May not be the best Bond movie ever made still entertaining in it's own way.
The use of CGI in some of the scenes certainly does stand out as BAD though. I still can't believe they apparently spent 12 months researching the ice and water flows for the Ice Wave/Para Gliding scene...it certainly does NOT show, and seems a total waste of 12 months to me.
The editing too leaves much to be desired for me. The editors use of speed ramping...(that scene speed-up / slow down stuff)...is a used badly at times and just little to MTV for me.
My gripes about the movie are minimal though, and as I said, it is still an entertaining piece of cinema....if viewed with an open mind.
Yeah I agree. What I loved about the Roger Moore movies is that, basically he didn't really give a toss about anyone. He turned up saved the world shagged a few women & then buggered off to the next job leaving a trail of broken hearts in his wake.
This gave me a good chuckle ) ... an excellent description of the Moore moviesWords.
Is it possible to dislike a Bond film without having to resort to the harshest criticism which, in effect, condemns it outright.
You hate DAD? Fine.
Its garbage? All right.
Terrible? If you say so.
Lousy movie? Perhaps.
And then what?
No one is denying anybody their right to hate a Bond film...that's what an open discussion of 007 is all about.
What's distressing is the absolute and complete condemnation of a Bond movie...BY BOND FANS?!?!?
Now, I cannot honestly sit here and defend DAD as being a Bond classic. Far from it. The criticisms are all valid.
IMO, from the time Bond arrives at the Ice Palace, Lee Tamahori manages to create the single worst hour in Bond history. Without question, a major MAJOR misstep on so many levels.
But the first half of the film? Very enjoyable and as good as anything in the Brosnan era.(Glad to see some folks point this out)
And that's my original point.
Its one thing to dislike a Bond movie...but out-and-out HATE?
As a long-life Bond fan, I am always ready to defend the world's greatest fictional character.
No one slags 007 on my watch.
Now this may sound very harsh...but it needs to be asked to every member here:
Are you REALLY a Bond fan?
Because if you are...this policy of hating Bond films outright is completely contradictory.
How many times has someone totally dismissed Roger's tenure as Bond? Without any attempt to acknowledge Roger as a worthy Bond...IN ANY WAY!
Go down the list:
DAF, TMWTGG, MR and AVTAK have all been ripped to shreds over the years by fans who can not and WILL not concede one redeeming feature in any of these films.
If I had a nickel for every time someone has pointed out how much they "hate" one of these films I would be as rich as Auric Goldfinger.
Slagging AVTAK and how old Roger looks in it is like shooting fish in a barrel. Both boring and predictable.
TMWTGG...a film for the trash-heap in some eyes...and even THAT's a compliment.
MR...a very enjoyable Bond flick IMO...Hugo Drax, with all his money, could not buy any respect for this atrocity in some circles.
Dalton? A worthless bum from way back to the haters.
Brosnan? Throw a stick in this forum and you'll hit a member who believes that Pierce did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING right in four movies.
And so on. Do I protest too much? You bet I do.
Celebration of 007 is what I'm talking about.Of course, the movies are from perfect, no one can dispute that but,in my books, this emphasis on negativity from some members is starting to bog me down.
I mean seriously, what's with all the hate?
Broadshoulder calls DAD so "dreadful it was an insult to celluloid."
That's a hilarious line but, come on, no Bond movie has ever been THAT bad. Ever.
And, in the end, that was my original point of this rant. What's with all the venom?
Broadshoulder eloquently puts it this way:"I could go on and on." when ripping apart DAD.
Ripping apart DAD? That's like falling off a log its so easy. What would shock me is a Bond-fan who, despite hating YOLT, for instance, would still defend its worthy aspects.
You may disagree with me when I say that this series has spoiled Bond-fans. The consistent quality of craftmanship throughout 21 films is unparalled in movie history.
AVTAK is an abomination for some people. Not worthy of comment. Well, its no FRWL, that's for sure, but IMO it could hold its own against any genre film of 1985. And then some.(Ditto for DAD in 2002)
In effect, Bond movies are ultimately judged against each other and that is why there are people who will elevate GF to Citizen Kane status while at the same time relegate DAF to the Plan 9 From Outer Space Hall-Of-Shame.
