Viewing Thread:
"Stop Killing the Villains"

Bond was better when he had Blofeld to deal with, and the threat of SPECTRE. Blofeld and his organisation had time to develop over a number of movies, and we knew what the threat was right away. Yeah there were all of the sub-divisions and plots he had to deal with - eg Goldfinger, but at least it was a proper threat. The worst recent example would have to be Tomorrow Never Dies, when our villain is a media chap. Ooh, scary. I can't help but think that the quality of the Bond movies would improve if SPECTRE still existed, sometihng consistent to tie the films together.

If you want to really see the problem with multiple villians though, with a new one for each movie, look no further than Star Wars. Darth Vader. Bad Guy in the first movie, gets blasted off into space. But he's okay, and back in the second, when we learn that he's actually Luke's father! Then in the third, there's redemption. What an arc! What a villain!

New movies, Darth Maul looks like he could be a fantastic villain for the trilogy. But he dies at the end of the first movie. Damn. But that's okay, because we've got Count Dooku (albeit in a rather confused role) he's bound to play a significant part in the next two movies. Yes, and he lives through the second. Only to die in the first scenes of the third movie. When we get General Grevious. A coughing robot. Where the hell did he come from? Oh, a cartoon series. Great. But if you haven't seen it it's just another bad guy with no past, no story, just a plotsticle.

I watched the X-Men the other day. The relationship between Professor X and Magneto is a fascinating aspect of the series. Whilst they have to work together in the second, it seems they'll be enemies again later on. What's more, a Magneto prequel is planned. So he has a backstory, and more importantly, he has a future.

One of the failing of the Batman series of the 90's was its constant killing of its bad guys. Fair enoguh when you've only got one to deal with, but by the time the turkey that was Batman and Robim arrived you had two new villains backstories to tell (and Arnie demanded an awful lot of screen time) don't you think if the bad guys lived to fight another day the battles between good and evil would mean a little more? I've yet to see the new Batman, but the focus isn't so much on the villains here anyway, is it? As it's more about Batman's beginning (funny that)

Maybe it's just me. Being a second child, I always had to play the bad guys. I had the decepticons. Skeletor and his crew. In play, I'd want them to get away, even if I didn't actually want my evil plots to succeed...

Doesn't it make more sense to let evil live to fight another day though? Learning the strengths and weaknesses, creating even greater battles? It's odd, especially in super-hero type movies where they like to leave it open for a sequel, that t's not through the nemesis? Does it say something about the world we live in today that evil has to be defeated? Must good always triumph in every single aspect? Can today's movie going public not live with the idea of the bad guy getting away, even if to make his downfall greater in the long run?

Why did you put Brosnan last?

RoJ wrote:
> Best to Worst
>
> Connery
> Brosnan
> Dalton
> Moore
> Lazenby

Pfft.

Connery
Moore
Dalton
Lazenby
Brosnan

Clazon wrote:
> I love people who love Dalton (like me) for this reason. There can be
> no doubting he was one of the best Bonds despite minimal screen time.

You know we obviously have to rank them now, don't you?

Best to Worst

Connery
Brosnan
Dalton
Moore
Lazenby

It's tight between Brosnan and Dalton, but Brosnan just pips it for me.

sorry to stray the topic Meka

Mute wrote:
> Villains have to die, it demonstates the inevitable triumph of GOod
> over Evil. And Bond films rock!!

True. It's biblical.

RoJ wrote:
> True. And Dalton brought back the seriousness and some darker
> elelments that Moore lacked with his flippant sexual jokes and feeble
> one liners, which were even more obvious in License to Kill.

I love people who love Dalton (like me) for this reason. There can be no doubting he was one of the best Bonds despite minimal screen time.

Villains have to die otherwise you get guff like Natural Born Killers. ;)

Villains have to die, it demonstates the inevitable triumph of GOod over Evil. And Bond films rock!!

Yeah it's a good bit, it's the ruthlessness combined with the humour that can work really well when it's done right.

Yeah, but FYEO they did tone down Moore's array of cheesy jokes. The Spy Who Loved me was a pretty good film as well, even though parts were complete naff like the nuclear explosions. And the ruthless dispatch of that little puggy git Sandor. Don't know why but it's one of my favourite parts of the film.
Bond: "Where's Fekkesh?"
Sandor, dangling over the edge of a tall building, holding on to Bond's tie: "Py-Pyramids!"
*Bond brushes Sandors arm off his tie and the henchman falls to his death*
Bond: "What a helpful chap"

Like I said I don't now why, but I quite enjoy that part.

The best villain is the English gangleader from Bulletproof Monk.