ReBONDing: The Dalton Years
Reevaluating the Dalton Era (1987 - 1989)
When we last left James Bond he had successfully scaled the "cliffs of mediocrity." While each of his four films had made more money than the last, Brosnan failed to make an indelible mark on most viewers...
James Bond films were an institution growing up in my house. Regardless of whether some elements were a bit risqué, I was never denied the ability to watch them as a child. These movies -- while filled with action, suspense, intriguing women, and mild violence -- were never portrayed as being gratuitous, so Bond was never off limits once I reached a particular age (somewhere between 8 and 10 most likely).
That institution was Roger Moore. He was James Bond. If you were a boy growing up in the 70s and 80s that watched James Bond movies, then Roger Moore was your Bond. Sean Connery was also an institution, he just wasn't mine at that impressionable age. He was much more relevant to me when I was in high school and the advent of home video rentals and owning a VCR became common practice.
But I'm not hear to discuss Moore or Connery. That's another post for another time. I'm hear to talk about Timothy Dalton. The man who replaced replaced Roger Moore. When I first heard that he was to be replaced by some new guy, I wasn't exactly sure to how react. I was twelve-years-old. I'm not sure if I really cared. I just wanted to see the next Bond movie in the theater, which I did.
For the past couple of decades I've always been torn with Dalton's two entries as Bond. They came out at a time when my Bond fascination and interest was fully peaked. I should have loved both, but that was not the case. So this revisit should be enjoyable, if nothing for the fact that I get to watch two more James Bond movies and re-critique them for you now.
THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS (1987)
Directed by John Glen
Written by Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson, Ian Fleming (story)
Running Time: 2 hours, 10 minutes
Original Verdict:
A return to the format -- the cold war -- is always a good indication that James Bond still serves a purpose. Timothy Dalton enters the scene and apparently proceeds to piss off quite a few fans in the process as not being either suave enough, like Connery, or not old enough to execute the perfect one-liners, like Moore. It still produced a decent story and some neat gadgets as well as Dalton being a closer representation of the literary James Bond.
Rating: 3.5 out of 5.
I finally had the chance to re-watch this about a week ago with Travis. (He's a good friend of mine who used to guest post on a movie review site that I gave up on a while back. You can follow him here on tumblr or be witness to his quirky pictures and videos posts on Instagram.) We're both big Bond fans, but our likes and dislikes sometimes differ depending on the movie. However, a Bond fan is a Bond fan first and the one thing Bond fans can always agree on is... James Bond. (Silly, isn't it?)
While I was fairly certain I would enjoy the revisit, Travis was a bit skeptical. He likes his James Bond a certain way, and when it doesn't follow the formula, he tends to be disappointed. Additionally, he also hadn't seen the film in a good 15 years, maybe more. Thankfully, the revisit went well and he was pretty pleased with the final outcome of film, as was I.
The Reevaluation
The cold open is fantastic. Double-Os skydiving onto the Rock of Gibraltar for a training exercise. The bad side of this opener is that this displayed exactly how bad these other Double-Os really were. Definitely not worth their salt compared to Bond (but maybe that was the point). I can almost see an MI6 office aid saying to M. something like, "We're gonna need some more Double-Os, sir." (Now imagine if that line was delivered like this.)
Live-action stunts are always the best, and they are a particularly favorite of mine when it comes to James Bond movies. That extra element of suspense is hard to suppress when you know that actual people were outside risking their lives to get the best take on camera, instead of computer-generated imagery. The Living Daylights is filled with well-executed practical effects that still hold up almost 30 years later.
I'm sure that Dalton's portrayal of Bond was either frustrating or refreshing to audiences back in 1987. By the end of Roger Moore's run, the character had pretty much become a quasi-superhero of sorts, never taken very serious - hardly ever seen as human. Dalton reigned all of that back in and tried his best to bring a serious take on a serious man and it works.
Dalton's Bond is cold and calculated, he's practically celibate at the height of the AIDS epidemic (the press would label him as "monogamous" in this film for that precise reason), and his performance is grounded, often toning down what few "one-liners" that are in the script to almost nonexistence. He even throws away the famous "Bond... James Bond" introduction line at the beginning of the film.
I was indifferent to Maryam d'Abo's portrayal of Kara. Not entirely sure why. I didn't dislike her, but her performance felt forgettable at best. (And it took Travis all of twelve seconds to let me know that she was the older sister of Karen Arnold from "The Wonder Years.") Andreas Wisniewski, however, was much more memorable as the competent henchman/villain Necros. He possessed no strange abilities, nor any superhuman strength. He was just a cold-blooded killer who reminded us both of the brilliantly brutal character Grant (played by Robert Shaw) in From Russia With Love.