Well, fellow Bond-fans, the gap between good and bad is not as pronounced as one thinks.
There are treasures to be found in EVERY bond saga...if one looks.
It comes down to this:
A Bond-fan should give a tip of the hat to EVERY Bond flick...even if its one at the bottom of the pack.
Like DAD.
Anything less is shocking. Positively shocking.
"When do you sleep, 007?"
"Never on the firm's time, sir."
A Bond-fan should give a tip of the hat to EVERY Bond flick...even if its one at the bottom of the pack.
Like DAD.
Anything less is shocking. Positively shocking.
I enjoyed your post bigzilcho. However, I do not think that those who call themselves automatically have to enjoy appreciate Bond film, in the same way as I do not think that everyone who posts here has to appreciate the Raymond Benson continuation novels (which are, like Brosnan's last film, pretty awful in my view). I do believe that Die Another Day is a very poor piece of film-making. The fact that is is a Bond film does not alter that. I absolutely went into the cinema wanting to enjoy it, especially as I enjoyed The World Is Not Enough. Unfortunately I was hugely disappointed, and having re-watched it in recent weeks I would be hard-pushed to identify a major redeeming feature of it.
Perhaps that makes me less of a Bond fan than others. That said, I will defend Moonraker to the bitter end. . .
Bond fans come in all shapes and sizes and everybody's opinions must be respected.
All I wanted to point out was that sometimes the trashing of a Bond flick (or Roger at times) requires a teaspoon of generosity from a Bond fan.
As for MR...I'm with you all the way.
"You missed, Mr. Bond."
"Did I? As you said, such good sport."
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,993Quartermasters
edited May 2008
All Bond films---even my least favourites!---have something special to recommend them. I believe that the first half of DAD features Brozzer's best work in the role. The swordfight is Classic Bond B-)
AVTAK has the dive from the Eiffel Tower.
OP has the banister scene---and the obviously fake bed of rubber 'nails,' with the Indian fakir saying "Get off my bed!"*
MR has the centrifuge, and the fight in Vennini Glass.
They are all Bond films---and they all got us where we are today: the 22nd official Bond film in production, featuring The Best Bond Since ConneryTM :007)
* Okay, the bed of rubber nails isn't so special |)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Big, great to have you back. {[] Let me assure you, I find something to like in every Bond film; even AVTAK, TLD and DAD. Those are my three least favourite Bond films. However, I'm only using the term 'least favourite' in contrast to other Bond films. I hate AVTAK, but only in comparison to other Bond films. In contrast to non-Bond films like Dancer in The Dark, Drop Dead Fred, Crash, Predator 2 and Robocop 2, I absolutely adore it.
That to me is what it comes down to as the truth is, no Bond film is among my all-time least favourite films. There are films which have stressed me out so much I have vowed never to see them again, however these do not include any Bond films. I may 'hate' certain Bond films, but that is only when comparing them to other Bond films.
Big, I think it comes down to this. As this is a Bond site, everybody have an interest in the Bond films (or novels.) Expressing a dislike of a particular film is IMO not such a big deal, since it's Bond fans who are doing so (and like the films generally) rather than non-Bond fans who may not like any of the films.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,485MI6 Agent
edited May 2008
I love Bond, Flemings Bond, Connery's Bond, I liked Dalton, Lazenby, Brosnan and Rog in the role. I hate DAD. My opinion is like the sea, unrelenting, ongoing and will not change.
I agree that Bond fans bashing a Bond film is a little shameful and disconcerting. There are a few films in the series that I consider to be weak points and there are some other moments that I wish had turned out differently, used more elements from the novels, or not have occurred at all. That being said they are still Bond films and that makes them superior to most films in my eyes. I'm not saying that the worst Bond film is better than any other movie out there because this is not the case, though I'd still take a bad Bond film over a lot of the trash that is out there in cinema land. But this series has spanned much of cinematic history and is kind of in a class of its own. When comparing the films to each other of course some are going to be viewed more favorably than others. There will surely be bumps in the road in a series that's been around as long as the Bond franchise. But these bumps in the road are all part of the overall Bond experience and still have meaningful things to add to the Bond universe. And wishing that things had been done differently isn't going to make a bit of difference. What's done is done and we should just all try to enjoy what has been done.
