This is the seventeenth James Bond movie and the first movie I ever saw as a child. I'm actually agonizing between the subject and "Die, But Not Now," but the data about this event has gone into such long-term memory that you'll have to retrieve it layer by layer to recover it. My memory is no longer that far. In this film, Timothy Dalton was replaced by Pierce Brosnan and it is believed that he is closer to the canonical image played by Sean Connery. He has a strong masculine beginning and a gentlemanly charm. And a sense of danger. I have made a new acquaintance and am ready to share with you my impressions of what I saw and some thoughts about this tape. Prepare snacks and drinks, we begin our analysis.
A narrative criterion or narrative. James Bond travels to Russia in search of terrorists who seized control of the new secret weapon complex "Golden Eye". Designed to destroy any computer equipment, in the hands of the villains, these weapons become a powerful tool to pressure the governments of economically developed countries. During this extremely dangerous mission, Bond has to fly an invisible helicopter, blow up an armored train, make a fascinating trip in a tank in St. Petersburg and, of course, seduce a couple of long-legged beauties. As the villain here again offered our compatriots, playing their political games, and seeking to undermine the balance of “American democracy”. Without immersion in the cranberry set of characters and meanings, of course, did not do. But you should not expect anything different from classic Bond movies. As partners of Bond are an accomplice of terrorists, loves money and luxury, as well as a programmer of one of the abandoned stations. Both are beautiful. Just two different types – Femme Fatale and a lady in trouble, accompanying the hero and masculine manifestations of the main character. The plot is simple, but not to primitive. This film is far from literary.
Visual criterion or technical support of the tape. In this part, the film successfully combines dynamics and conversations that do not create a sense of tempo overload, pressing on consciousness. Operator Phil Mayhew works well with the camera, enough to maintain the quality of the picture, there are both hits on faces in dialogues, and angles from the side and from behind. Also note the staging of dynamic scenes and the use of visual effects such as explosions and chases. During the chase, you can see several beautiful views of St. Petersburg, a couple of stop frames from the screensaver can become the design of the desktop of your devices, with the proper level of fanaticism. The composer on the tape was Eric Serra, the author of music for Leon and the Fifth Element. Here melodies act as the main means of emphasizing and creating an atmosphere, few scenes at all without them. The song from the opening traditionally claims to be a hit, could compete if it hit the Oscar longlist for this part. But, whether the academics were too strict at the time, or the tape is not deep enough for this. You can guess for as long as you want. I'll also celebrate the sound. There is also a director with a cameraman. And at the level of balance and all tracks, everything is acceptable. The effects do not overlap the dialogues, acting in the right synchrony.
Acting can be a pleasure. Pierce Brosnan got into Bond's sense of self well. The actor has masculinity of the kind that does not involve pumped limbs and press cubes. The ability to love and present themselves in society should also be highly valued. Which Brosnan demonstrates with his appearance. The voice of Vladimir Antonik falls into this character plan, and the merger with Brosnan took place. Sean Bean is here in a typical role, but exists in it organically. I watched the film in the version where it was written by Peter Glanz, no less organic than Vladimir Gerasimov, who is accustomed to hear in it. Which I think is more appropriate. But there was no discrepancy between my voice and appearance, so I also liked it. Isabella Skorupko and Famke Janssen play female characters here, the actresses play well. And the selection of votes is also successful. Lyubov Germanov and Olga Zubkova perfectly synchronized with the actresses, completing the image of their characters for the domestic audience. The first appearance in the series Judy Dench was successful. It's not much, but it's good.
In front of us is a good action adventure about bad Russians and villainous villain. Disclosure of it is not ideal, but fits into the general concept of Bond films. Of luck - acting, musical accompaniment, the main idea. I advise you to meet, the tape is able to like. All health, peace and good cinema.
After License to Kill, 6 years have passed – enough break in the franchise to give a completely updated Bond in the middle of the new decade. The painting seems to have found a second wind. Despite the classic plot, Pierce Brosnan added dynamics and spurred excitement. It was a pleasure to watch 007. The matter is in modern (in 1995) shooting technologies, and in a more brutal rating, and in a rich cast - the picture, if it loses somewhere according to the scheme of the action movie, then wins by the characters.
The enemy is the USSR again. Even in 1995, when for almost 4 years, as outside the window of the Russian Federation, British intelligence is fighting Hammer and Sickle. The picture introduces the viewer to Russian spies-officers and a rather convincing employee for persuasion. Spy action includes interaction with enemies, and the female power of seduction, and personality change (as Tom Cruise did a year later in his debut Mission: Impossible).
Famke Jansen shows not only a double game with a change of sides, but also an amazing scene of murder in a fit of passion. Brosnan faces an unknown (once again) threat in the face of a secret leader of antagonists operating through the Russian military. The tape does not come up with new tricks and mysterious plans, as did the line with Daniel Craig, but just took the old tricks of Sean Connery and Roger Moore, placing in a different reality, but it was enough to look at Bond differently.
New gadgets from Kew please the eye, and the attack on a secret station in the USSR allows you to guess about betrayal. In addition, the new female heroine is, by coincidence, the only one who can help James. The film temptingly leads the viewer through the USSR, allowing the agent to plunge into the Russian mentality (in the understanding of Great Britain, of course). Yes, even Robbie Coltrane, unfortunately recently left us, plays a Russian mafia, who is associated with Bond not very pleasant past.
Yes, the villains are Russians, but the picture does not denigrate our fatherland, but brings out traitors since the Cold War to the clean water, so that in the gloomy and arthouse scenery – an abandoned amusement park with sculptures of the leaders of Russia – suddenly imagine the face of the villain. On the one hand – too early to reveal the identity, on the other hand – the episode connects the main plot with the dramatic exposure.
Chasing on different modes of transport, an attack by hackers and “IT people” and James Bond trying to save the world. Pierce Brosnan doesn’t look like an energetic agent, so it’s amazing how 007 performs various stunts and risks his life, from a hidden helicopter to a tank chase through the streets of the capital. The tape constantly throws Bond either into the hands of enemies or leaves to die in the most amazing locations – too many branches and movement for a linear plot. Director Martin Campbell plays the film, showing at once all the “blows” of the franchise and intriguing the viewer.