The film really only suffers from three issues: multiple villains, multiple endings, and multiple Joe Don Bakers (well, that third one is partially true and only makes sense if you've branched out into the Brosnan era). The pacing can be a touch sluggish at times, but overall it never really drags.
Be that as it may, The Living Daylights still succeeds on almost every level. The film dances on the borderline of the ridiculous, but never gets too fanciful. It successfully weaves Ian Fleming's short story, includes "Smiert Spionam," (meaning "Death to Spies") which is a throwback to SMERSH, as well as other elements from his novels that had seemed to all but vanish in previous films.
The Living Daylights is a great introduction to Timothy Dalton as Bond. I feel that if the screenwriters had focused a little more on reworking and tightening up the third act, this might have gone down as one of the best films of the franchise, or at least in the top five. Instead it often seems overlooked, and that's too bad.
Reevaluation Score: 4 out of 5.
LICENCE TO KILL (1989)
Directed by John Glen
Written by Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson
Running Time: 2 hours, 13 minutes
Original Verdict:
Dalton returns, pissed as always... except this time he goes rogue and loses his license to kill. It was the first Bond film to be rated PG-13 for excessive violence and seems to lose some of it's charm because of it. Apparently Bond exacting revenge isn't always the best formula to follow.
Rating: 2 out of 5.
I had the opportunity to re-watch Licence to Kill over the Holidays on HBO. It's probably what first sparked my interest to re-visit the Bond films (even before the internal Brosnan debate took place in my head).
The Reevaluation
So... James Bond goes rogue. It's not an entirely uncommon theme, but it's definitely not my favorite. I tend to enjoy Bond when he is actually on assignment from M. Instead it feels like too much of a departure from the format. I could recognize what director John Glen was trying to do with Licence to Kill. He was attempting to make the first "serious" James Bond film. And while he succeeded -- at least in parts -- the film suffers as a whole and comes across as a misfire.
The film lacks the level of charisma and charm that previous Bond films normally possess, including Dalton's last entry. Instead it plays like a bad 80s action movie. Licence feels almost reactionary -- especially when you compare it to other movies being released around the same time frame. This isn't the first time that a James Bond film is influenced by other genres/thematic elements at the height of their popularity -- especially in the 1970s. But it's almost as if the screenwriters sat down and made a list of all the most stereotypical 80s themes like cocaine, drug cartels, ninjas, televangelism, and Michael Kamen's score (think Lethal Weapon, Die Hard), and then wrote a James Bond movie around all of it. (Even the bar scene screams of Road House.)
Unfortunately the end result just doesn't work for me. The film comes off as too "American" for a James Bond film (and that's nothing to brag about). Remember what I said at the beginning about James Bond and mild violence? Yeah, this film threw that idea right out the window.
While successfully making a grittier film, John Glen also produced the first PG-13 rated Bond. Back in 1989, that was monumental. The tonal shift is really rough coming off of the success of The Living Daylights. But it was especially rough for this 13-year-old who witnessed unspeakable acts of violence at the hands of Sanchez. You remember that decompression tank death scene with Milton Krest? It still haunts me to this day.
The saddest part about all of this -- at least until the Casino Royale reboot with Daniel Craig in 2006 -- is that this film was probably the closest representation of Ian Fleming's character, along with its simplified story-line. I appreciate Dalton's performance. There's nothing wrong with it in this film. Would Ian Fleming's Bond seek revenge after what happens to Felix Leiter? Absolutely. That entire segment -- including the brilliant little note that reads "He disagreed with something that ate him" -- is lifted almost verbatim from the novel, Live and Let Die.
Robert Davi is fantastic as the villainous drug lord Sanchez. He's brutal and sadistic. He's a vengeful egomaniac. He's exact the guy you want James Bond to take down. Benicio del Toro as Dario, Sanchez's right hand man, is also a masterful stroke. He plays the completely loyal sociopath to perfection. Carey Lowell portrayal of Pam Bouvier wasn't really on my radar when I first saw this film. Upon this revisit, I can take her or leave her. I'm mostly indifferent to her performance. While incredibly sexy, she doesn't really elevate the role to anything special. Instead she falls right into the middle of the pack.
In the end, Licence to Kill limps to the finish line. The deciding factor in all of this -- the icing on the cake as it would be for me -- is when James Bond "pops a wheelie" with a semi truck (see image above for point of reference, if needed). If they were going for gritty and realistic, then why do this? I can almost believe the tanker lifted up and driven on one side. Someone actually did that. But those trucks just don't do that. Suspension of disbelieve bubble has been burst. Game over. I know it almost seems petty, but I stand by my word.
Reevaluation Score: 2.5 out of 5.
JAMES BOND WILL RETURN...
