Reviewing 'Tomorrow Never Dies' - The Countdown to Bond 25
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
- CINEMATIC 007 -- "There's no news, like bad news." The Countdown to 'No Time To Die' continues with a review of 'Tomorrow Never Dies.'
CONSIDER BECOMING A PATRON | www.patreon.co...
Being James Bond | www.beingjamesb...
Facebook | / being-james-bond-17631...
Twitter | / headofsection
Instagram | / beingjamesbond
iTunes | itunes.apple.c...
RUclips | / @beingjamesbond
![Cody Johnson - I'm Gonna Love You (with Carrie Underwood) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yy9PuYMU29g/mqdefault.jpg)
The suggestion of Monica Bellucci being cast as Paris Carver when this came out instead of Teri Hatcher is one I wholeheartedly agree with.
It might be fun if they did a video where they suggested alternative casting for Bond Girls, Villains, henchmen, and others who didn't quite work.
They should have cast someone who could act.
As if Bond would leave a Prime Bellucci...come on, even he knows when he's on top of the everest
@@ghenulo Bond Girls are known for being attractive, not for winning Academy Awards, lol
But the Role of Paris Carver come way to short in the Movie. She dies in the first Third of the movie
the one thing I will say is the end theme is one of the best Bond songs that wasn't a title theme.
Robert Carson 👍 "Surrender" should've been the title theme, and Moby's Bond theme remix should've been the end theme.
It IS the greatest Bond theme song never used.
I think they should do that more - use dicarded theme songs as end titles if they´re good enough. Hell I think we´d all like it better if Ace Of Base came on at the end of GoldenEye instead of The Experience Of Love.
I like both songs a lot, the Sheryl Crow one as well as the K D Lang one. I understand that many would have preferred Surrender as the title song, but in my opinion, with the way it is, they found a good solution to utilize both of them. The Sheryl Crow song has more changes in dynamic, it starts off slow and understated, but then it builds up so much dramatic tension towards the chorus, which is then beautifully released through the "tomorrow never dies" line. I find it very intriguing. And that's what you want at the beginning of a movie. It wouldn't work in the closing titles. You've just witnessed the resolution of the plot, the world is saved, you don't want to go through all those dynamic changes again. You want something more upbeat, something bombastic and epic, that ends it all on a high note. And that's exactly what you get with Surrender. Don't get me wrong, it would have worked just fine as the title song as well. But that would have meant dropping Sheryl Crow's song altogether. I'm glad they kept both.
And this way, K D Lang at least gives us a good reason to sit through the closing credits.
@@niels25chr1 though I am also fond of If there was a man. I mean it is The Pretenders.
@@robertcarson2365 that song was very good
I’m sorry Scott is wrong on this one lol.
It’s a fun Bond movie with tons of action, one of the best openings, great music, cool locations, great cast, excellent title song, loads of 007 tropes, great villain IMO, one of the best Bond allies who you believe can kick ass, awesome Q moment, evil henchman (and creepy “torture doctor”), high stakes (WW3), etc.
It's incredible how Scott gives Tommorrow Never Dies a 3 while he gives Diamonds Are Forever a 7. Explain yourself Scott!
Because he didn’t grow up with this one
People are different.
I am a big fan of diamonds
@@Oakwoodstudiosmoviesandtvshows sigh 😤
Both movies are very much products of their time. Scott probably has more nostalgia for the 70s nuttiness of Diamonds
About the lack of mystery. Scott, you're right, there are no surprises. But here's the thing: Mystery doesn't age well upon repeated viewings. The Elektra King twist doesn't grab me any more when I'm watching TWINE for the 5th time. When I'm watching Skyfall for the 10th time, all that surprises me is some new details regarding continuity and logic I notice that further destroy my suspension of disbelief about Silva's escape. It's all great for a good first time viewing experience, but not for rewatching.
Tomorrow Never Dies, however, stays exactly the same, no matter how often I watch it. I can put it on for the 100th time and I know I'm gonna have a good time. And that is a quality in itself that can and should be appreciated.
It is not an obvious quality, I'll admit that. I only noticed it while doing a full Bond marathon within a couple of weeks last year. Watching it on the back of all those 70s and 80s Bond movies that mostly did not nearly age as well really put things into perspective for me.
Good to see more love for TND. I feel it follows FRWL and TB in that it outlays the villain's scheme from the outset and the fun comes from Bond navigating his way through it all.
As for TWINE... the remarkable thing from that film is that I always instantly fall in love with Elektra, and find myself hoping she won't become the villain. As if I'm watching an alternate version. Such a great performance from Marceau.
@@curiouscase0075 That is a very good point, although I'll admit I'm not a fan of Thunderball. Being aware of what's going on on the villain's side is one thing, but being guided extensively through every detail of the plan and its execution is quite another. Anyway, Scott didn't seem to have much of an issue with that back then.
Skyfall is certainly the most overrated of all Craig films. Of course, it is still is second best but there is not much competetion.
This is like the same formula of You Only Live Twice and The Spy Who Loved Me, but with the more brutal Michael Bay type action
Exactly!
But to me it still works!
@Tim Hands Exactly. Maybe more The Spy Who Loved Me. The ending on the ship is basically the same - just without the submarines.
They made bond into rambo in this movie and i love it.
@@thedarkknightman6150 I don´t think its Rambo. Even Rambo isn´t as lighthearted as this movie. There is no plot, there is no substance, there is just a bunch of action scenes.