That's not to say that we can't be critical. Being Bond fans I think means that we should have greater insight into the films than over moviegoers and we should hold the franchise to high standards. But I feel that sometimes that turns into shameless and pointless bashing. Every film has redeeming qualities and while we should have high standards and not be afraid to say if we don't like something, we should also be sure that we don't overlook the good qualities present in the films (and yes there are good qualities in EVERY Bond film).
I had to watch Die Another Day a few times recently for a dissertation that I was writing and I do consider it to be pretty awful and, at times, even offensive.
I don't think anybody could blame North Koreans or South Koreans for being angry about the film. The fact that Bond ends up having sex in a Buddhist shrine is unbelievable and South Korea comes across as a poor American colony when it is in fact one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
The bad acting, poor dialogue and infantile ideas make this a genuinely poor film in my view. Not just in the context of the Bond series but in general terms.
You raise some good points. I often say even a bad Bond film has something in it you can enjoy. TMWTGG is my least favorite, but I've seen it multiple times. Now compare James Bond to other franchises, and it seems like every film series always has at least one entry that is too painful to watch. (Yes, Star Wars: Episode I, I'm looking at you.)
And as enjoyable as the first half is for DAD, there is simply no mathematical way for me to classify it as "the worst."
There seems to be a good amount of fans who break Die Another Day's merits into two parts. The first hour or so, from the beginning to when Bond meets up with Q in London, and the second half from when Bond arrives at the Ice palace until the end of the film. I would largely agree with those who appreciate the first half and find themselves struggling to get through the second. The first half contains some impressive action sequences, a sincere attempt by Brosnan to stretch the characters limits (though even the first half shows the timidity of the producers to break the formula, how that would change in four years!), some actually funny lines, and a neat plot developing around a mole in MI6 and conflict diamonds. The homages to the past Bond films are not in-your-face, and while Jinx is generally frustrating to watch, she is such a small part of the movie thus far that she can be overlooked.
Then, we get to the Ice Palace....
We are then exposed to some of the worst dialouge, camera effects, special effects, and script sequences in a Bond film. Whatever was good about the plot gets canned when we revert back to big bad rich guy with a satellite and something to hide, and the characters are actually annoying. For me, Die Another Day in spite of the potential early on, reminds us all that bigger is not always better, and sometimes the best way to break with the familiar formula is not to make it over-the-top, but to break with it.
In that sense, Die Another Day is a fitting "end" to the first era of Bond films. It typifies the half-hearted attempts taken by most of the films in the series to show off some of the Fleming source material, as well as the rare gems that actually use the source material, and the disappointingly high amount of lemon films that abandoned it entirely. Its salute to the films preceding it also make the film a fitting end to an era of films that, with a few very notable exceptions, were never as much as they could be.
it was so bad it forced the producers to go back to the drawing board and we ended up with CR.
That's another reason to hate CR! )
All I will say about DAD is that the only things I like about it are Brosnan's performance, the sword fight and the 'say goodbye to him for us' line.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
That's not a reason to hate CR. CR was a brilliant film that we never would've had were it not for the atrocity that is DAD.
I don't think that CR was a brilliant film at all, and so, in my case, it is a reason to hate (or at least dislike) DAD.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I don't think anybody could blame North Koreans or South Koreans for being angry about the film. The fact that Bond ends up having sex in a Buddhist shrine is unbelievable and South Korea comes across as a poor American colony when it is in fact one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
That is a great point. In that sense the producers really did have a tin ear for other cultures: the depiction of South Korea as little more than a US outpost, despite being a very sophisticated economy and undoubtedly a member of the 'First-World' club, was fairly insulting. The sex in the temple was even more so.
The film as a whole is pretty insulting to the intelligence of the viewer (the constant reminder that the diamonds were African Conflict Diamonds, just in case the three-year-olds at the front of the cinema didn't catch it as an example). Like others have mentioned, for me it is a very poor film not just in terms of the Bond canon, but in terms of films more generally. Very poor writing, wooden acting, odd ideas woefully executed; the whole thing is a mess in my view. Nevertheless, there is always a nugget of gold in a Bond film and in Die Another Day that is the delectable Rosamund Pike. Gorgeous and sublime, she is the best aspect of the film despite some dodgy dialogue.
