The World Is Not Enough

[Veronica]

You know what? TWINE could have been remarkable. I mean truly great-truly something. David Arnold actually wanted to put a song with the end credits that would represent the failed romance between Bond and Elektra. Of course the idea was probably abandoned once he saw the nauseating Chriatmas Jones ending ... with Bond and Elektra we could've had Bond and Vesper without the cringe-worthy dialogue and complete lack of chemistry. We could have had Bond and Tracy without only one lead pulling all the strings. Of course-this all would have been from Bond's side only. It's like they were afraid people wouldn't known it's a Bond movie if Bond doesn't end a movie with a chick. Ironically they made Bond unrecognisable a few years later. That's why the presence of Christmas Jones is so d**n infuriating. We get the sense that Bond truly fell for Elektra and the last moment between them is a stunning one. Of course the script pretends that never happened. . Add to that the fact that Christmas Jones is played by-Mrs.Charlie Sheen and well..you get the picture. Seriously-they could've ended the movie with some other "Bond" moment. And the whole thing would have been better. Now,instead of remembering Bond and Elektra and how tragic that was the first thing people remember is that big-breasted totty. After the final scene you don't get the feeling that you watched a Bond with with a sense of emotion and tragedy. It feels like you watch one of Roger Moore instalments. Elektra's death should also be looked as a tragedy as her name says so. She was as much as a victim as she was a villian. Her behaviour was a product of things she went through. Someone should mourn not necessarilly the person she became but the woman she never got to be. Instead? We get M and others watch the screen and "It's getting redder" line. I mean..Apted...

[Barry Niven]

Aside from my own personal reservations about TWINE, even I must concede that EON were still too conservative at that late point in their run to leave Bond without a "Final Girl" as his "reward" for a Job Well Done. At least until it got so gloomy with the Craggy that letting him have The Girl would only be cruel... to the Girl herself.

That said, on paper the Christmas Jones character would've been more tolerable if 1) she'd had a less "pun-y" name that drew attention to how ridiculous she was, 2) weren't so inappropriately dressed like a "Lara Croft" cosplay reject so she can't possibly be taken seriously as a Nuclear Physicist, and 3) cast a better actress who wasn't that horrible Denise Richards. Like, oh I dunno, her Starship Troopers' co-star Dina Meyer, who actually CAN act, IS beautiful, and is still a hell of a lot more charismatic and likeable than no-class Richards will ever be. Then maybe the juxtaposition between Elektra vs. Jones would've been more balanced, while giving the audience an actual heroine to root for to help Bond save the day instead of audibly groaning at Richards' simultaneously wooden and pissy line-readings. But that's just what I think.

[Veronica]

This is all true but still..there was absolutely no need for any other Bond girl in this movie than Elektra. I mean Marceau has beauty,charm and elegance coupled with talent. Richards has big breats(fake by the way) and...that's pretty much it. She is suitable for high school cheerleader not a nuclear scientist. Someone commented on imDb how "Bond girls should have class,not be late for it." No one can argue much about that. She was obviously cast because she was nailed as "next big thing" for about 5 seconds in Hollywood and searches for her on infant internet were probably off the freaking charts. To put her in the same movie as Oscar actress Judi Dench and Cesar actress Sophie Marceau...it's like Apted got stoned at one point. And then she was put in that Lara Croft clothes probably to distract(mostly teenage boys) from her terrible acting.

[Veronica]

Aside from my own personal reservations about TWINE, even I must concede that EON were still too conservative at that late point in their run to leave Bond without a "Final Girl" as his "reward" for a Job Well Done. At least until it got so gloomy with the Craggy that letting him have The Girl would only be cruel... to the Girl herself.

That said, on paper the Christmas Jones character would've been more tolerable if 1) she'd had a less "pun-y" name that drew attention to how ridiculous she was, 2) weren't so inappropriately dressed like a "Lara Croft" cosplay reject so she can't possibly be taken seriously as a Nuclear Physicist, and 3) cast a better actress who wasn't that horrible Denise Richards. Like, oh I dunno, her Starship Troopers' co-star Dina Meyer, who actually CAN act, IS beautiful, and is still a hell of a lot more charismatic and likeable than no-class Richards will ever be. Then maybe the juxtaposition between Elektra vs. Jones would've been more balanced, while giving the audience an actual heroine to root for to help Bond save the day instead of audibly groaning at Richards' simultaneously wooden and pissy line-readings. But that's just what I think.

And yes putting Craig with a girl would be,just like you said,cruel to the girl herself.. I read somewhere how they couldn't find an actress for Vesper because no one wanted to have Craig as a partner until Eva Green came up. I don't if that's true but

[Count_Lippe]

Great title The World Is Not Enough, the motto from OHMSS you know, I think such a title demanded a much more epic film than we got.

TWINE is very boring and slow in my opinion, too much tired Bond clichés (but not as much as TND or DAD), mediocre action scenes, and like all Pierce's films a lack of true Bondian style and atmosphere.

[Odessy]

Casino Royale having too much humor?W.H.A.T.? I don't think CR and humor can go in the same sentence.

This guy had absolutely no sense of humour himself, and thought that a Bond film should be completely devoid of humour, presumably so he could watch it in the cinema without being subjected to the sound of other people's laughter. He insisted that a humourless Bond would be truer to Fleming, and continued to do so no matter how many examples of humour in Fleming's books people presented as evidence to the contrary.

I would hazard a guess that Fleming based his novels more autobiographically than people actually imagine, even though they were set in a post WW2 world.

If you wish to understand why so many Bond novels feature Casinos and Monte Carlos then you should consult the book written by Nazi industrialist Fritz Thyssen, "I Paid Hitler" pub Farrar & Rhinehart with its account of Hitler enjoying the Casino life of Monte Carlos in 1940.

I think that whilst we view Bond films as entertainment, Fleming was struggling with post war censorship to tell an intensely personal story in fiction. For him it was not funny. Often it was thinly disguised autobiographical work.

[Kristatos]

I would hazard a guess that Fleming based his novels more autobiographically than people actually imagine, even though they were set in a post WW2 world.

If you wish to understand why so many Bond novels feature Casinos and Monte Carlos then you should consult the book written by Nazi industrialist Fritz Thyssen, "I Paid Hitler" pub Farrar & Rhinehart with its account of Hitler enjoying the Casino life of Monte Carlos in 1940.

I think that whilst we view Bond films as entertainment, Fleming was struggling with post war censorship to tell an intensely personal story in fiction. For him it was not funny. Often it was thinly disguised autobiographical work.

People can find humour even in personal, autobiographical works. It's an interesting perspective that you present, but it's possible that you attach too much significance to this one aspect of Fleming and his work. I don't doubt that there is some truth to it, but it's easy once you stumble across a theory like this to view everything through the prism of that theory. People are more complicated than that.