I don't see how The Spy Who Loved Me is anywhere similar to this. YOLT and this dealt with instigation of a war between superpowers, where TSWLM and its slightly less cheesy followup, Moonraker, dealt with global annihilation. It's a big difference.
Great job as always guys. Superb first 007 score by David Arnold with, for me, 'Backseat Driver' being a definite highlight. Also, as I am sure most of us agree, the marvellous song 'Surrender' was sadly played at the wrong end of the film!
The music in this movie is so good, David Arnold nailed it.
Wow I’m surprised by the hate this one gets. I love this film! The opening scene is amazing. It’s pure Brosnan all the way.
I wasn’t a fan of the P99 switch but in reality that gun holds 16 rounds and is way more logical for Bond to use than a max 8 round PPK... but for the sake of the character I’d stick with the PPK.
I love Wai Lin, she was right on par with Bond. Badass, smart, beautiful... she’s just as good as Bond and kind of a first of her kind. Pierce is on point and more badass in this one to me. Yes the villain isn’t as good, he’s a bit silly but for 97 he was kind of way ahead of his time! I could see that villain being a real thing now a days.
I can understand the flaws and it’s a bit action heavy but I think for the time period and to follow something as great as Goldeneye it did pretty good.
And yes Surrender is by far the better song.
Brosnan was written so badly, or he was just a wimp, that he was often outdone by his leading lady. He was the least tough Bond of the series. At least Moore had a presence. He had a big, commanding figure. Brosnan was model/13 year old boy with juvenile one liners, constantly mugging for the camera that he always took me out of the movie. Talk about 4th wall breaking. Wai Lin, hell, Jinx outdid him. She was tougher than he was and she was a cartoon character.
i loved this film. wow, i find it very interesting to here from other 007 fans. brosnan era was ace apart from die another day. im so much of a fan i love them all. watched the brosnan films more than any other
Amen, have you even play the videogame call goldeneye on nintendo 64? Great game.
Tomorrow Never Dies is a great Bond movie. I don't like the remaining two Brosnan movies, however.
@@hyldenchampchamp498 yep 1 and 2 were good 3 and 4 crap!
27:41 Watching the backseat-driver sequence again, I wondered: where did that sense of joy go?
Pierce Brosnan looked like he was having more fun in that sequence than Daniel Craig did in his entire time as Bond - and Craig looks just as miserable in the trailers for No Time To Die. Hopefully the next James Bond will actually have fun again.
A heterosexual white male is definitely not allowed to have fun in 2020.
Absolutely ! I've never bought Craig as Bond. And I was actually saying last night that Brosnan, despite the films he was in and whatever you may think of them (DAD not the greatest etc) that he actually always respected the part, enjoyed the history of it and wanted to be there. At NO point would i ever say that about Craig. The brick-with-eyes has never given off any clue that he actually likes being Bond or wants to be there !!
liquidgeorge That wraps it up so well😂
@Tim Hands most people would say Dalton is the Bond of the books - and if that's the case he emoted through his 2 films. Craig just doesn't. No change in expression in 5 films for the most part. Dalton, and Connery would show a whole range of emotions depending on what the scenes would be requiring of.
this is just my opinion
@Tim Hands absolutely !
These reviews have been a highlight for me over the last few months. Keep up the phenomenal work. While I know it wouldn't be on the same level, I wouldnt mind hearing your opinions and reviews of the Ian Fleming books. I'd even goes as far as saying I wouldnt mind your opinion on the John Gardner and Raymond Benson books.
Great idea, Derek. Haven't read all of the Benson books but Never Dream of Dying was fantastic stuff. I'm currently reading Anthony Horowitz's Forever And a Day and it's real old school Fleming cool. Highly recommended 👍 👍
@@jamielynch9807 Yeah, I really enjoyed the two Anthony Horowitz Bond books.
The book Bond has always been my favorite Bond. I'll even goes as far as liking the somewhat rebooted book Bond in Carte Blanche and wish that would have continued concurrently to the original timeline books. I got into Bond and the books in early junior high and I'm now 35 years old. The Bond books have such an interesting arc for me as, of course, I love the orginal fleming books and the Raymond Benson books when I was younger, but the Gardner books I really had to slog through at my younger age. Gardner was too political and realistic for my young mind to completely get lost in them then. Now though, I love the Gardner Books because of their realism. As a gun aficionado, I also love that Bonds carry gun for most of the Gardner books was the ASP 9mm. That gun epitomizes Bond if Bond was a real character and Agent. Didn't care for him replace Q with Q'ute though. Didnt like the idea of Bond bedding the armorer.
Also if your a fan of the orginal Fleming novels I highly recommend the Dynamite Entertainment graphic novels of Casino Royale and Live and Let Die. I really hope they are able to do all the Fleming novels into graphic novels.
I actually really like this movie 😬
Cade Pickron your not alone
@@jlazor1 Not alone by a long shot! I think most fans enjoy this one.
I don't care what people say, TND is my #1 bond movie of all time and yes i seen all the bond movies to sean to Daniel and i still love this movie than all the bond movies and pierce brosnan is my #1 bond because without him and the game call goldeneye i would not got into this franchise.