It turned out well and nice, but it’s still Bond, who, in the most dangerous situations, can still save the world and charm a key female character. The picture is moderately cruel, perfectly matches the villain to the hero, sexy at the expense of the female caste (Famke Jansen a separate bow) and gives dynamics with intrigue. For the conveyor "bondiana" is a great return to service. Space satellites "Petya" and "Misha" - the original name, but being in the USSR, can already make less funny inscriptions.
In the early 1990s, after a long break associated with the settlement of legal disputes and the transfer of power over EON Productions, Albert Broccoli and his daughter Barbara and stepson Michael Wilson resumed work on Bondiana. However, during that time, the performer of the role of James Bond Timothy Dalton did not wait for his third film (the working title of which was “Lady’s Property”) and left the franchise without mutual claims. Broccoli and Wilson decided not to stop with just one new Bond and conducted a research almost all the key characters of the franchise with the exception of only Q performed by Desmond Llewelyn, the only actor from the old guard, who starred in almost all the Bond films (except “Doctor No” and “Live and Let Die”). So for Bond began a new era, where the agent 007 played the Irishman Pierce Brosnan.
Ironically, fate had previously brought Brosnan with the Bond. Once he met Albert Broccoli thanks to his wife - actress Cassandra Harris, who played Countess Liesl in "For Your Eyes Only". Then, when a few years later there was a need to look for a replacement for the aged Roger Moore, Pierce was remembered and invited to audition (in which he showed himself very well). Brosnan could become the new Bond back in 1987. However, the creators of the series Remington Steel, where Pierce was filming at that time, extended the show for another season, thereby disrupting the deal between him and Broccoli, and Timothy Dalton got the role of 007. And although I really like Bond-Dalton, it is Pierce Brosnan that I can confidently call one of the best (along with Sean Connery) performers of 007, since Dalton’s seriousness, Moore’s humor and Connery’s charisma coexist equally in him.
Although feminization has always been about bonding (there were a lot of girls in 007 who could stand up for themselves), now for the first time the boss of Bond was a woman. This, too, was an allusion to modernity, as Stella Rimington became head of British counterintelligence MI5 in 1992. And, by the way, actress Judy Dench in the role of M outwardly even resembled her.
The third new face of the franchise was the actress Samantha Bond, who played the secretary M - Miss Moneypenny. Well, despite the sporadic appearance, at least this woman was with character (which was lacking in the previous performer).
As for the plot, “Golden Eye” turned out to be a rather primitive action movie of the 90s, where Bond confronts Russian terrorists who stole a super-secret weapon and now threaten the security of the UK. Of the merits, I would note first of all the main antagonist - the head of the criminal syndicate nicknamed "Janus". Here, the motivation of the villain is quite clear and refers to real historical events half a century ago, justifying his actions, and Janus himself came out as an opponent to become Bond: he shoots well and is able to go hand-to-hand (practically none of Bond’s opponents in early films had such properties). Things are much worse with other villains (and in general with the image of Russia in the film). So, the secondary enemies of 007 will be the big military rank of the Urums (in whose career growth it is very difficult to believe that after the incident in the prologue of the film, he managed to jump from colonels to colonels-general) and the outrageous sadist Ksenia Onatopp (whose image is very reminiscent of the character Fatima Blanche from the unofficial Bond film “Never Say Never”).
Honestly, in terms of “cranberries” this film managed to surpass even “Sparks from the eyes”. There are rather strange Russian names of the characters, and Russian soldiers in Soviet uniforms in the mid-1990s, and space satellites “Petya” and “Misha”, and a meeting of the Government of the Russian Federation in the Winter Palace of St. Petersburg (although this building has long been used only as a museum). And in one of the scenes Bond meets a contact from the CIA in a hat-hushanka and on a blue faulty Zaporozhye, which can be repaired with a sledgehammer strike. By the way, the role of this ally was played by someone other than Joe Don Baker, the performer of Whittaker in Sparks from the Eyes. Well, as an ally, Baker looked more convincing than the villain in the film with Dalton.
I was not impressed by Eric Serra's work as a composer. Yes, Eric himself is quite a good professional in his field (and for the mass audience he is remembered as a composer who worked with Luc Besson). But here his tracks, his arrangement of the Bond theme, his song in the final credits - nothing. But the title song performed by Tina Turner seemed to me chic - that's where it turned out beautifully, powerfully, and in a Bond way.
Overall, despite some weaknesses based on my taste, I can’t call Golden Eye a bad movie. This is the Bond we love, who has managed to fit into the new decade. Chic villain, and no less hot Bond girl (by the way, the Russian programmer was played by the Polish Isabella Skorupko), the dizzying chase of Bond on a tank on St. Petersburg (where it is difficult to distinguish the real city from the pavilion), tricks, explosions. In short, it was a worthy revival of the franchise.
... In 'coved' time, while once again postponed the long-awaited premiere of the last part of the Bond for Daniel Craig, why not take, and not look at the previous parts of the cult franchise. In addition, in the case when except for one of the parts with the participation of Timothy Dalton, and all the films with Craig, more Bond you have never seen! . .
... and if you start with the famous Swiss bridge from ' Taxi 3', the initial casino in Monaco, the chase of the serpentine and the local port, the final romance on the ocean coast, flights over Puerto Rico, beautiful moments of seduction of women (without vulgarity and erotica), as well as a light pleasant unstressed humor - which is not in the films with Craig, and finally, the final song of Eric Serra, played clearly in plus the picture, then caricature Russia, pavilion locations, another & #39; as an interesting film, as a 75 percent and an interesting film, and an interesting film, which could be a single and a good one-80 percent.
It is no secret that in the history of world cinema Hollywood (or Britain) filmed about Russia. The Soviet Union is brilliant only recent TV series ' Chernobyl' - a first-class thriller, where the Soviet Union resembles itself even more than in Soviet old films and Russian new ones. And from my previous sentence, it is absolutely clear that Bond in this case, too, failed. Including the bacchanalia with the tank that Pierce Brosnan did by dissecting in St. Petersburg (or Warsaw - I don't know where such a riot was filmed...), an eye similar to the colorful madness of the sixth & #39; Furious & #39;, but bearded military in uniform, modern underground laboratories in God-forgotten northern points of the planet, armored trains, space satellites, monuments to Lenin and many other things that this frankly mass, fantasy and, sorry, despicuous film could fit into itself.
