Innocent Bystander

Quantum of Solace still leaves me Blu...

I bit the bullet and solved my Blu-ray problem yesterday. As I recounted last week (you knew there'd be a quiz, didn't you?), my Sharp Blu-ray player, which I've had for a little over a year, refuses to acknowledge any software updates. Beyond that it's always been problematic, requiring resetting on a regular basis, and it had problems with regular DVDs, too, pausing and sometimes freezing when layers changed as the movie progressed (you can always see a momentary pause when a DVD goes to another layer to continue the movie--at least that's why I assume it was pausing).

I lived with this for a while, though, and my total dissatisfaction finally bubbled to the surface when I purchased the new Blu-ray versions of Quantum of Solace and Goldfinger, neither of which would play on my Sharp player. I needed a software update to do so, which I dutifully downloaded from the Internet, placed on a USB portable drive and tried to upload to the player. Tried and tried and tried, to no avail.

Let's pause here for a moment (no, we're not changing layers) to discuss Goldfinger. Since the beginning of the home video revolution, I think I've owned Goldfinger at least 5 times; twice on VHS, and 3 times on DVD (thank God I never embraced Beta or LaserDisc). It's probably the only Sean Connery Bond movie I'd buy on Blu-ray (I still have my regular DVD copy that came with the "Ultimate 007" sets a couple years back, which promised to be the "Ultimate" versions). The Bond producers have a canny way of separating me from my money, which makes me think they're bald, wearing monocles and Nehru jackets, and stroking particularly fuzzy cats while they count the money rolling in from fools ike me who buy the same product over and over and over again. But I digress.

So here's how I solved my problem with my Blu-ray player: I went out and bought a new one. Yeah, real smart, huh? I got a new LG player, and it's great. It took all of 10 minutes to hook up, and it's Netflix ready (soon as I figure out how to hook up the ethernet function on it, which I think means I need a new modem with multiple outputs). The picture is sharper than the Sharp (I'm too lazy to consider that a pun), and the ease of operation--in other words it played BOTH my new films without an attempted and aborted software update--are wonderful.

But you know what? Quantum of Solace is still a crappy movie, even on a second viewing at home without the distraction of a theater audience. Okay, the very presence of Daniel Craig as Bond elevates it above the muck of the Roger Moore/Timothy Dalton years, but it's still nonsensical, hard to follow, and ultimately a major disappointment after the triumph of Casino Royale. Yes, I know...I'm not supposed to treat it as a sequel, it's a continuation, and as such, it sucks. It's badly written, poorly constructed, and horribly miscast. The main villain, Dominic Greene, gives Bond villains a bad name. Actor Mathieu Almaric looks like a young Roman Polanski, and is just as creepy. I don't buy for a second that this wimpy little wisp of a guy is able and ready to go toe-to-toe with Bond in a fist fight. Olga Kurylenko is also a bad choice as this film's Bond girl. She's just out and out unpleasant.

Don't get me wrong, the film looks great on Blu-Ray, but the special features are lacking and it's obvious we'll be treated to still another "special edition" when the next Bond movie comes out in 2011 or whenever. We can only pray they get over this storyline and move Daniel Craig on to the next mission. If he's going to spend his next 2 hours as Bond chasing down Quantum (the shadowy organization that both Greene and Vesper Lynd were part of in the first two years), Craig's time in Bondage will resort to a very boring tour of duty, indeed.

Quantum of Solace (2008)

I doubt there was a more eagerly awaited film for me this fall than the new James Bond adventure, Quantum of Solace. Despite the less than rolling off your tongue title (in defense of the producers, it IS from an Ian Fleming short story), a second outing for Daniel Craig as 007 was exactly what the doctor ordered in these tight economic time. There's nothing like a dose of action, adventure, and spy-driven mayhem to make one forget their 401k has shrunk to almost a 007k these days.

Unfortunately, Quantum is a big disappointment. It has its moments (I particularly liked the last third or so, especially the snowy ending scene), and it's certainly action-packed. But if you're like me, you'll want to watch the action scenes in 3/4 time, so your eyes can adjust to what you just saw. If movies these days are cut for the MTV generation--viewers used to music videos telling a story in 4 minutes or less and with little patience with anything longer--this film is cut for people who were born with receivers embedded in their heads.