@@Beingjamesbond you have to understand that at the Time of the Film Lois and Clark The Adventures of Superman was a Very Popular Series at the Time and Teri Hatcher was a Huge TV Star. It's Understandable that she got the Part of Paris but Monica Belluci could've done the Part too!!!
@@thedarkknightman6150 TND is #5 to me but still.....I love this movie. I have a hard time figuring out which is better Goldeneye or Tommorrow Never Dies
This is actually one of favorites... But agree that the score is fantastic!
This is my #1
KD Lang should have been performing the opening theme instead - "Surrender" is a far stronger composition - not Sheryl Crow's : sorry!.
Monica Bellucci dis a screen test for this movie, Sir Anthony Hopkins was cast to play Elliot Carver, but the whole production was such a mess, didn't get along with some of the cast, and in the end got a better offer from the director of Goldeneye Martin Campbell to play Zorro. The original screenplay was about the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, but the producers changed their minds at the very last moment. Love your reviews, thank you for your dedication.
I'm glad Jonathan Pryce got the role. Hopkins was surely too associated with Hannibal Lector.
Hopkins. Didn't know that. But Zorro was perfect for him.
Hopkins would have been a great villain
Some good points made. I just find this a very fun film to watch. It's not too deep and dreary. And I love Jonathan Pryce in this. Fantastic film second to Goldeneye. As far as the Brosnan era is concerned.
Hearing all the hate for this film pushed me to the comments section, and I wasn’t disappointed. 😁 The Brosnan era deserves more love!
Yes it does. And its my #1 bond movie ever.
The one thing this movie got right was that if your going to modernize Bond you absolutely need to modernize his firearm. The Walther P99 wasn't the best choice for an upgrade but it did stay true to Bond being a Walther fan, which I can definitely get behind. I wish they would have kept going and ended up with a Walther PPS or even a PPQ but I think too many people complained and they eventually regressed back to the PPK. Which if you know, is a terrible modern choice for a carry gun.
They probably should update his gun of choice.
I agree wholeheartedly. Bond's style should reflect the mid 20th century but not his tools. Bond should not be being carry a Walther PPK in 2020.
Bond should still be distinguishable from Rambo.
Also, they jumped the shark with that whole Walther PPK thing early one. In Dr No, Bond has to be forced to take a Walther PPK because it never jams and all the CIA use it. And only a few films later, Bond is supposedly the only guy in the world to use that gun.
Monica Bellucci. “The fools said no”
Hey, guys! You just MUST do "Reviewing "Never Say Never Again"" too! Altough not the smartest Bond movie, it is certainly not that bad as people say! And as time goes by and old rivals Saltzman/Broccoli vs. Mc Clory are dead, I think that we just have to take this film into Bond family! But of course not that "Casino Royale" 1967 crap!!!
Great movie IMHO. I used to watch it with a Barry score playing in the background!
I have a newly found appreciation for this film since I watched all of them in short succession last year. It may not be exactly original or innovative, there's no surprise twist, but it's just so much fun. It ticks all the boxes and has everything I want in a Bond movie, which I can't say for most of the films from the 70s and 80s. In fact, I believe the absence of a plot twist or novelty story elements is what makes it so timeless and rewatchable. They didn't tamper with the established formula and instead focussed on the execution.
It just so happens to be overshadowed by its predecessor GoldenEye, and in my opinion that's why many tend to underrate it. But if you look at what came after it: Tomorrow Never Dies is in fact the last time we see Bond do his bloody job instead of going rogue, faking death, going into temporary retirement or doing his own thing behind M's back. And it is quite frankly the last time MI6 have their sh*t together and aren't either infiltrated or completely outsmarted by the enemy. After 6 installments of Wade & Purvis trying to be clever over the last 23 years, I find it actually quite refreshing to put Tomorrow Never Dies on, a movie that simply follows the classic Bond formula while providing great action setpieces and an epic score.
All Bond movies up until Licence to Kill had been events which set new standards and upped the ante as regards the bounds of cinema. CGI changed all that, acting as a leveller which helped other movie makers compete. By the time the Bond franchise was reborn with Brosnan, True Lies had set new heights and made recent Bond efforts appear already dated. Later on, the Bourne trilogy "out-Bonded" Bond and it wasn't until the Craig era that the Bond franchise was able to once again be relevant in setting new levels of expectation. You fellas have touched on pacing and I think that's largely where the issue lies with Brosnan's four efforts. All four Brosnan outings are solid efforts. As Scott suggested, Brosnan was a great Bond in search of a great script. Despite that, TND is better than I recall, has a great villain and has aged well. It's a stylish and polished movie like all four of the Brosnan offerings with a sharp script which seems prescient today. The Saigon action chase was pretty original if far fetched. Unfortunately originality on its own was no longer good enough when competing with the more realistic action sequences then beginning to be offered by the Bourne movies. The ending on the stealth ship is a let down (though no more than the mass shootouts that have blighted the ending of many a Bond movie before and since). TND gets a 7 from me.
Not one of the better Bond films, but I still enjoy it.
i think this is it at th end
With respect to the Head of Section, I'm with Scott on most things as far as this series of reviews is concerned (including his ratings of the movies), and this is no exception. I'd love to meet you guys one day! Love your work, guys.
Teri Hatcher is surprisingly good in the TV show MacGyver from the 80s, but here... It's well known that Brosnan and Teri didn't get along on set and the acting shows.
I really liked her in MacGyver
Great review guys! But no mention of the horrible sounding punching sound effects!