For me, the real tragedy of DAD is the waste of what started out to be an interesting idea. All the Brosnan Bonds deal with betrayal in some very personal way. Alec's betrayal in Goldeneye,
the Bond/Paris/Carver triangle. Elektra King, feeling betrayed by her father then trying to take revenge for it, and finally Bond betrayed by an MI-6 insider. If Die Another Day had focused on his pursuit of Zao and his investigation into who had betrayed him, instead of all the Sci-fi, dream mask, face changing, laser weapon in space nonsense, DAD could have been an enjoyable, exciting film.
I liked that Bond had been captured, held prisoner for more than a year, tortured, abandoned. It was a great start. If Zao had then become the focus of 007's pursuit and Moon/Graves had been left drowned/crushed, the film could have been something special.
Instead it became a bad video game.
Although Die Another Day was not the worst film in the franchise (Moonraker still holds that title IMO)it ranks near the bottom of the barrel.
Pierce Brosnan is a fine actor and he deserved better than this muck.
I actually just watched this film a couple nights ago. Had a strange urge to watch DAD.
What did I think? Not as bad as I remember it being. Of course, my memories are probably partly clouded by all of the negativity I read on here about the film. It still falls in my bottom five films, probably more like bottom three, but despite this there are still good moments throughout. Everyone knows the poor elements: CGI, ice palace, etc. The reliance on gadgets was annoying, but the worst quality of the film was the use of all of these fancy sci-fi elements: icarus, face changing things, Graves little hideout complete with a ludicrous laser system, and that ridiculous suit Graves wears at the end. Also felt the film had a weak leading lady (though I did like Miranda Frost) and the villain was one of the worst of the series. But there were good moments. I enjoy all of David Arnold's scores for the films (could have done with a different title song for this one though), Brosnan's performance is excellent, the scene in the hotel as he walks in dripping and scruffy is classic, the attack inside the clinic is pretty entertaining, I actually didn't mind the abandoned station idea, and the sword fighting/fencing sequence was good. It is definitely one of the worst Bond films and it could have been much better BUT I was still entertained and actually had a pleasant time watching the film. Definitely fun if you put your reservations aside and just watch it mindlessly despite the poor climax.
Comments
The use of CGI in some of the scenes certainly does stand out as BAD though. I still can't believe they apparently spent 12 months researching the ice and water flows for the Ice Wave/Para Gliding scene...it certainly does NOT show, and seems a total waste of 12 months to me.
The editing too leaves much to be desired for me. The editors use of speed ramping...(that scene speed-up / slow down stuff)...is a used badly at times and just little to MTV for me.
My gripes about the movie are minimal though, and as I said, it is still an entertaining piece of cinema....if viewed with an open mind.
Is it possible to dislike a Bond film without having to resort to the harshest criticism which, in effect, condemns it outright.
You hate DAD? Fine.
Its garbage? All right.
Terrible? If you say so.
Lousy movie? Perhaps.
And then what?
No one is denying anybody their right to hate a Bond film...that's what an open discussion of 007 is all about.
What's distressing is the absolute and complete condemnation of a Bond movie...BY BOND FANS?!?!?
Now, I cannot honestly sit here and defend DAD as being a Bond classic. Far from it. The criticisms are all valid.
IMO, from the time Bond arrives at the Ice Palace, Lee Tamahori manages to create the single worst hour in Bond history. Without question, a major MAJOR misstep on so many levels.
But the first half of the film? Very enjoyable and as good as anything in the Brosnan era.(Glad to see some folks point this out)
And that's my original point.
Its one thing to dislike a Bond movie...but out-and-out HATE?
As a long-life Bond fan, I am always ready to defend the world's greatest fictional character.
No one slags 007 on my watch.
Now this may sound very harsh...but it needs to be asked to every member here:
Are you REALLY a Bond fan?
Because if you are...this policy of hating Bond films outright is completely contradictory.
How many times has someone totally dismissed Roger's tenure as Bond? Without any attempt to acknowledge Roger as a worthy Bond...IN ANY WAY!
Go down the list:
DAF, TMWTGG, MR and AVTAK have all been ripped to shreds over the years by fans who can not and WILL not concede one redeeming feature in any of these films.
