Bullseye?
[spoilers follow]
I'll give Pierce Brosnan credit. His Bond does not vary in tone. He's the same suave, slightly wooden guy in Goldeneye as he is in Die Another Day. But the film around him changes.
But not much, really. Goldeneye is still an action movie rather than a spy story and all the worse for it, although at least here the plot does make sense and the script has not quite degenerated into the morass of oneliners and bullshit that later Brosnan is stuck with.
So what goes on here? Well, some bullshit about a helicopter that I wasn't interested enough by to actually pay any mind to, something about 006, masterfully sneered through by Sean Bean and a Russian dupe/villain who appeared to have mislaid his lunch. I mean, I say the plot makes sense but don't ask me to describe it for you. It kind of worked at the time.
The action is okay. It hasn't descended to the level of later Brosnan -- there's a tank, but it's a cool tank iykwim. It's more explodey than fighty, which is a minus, because Bond works better when he fights, preferably against someone who equals him for strength and/or guile.
The female villain is awesome, of course. She probably could have featured more or had more character, since she just smirks in the background a bit more than really works. But the thighcracker effect still works to shrivel a man's nub, believe me.
All in all, I'd say it was forgettable. Quite good. Not bad. Okay. C? C. From the theme music, which I've already forgotten but it was an improvement on Madonna, let's put it that way, to the overall design (looks a bit cheaper than the extravagance of Die Another Day), it all kind of worked. And there was some archness as the Bond girl (whose name I didn't catch) remarks on Bond's ability to make things explode. Which he does.
posted by Dr Zen @ 8:11 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home