I have no questions for Brosnan, nor for any of the cast members. But shown in this way 'Russia' with its 'Russian', superbly noticeable understudy, scorching initial credits (where it immediately becomes clear - who the main antagonist of the tape and will soon be resurrected...). a bunch of boring chatter and instant death, little good action, lack of style and coolness (as in the last films with Craig) - what turned out is more like a half-adult morning with a clown for the near than a class first-class fighter spy.
'Mission Impossible' also not a perfect spy film, but there is much more common sense there and there are less outright blunders there than here in ' Golden Eye'.
The result seems to be good, in some places even very interesting, but annoying not so much the age of the film as that nonsense, namely, how it is shown and embodied about Russia. In truth, from the film of the cult franchise with the main bond of the Earth - expected much more. . .
After a six-year break, James Bond returned to the screens, though not performed by Timothy Dalton, but in the person of Pierce Brosnan, who by 1995 had already gained a certain fame after “The Lawnmower” and “Miss Doubtfire”. Dalton, after George Lazenby, became the second performer of the role of Agent 007, who had the opportunity to play the superagent of Her British Majesty less than others. If Lazenby appeared in only one picture, then Dalton was destined to play in two. Anyway, after the “License to kill” there was a lull, interrupted by Martin Campbell – the director, who for the first time in his career was entrusted with such a large project.
“Golden Eye” tells about the echoes of the “Cold War”, resulting in the corruption of the military of one of the countries (Russia) and their (military) desire to cash in on the latest developments of the defense industry of their state. At the very beginning, Bond and his partner work in the Russian rear, trying to blow up a chemical plant. Unforeseen circumstances make the operation almost a failure. After a while, Agent 007 is working on another case, in the course of which he first goes to the corrupt Russian military, then to the Russian mafia, and then discovers the terrible plans for Britain villains to collapse the economy of this island country. Challenge accepted! And Bond, enlisting the support of a charming assistant, again goes to save the world!
Despite the fact that it was already in the mid-90s, the franchise has not lost the touch of naivety and implausibility inherent in it in the first couple of decades of Bond’s existence. One such episode was the scene of the pursuit through the streets of Leningrad, when Bond chased down villains in a Russian tank (here you can also question the ability of Agent 007 to manage our military equipment) and tore down walls and houses built as if without cement. At the same time, I do not doubt that this scene looked very spectacular and certainly the names of the Golden Eye were once watched by the creators of Fast and Furious and decided that their series of films had not yet been racing on tanks (or maybe they revised Tank Biathlon, who knows).
In terms of action saturation, GoldenEye not only supported the previous few films, but also developed their success. Here in almost every scene you expect something spectacular, and you get it. The plans of the villains look much larger than those that were. It is one thing to steal a satellite in order to use it for your own purposes (one of the very first Bond films), and quite another to steal a helicopter, then use it to rustle at a secret station in the Russian outback and only then bring it to its main goal. In other words, the villain in the film “Golden Eye” is presented not only well savvy technically, but also able to build multi-level combinations, like sophisticated chess players, calculating their actions a few steps ahead.
As I wrote above, “Golden Eye” was the first major project directed by Campbell, as well as the first for Brosnan in the role of Bond. But at the same time, it is impossible not to mention Isabella Skorupko, who played the Bond girl – Russian Natalia Fedorova, who worked at a secret base. For this actress, “GoldenEye” became a gateway to the world of big cinema (even if she did not stay there for a long time), and Campbell liked her game so much that he invited her to one of his next films – the mountaineering blockbuster “Vertical Limit”.
But look at you. I do not impose my opinion on anyone.
James Bond movies have always had a special relationship with history, geopolitics and the laws of physics. In those films where the main role was played by Pierce Brosnan, the relationship became particularly tense. And I'm not going to tell you if it hurt the franchise or it helped. Still, such a high degree of absurdity gives tapes a certain charm and most importantly makes them memorable. Here and here you probably do not remember the plot of the film, but how the USSR was depicted is unlikely to fade from memory.
And there's a surprisingly well-chosen cast. All the main characters are colorful, and the actors try to give a good game. From Pierce BrosnanBond I came out ambiguous. Outwardly, he really fits the role of the savior of the world and conqueror of women's hearts more than others. But the character himself became too straightforward, not serious, and the worst unprofessional, and this is being a super spy.
In general, the franchise really changes a lot with the arrival of each new actor for the lead role, and that’s probably for the best. Perhaps this is why it has been around for so many years.
Golden Eye (United Kingdom, United States) Agent 007 and number 5.
James Bond... Adventurous, determined, strong... He breathes unevenly to beautiful women, high-quality, expensive alcohol and gambling (when he works, he can afford it). Witty... With weapons in hand, it can be cold-blooded. He loves high-speed cars, with the usual “stuffing”. Beautiful, charming and always tries to dress with taste, thereby showing class, experience, the right approach to business. Commander of the Royal Navy, with a license to kill. And that says everything.
Hello..
In the huge Bondian (24 films) there are 6 special films, which are not so much the best, but present to our court the new agent 007. On trial, on possible sympathy, criticism or praise. In Dr. No, this is Sean Connery, in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, this is George Lazenby, in Live and Let Die, Roger Moore, in Sparks from the Eyes, Timothy Dalton, in Golden Eye, Pierce Brosnan, and in Casino Royale, Daniel Craig... I've written about the first four, Craig, several times. But not a word about Brosnan. Unfairly... We need to fix this...
So... The fifth James Bond, after the dramatic and expressive Timothy Dalton, was the beautiful and charismatic 42-year-old Irishman Pierce Brosnan. In fact, he could have become 007 agent in the second half of the 80s, immediately after Moore, as he received an official offer, but contractual obligations in another project did not allow him to do this and the role went to Dalton. However, justice prevailed and, after all the truths and untruths (between the last story with Timothy Dalton, titled License to Kill and Golden Eye with Brosnan - 6 years passed - the longest break in all Bond!), Pierce became the fifth James Bond. And how? Bright, fast, charismatic, with a serious and focused expression, a sharp look, intelligence, the ability to clearly assess the situation in non-standard positions, beautiful charming and charming (the latter, of course, for women, but since it is, then, not to emphasize the obvious, I can not), resourceful and witty. And it's all Brosnan. Pierce Brosnan ...