This is, I think, what happens when you hire a director basically known for more "delicate" fare and hand him the keys to the world's highest-grossing action franchise and the biggest budget ever within that franchise. Marc Forster is a very talented director (he won Halle Berry an Oscar for Monster's Ball, although you'll never convince me that there wasn't a large sympathy vote involved because she had to have sex on screen with Billy Bob Thornton). And he won hearts with Finding Neverwhere, the touching story of James Barrie, the creator of Peter Pan. Not your typical Bond director? Well, he isn't and he probably shouldn't have been picked. What we have here is what I call "arthouse Bond."

Some of the action scenes are indecipherable. We have a car chase (check!), a boat chase (check!), and even a plane chase (check!), and they're cut so fast and shot so tight that they're almost impossible to follow. The boat chase has a climactic moment that had me asking, "What just happened?" The plane chase involves an escape that ranks up there in the annals of misuse of a parachute that is almost a hallmark of the entire 47-year history of Bond on film (no Bond movie writer to date seems to understand the physics involved in jumping from a plane with a parachute). Most of the fight scenes are also shot and cut with the same bewildering style, a style so oppressive it makes your mind try and figure out what you just saw while trying to digest what you're seeing now. And one scene's promising action sequence is totally ruined by Forster's awful decision to edit in counterpoint to the opera being performed on stage (it might have worked for Coppola, it doesn't work here).

Admittedly, Casino Royale is a hard act to follow, and Quantum lacks one of the key ingredients of that film--an emotional center--that made it different from just about all the movies that preceded it in the series. But there are other flaws, too. A totally uninspired opening credits sequence--always a high point of the Bond series--is so blase it should have been skipped. A fairly awful title song by Jack White and Alicia Keys. The pissing away of an interesting character in Agent Fields (Gemma Atherton) in a scene reminiscent of a classic one from another Bond film (shame on you, Michael Wilson and Barbara Broccoli--seriously). A less than stellar "Bond girl" in Olga Kurylenko. A plot--there's a plot in here somewhere--that has to do with oil or water or a secret organization or a coup in Bolivia or all of the above. And worst of all, another dumb casting decision in the lead villain, Dominic Greene. I'm sure Mathieu Almaric is a fine actor in the right role (like The Diving Bell and the Butterfly), but here he comes off like Roman Polanski menacing Jack Nicholson in Chinatown: creepy, yes; a worldwide threat? Decidedly no. Even the great Dame herself, Judi Dench as M, is reduced to being more of a kindly mother than the leader of one of the free world's largest spy organizations. I'm convinced the M now stands for "Mum."

Daniel Craig is excellent with what he's given to do and he is a flinty, threatening, world-weary Bond. You don't doubt for a second that he's dangerous. But this Bond is one who is drowning in his own self-pity, not a Bondian trait to be sure. Hopefully this film puts a rest to that part of the story, because I think the Quantum storyline will continue in the next film (Craig is signed to star in two more).

Despite these flaws, Quantum is better than any of the Roger Moore and Timothy Dalton films, three-quarters of the Pierce Brosnan ones, and even a few of the Connery ones. I'd rank it #6 on this list I posted the other day, ahead of Dr. No, the first Bond movie. There's still a lot of promise here. Two years will be a long wait for the next installment, and there will be one, never fear. I waited through that long list of credits just to see these four thrilling words: "James Bond will return."

A look back at Bond...James Bond...

On the eve of the US premiere of the new James Bond film, Quantum of Solace, I think it's the perfect time to look back at the first 21 Bond movies. As hard as it is to believe, 2012 will mark the 50th anniversary of Ian Fleming's James Bond on film, and while that year still sounds to me like we'll all be wearing jetpacks ala 007 in Thunderball, it's really only one presidential election away. Here's my own personal rankings of all 21 films. Yours will most certainly vary. Like a lot of things, the best James Bond movie is probably your first James Bond movie. I actually met someone once who LOVED A View To A Kill. "Best Bond movie ever!" she exclaimed. "Roger Moore! Christopher Walken!! GRACE JONES!!!"

I, of course, had her killed.

THE TOP TEN:
1. Goldfinger
Yep, it's my first. 8 years old at the Victoria Theatre in downtown Tamaqua, PA, on a sunny Saturday afternoon in 1964. Sean Connery was the essence of cool to even someone as young as me, and the name "Pussy Galore" meant she just liked cats. A lot. The gadgets, the car, the villain, the naked (!) girl covered in gold paint. It was all golden to me.

2. Casino Royale
"Bond Begins," if you will. The film bolsters my personal opinion that the producers now look at 007 and "James Bond" as a code-name taken on by various people, thus meaning Daniel Craig replaced Pierce Brosnan in a literal sense. Tough, violent, and smart, this was the perfect restart to bring Bond into the Bourne age.