When we last left James Bond he had successfully scaled the "cliffs of mediocrity." While each of his four films had made more money than the last, Brosnan failed to make an indelible mark on most viewers...
James Bond films were an institution growing up in my house. Regardless of whether some elements were a bit risqué, I was never denied the ability to watch them as a child. These movies -- while filled with action, suspense, intriguing women, and mild violence -- were never portrayed as being gratuitous, so Bond was never off limits once I reached a particular age (somewhere between 8 and 10 most likely).
That institution was Roger Moore. He was James Bond. If you were a boy growing up in the 70s and 80s that watched James Bond movies, then Roger Moore was your Bond. Sean Connery was also an institution, he just wasn't mine at that impressionable age. He was much more relevant to me when I was in high school and the advent of home video rentals and owning a VCR became common practice.
But I'm not hear to discuss Moore or Connery. That's another post for another time. I'm hear to talk about Timothy Dalton. The man who replaced replaced Roger Moore. When I first heard that he was to be replaced by some new guy, I wasn't exactly sure to how react. I was twelve-years-old. I'm not sure if I really cared. I just wanted to see the next Bond movie in the theater, which I did.
For the past couple of decades I've always been torn with Dalton's two entries as Bond. They came out at a time when my Bond fascination and interest was fully peaked. I should have loved both, but that was not the case. So this revisit should be enjoyable, if nothing for the fact that I get to watch two more James Bond movies and re-critique them for you now.
THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS (1987)
Directed by John Glen
Written by Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson, Ian Fleming (story)
Running Time: 2 hours, 10 minutes
Original Verdict:
A return to the format -- the cold war -- is always a good indication that James Bond still serves a purpose. Timothy Dalton enters the scene and apparently proceeds to piss off quite a few fans in the process as not being either suave enough, like Connery, or not old enough to execute the perfect one-liners, like Moore. It still produced a decent story and some neat gadgets as well as Dalton being a closer representation of the literary James Bond.
Rating: 3.5 out of 5.
I finally had the chance to re-watch this about a week ago with Travis. (He's a good friend of mine who used to guest post on a movie review site that I gave up on a while back. You can follow him here on tumblr or be witness to his quirky pictures and videos posts on Instagram.) We're both big Bond fans, but our likes and dislikes sometimes differ depending on the movie. However, a Bond fan is a Bond fan first and the one thing Bond fans can always agree on is... James Bond. (Silly, isn't it?)
While I was fairly certain I would enjoy the revisit, Travis was a bit skeptical. He likes his James Bond a certain way, and when it doesn't follow the formula, he tends to be disappointed. Additionally, he also hadn't seen the film in a good 15 years, maybe more. Thankfully, the revisit went well and he was pretty pleased with the final outcome of film, as was I.
The Reevaluation
The cold open is fantastic. Double-Os skydiving onto the Rock of Gibraltar for a training exercise. The bad side of this opener is that this displayed exactly how bad these other Double-Os really were. Definitely not worth their salt compared to Bond (but maybe that was the point). I can almost see an MI6 office aid saying to M. something like, "We're gonna need some more Double-Os, sir." (Now imagine if that line was delivered like this.)
Live-action stunts are always the best, and they are a particularly favorite of mine when it comes to James Bond movies. That extra element of suspense is hard to suppress when you know that actual people were outside risking their lives to get the best take on camera, instead of computer-generated imagery. The Living Daylights is filled with well-executed practical effects that still hold up almost 30 years later.
I'm sure that Dalton's portrayal of Bond was either frustrating or refreshing to audiences back in 1987. By the end of Roger Moore's run, the character had pretty much become a quasi-superhero of sorts, never taken very serious - hardly ever seen as human. Dalton reigned all of that back in and tried his best to bring a serious take on a serious man and it works.
Dalton's Bond is cold and calculated, he's practically celibate at the height of the AIDS epidemic (the press would label him as "monogamous" in this film for that precise reason), and his performance is grounded, often toning down what few "one-liners" that are in the script to almost nonexistence. He even throws away the famous "Bond... James Bond" introduction line at the beginning of the film.
 |
| If Maud Adams can be in more than one Bond movie, why can't Joe Don Baker as well? |
I was indifferent to Maryam d'Abo's portrayal of Kara. Not entirely sure why. I didn't dislike her, but her performance felt forgettable at best. (And it took Travis all of twelve seconds to let me know that she was the older sister of Karen Arnold from "The Wonder Years.") Andreas Wisniewski, however, was much more memorable as the competent henchman/villain Necros. He possessed no strange abilities, nor any superhuman strength. He was just a cold-blooded killer who reminded us both of the brilliantly brutal character Grant (played by Robert Shaw) in From Russia With Love.