The Golden Eye is the 17th Bond movie. Pretty good... The tipping point seems to be. They say that the 90s have come and we, the creators of history, will emphasize this. The energetic and extreme appearance of Pierce, the well-coordinated, fitting song of Aunt Tina Turner, Russia, Peter’s pogroms (which cannot but cause a smile), riding in a non-standard vehicle, traitors (as many as two names I will not say, this will become clear when you see the film), Cuba, a serious girl, romance, the finale ... Not bad, but something is missing. And at the beginning of the film, even a bit too much is seen.
But a lot is brightened up by good acting. Here is what I mean...
Sean Bean is good. How much you do not look at him, no matter what roles he played, and the guy everywhere will make you pay attention.
"The booth is closing! What about the last one?
"For England, James?"
And my favorite (especially in this movie):
“Oh, please spare me Freud. I’m not asking if Martini’s Vodka helps drown out the cries of the people you killed. And do you find forgiveness in the arms of all these women, for those whom you could not protect?
That's brilliant.
And the sadistic villain Famke Janssen? In the film, she is Xenia Onatopp. By the way, I was sorry for something, but it's so... personal, for the brand, so to speak, Bond. I have no complaints about the game.
Judy Dench's first appearance (as M) stands out. They say that he is still an inexperienced leader, but with an eye, foresight, ability and ability to adapt. It will show you more...
It was again a pleasure to see the old, wise Q (actor Desmond Llewelyn, or in the English manner: "Llewellyn", as it is not the letter "v", but "w" - "Llewelyn"). From the second film, From Russia With Love, in 1963, to the third with Brosnan, in 1999, The World Is Not Enough, he was the unchanging, eternal Q (where Q is the code name for the military rank of Cuotemaste or Quartermaster, Quartermaster, and the man himself, Major Jeffrey Butroyt, head of the British Secret Service Research Center, develops and supplies his employees with all kinds of innovative, unusual devices for complex and dangerous operations). It is a pity that the actor tragically died in a car accident. The kingdom of heaven to him. And good remembrance throughout Bondian.
Together with Brosnan for the first time appeared on the screen and the new Miss Moneypenny (Samantha Bond). Pretty girl. It catches your eye. And there's something funny about her... Looking ahead, she will spend the entire cycle with the fifth Bond. I mean, all four movies... Hmm. Persistence. Appreciate...
About Natalia Fedorovna Simonova (she is exactly Simonova, not Semyonova - this is even in the credits!) And the movie says. Although she calls herself Semenova. Ay-yay-yay! Not agreed. Either the credits were wrong, or the script, or the actress confused. And the actress - Isabella Skorupko - I note that not quite in my taste, which is why I looked at her indifferently. But it wasn't about the game... Not bad, Isabella, not bad. However, it was a little annoying that she unfairly criticized Bond, since, being in exactly the same deplorable position as she, he listened to unconstructive psychic attacks. The kid didn't deserve that kind of push. Really, he's for it... Something that unfortunately didn't happen to the sadistic villain. But the fact remains: the lady is a stitch or a splinter.
It was a pleasure to see Hagrid until the very first Harry Potter. Robbie Coltrane is good without a beard. I liked how he portrayed Valentin Dmitrievich Zhukovsky. Included..
Of the director, I can say that... Probably nothing... Stop! It's New Zealander Martin Campbell! “The Mask of Zorro” with Banderas, Catherine Zeta-Jones and another Bond movie: “Casino Royale” with Craig! Well, then I note that here he (in "Golden Eye"), as he should have trained and, 10 years later, gave out a masterpiece.
That's it. Although there were disadvantages, but the rating is still high, as I believe that this film can be seen more than once. Which I did, a few years later, before I sat down and wrote about it.
8 out of 10
Russia is now a country of great opportunities.
Does everyone now have a Ferari in their garage?
After six years of silence and in fact at another era, when the Cold War has sunk into the past and the topic of Western and Communist confrontation was no longer relevant, the legendary franchise has revived! After many years, a new Bond painting appeared. It was the seventeenth super-fighter, the Golden Eye. Which also returned the film studios - the producers of "Bondiana" - "United Artistes" and "Metro - Goldwin - Mayer" in the "big game" on the Hollywood monopoly. For a long time did not shoot such large-scale films, once the largest players of the film market, in the fold collected, so to speak, scraping through the clutches quite solid for a big blockbuster budget - almost $ 60 million. This money was enough to attract famous performers to the production, to assemble a first-class film crew and professional stunt scene directors, as well as an integral part of Hollywood, entertainment cinema - computer graphics. The director of the film was appointed at that time by an unknown director Martin Campbell, who brilliantly made a “reboot” of the cult cinema – a series on which more than one generation of viewers grew up!
The script for the new Bond was handled by Bruce Ferstein and Michael France. Since there was no literary source, since the spy novels of Ian Flaming were already all filmed. The authors of the script had to come up with a completely original story from scratch. They composed a fascinating, filled with selective action with car and helicopter tricks, explosions and shootouts, spectacular chases and an excellent, entertaining drama story. In which they tried to collect all the stamps previously featured in Bondian. From the “evil” Russians and their first-class hackers, computer technologies of secret space weapons – about which in modern times one can only dream, an invincible secret agent – to the easy escaping from the chase and able to get out of any hopeless situation, beautiful and dangerous girls and to a terrorist threat on a global scale! But there was no blunt imitation of his colleagues' previous works, only a tribute and some ironic wink at Ian Flaming's rich literary legacy. Who, we can say with confidence - a new chapter on the adventures of the British agent, certainly would have liked!