3. You Only Live Twice
Connery again, with all the trappings of success: the big villain headquarters, the mini helicopter, the huge climactic raid and battle at the end, plus the wonky joy of Bond as ninja.

4. From Russia With Love
Connery, Robert Shaw, and Lotte Lenya. 'Nuff said.

5. Goldeneye
Bond reboot 1.0, also by Casino Royale director Martin Campbell. A promising start to the Pierce Brosnan era of 007. Too bad it didn't last long.

6. Dr. No
The first, introducing Connery and company--including Bernard Lee as M and Lois Maxwell as Monepenny--to the world. Dated, certainly, but it was an auspicious debut.

7. Tomorrow Never Dies
Brosnan's second outing includes a megalomaniacal media baron, but hey...that's not so far off the mark these days. Lots of people hate this one, I like it.

8. Thunderball
Hailed in its day for its underwater photography, it's slow-moving and dull now, but has a few moments. It's certainly a mark of how successful the Connery films were, though: big, bloated and water-logged.

9. Die Another Day
I actually like this more than any of the Moore/Dalton movies, but I'm convinced if you edit out all the Halle Berry scenes and the Madonna cameo, you have a much better film. Thank God they never did the "Jinx" spin-off with Berry.

10. Live and Let Die
Interesting as only the first Roger Moore outing, it was all downhill from here for him as Bond.

THE MIDDLING SIX
11. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
One of Fleming's weirdest novels makes an equally unsettling film. It is, of course, the one with George Lazenby (ugh) and Diana Rigg (sigh), the best "Bond girl" ever. Lots of people claim this is one of the best. I'm not amongst that group.

12. The Spy Who Loved Me
One of Moore's better flicks, but "Jaws?" Seriously?

13. Diamonds Are Forever
Connery's last real Bond flick (1983's Never Say Never Again doesn't count), and it really, really sucks. Whoever thought Jill St. John could act?

14. For Your Eyes Only
Get rid of the ice-skating chick, and it's barely half-decent. This was an attempt to "toughen up" Moore's Bond persona, a plan that lasted for this film only. Memorable poster, though (the one shot through the woman's legs with Bond in the distance between them, gun drawn).

15. The Man With The Golden Gun
Christopher Lee as Scaramanga, the assassin, was inspired casting for all of us Hammer Films fans, but that's about it. And a second visit with Sheriff J.W. Pepper was two visits too many.

16. Moonraker
One of Fleming's better novels, totally gutted for the big screen in the wake of the success of Star Wars. And "Jaws". Again.

THE BOTTOM OF THE GUN-BARREL
17. License To Kill
Timothy Dalton's second time at bat. And who would ever think Wayne Newton is menacing? Creepy, yes. Menacing, NO.

18. The Living Daylights
One of Ian Fleming's titles that would have been better ignored (likewise A View To A Kill and Quantum of Solace). Dalton's debut, and not an auspicious one.

19. Octopussy
Ick.

20. A View To A Kill
Who's scarier and/or more masculine: Grace Jones or Christopher Walken?

21. The World Is Not Enough
Worst Bond villain ever: Robert Carlyle as the painless and evidently emotionless Renard; worst Bond girls ever: Sophie Marceau and Denise Richards. The latter as a nuclear scientist (I'm sure that's why Charlie Sheen married her). Absolutely indecipherable plot. It would take a nuclear scientist to explain it, and none were present.

Where does Quantum of Solace stack up? I'll let you know over the weekend.

That was then, this is now...

On the eve (well, almost...3 weeks and counting) of the premiere of the next James Bond movie, Quantum of Solace, I rewatched Casino Royale for the umpteenth time last evening. It's out again, this time in a brand-spanking new special edition on both Blu-ray and regular old DVD no-ray. Does it look better? I dunno...you can judge that. I just know I could probably watch this movie once a week for the rest of my life and be happy with my viewing choice (or lack thereof).

But it took an additional viewing of another Daniel Craig movie, Layer Cake, to finally realize what that undefinable "thing" is that makes Craig such a perfect 007. I was amongst the nay-sayers when he was first cast three years ago, clucking my tongue with such pithy sayings as "it's James BOND, not James BLOND."