If I had a nickel for every time someone has pointed out how much they "hate" one of these films I would be as rich as Auric Goldfinger.
Slagging AVTAK and how old Roger looks in it is like shooting fish in a barrel. Both boring and predictable.
TMWTGG...a film for the trash-heap in some eyes...and even THAT's a compliment.
MR...a very enjoyable Bond flick IMO...Hugo Drax, with all his money, could not buy any respect for this atrocity in some circles.
Dalton? A worthless bum from way back to the haters.
Brosnan? Throw a stick in this forum and you'll hit a member who believes that Pierce did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING right in four movies.
And so on. Do I protest too much? You bet I do.
Celebration of 007 is what I'm talking about.Of course, the movies are from perfect, no one can dispute that but,in my books, this emphasis on negativity from some members is starting to bog me down.
I mean seriously, what's with all the hate?
Broadshoulder calls DAD so "dreadful it was an insult to celluloid."
That's a hilarious line but, come on, no Bond movie has ever been THAT bad. Ever.
And, in the end, that was my original point of this rant. What's with all the venom?
Broadshoulder eloquently puts it this way:"I could go on and on." when ripping apart DAD.
Ripping apart DAD? That's like falling off a log its so easy. What would shock me is a Bond-fan who, despite hating YOLT, for instance, would still defend its worthy aspects.
You may disagree with me when I say that this series has spoiled Bond-fans. The consistent quality of craftmanship throughout 21 films is unparalled in movie history.
AVTAK is an abomination for some people. Not worthy of comment. Well, its no FRWL, that's for sure, but IMO it could hold its own against any genre film of 1985. And then some.(Ditto for DAD in 2002)
In effect, Bond movies are ultimately judged against each other and that is why there are people who will elevate GF to Citizen Kane status while at the same time relegate DAF to the Plan 9 From Outer Space Hall-Of-Shame.
Well, fellow Bond-fans, the gap between good and bad is not as pronounced as one thinks.
There are treasures to be found in EVERY bond saga...if one looks.
It comes down to this:
A Bond-fan should give a tip of the hat to EVERY Bond flick...even if its one at the bottom of the pack.
Like DAD.
Anything less is shocking. Positively shocking.
"When do you sleep, 007?"
"Never on the firm's time, sir."
Perhaps that makes me less of a Bond fan than others. That said, I will defend Moonraker to the bitter end. . .
Bond fans come in all shapes and sizes and everybody's opinions must be respected.
All I wanted to point out was that sometimes the trashing of a Bond flick (or Roger at times) requires a teaspoon of generosity from a Bond fan.
As for MR...I'm with you all the way.
"You missed, Mr. Bond."
"Did I? As you said, such good sport."
AVTAK has the dive from the Eiffel Tower.
OP has the banister scene---and the obviously fake bed of rubber 'nails,' with the Indian fakir saying "Get off my bed!"*
MR has the centrifuge, and the fight in Vennini Glass.
They are all Bond films---and they all got us where we are today: the 22nd official Bond film in production, featuring The Best Bond Since ConneryTM :007)
* Okay, the bed of rubber nails isn't so special
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
That to me is what it comes down to as the truth is, no Bond film is among my all-time least favourite films. There are films which have stressed me out so much I have vowed never to see them again, however these do not include any Bond films. I may 'hate' certain Bond films, but that is only when comparing them to other Bond films.
Big, I think it comes down to this. As this is a Bond site, everybody have an interest in the Bond films (or novels.) Expressing a dislike of a particular film is IMO not such a big deal, since it's Bond fans who are doing so (and like the films generally) rather than non-Bond fans who may not like any of the films.
That's not to say that we can't be critical. Being Bond fans I think means that we should have greater insight into the films than over moviegoers and we should hold the franchise to high standards. But I feel that sometimes that turns into shameless and pointless bashing. Every film has redeeming qualities and while we should have high standards and not be afraid to say if we don't like something, we should also be sure that we don't overlook the good qualities present in the films (and yes there are good qualities in EVERY Bond film).