Despite its faults I do prefer TND to the other Brosnan movies. Ironically the story and villain seem more relevant in to days world of fake news, social media, etc. than it did in 1997 when it seemed a bit odd.
I don't know about that. Elliot Carver was based on real newspaper magnates.
I didn't think it odd back in the day.
The difference is that in 1997 can could think this is one "Rupert Murdoch gone crazy" - and now it is whole networks who would actually do this.
It just wasn't as obvious as it is now.
Couldn’t disagree with Scott more. The plot is not about sinking boats, it’s about “how do we prove to the UK/China that the threat is manufactured by Michael Bloomberg…sorry Elliot Carver…before WWIII starts” There isn’t suspense because we already have a ticking clock. It’s literally why Michelle Yeoh is there. Also, the assassins in Hong Kong that Michelle fights are working with the Chinese General that Elliot was meeting with… did you watch the movie??
Love how you guys disagree with each other so good naturedly.
I disagree. This movie is awesome. The first two Brosnan films were solid entries. Then WINE starts to come apart and we don't need to discuss the movie of which we do not speak.
The pacing is good. The filmmakers were experimenting. This isn't Law and Order. Anyway, henchman are cool. Gadgets are cool. Main Bond Girl is awesome. Action delivers! A handcuffed bike chase? You kidding me? It's a lot of fun. I feel like you're those old men from the Muppets.
8 out of 10.
PS - The Media are among the most corrupt and evil people in the world.
And yes Scott, I often look back at the films you rate highly and wonder if you know what you're talking about. LOL
Love that Muppet comment! LMAO! I too wonder many times if I know what I'm talking about!
@@TheYojimbo6 I'm looking forward to the World is not Enough. A movie that leaves me conflicted. I feel there was great movie in there, but the editing killed it. But perhaps I can be swayed one way or another based on your insights. Keep up the good work. It's great to have a channel doing what you guys do!
The World is Not Enough was a poor attempt at a character driven story. M, Bond, and even the villain were reduced to being bone headed sentimentalists.
TND is a great bond flim and i love it.
Hitchcock often said that the key to suspense is to show the audience exactly where the bomb (or whatever) is and then the suspense
comes from the audience anticipating what will happen. Will our heroes make it and how?
Of course, he didn't fill his films with endless action scenes, so there is that...
But perhaps Tomorrow Never Dies is a Hitchcockian James Bond film?
Nice!
teppolundgren Here's Hitchcock talking about his "suspenseful bomb" theory: ruclips.net/video/DPFsuc_M_3E/видео.html
There is a terrific Hitchcockian scene in GoldenEye, where we know that Bond's pen will explode four seconds after it's clicked three times: ruclips.net/video/nOGrIcYCu_I/видео.html
When Hitch talks of suspense in this context, he refers to the immediate danger nearby. That's something far more reserved and calculated. Tomorrow Never Dies is more of a blunt tool that is stuffed with explosions and too much is revealed at the beginning. Hitch's thrillers, or any competent thriller, carefully doles out the information because you want to keep them stimulated and curious.
@@ricardocantoral7672 Not always, though. In "Rope", the murder happens very early in the film, and then the entire premise is about anticipating or even fearing the discovery of the body.
Hitchcock gives us everything we need to know right from the start.....and it still works.
@@SpaceCattttt Rope is an intimate story. A thriller is on a larger scale so doling out the information slowly is the ideal way to keep the audience interested throughout the picture.
Oh Scott, you need to take Zaritsky's Tomorrow Never Dies appreciation course. But you are right that the last quarter is the weakest part.
24:32 they actually had a deleted scene from Licence to Kill where when Dalton's Bond comes to Sanches' Hotel at first, there was a scene where he was getting dressed and he smoking cigarettes, drinking and loading up his gun and watching the TV and monitoring Sanchez. Shame they left out a similar scene which was so Flemingesque
The great things: great David Arnold's score, great energy, well made action scenes, Michelle Yeoh and the car chase of course! Probably the best in franchise!!!
If Carver succeeded, his plan would have been upended a few years later. BY THE INTERNET!
But I don't hate this one. I saw Michelle Yeoh in Police Story 3 when I was very little, and thought she was awesome, so going to the cinema as a young teen and seeing her being treated as a big deal in a mainstream film made me very happy.
Whenever you get a Bond film that makes a huge impact and reinvigorates the franchise like Goldeneye the follow up will always struggle to reach the same heights. I don't hate this film. It's not Die Another Day, which is a good thing but it just feels weak in so many areas, the plot, the chief villain. Brosnan's fight scenes seem clunky in comparison to the previous film and in comparison to Michelle Yeoh's fight scenes, which are far more fluid, dynamic and better choreographed. In fact Michelle Yeoh completely steals this film from Brosnan and you end up wishing that she had more scenes than she was given. There are things to like here, however, the pre-title sequence, the car chase in the car park, the motor cycle chase, Michelle Yeoh's fight scenes, David Arnold's first score for the franchise and Brosnan gives a more assured and confident performance. I have to say though, my whole enjoyment of the movie does centre around Michelle Yoeh's presence as I have been such a fan of hers since the 80's but as you said she is totally under used as is Terri Hatcher, which is a great shame. Overall, the film is a watchable entry in the series but not really up there with the best of them. It's a bit lacking and not quite fully engaging. Not bad...just okay.