Craig is certainly the best actor the Bond producers ever hired to portray Ian Fleming's secret agent. Sean Connery had both danger and charm, Timothy Dalton had Shakespearan experience (fat lot of good it did him--his 2 outings are among the worst Bond movies ever), Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan were both lightweights (although Brosnan has gone on to make some good movies, such as The Matador and The Thomas Crown Affair), and Lazenby...well, Lazenby would have made a great Bond in still photos (he was, after all, one of the world's highest-paid male models when he was plucked form relative obscurity to replace Connery). Craig brings to the role a harsher edge, a world weariness, and a more pronounced sense of menace. At one point in Casino Royale, M (Dame Judi Dench) calls him a "blunt instrument," a direct quote from Fleming.

But that undefinable extra "thing," that subtle push came to me while watching Layer Cake, Matthew Vaughan's British gangster film, where Craig plays a drug dealer, albeit one with a bit of a conscience. Watching him strut his way through the London underworld, it hit me like a thunderbolt: Daniel Craig is this era's Steve McQueen.

Seriously. There's a passing physical resemblance, the blondish hair and the blue eyes. McQueen was certainly a "prettier" actor; Craig is, to be polite, a bit homely. But beyond the physical similarities, there's that one peculiar trait that separates them from everyone else: an innate sense of cool. McQueen was the epitome of cool in the '60s and into the '70s, and is still regarded as such to this day. Craig embodies that trait now. Part of that is the pedigree that comes with playing 007; you HAVE to be cool to carry it off, and a mantle of coolness is certainly thrust upon the current Bond. But while Craig is a far better actor than McQueen, they both have that presence, the one that makes the women swoon and the guys wish they were him. Both those qualities play in equal measure in Bond, both on screen and the printed page.

McQueen could have never played James Bond. He was too American, too white-bread, and a fake British accent would have been ridiculous on him. Yet take a look at him circa 1968, in the original version of The Thomas Crown Affair, then watch Layer Cake. If there are two cooler stars lurking anywhere else on screen, let me know. But in the meantime, enjoy the fact that Craig not only makes one of the best Bonds ever, he also carries on the tradition of movie star cool started 40-some years ago by a bloke from across the pond who carried himself quite the same way.

More Bond, James Bond...

A very nice person from Penguin (thanks, Darel!) emailed me today to comment on my post of a few days ago on their new Bond book release, Quantum of Solace, and sent us this great link to a page on the Penguin site where you can see all the Bond trade paperback covers and read excerpts from the books--and, if you want--order you some of the same.

In related news, I read in Empire Magazine (the British film mag), that the QUANTUM in the title of the next Bond movie actually stands for the new evil organization that's central to the film's storyline, ala Spectre in the earlier movies. And the new movie picks up one hour after the ending of Casino Royale. I guess we'll see if all of this is true come November 7!

Quantum of Solace

Back in 2002 or so, Penguin Books started to reissue the original James Bond novels by Ian Fleming, in new, absolutely lovely, trade paperback editions. They released all 14 of them over the course of a few years, coinciding--roughly--with the 50th anniversary of the first 007 adventure, Casino Royale. You're going to find all those books still in print and still in bookstores, since Penguin is now touting them as being available for the centennial of Fleming's birth, which is 2008. Evidently there are a lot of holidays on Bond's calendar.

I loved these books, and not necessarily because of Fleming's writing. Fleming is a notoriously uneven author, sometimes great, often just plain bad, but always at least interesting. What really attracted me to this new series was the collectible nature of it; mainly its size, format and wonderful covers. The covers are totally evocative of each book, with a standard wraparound format, certain common elements, and the oh-so-wise decision to not picture Bond on any of them. (Let's face it: we all have our own version of Bond, even if it's simply to substitute Connery, Moore, Brosnan or Craig...if you're placing Lazenby and/or Dalton into the equation, you might want to check your personal math skills.) Oh, he's there...a hand with a gun on the back, a silhouetted figure on the front, but the main focus is the "Bond girls," and the covers--designed by Roseanne Serra and Richie Fahey and illustrated using a painterly photo-illustration technique by Fahey--are all works of art. In addition, the title treatments changed from book to book, utilizing typefaces that were appropriate for each one. All in all, this is one of the most well-designed and illustrated series of books out there, and certainly among the best when it comes to consistent trade dress for the Bond series, something that's been attempted before to varying results.