I don't think anybody could blame North Koreans or South Koreans for being angry about the film. The fact that Bond ends up having sex in a Buddhist shrine is unbelievable and South Korea comes across as a poor American colony when it is in fact one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
The bad acting, poor dialogue and infantile ideas make this a genuinely poor film in my view. Not just in the context of the Bond series but in general terms.
You raise some good points. I often say even a bad Bond film has something in it you can enjoy. TMWTGG is my least favorite, but I've seen it multiple times. Now compare James Bond to other franchises, and it seems like every film series always has at least one entry that is too painful to watch. (Yes, Star Wars: Episode I, I'm looking at you.)
And as enjoyable as the first half is for DAD, there is simply no mathematical way for me to classify it as "the worst."
Then, we get to the Ice Palace....
We are then exposed to some of the worst dialouge, camera effects, special effects, and script sequences in a Bond film. Whatever was good about the plot gets canned when we revert back to big bad rich guy with a satellite and something to hide, and the characters are actually annoying. For me, Die Another Day in spite of the potential early on, reminds us all that bigger is not always better, and sometimes the best way to break with the familiar formula is not to make it over-the-top, but to break with it.
In that sense, Die Another Day is a fitting "end" to the first era of Bond films. It typifies the half-hearted attempts taken by most of the films in the series to show off some of the Fleming source material, as well as the rare gems that actually use the source material, and the disappointingly high amount of lemon films that abandoned it entirely. Its salute to the films preceding it also make the film a fitting end to an era of films that, with a few very notable exceptions, were never as much as they could be.
All I will say about DAD is that the only things I like about it are Brosnan's performance, the sword fight and the 'say goodbye to him for us' line.
The film as a whole is pretty insulting to the intelligence of the viewer (the constant reminder that the diamonds were African Conflict Diamonds, just in case the three-year-olds at the front of the cinema didn't catch it as an example). Like others have mentioned, for me it is a very poor film not just in terms of the Bond canon, but in terms of films more generally. Very poor writing, wooden acting, odd ideas woefully executed; the whole thing is a mess in my view. Nevertheless, there is always a nugget of gold in a Bond film and in Die Another Day that is the delectable Rosamund Pike. Gorgeous and sublime, she is the best aspect of the film despite some dodgy dialogue.
And I'm not sure about your Churchill sig, Lazenby. Here's another from the great man...
*I do not understand this sqeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes.*
Roger Moore 1927-2017
the Bond/Paris/Carver triangle. Elektra King, feeling betrayed by her father then trying to take revenge for it, and finally Bond betrayed by an MI-6 insider. If Die Another Day had focused on his pursuit of Zao and his investigation into who had betrayed him, instead of all the Sci-fi, dream mask, face changing, laser weapon in space nonsense, DAD could have been an enjoyable, exciting film.
I liked that Bond had been captured, held prisoner for more than a year, tortured, abandoned. It was a great start. If Zao had then become the focus of 007's pursuit and Moon/Graves had been left drowned/crushed, the film could have been something special.
Instead it became a bad video game.
Although Die Another Day was not the worst film in the franchise (Moonraker still holds that title IMO)it ranks near the bottom of the barrel.
Pierce Brosnan is a fine actor and he deserved better than this muck.
What did I think? Not as bad as I remember it being. Of course, my memories are probably partly clouded by all of the negativity I read on here about the film. It still falls in my bottom five films, probably more like bottom three, but despite this there are still good moments throughout. Everyone knows the poor elements: CGI, ice palace, etc. The reliance on gadgets was annoying, but the worst quality of the film was the use of all of these fancy sci-fi elements: icarus, face changing things, Graves little hideout complete with a ludicrous laser system, and that ridiculous suit Graves wears at the end. Also felt the film had a weak leading lady (though I did like Miranda Frost) and the villain was one of the worst of the series. But there were good moments. I enjoy all of David Arnold's scores for the films (could have done with a different title song for this one though), Brosnan's performance is excellent, the scene in the hotel as he walks in dripping and scruffy is classic, the attack inside the clinic is pretty entertaining, I actually didn't mind the abandoned station idea, and the sword fighting/fencing sequence was good. It is definitely one of the worst Bond films and it could have been much better BUT I was still entertained and actually had a pleasant time watching the film. Definitely fun if you put your reservations aside and just watch it mindlessly despite the poor climax.