The film really only suffers from three issues: multiple villains, multiple endings, and multiple Joe Don Bakers (well, that third one is partially true and only makes sense if you've branched out into the Brosnan era). The pacing can be a touch sluggish at times, but overall it never really drags.
Be that as it may, The Living Daylights still succeeds on almost every level. The film dances on the borderline of the ridiculous, but never gets too fanciful. It successfully weaves Ian Fleming's short story, includes "Smiert Spionam," (meaning "Death to Spies") which is a throwback to SMERSH, as well as other elements from his novels that had seemed to all but vanish in previous films.
The Living Daylights is a great introduction to Timothy Dalton as Bond. I feel that if the screenwriters had focused a little more on reworking and tightening up the third act, this might have gone down as one of the best films of the franchise, or at least in the top five. Instead it often seems overlooked, and that's too bad.
Reevaluation Score: 4 out of 5.
LICENCE TO KILL (1989)
Directed by John Glen
Written by Richard Maibaum and Michael G. Wilson
Running Time: 2 hours, 13 minutes
Original Verdict:
Dalton returns, pissed as always... except this time he goes rogue and loses his license to kill. It was the first Bond film to be rated PG-13 for excessive violence and seems to lose some of it's charm because of it. Apparently Bond exacting revenge isn't always the best formula to follow.
Rating: 2 out of 5.
I had the opportunity to re-watch Licence to Kill over the Holidays on HBO. It's probably what first sparked my interest to re-visit the Bond films (even before the internal Brosnan debate took place in my head).
So... James Bond goes rogue. It's not an entirely uncommon theme, but it's definitely not my favorite. I tend to enjoy Bond when he is actually on assignment from M. Instead it feels like too much of a departure from the format. I could recognize what director John Glen was trying to do with Licence to Kill. He was attempting to make the first "serious" James Bond film. And while he succeeded -- at least in parts -- the film suffers as a whole and comes across as a misfire.
The film lacks the level of charisma and charm that previous Bond films normally possess, including Dalton's last entry. Instead it plays like a bad 80s action movie. Licence feels almost reactionary -- especially when you compare it to other movies being released around the same time frame. This isn't the first time that a James Bond film is influenced by other genres/thematic elements at the height of their popularity -- especially in the 1970s. But it's almost as if the screenwriters sat down and made a list of all the most stereotypical 80s themes like cocaine, drug cartels, ninjas, televangelism, and Michael Kamen's score (think Lethal Weapon, Die Hard), and then wrote a James Bond movie around all of it. (Even the bar scene screams of Road House.)
Unfortunately the end result just doesn't work for me. The film comes off as too "American" for a James Bond film (and that's nothing to brag about). Remember what I said at the beginning about James Bond and mild violence? Yeah, this film threw that idea right out the window.
While successfully making a grittier film, John Glen also produced the first PG-13 rated Bond. Back in 1989, that was monumental. The tonal shift is really rough coming off of the success of The Living Daylights. But it was especially rough for this 13-year-old who witnessed unspeakable acts of violence at the hands of Sanchez. You remember that decompression tank death scene with Milton Krest? It still haunts me to this day.
The saddest part about all of this -- at least until the Casino Royale reboot with Daniel Craig in 2006 -- is that this film was probably the closest representation of Ian Fleming's character, along with its simplified story-line. I appreciate Dalton's performance. There's nothing wrong with it in this film. Would Ian Fleming's Bond seek revenge after what happens to Felix Leiter? Absolutely. That entire segment -- including the brilliant little note that reads "He disagreed with something that ate him" -- is lifted almost verbatim from the novel, Live and Let Die.
Robert Davi is fantastic as the villainous drug lord Sanchez. He's brutal and sadistic. He's a vengeful egomaniac. He's exact the guy you want James Bond to take down. Benicio del Toro as Dario, Sanchez's right hand man, is also a masterful stroke. He plays the completely loyal sociopath to perfection. Carey Lowell portrayal of Pam Bouvier wasn't really on my radar when I first saw this film. Upon this revisit, I can take her or leave her. I'm mostly indifferent to her performance. While incredibly sexy, she doesn't really elevate the role to anything special. Instead she falls right into the middle of the pack.
In the end, Licence to Kill limps to the finish line. The deciding factor in all of this -- the icing on the cake as it would be for me -- is when James Bond "pops a wheelie" with a semi truck (see image above for point of reference, if needed). If they were going for gritty and realistic, then why do this? I can almost believe the tanker lifted up and driven on one side. Someone actually did that. But those trucks just don't do that. Suspension of disbelieve bubble has been burst. Game over. I know it almost seems petty, but I stand by my word.
Reevaluation Score: 2.5 out of 5.
JAMES BOND WILL RETURN...
Comments
Post a Comment