The plot tells how a dangerous criminal group, with great connections and means, deployed in the post-Soviet space, plots a large-scale terrorist operation. About which the famous special agent from MI-6 is instructed to find out everything, who is immediately sent to Russia by his superiors. While it is known only that at the presentation of the latest combat helicopter, developed by a certain Union of European states, which is held in France by unknown military mercenaries or saboteurs, this same helicopter was hijacked during a demonstration in front of the world media. Traces of it lead to Russia, where in the Siberian region, on the supposedly long-abandoned meteorological station — recently there was an accident. James Bond knows that there was a secret base, which housed equipment to control a space combat satellite, which has a weapon of great power to destroy electrical communications, called the Golden Eye. To launch which Russia, according to MI-6, has no means. During the accident at the station survived the programmer Natalia, who is trying to eliminate the corrupt military of her native country, which, according to her, is involved in the destruction of the “Severnaya” – its duty station. Arriving in the cultural capital of Russia – St. Petersburg, James Bond understands that behind the lawlessness of General Urumov is someone more influential. And it turns out to be a certain "Janus" - a meeting with which 007 wants to organize in order to understand the ultimate goal of this large-scale, multi-stage operation.
A beautiful ensemble is assembled, consisting of actors who are international: Isabella Skorupko (Natalia), Sean Bean (Alec is a former agent 006), Gottfried Jon (General Urumov), Cheki Kario (Russian Defense Minister Mishkin), Judy Dench (M), Famke Jansen (Xenia Onatoppp), Robbie Coltrane (former "gebeshnik" Zhukovsky), Joe Don Baker (CIA Agent Jack) and the old - the good Desmond Levelyn (Kew), as well as Miss Mannishaya Fanny, speaking. A vivid image of Alan Cumming (hacker and programmer Boris Grishchenko). The main role of the superagent James Bond was entrusted to the young Pierce Brosnan, who had already been very active and quite famous since the mid-80s and had several notable hits in his career - for example, the fantastic thriller "Lazon Mower" or the detective "Night Watch". But, of course, the role of 007 turned this handsome brunette into a world-class superstar, opening the way to more ambitious Hollywood projects (for example, the film – the disaster “Dante Peak”). The new James Bond performer was so liked by all the audience and especially the audience that he held on to his post for 7 years. Until then, until the “Bondiana” again went silent in anticipation of another “reset”.
And for me personally, Golden Eye is the discovery of Bond, because my childhood was in the early '90s, and the very first Bond movie I saw was Martin Campbell. Therefore, the image of James Bond - agent 007, I strongly associate with Pierce Brosnan. Who, with all due respect to his predecessors, Sean Connery, George Lazenby and Roger Moore, as well as his successor Daniel Craig, I consider the best performers of the role of Her Majesty’s agent. As well as the film itself – which stands out for me among others – varying degrees of success of the Bond paintings.
The cameraman of the picture Phil Peyo was able to shoot the amazing scenes of cool action. Bond's jump with a cable made at a water power plant in the very prologue of the picture, or his way of catching up with the plane while falling after him on a motorcycle. What are at least the footage of the legendary car chase through the streets of St. Petersburg, when 007 is chasing a black Volga with General Urumov - on a tank, pressing the tracks, trying to prevent him from ment "Zhiguli" and military "Wasiki"! And the scene of the final fight of Bond and his former friend, which unfolds on a giant, moving antenna - with the help of which the terrorists intend to bring a Russian combat satellite to England!? This is a real master class, not only in the production and shooting of complex action, but also a masterful compilation of real and "drawn" by the computer episodes! The soundtrack was composed of compositions by Bono, Edge, and the composer of the film was Eric Serra. Specially written for the credits in the prologue, the song "Golden Eye" is performed by Tina Turner herself. The efforts of the authors were rewarded with high ratings of critics and viewers, as well as 360 million dollars – which the tape earned at the global box office.
Goldeneye I found his weakness… Goldeneye he`ll do what I please… Goldeneye no time for sweetness…
Another review on the results of the outgoing year. If last year was a spy for me, this one belonged entirely to one agent. Agent 007 James Bond. I've seen almost every movie about a famous spy. But I want to tell you about the movie where I first saw James. I can’t remember why the choice fell on him, but my acquaintance with the famous franchise began with the film “Golden Eye”.
While investigating the kidnapping of a new Tiger stealth plane, James Bond travels to Russia. There he learns about the existence of a secret Soviet object called the Golden Eye - two satellites that create powerful electromagnetic pulses that can both destroy information from digital media and cause mass destruction. Bond understands that someone is planning to use this weapon. In an attempt to uncover the identity of a secret enemy, James Bond must confront former Soviet scouts, drive a stolen tank through the streets of St. Petersburg, and remember the events of nine years ago and understand how they affect the present.
I first saw Golden Eye when I was 13 or 14 years old. Then I experienced a passion for a variety of action films and action films. So I watched the movie with passion. It was a dynamic, action-packed action movie, with interesting heroes, battle scenes, a good story. Now, after watching the lion's share of all Bond films, you involuntarily compare what was and what is happening now. I understand why many critics have called Golden Eye a reboot of the franchise. From the first frame, the viewer is immediately tuned to a completely different version of the development of events. And the reason is clear: the development of special effects and new trends in the cinema of the 90s prompted the creators to completely change the dynamics of the film. Golden Eye develops much faster than the previous parts, it contains more action scenes, shootouts, chases and hand-to-hand combat. The scene with the tank, which drives through the streets of St. Petersburg, ruined everything in its path – this I have never seen in the movies. The special effects are also pleasing, which now look more realistic and exciting. Also, I first saw the film from the director Martin Campbell, who will later shoot an adventure dilogy about the hero of the cloak and swords of Zorro and my favorite Bond film – Casino Royale!
For a long time, my only Bond was the incomparable Pier Brosnan. But he was great in the image of the famous agent 007. For experienced fans of the franchise, all the main features of Bond were preserved - a love for card games, a preference for vodka with a martini, the ability to instantly charm girls. In addition, he becomes an excellent field agent who can withstand an entire army of the enemy, shoots from various types of weapons and controls all types of equipment.
For a long time, I thought M, the head of British intelligence, was originally a female role. I was so impressed with Judy Dench's game. She plays a firm and unwavering head of MI6, who will not tolerate doubts in her own account, will not be condescending to the various antics of 007, but highly values his professional skills and knows that he can be entrusted with the execution of a dangerous mission.
The antagonists of the film also showed themselves well. Sean Bean in the role of agent Alec Trevelyan, who is eager to avenge the sins of the past, is perfectly opposed to Bond - I really like such a villain who is practically not inferior to the main character and even surpasses him in many ways ... Famka Janssen played a fatal woman, former test pilot Ksenia Onatoppp - a deadly beauty who will bring to the grave more than one man. In every way. The trio of villains includes Colonel General Urumov (Gotfried Jon), also a double agent in the Russian armed forces.