But alas, Fleming only produced 14 Bond books, so the well went dry quickly. Yes, there's been numerous non-Fleming Bonds, but eh...who cares? Penguin could reprint them, but how many John Gardner or Raymond Benson "Bond in the 80s and 90s" books can you read. Not many, I'd wager. In honor of the 100th birthday of Fleming, Penguin did come out with a new book this year, Devil May Care, (written by Sebastian Faulks), which picks up where Fleming left off, circa mid-60s Bond territory. The result was fair to middling, to be honest, although I sort of hope they'll reprint it in this format, when it goes to paperback, but I'm not holding my breath.

I so like this series of books that I found myself regularly looking at them in the Mystery section at my favorite Borders, even though they all sat at home on my bookshelf. I'd walk by, hoping against hope that a new one would somehow suddenly appear to join the ranks of the other 14 books, gazing wistfully at them. I was convinced it wasn't to be...until now.

Penguin has taken the two Fleming short story/novella collections--For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy and The Living Daylights--and combined them into one book, cannily titled Quantum of Solace. Buyers should beware, however: while that is the title of the new Bond movie with Daniel Craig--due November 7--this is NOT an adaptation of that movie, nor is the movie adapted from this book. It's a collection of short stories--one of which IS titled "Quantum of Solace"--and it does feature Bond and is written by Fleming. And as such, it's not even very good Fleming.

But it is in that magical--at least to me--format, a "new" 15th volume with a great cover, and I snapped it up greedily yesterday when I stumbled upon it at the bookstore. I knew it was coming. I read a lot of books, but I also read a lot ABOUT books, so I knew it was due at the end of August. It showing up in the middle was a bit of a surprise, but I like surprises like this. Now if there was just some other "lost" Fleming Bond book that could keep the series going, I'd be a happy camper, but I guess I'll just have to content myself with the new movie coming in November.

Two minute warning...

Quantum of WHAT?

I'm all for the James Bond producers going back to the Ian Fleming well for a title for the 22nd 007 film, but could they have picked something better than Quantum of Solace? It is a title of an obscure Fleming short story (appearing in For Your Eyes Only), a story that begins with the far-less-than-thrilling line:

"James Bond said, 'I've always thought that if I ever married I would marry an air hostess.'"

So that's it then? Bond, distraught over the betrayal and death of Vesper Lynd in Casino Royale, shacks up with a stewardess--er, FLIGHT ATTENDANT--he meets on a British Air flight back to London?

And while Fleming had a way with titles--admittedly Casino Royale was no barn-burner, but look at the rest of the list: Live and Let Die, Diamonds Are Forever, From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, You Only Live Twice, are just a few--this one is the bottom of the barrel. It sounds more like a Merchant Ivory period piece, starring Colin Firth and Keira Knightly. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

The Bond producers, famous for stupid decisions (the ice skating chick in For Your Eyes Only, Grace Jones in A View to a Kill...in fact, using the title A View to a Kill, for that matter), get a pass on this one because CR was so damn good, and they had the good sense to sign star Daniel Craig on to two more Bond movies in the "off season" between films. If Quantum of Solace is even partially as good as Casino Royale, I'll be happy. But boy, Fleming notwithstanding, that's a horribly stupid title.

Casino Royale revisited

I just watched Casino Royale on DVD and enjoyed it as much--if not more--upon a second viewing as I did the first time in the theater. Some minor quibbles with the DVD itself, though. It's a "2-disc special edition," but it's anything but special. Obviously the Broccoli family is hanging on to do another "Ultimate" DVD, God knows when. One wonders if they'll re-release CR on DVD when the second Daniel Craig film comes out in 2008, or wait until all three of the Craigs are released on DVD as a special boxed "Ultimate" set, an event occurring, I would imagine, sometime in 2011.

I reviewed CR when I originally saw it (you can read that here, if you like), but the second viewing points out some problems. The first part of the movie, leading up to the casino poker match, is hopelessly convoluted, introducing a number of plot points and action set pieces that Bond must clear to get to the real scheme, a scheme that only M can relate to us. It involves money, stock manipulation, terrorists and Texas Hold'em poker, a bit of a letdown from the more high-minded baccarat that author Ian Fleming had in mind in his first Bond novel of the same name back in 1953. But the game--and the plot--are secondary to the real allure of CR, the movie: the rebirth of the cinematic James Bond.

I was among those dubious of Daniel Craig as Bond when he was first announced (not dubious enough to start a website about it, but dubious nonetheless), and I was on the fence about the movie itself until the wonderful final scene where it all--the legend, the name, 007 and the importance of that one piece of music known as the "James Bond Theme"--all come crashing together. Craig restores Bond to what Fleming envisioned, a "blunt instrument" sent out to do the bidding of Queen and Country. His Bond is ruthless and without a conscience.