Very true! You can feel that 'sophomore' struggle.
You've listed quite a lot of stuff you like in the film!
@@RighteousBrother I also liked the HALO jump sequence but the things I mentioned were just disjointed elements that for me did not add up to a satisfying whole. I found the pacing of the film to be inconsistent and the villains to be a bunch of like-minded, incompetent sadists playing at being bad with wealth and resources at their disposal rather than seasoned professionals. You can see that by how easily Bond dispatches most of them. The overall plot is silly and less interesting than the plot of Goldeneye or indeed the plot of the film that followed this one, 'The World is Not Enough,' which had a much more interesting story and more strongly defined characters. I think this film was more of a cash in on the success of Goldeneye, attempting to recreate the spectacle of that film and not quite managing to hit the same high notes. Which is probably why they adopted a totally different approach with the next one.
Your even handed opinion is probably closer to the truth than my feeling on the movie. Kudos!
@@TheYojimbo6 Thank you. I've been a Bond fan since the age of 6. Started reading the Fleming novels from age 9, inspired to by my love of the movies. But as I've become older, like you, I've tended to be more critical of the ones that don't work for me and don't quite hit that level of sublime Bond perfection. Of course that line is different for everyone. I love Licence to Kill, that one doesn't work for some and that's okay. Some people actually love Die Another Day (No comment there, biting my tongue right now). I think the very first time I realised the Bond team don't always hit that sweet spot was with Moonraker but to their credit for a franchise that's been running since 1962 and has clocked up 25 films in the series they've hit that sweet spot far more times than they missed it.
I love your channel. I look forward to receiving notifications of new videos and I'm really enjoying your retrospectives. Can't wait to hear your views on The World is Not Enough. Good luck with that and great job all round. Kudos to you too pal. Much deserved.
This is actually one of my favorite 007-movies.
This movie never got me. I mean the pre title action looks okay, the score sounds like a modern version of Barry and the actors do okay, but all in all this movie has nothing new to offer. The plot is paperthin, the villain is kinda silly, the women don´t have enough to do, the music truly lacks variety (It´s the Bond theme and Surrender instrumentals on end), the theme song is kinda borring (God why didn´t they use Surrender?), the landscapes and locations aren´t astonishing - Germany in overcast weather...? Come on.
This is one of those flicks that are neither good or bad. It´s unoriginal and predictable. A major step down from the three movies that came before it. I even think I like A View To A Kill better - mainly due to the music and the villain.
I like it (though IMHO "GoldenEye" and "The World Is Not Enough" are both better), but I'll agree with you (for the most part) about its deficiencies. It has the weakest villain since "The Living Daylights". Even still, Pierce Brosnan is still incredibly handsome in it, and Michelle Yeoh has some Kung Fu moves.
Your criticisms can easily be applied to Goldeneye. There was little or nothing that made it stand out from the rest of the series because it's filled with wall to wall Bond cliches stuffed into a 90's action package. Tomorrow Never Dies is also formulaic but at least it goes for a satire targeting the crooked, corporate media that still seems fresh today unlike Goldeneye.
This is one of my most favorite Bond films after Goldeneye. I really don't understand the hate it gets. For years after it came out, I did not realize there was a group that hated it. I thought the hate did not start until Die Another Day. To me, this Bond film is fun and entertaining. It is crammed pack with some of the best action sequences in the entire franchise. The Acting from Jonathan Price is superb and over the top. I like the story because it ties in well with all the fake news of today. It gives insight on how news is manipulated to get people and especially countries to react according to the narrative. The only complaint I have with this film is the straightforward fight sequences they had Pierce do. If it only had the gritty looking fight sequences of Goldeneye, I might pick this movie as my favorite. Because that fight in Goldeneye with Pierce and Sean Bean is realistic and gritty. We would not see this again until Daniel Craig in Casino Royal and other movies like the Bourne series and Taken. Think about it Goldeneye was 1995, that type of fighting on screen was way ahead of its time. It is a shame that they did not do it again with the Pierce Bond movies.
Watching AVTAK twice at the cinema. You must be the only one.
52:35 YES!!! THANK YOU!
I was almost getting frustrated while watching this episode, because Scott kept interrupting whenever you were about to talk about the great little Bond moments here. And this one is my favourite, too. It is the first time since Dr. No that Bond's drinking habits are portrayed as seriously unhealthy as opposed to merely quirky. It is a dark, flawed side to Bond's character that was pervasive in Dr. No but had been downplayed ever since, especially in the Moore era.
Other great moments: The Monty Norman theme plays while Bond does mundane stuff like driving to work in his DB5 or travelling to the location of his assignment. These kind of scenes were a signature feature of the first two Bond movies, but apparently came out of fashion after that. Then there's the ending scene with Bond and the girl floating on the ocean, putting off being rescued for some quality time. That's another callback to the 60s. They don't really go for these kind of ending scenes anymore these days. There's also that classic Golfingeresque scene where Bond meets the villain undercover in a social environment and provokes him by dropping some more or less subtle hints that he knows what he's up to. Also, Bond does have a few good one-liners here.
By the way, I wouldn't change anything about Dr. Kaufmann. I'm German, and I find him and his accent hilarious and awesome. The Stuttgart line is great, but what's even better is how he gets so embarrassed by having to ask Bond how to open the car, like that's so beneath him. That scene wouldn't work if he or some other actor played the role straight.