The film retained all the important elements of Bond: the role of the Bond girl was performed by the actress Isabella Skorupko - she played the programmer Natalia Simonova, who helps James find the Golden Eye. Also there is Miss Moneypenny - she was played by Samantha Bond - who still flirts unsuccessfully with James, and Q (Desmond Llewellyn), who supplies Bond with the latest gadgets.
Separately, I want to talk about the title song "GoldenEye" - it captivated me from the first minute. The captivating, enchanting, delightful composition performed by Tina Turner has been one of my favorite songs for over 10 years. And after reading the other films of the franchise - I will call it one of the best songs of Bond!
I discovered the incredible world of the famous 007 agent after the movie Golden Eye. Since then, James Bond has been one of my favorite movie heroes, and Golden Eye is one of the best Bond movies. Rating the film at
It's going to be a story about not loving James Bond. It will surprise you.
I don’t like James Bond, but at the time of writing this review, there are 24 movies out. And, yes, I've seen them all. Ask “why?” if I don’t like it. I don't know. I’ve never said that Bond movies are bad, they just don’t touch me, I don’t like the character or the plot, except that, as I said, a lot of Bond movies are visually beautiful. You bet! It was not only in England that the shooting took place.
I’ve written about those artists who played before Roger Moore, so I’ll tell you how the franchise rolled on. In the mid-80s, Bond, or rather the producers realized that now begins the era of cool action films, and, of course, as it happened with the same “Munraker”, they decided to change the style of Bond (even Roger Moore, at a fairly serious age, was able to touch this time with the film “View to kill”). Later came Timothy Dalton, a very serious actor in terms of his acting abilities and with him released 2 films. Some think it's bad, some think it's the best, as usual. But everyone agrees that Bond became more serious, less ironic, and the plots became less fantastic. To each his own, I won't argue. I will write about Brosnan before the conclusion at the end of the review. Afterwards, everyone realized that the Pierce movies were no longer rolling and decided to reboot the franchise by inviting a new Bond in Craig’s Face. I will not argue, again, the worst or the best, I will only say that Casino Royale (again at the time of writing the review) has a rating 8(!) on the IMDB website, the best among all Bond films. There are many reasons for this, but I will not describe them all, but I will say that this is a rare case when a highly regarded film coincides with my opinion. I do think Casino Royale is the best Bond movie, but it’s not my favorite. Because I don't like James Bond.
Plot. Let me get to the point. "Golden Eye" will always be scolded for its fierce "cranberry". I will not blame him for this, but, indeed, the creators of Bond have a strange attitude towards our nation. Otherwise, who needs a Bond story? Yes, the plot is important to me, but when I watch films about this character, I do not expect anything twisted and philosophical. The plot here is quite bad, both in terms of the same attitude towards Russia and in general nothing special. It’s just that the Russians have seized deadly weapons and are now threatening. And even Bond catches up with the flying plane down, manages to take off on it, ride a tank on St. Petersburg.
Directing. Martin Campbell. Probably one of the best directors of our time. He made a little, to be honest, movies. However, for Bond – two, with an interval of 10 years! And he made that wonderful picture of Casino Royale that I talked about in the prologue. And I really understand that both there and here, you need to take off your hat in front of him. If anyone drags this film, so first of all the director, otherwise with this plot, the films would become a second-rate action movie, and he was known only by the fact that this is the first film with Brosnan. And it’s also a funny fact that Campbell, acting as director both times in the franchise, worked on the first films for actors who played Bond. But that doesn't change my attitude towards James.
Cinematography. I honestly have nothing to say about it. It's normal. Yes, there are beautiful views of different countries. The camera is not twitching, there are no jumps in the frame. It's nice to watch.
Music. One of the best compositions performed by Tina Turner in the entire franchise, written by the soloist and guitarist of the legendary band U2. Is there anything else you need? Not for me. I don’t like Bond though.
Actors. There's one more thing about this movie. Pierce Brosnan, as many people know, has long dreamed of playing 007. And how great he played. He took in all the best of past Bonds and he did very well. Especially his jokes, it's worth watching. In general, everyone is 5+. I won’t even describe it, it’s a long time, but the actors here played just fine!
If it weren’t for the actors and the director, this movie would probably be even worse than not. However, again comparing the ratings of all 4 films with Brosnan, I agree again. “Golden Eye” is good. Whether fans of the franchise like it — I don’t know. The average viewer, too, probably spit, because of the “cranberry”. But for me there are great heroes, harsh action, and the whole film is interesting to me, not so exciting, but interesting. About the next three films performed by Pierce Brosnan, I can not say so. There seems to be action in them, and the plot is wiser, but some soulless are just boring, but I think those who love the hero will like it. There was an attempt to also pull out on the direction “Die, but not now”, but alone the director could not pull out such a bad plot and the actors’ play.
I don’t like James Bond, but I like this movie. Sometimes I don't know why. It’s up to you to watch or not to watch. In my opinion: one of the best Bond movies, at least of those with Pierce Brosnan, for sure. Personally, I would add it to my collection, although... you know.
P.S. Vladimir Antonik, who duplicated Brosan in this film in the program "Legends of Dubbing" noticed that he after "Golden Eye" was not so interested in playing Bond. And, you know, it is obvious and I agree with him, so, at least for the sake of it, it is worth a look.
About how Bond once again saved the planet from Russian evil.
James Bond, the hero of books, movies and video games, went on his seventeenth film assignment in 1995. He must find the “Golden Eye” – a powerful paralyzer of everything electronic, which will help terrorists gain power over the world.
The 80 millionth Bond of the 95-year-old model appears to us for the first time in a computer, not a cardboard gun muzzle. The film has a more modern (albeit outdated) look, has a lot of computer graphics, but is still true to good old models. The introductory scene with James’ flight is dynamic. On the plane he flew, on the plane too (above), without the plane tried, now it is the turn to fly for the plane. In the film, there are many beautiful explosions of everything and everything, aircraft crashes, but the coolest thing in the Golden Eye (and in general in the Bond perhaps) looks like Bond in a tank (not a metaphor) tearing defenseless Peter and beating police jiguli. A rather handsome British agent, behind the levers of an armored monster looks formidable and brutal.