Yet, this film also reveals Bond's human side, the chink in his armor, brought out by the wonderful performance of Eva Green as Vesper Lynd. One thing you notice on big screen TV that I didn't pick up on the movie screen: The fine layer of freckles across Green's forehead, which takes her sophisticated beauty and brings it down to a more "common" level. (I can't vouch for her Goth raccoon look at this year's Oscars, though.) In Green, the producers found a perfect female counterpart for their new Bond. It's a shame she won't be returning.

And that begs another interesting question: Will Bond 22 be Casino Royale II? It's rumored that all three Craig Bonds will be an interrelated trilogy. In the original Fleming book, Le Chiffre's boss was SMERSH, the Soviet assassination arm of the KGB. And even though M (the wonderful Judi Dench, the only returning star from the previous Bond films), longs for the Cold War, I don't know that SMERSH will translate to our modern times, of which Bond is certainly a part. At this point, it's anyone's guess when Bond 22 will start filming. It's currently director-less after Roger Michell (Notting Hill, Venus) pulled out over the proverbial "creative differences." CR director, Martin Campbell, also wasn't interested in tackling a Bond film for a third time (he relaunched 007 in GoldenEye when Pierce Brosnan was the newbie agent). November 7, 2008 is a lot closer than anyone thinks, which is good for us diehard Bond fans, at least in a calendar sense. The Broccolis raised the bar on CR; it will be hard to top it.

GoldenEye (1995)

The third and fourth Ultimate James Bond DVD sets came out today. I think they're a better selection than the first two, but no matter how you cut it, there's dogs on each of them. Volume 3 has From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Live and Let Die, For Your Eyes Only and GoldenEye. Volume 4 has Dr. No, You Only Live Twice, Moonraker, Octopussy, and Tomorrow Never Dies. Believe me, any set that has both of those deadly Roger Moore movies in it has loser written all over it. Maybe that's why they picked black for the basic color design of Vol. 4; they were in mourning for these two deadly films which should have all but killed off the 007 franchise. But they make up for it by including both Dr. No and You Only Live Twice on this set.

Tonight I watched GoldenEye and once again, the DVD transfer is wonderful. Rich colors, bold blacks and just an incredibly vibrant look to the whole thing. I'm not an expert, but even an armchair DVD cineaste like myself can see how sharp these new DVDs look. And I love GoldenEye. It's the best of the Brosnan Bonds, and while not as radical a reboot as the current Casino Royale, it did jumpstart Bond with a bang once again back in '95. It includes one of the best Bond villains in years, Sean Bean as 006, Alec Trevelyan, and a thrilling--and ruthless--fight to the finish between the two former friends. GE also has a great female villain in Xenia Onnatop, played by the wonderful Famke Janssen.

GoldenEye doesn't just introduce Pierce Brosnan as Bond, either. It gives us a new Moneypenny (the coincidentally-named Samantha Bond) and a tough new "M," played by Dame Judi Dench. It's obvious in this film that she's new to the job, and comes out of a different background than her predecessor. She's regarded as a "beancounter," an accountant, but she makes no bones about sending 007 out to die, if need be.

GoldenEye has all the things that made Bond movies what they were, to both good and bad effect. The gadgets, the girls, the car, the outrageous stunts--Brosnan jumps off a cliff on a motorcycle and drops into a plane and pulls it out of a death dive--the puns; they're all here, along with one of the worst soundtracks of any Bond film. Brosnan skates uneasily between Connery ruthlessness and Moore affability, and it doesn't always work. He's too good-looking to be as mean-tempered as Connery, too baby-faced--in this film, at least; Brosnan aged quickly in the 4 films he made as Bond--to pull off some of Moore's glib lines.

I couldn't help but think while watching GE what a fine Bond Sean Bean would make. Tall and lean with that ruthless look he used so well in the Lord of The Rings movies and some British TV series (plus as the bad guy in the American equivalent of James Bond, the Jack Ryan flick, Patriot Games), dye his hair a darker color and you have a fairly close eqivalent of the Ian Fleming description of Bond. But I guess we're all over the whole "blonde Bond" bombshell of over a year ago, when Daniel Craig was announced. Craig's total embodiment of the 007 role, tux, Aston-Martin and all, has made us forget that furor. I guess we'll just have to settle for Bean being a great Bond villain and the closest thing to being 007...006.