Great video a huge fan of your channel and these videos keep up the awesome work!!
Thank you so very much!
wow was that negative. it got over reliant on acton, but it wasn't that bad. Scott really jumped the shark picking Spectre over this. any film that turns Blofeld into Bond's brother, of sorts, is way out there.
Oh no...I nuked the fridge! Lol!
@@TheYojimbo6 LOL
Completely agree re Spectre. A complete horror show for that reason alone!
Although I may be biased as this is the first one I watched but I think this one is seriously underrated, the score was brilliant and I think brosnan although maybe on a plateau after goldeneye still maintained a brilliant job, the plot was a lot more realistic and modern without losing that bond style. Not sure why people hate on this film too much
4:48 I had no idea that a cover of "Surrender" was made by Meat Loaf.🥁
[crickets]
Is this thing on?
It felt like they had a hard time finding anyone who could measure up to Martin Campbell in the Brosnan era. The closest they got was almost picking Peter Jackson to direct The World is Not Enough, but sadly when Barbara Broccoli saw The Frighteners he was no longer considered afterwards.
Barbara Broccoli made a lot of bad calls IMO.
My fave Brosnan movie, Was really surprised you gave only a 3. Opening really great,Bike chase excellent, remote control BMW and chase.Q, Michelle, Teri, Pryce, etc all great. and the music makes this movie great!! I like the story even more as its gotten better with age and became relevant.
Btw I recall an old MacGyver episode with Terri Hatcher and that Dr Kaufman guy, lol
I have to say this is one of my favorite Bond movies, Great action sequences, Great locations, I think they’ve tried to mix some classic things with modern staff and it works really good to me, Great score and Brosnan looks great compared with Goldeneye, respect your opinion but this is a very entertaining film to me!! Cheers✌🏻
Hey Scott.... Don’t apologize!
A big fan of these reviews, guys but think Scott is well wide of the mark with this one. Sure, this isn’t amongst the best in the series but great locations, solid action set-pieces, enough “colour” scenes and good pacing make this an enjoyable watch and definitely not amongst the weakest in the series. There is a zip, charm and panache to the Brosnan films which is identifiably Bondian and which unfortunately has been lost in the Craig era (save for Casino). No emotional trauma, no family issues - just Bond on a mission saving the day with style and a fair amount of humour. Sure, the execution could be better and it has its weaknesses but this is the type of Bond film which hits the spot for me. Keep up the great work and thanks for all that you do!
I liked this 007 Adventure !!!!!! The Elliot Carver heavy is extra realistic compared with today’s sinister media moguls !!!!!!!!
jeah, but he give evil speeches and his acting is a LITTLE bit TOO goofy i thought. This is a memorable, but NEVER a menacing villain
Wow,first time I have disagreed with Scott!
I really like this one!I think it has great energy,lots of very good action sequences,plenty of cool 007 moments and one of the absolute best scores in the series.
In fact,the music is so good it probably elevates the entire film!
Brosnan is also smoother and more polished here than he was in Goldeneye.
I do agree that some of the camera setups seem a bit strange sometimes and the finale on the Stealth ship was sort of standard action stuff that we’ve seen too many times before so it sort of ends too abruptly.
But overall, as someone else mentioned, this seemed like very similar to You Only Live Twice and The Spy who loved me and I enjoy those movies so this one works for me also!
To Head of Section: I don’t think Carver sent in the kung fu fighters. I think General Chang sent them to fight Wei Lin. Joe, I love your videos!! Well done!!
YESSS!!! I've been looking forward to this. the best of the Brosnan Bond's imho.
It's so much fun. Such an easy watch every time. That helicopter stunt is insanity! Dr. Kaufmann and Stamper are two of my favourites. They're just so ridiculous it's great 😂
You criticize Tomorrow Never Dies for showing the villain’s scheme up front but Thunderball does this exact thing and you’re both avid supporters of it. Grrrrr. I watched Thunderball recently and I always find myself feeling empty by the end of it. Would have loved if they cut who was behind it or the whole event. We know where the plane and nukes are, it’s in shark infested water in Nassau, oh boy where will Bond go this time. Who is the villain? Probably the guy with the eye patch who cut a guy’s oxygen tank. Same issue, works better in Tomorrow for me, better action.
This is a great Bond film!
I agree with everything you both said. I would give this a 7 too because I like the pre-title sequence, Vincent Schiavelli's assassin, the remote control BMW, the sneaking around the office leading to the fight scene with the security guards and the security guards beating up Bond in the sound proof room. It had more moments that I liked than disliked. I prefer this movie to The World is not enough and Die Another day. Pacing was fast for this film which I liked because it was very different from anything we've seen in a Bond film before. The World is not enough tried to change this which resulted in the pacing being too slow for me which is why I didn't like that film along with the pointless ski chase scene in it. Good review from both of you.
I thought this was an ok Bond movie, the score by David Arnold made it much better than what it was. My younger self loved it for all the high pace action, I agree now though that the pace is too fast and too much commando crap.
Certainly didn't spend the whole film cringing. Unlike when watching AVTAK.
My favorite movie from James Bond collection.
Incredible how Scott gives this a 3 because primarily the mystery is over with the underwater drill and Bond is catching up to the audience, even though later more is revealed about the stealth technology and Carver’s main plot, but Thunderball he gives a very high score (9?) and there the whole Spectre plot is revealed from the start and Bond is catching up to the audience… Scott? Care to elaborate?