To replace Timothy Dalton, came probably the most faithful vision of Sean Connery - Pierce Brosnan. It doesn't have Murov's buffoonery or Dalton's dignity. Brosnan fits into the image organically and walks along the line between a loving womanizer (Roger Moore by 90%) and a normal agent, a killer-spy-strategist (Timothy Dalton by 90%). The rest of the caste is fine. Sean Bean, who played the role of nebulous agent 006, is very good, Famke Janssen in the role of Xenia Onatopp (it is time to change the generator of Russian surnames from the time of the Connerevsky Bondiana) was slightly overplayed in some moments, although her acting skids fit well into the image of a 120% psychopath. Recognises Caesar from Asterix and Obelix. Desmond Llewelyn in his usual place, Judy Dench is finally a worthy replacement for Bernard Lee, and Samantha Bond (her character wants such a name) well, quite a bit worse than Lois Maxwell. I remember well another future Xman - Alan Cumming. Well, there are no crazy Russians, right?
The title song is performed by the notorious Tina Turner with the filing of the no less notorious Bono. "GoldenEye" is one of Bond's best tracks, and the best of Brosnan's movies. But I like Eric Serra's "Experience of Love" better.
When Sean Connery, George Lezenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig come together (it’s great that they’re all still alive), everyone will brag about their best film assignment. And Brosnan and Craig are sure to give the works of Martin Campbell as their best tapes about 007. “Golden Eye”, despite its cranberry, is a worthy transition of James Bond into the modern cinema world.
10 out of 10
A short stay of Timothy Dalton as the most famous special agent of all time, almost cost the long-running franchise life. The discontent of the audience with the cold-blooded Dalton, who took the baton from such mastodons as the perfect James Bond Sean Connery and the ironic seducer Roger Moore, catastrophically affected the box office and forced the producers to postpone further development of the story for an unknown period. After the release of License to Kill, Bondiana went through all possible circles of production hell. Fans of the franchise demanded a radical renewal of not only the image of James Bond, but also the tone of the series as a whole. The timid attempts to bring back Timothy Dalton were left behind for lack of prospects. It is time to present the world another variation of the image of the unforgettable 007, which took Pierce Brosnan, one of the most worthy candidates for the responsible post, who later managed to become the second best Bond, after Connery himself. As you know, you cannot escape fate. Brosnan had previously tried to serve Her Majesty, but lost the fight to Dalton. Producers could not twice refuse a promising performer, able to break a big jackpot. A frivolous return to the screens of the famous franchise a priori could not be. Large-scale resources were attracted to the creation of the next film of the series, “Big Eye”. In the director's chair was at that time not the most famous, but confident director Martin Campbell, for whom the adventures of Bond were to become a cherished pass to the big movie. Long years of waiting, an intriguing replacement for the lead actor, a grand scale and the largest production budget in Bond history could not pass by the attention of the audience rushing to theaters to look at what 007 appeared before us in the 90s, when the Evil Empire in the face of the collapsed Soviet Union disappeared into oblivion, and special effects reached unimaginable heights, allowing filmmakers to turn any dream into reality. In 1994, Golden Eye received a really warm reception, not least thanks to the charisma of Pierce Brosnan and the skill of storyteller Martin Campbell. At one time it was an exciting action, but over time it became clear that “Golden Eye” is not the best film of the Brosnan era, which has both its irrefutable advantages and tangible shortcomings.
The plot of the film takes place a few years after the main ideological adversary of the West, the Soviet Union broke up into several independent states. Borders and politics have become much more open, but the danger to world order has not passed. The mistakes of the past do not give rest to a calm future. This means that sooner or later you will have to answer for them. Her Majesty’s special agent, James Bond (Brosnan), is forced to face the most dangerous enemy who knows all the secrets of British intelligence from the inside. Considered dead, Bond’s old friend and colleague, Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean) rose from oblivion with the desire to plunge the world order into chaos. The collapse of the USSR allowed him to achieve considerable success in the planned business, and the corrupt military, smelling the smell of money and power, contributed to the fact that Trevelyan could not be stopped. However, when James Bond is taken on the case, it becomes clear that the villain will not escape punishment so easily. Never mind that James and Alec once had strong friendships. Bond remained faithful to the ideals of his native England, while Trevelyan put everything on the line to overthrow her from the pedestal of honor. Thus, before us, a duel of equals is played out, in which the winner is not the owner of technological gadgets, but only the strongest in spirit.
Martin Campbell had a difficult task to add a slightly outdated “bondian” fresh notes inherent in the films of the 90s, with which he coped quite digestible. Under his leadership, “Golden Eye” turned into an almost non-stop action, flavored with beautifully staged tricks and appropriate jokes, emphasizing the sophistication of the manners of James Bond, discouraged even in a hopeless situation. Pierce Brosnan from the first minutes of being in the frame looks almost exemplary Bond. The professionalism of the actor forces to close attention to the absurdity of some scenario turns and the improbability of certain scenes that migrated into the franchise from its extensive heritage. Pierce Brosnan is interesting to watch in any situation. When he starts a shootout, you do not think that he with a gun destroys hordes of enemies armed with machine guns. On the contrary, you try to assimilate his every move and admire the elegance with which he does the most unimaginable things. An important part of Bond’s adventures are also love victories over the weaker sex, which does not have a single opportunity to resist the all-conquering charm of 007. And in this part Brosnan is also distinguished by serious achievements, complementing the image to the classical canons of Ian Fleming.
Every James Bond movie should have an impressive villain who can fight a brave spy on equal terms, simultaneously competing with him for the audience’s attention. In the Reborn Bondian, one of the most famous actors of his generation, Sean Bean, took up such a difficult task, proving that he is not in vain invited to box office projects for serious roles. Possessing a mesmerizing negative charisma, Sean Bean turns her into the object of his appeal. The actor can play for the sides of good and evil with equal confidence, but in the memory of the audience will primarily remain his villains. And Alec Trevelyan occupies an honorable place among them. Attractive Briton, for the time being, hiding the true face, looks really frightening. No one can block his cold calculation. In addition, the creators of “Golden Eye” refused to excessive caricature of the image, presenting Trevelyan as a rival focused on the task without any theatrical techniques that distract him from his original intentions.
