Never really liked this one. Found the storyline with Terri H boring, the car is boring, and the baddie is a bit boring too.
Well the car is anything but boring in that wonderful underground carpark scene.
Greatness of amazing awesome video reviews James Bond one my favorite James Bond movies adventure TND 18 James Bond movies adventure tomorrow never dies one of the most entertaining enjoyable action pack excitement Bond movies of fun TND tomorrow never dies amazing awesome fun movies 😊😊😊 Pierce brosnan James Bond he is amazing in this movie I really do love the main villain Jonathan Pryce media Mogul Elliott Carver campy fun villains Michelle yeoh an amazing sidekick agent Bond girl Teri Hatcher Paris Carver I love the storyline in the movie David Arnold music soundtrack it is amazing I love the Sheryl Crow theme song and I love the surrender theme song tomorrow never dies one of my favorites in in the Pierce brosnan James Bond era great review an amazing review TND 18 James Bond movies tomorrow never dies tomorrow never dies my childhood favorite James Bond movies that made me love the franchise even more as a kid back in the day and I still love it till this day Tomorrow never dies is one of my go-to favorite James Bond movies Tomorrow never dies in the world is not enough of one of my important favorite James Bond movies I love TND tomorrow never dies it is fun movies in the series I love the movies 😎😎😎
17:27 I love Tomorrow Never Dies by Sheryl Crow. Had it been used for any other Bond movie it would have regarded as one of the best. It just so happens that Surrender by K.D. Lang is a better song. And the way it was so expertly used in the score makes it quite jarring as to how that song is not the title song.
Well, I never liked it. Some really good action sequences but the plot is rubbish as far as I'm concerned. That's not the fault of the actors (except Pryce whom you rightly cite as "camp"). I rank it 17th, better than TMWTGG and DAF but below TLD and DrN. As for the title song, I do wish all you reviewers would quit it with the championing of "Surrender". I really, really prefer the Sheryl Crow song.
BTW congratulations on having this video up for (so far) 7 hours without being blocked.
@darcyj19 Glad to see someone who prefers Sheryl Crow. I can promise you that until I do a video covering the rejected theme songs, this will be the last time you hear me talk about that song.
Crow's song isn't as bad as some people make it out to be. However, I am also in the camp that prefer's Surrender.