Sorry Scott but i love this one. 90s kid 🤷🏻♂️
I wonder if the Bond producers, directors, etc watch this and other Bond youtube channels and take note on what is being said and read the fans comments. They could learn alot about what the fans like and what doesn't work in the franchise and for the Bond character itself.
It's an 8/10 for me.
I’ve always been fond of this one, it was actually the very first Bond film I ever watched
How did Carver pull Paris? Money.
I find TND very middle of the road. It's main problem is that feels more like a generic action movie rather than a Bond movie. My highlights are the pre-title sequence and David Arnold's killer score. Least favourite, backseat driver and Bond being like Rambo for the climax. 6/10
PS. I will easily watch TND over Spectre, which is worst crime, it's boring.
This was the first bond movie on saw in theaters back in 97.
I agree with this review on practically every level, lol... To say the least: Great Idea, poor execution...
Out of all the bond movies i seen TND is my #1 bond movie of all time and yall can make fun of me all you want but i really love this movie with goldeneye 2nd and pierce brosnan is my #1 bond because with out him and the game call goldeneye i would not got into this franchise, bond became rambo in this movie.
@@unlimitedayoproduction2452 i did and TND is still my #1
I love to hear Scott tear down a movie that he feels is subpar. I agree with him that the style in which this movie was shot is IMO hot garbage. It was distracting and not in a good way. I'm glad he called it out and didn't make excuses for it. Well done sir!
Why thank you kind Sir! I think being honest is just the best policy. And It would be so boring if Joe and I praised every Bond film to the hilt. I'm fascinated with movies that don't work (for me) and like to get to the bottom of why..
@@TheYojimbo6 The Brosnan movies are difficult for me. It seems to me that the writing, directing, and general tone of the movies were not very strong and that is such a waste considering Pierce was so perfect for the role. It really is a shame. Still fun movies but always a bit of a let down.
Goldeneye was the better movie but Tomorrow Never Dies had one of the best ideas for a plot, Media Barron trying to start a war for ratings. Just wasn't executed great.
We needed more of General Chang.
The guy who sings "Surrender" at the end is amazing, I agree I think it would have been a much better opening song.
that's a woman singing, K. D. Lang.
@@qualityautismNoah Thank you for that, I apologise, you are quite right. I just googled and now I am listening to more on youtube. Amazing artist, thanks for the info
Scott you are mr. postive....this is the one movie you decide to hate everything? Lol
TND was the first Bond movie I saw in theaters but didn't remember very much from it. I watched it again for the first time since the theater this past December and enjoyed it, but it's definitely the most "mindless" of the Brosnan films. It doesn't try to do anything too out of line with the Bond or 90s action formulas, but still a solid, fun movie.
Rating: 6.5. Parking garage and helicopter chase are great. It's a bit on the short side for a 007 movie so they could've allowed a couple more moments to breathe and develop the characters. Ricky Jay was criminally underutilized, the Bond/Paris history feels very contrived, and there are some silly stock sound design choices that distracted me.
Does Scott have some new headphones?
Lol! Nice catch! My other headphones stopped working so I'm using my gaming headphones.
@@TheYojimbo6 Cheers Scott!.. Don't throw the old phones away, they're a unique piece of Bond memorabilia in their own right lol. Can we expect reviews of CR '54/'67 and NSNA after No Time to Die?
Yes! Joe and I are going to do reviews of the other Casino Royale's and NSNA. I'm looking forward to it! And Joe will probably have an early non spoiler review of NTTD for everyone plus we will do a full review in our regular format.
this film was good, but like what scott said the underwater scene's are Boring. the Elliot Carver Villain wasn't a convincing villain to me and his Demise was very weak at the end. the BMW Car was in Keeping with Bond Tradition and probably saved the whole Action Scene's in the film also the BMW BIKE. Sheryl Crow's song should've been in the end Credits and K D LAING'S song at the openning I, Give ''TOMORROW NEVER DIES'' 6 OUT OF 10
Tomorrow never dies feels like if Michael bay directed a Bond movie
Bond villans can be spotted a mile off. As if Drax in Moonraker was a surprise. So didn't mind Carver at the beginning.
Film was a decent quickie follow up to Goldeneye. Cool car.
6:54 Fun Facgt: To Fooebe´s authobiogtraphy< the actor never wanted to do a movie done after a book by Tlemming but sowmhow he must have overliooked tthat CHITTY CHITTY BNANG BANG . were Froebe had played in the crazy king, was a,sk done as a book by Fleming.
This movie tried to be too hip and fast by the numbers to compensate for some of Goldeneye's risk-taking, slowness, lack of car gadgets, lack of Bond theme, etc. But there are some golden Bondian moments, "I'm just a professional doing a job.... So am I." You have to admit that David Arnold really put his mark on this to bring back that Bond sound. If past James Bond films mark their era like 'Live and Let Die' is Blackexploitation and 'Man with the Golden Gun' is Kung-Fu, then this is James Chan aka Bond meets Jackie Chan action.
Goldeneye is slow ? Outside of the music, the film hardly took any risks.
@@ricardocantoral7672 the whole part at the Siberian outpost was a snoozer. Then in Russia, it was a,mess up until the tank chase. And that love theme was out of place. Don't get me started on Serra's work like the scene with the Ferrari vs Aston chase or even that end credits theme, zzzz. And that ending without Bond kissing the girl, he just picks her up and walks? They sure tried something different, but it was a mess.
@@nashf5925 You mean the attack on Servenaya ? I had no issue with that at all. Then you state that in Russia it was a mess until the tank chase ? Some best scenes of the film occur in Russia like the confrontations with Valetin and the "ressurected" Alec. I don't see any real risk taking though among any those scenes and the score was a misfire, not risky. A REAL risk would have been developing Bond's character. The beach scene is exactly what the film needed more of; a real examination of Bond's morally ambiguous nature. Too bad audiences would have to wait until Casino Royale for a Bond film to finally nut up and analyze 007.
Not a fan of any of the Pierce Brosnan Bond films....however I tend to like him better in non-Bond films.
Terri Hatcher was a TV star. Looked out of place next to Bond in a big film.
Talking about Tomorrow Never Dies lack of mystery...
Have you ever seen the trailer for Goldeneye?! 😂
The guy on the right doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Nothing he said makes any sense
Awful film! Brosnan is great as Bond though, it’s just the films he’s in that suck. Totally agree with Scott. Loving all these reviews guys, they’re really cheering me up
Thought the KD Lang song was as bad as the Sheryl Crowe song. The last good Bond songs were Goldeneye & LTK. Didn't like Madonna's but it worked with the torture scenes.
LALD was the song that was continually played in the film.
In so many ways (you won't like this) I'd compare it to "Die Hard 5" : both movies could have been so much better if the focus was on plot, rather than a small amount of drama was thrown in and other material got dumped in place of excessive shootouts and action.
The Spy Who Loved Me (20 years earlier) is as closest TND could ever get : both feature a white haired megalomaniac intent on destruction, main henchman is 6ft tall, car chases, helicopter assassins try (they never succeed) to do away with 007, James Bond's past gets referred to, "Q" is there quite a lot - as with regulars - only I prefer 1977's episode.
I digress, it's a great shame with a chaotic production and rewrites, Anthony Hopkins and Monica Bellucci in so many ways must be thanking "powers that be" with Tomorrow Never Dies not being in their resumé - by no means a bad movie, no way near my favourite one.
always felt this movie was chasing the current trend, whats popular hong kong action cinema, its like they tried to do john woo style of bond movie but didnt trust him to direct it
Thanks for another great review.
Rewatching these movies back with you, it has reasserted how brilliant Brosnan is as Bond. I have to give this movie a 6/10 just for him and the backseat driver scene. Brosnan's presence is an ongoing 'Bond moment'.
A big issue I had with this movie which you guys didn't mention are the tonal shifts. The film has a great first 10 minutes and you start to become invested: Bond has 48 hours to stop WW3. Then the next shot is for laughs, and it cheapens the impact and stakes of the story. This repeats throughout.
A key example is the death of Terri Hatcher's character which is supposed to be of immense significance to Bond, and then the same scene goes to a 'for laughs' segment with Kaufmann and the goons trying to open the car.
The script also seemed sloppy, there was no subtly or wit to it, dare I say it seemed rather Americanised. The the whole 'pump her for information' instruction by M and then Moneypenny re-asserting the pun is just so on the nose and off-putting. Carver's character was also nauseatingly 2D and simplistic.
The great Bond films of the past have the villain's personality slowly seep out over the picture, this one just goes full speed Media Hitler: we learn nothing more about him. You can say the same for Wei-Lin: literally just cast as anonymous Kung-Fu girl. This is why the classic Fleming trope of first encountering the villain over a game is so effective.
I’m with Scott. The Devonshire sequence was always boring. I always skip it during a rewatch.
This movie is boring!! That’s the worst thing a Bond movie could be!! Sorry!😢
Tomorrow Never Dies is one of the worst Bon movies in my opinion. This is a soulless, typical 90s action movie. There really is nothing good here. Even Die Another Day, for all it's faults, is more fun and memorable (if even in a bad way). Tomorrow always leaves me flat.
Does Scott even like James Bond movies?
Better than Goldeneye. Don’t @ me.
I am in agreement with you. Too many defenders of Goldeneye can't take off their nostalgia goggles long enough to give that film a real examination. The film is a good pastiche but is it on par with the classics ? Please.
Ricardo Cantoral I loved it as a kid. As I got older though I realized it has a weird tone. It feels....off. Tomorrow is much better IMO
@@gocanuckurself1 Goldeneye had one compelling moment and that was the beach scene but other than that, it only half heartedly probed the Bond myth. Everything in that film was a regurgitation of old Bond cliches which were stuffed into a 90's action package. Like I have said before, it's a fun action film but it pales in comparison to everything it samples from.
TND is a weak Bond film. Not totally bad, but directing is weak and especially weak is camerawork! Was it Allan Cameron as DP? I mean that so many scenes are sooooooo badly shot! They look hazy, especially indoor scenes! And yes, the finale in that Carver stealth ship is so long and boring. I didn't like that at all!!! *** The best things are car chase(one of the best) and Michelle Yeoh's fight scenes! She's capable of anything!
No the DP was Robert Elswit who did a lot of PTA movies (Boogie Nights, Magnolia, Punch-Drunk Love, There Will Be Blood and Inherent Vice).
And the car looks terrible. Bond and BMWs don't mix.
Thanks to sorta.app I got this film ranked #5 out of 24.