And yet Golden Eye has not escaped negative moments that look odd, at least. The image of one of the most talented actresses in Hollywood, Famke Janssen, was disfigured to the point of impossibility by the desire of the filmmakers to introduce at least one character from the villain camp, who has a mad temper and the makings of a psychopath. Ksenia Onatopp performed by Janssen looks outdated and completely optional heroine, whose place in the cage, but not on the field of the main action. It is possible that the creators expected to conquer the male audience with her animal sexuality, but as for me, they miscalculated, creating a parody, but not inspiring heroine. Martin Campbell could not escape the traditional stereotypes associated with the USSR. Eternal frosts, soldiers dressed in World War II uniforms, crumbling cars and weapons scattered on every corner remained an indestructible part of the “bond”, which made attempts to rethink the franchise were mixed.
In conclusion, I want to say that “Golden Eye” can actually be called quite a decent part of the adventures of the most famous British spy in history. No one can argue with the fact that the film could have turned out much better, but the desire to change the tone of the series has already appeared. And that's the point.
After watching “Golden Eye”, I realized that the genre of “fighter” is the most perishable. A film that is good for its time is hard to watch in twenty years. This statement fits into the Golden Eye.
He is ugly in everything: the gray emotionlessness of Bond (it seemed to me that Mr. Brosnan just walked around the set and was filmed), the most clichéd phrases, “sudden” plot moves and ... cranberries.
I understood why the Soviets were being cast as idiots in Rambo 3. I laughed from the heart of the stereotypes about Russia in Red Scorpion. The above films came out in the 80s, before the fall of the Curtain, and cranberries were in order then. But in 1995, to show the Evil Russian General, ready to extinguish his own subjects, the Fatal Russian Woman and stupid soldiers, is, sorry, anachronism. Although one scene is very impressive in the film.
Otherwise, this is an ordinary clichéd action movie - expensive cars, zero scratches on GG, "typical love". If you miss such a thrash, look.
It has been 5 years since the last film. License to Kill, unfortunately, did not become as prolific in terms of fees as the previous parts, and so the writers decided to return the series to its roots: evil terrorists, girls, Martinis, and everything that the audience loved Bond so much for a long time. Unfortunately, the former performer – Timothy Dalton – refused to continue to please the viewer in the image of a British spy, and therefore the fifth official performer – Pierce Brosnan – enters the arena.
In the seventeenth film, Bond is tasked with investigating the mysterious destruction of a Soviet station with a secret device called the Golden Eye, which is capable of depriving almost everything, including the British government. But in the way of a brave spy stands an army of Russian soldiers led by a corrupt general, but will this stop Bond on the way to his seemingly simple business?
Not for nothing at the beginning of the review, I mentioned that the series was decided to return to its roots. The creators again please the viewer with all the things for which the series was so loved, and all this is almost doubled. Chase? There is, and the most iconic of them - Bond rides through the streets of St. Petersburg in a tank, knocking down everything, including buildings and monuments - on his way. On the one hand, it looks stupid and schizophrenic, and on the other hand, it is quite entertaining. Shootouts? Oddly enough, there are a lot of shootings here, even more, compared to the previous parts - fans of militants will be pleased. However, those who are looking for common sense will find this delusional and fantastic, especially when Bond calmly shoots a dozen soldiers from a long distance, and they can not even get into the hero from close range. That would have worked with Schwarzenegger, but not with Bond. Yes, in the old movies it was similar, but not in such quantities as here.
The authors also delight in the endless cranberry, except that Russian soldiers do not drink vodka in liters.
The new actor in the role of Bond - Pierce Brosnan - was received quite warmly. I can even safely compare Bond Connery and Brosnan, and say that there was no special difference between them, except that Brosnan brazenly and very often makes cynical jokes, and at the same time continues to look like a lover and invincible superman. Old new Bond, no other way. I would also like to mention Sean Bean, and the deadly-psychotic Famke Janssen - it is painfully bright her character.
Golden Eye is a movie that returns to the good old Bond movies, a real gift for a fan of the character and the series as a whole. Quite a dynamic, nimble and cranberry action movie, which, despite the stupid moments, is quite pleasant to watch.
8 out of 10
Every person who has seen all or approximately all parts of the immortal “bond” has his own favorite or a couple of favorite parts, so we are arranged, in some episodes, according to some laws, something likes more than another and may even radically differ from the opinion of the majority. Personally, the Golden Eye is one of my favorite parts. I pay tribute to “Dr. Nou”, the first to create a unique look of “bond”, also consider fully created in the action mode “Goldfinger” an excellent picture, and the reboot from Sam Mendes is good in its own way, but still “Golden Eye”. Probably because this part was one of the first very suitable in spirit to the present day. Maybe if you were born earlier, when you would have already realized what “blackspace” is, or you would have become a spectator of “Lucasian” film fiction, then other parts of “Bond” would have fallen on your soul, but so far “Golden Eye” and Bond. James Bond.
After two films, Timothy Dalton dropped out of the project, they probably did not even have time to get used to it, but a flurry of criticism against him could not pass by the producers of the spy cycle. Liam Neeson, Mel Gibson, Sam Neil, Hugh Grant and Lambert Wilson claimed the vacancy, but in the end the character went to Pierce Brosnan. He had to understand that the viewer had become very picky and the right to make a mistake he simply did not have, otherwise his fate would have waited like George Lazenby suddenly left the “bondiana” after one, very unsuccessful part. And Pierce Brosnan didn't hit his face in the dirt. Of course, there were accusations that James Bond turned out to be a very sweet, powdered sugar, but here you will not understand the gentlemen of the audience, then the serious, collected Timothy Dalton did not fit, then the unbridled balcony Pierce Brosnan is not such. The time of Sean Connery and Roger Moore is gone, it should have been understood.
The producers of Golden Eye decided to shake up the franchise, changing not only the main actor and some important personalities. Here fans of the spy epic were waiting for a surprise: the great "M" became the great "M" - Bond mentor is now a woman. She played the role of Judy Dench and played just fine. With her, "M" has become (as a character) more weighty, the course of action depends on him more, and Bond no longer takes a swipe, everything is under the control of a confident and intelligent woman. The risky step turned out to be victorious: the viewer hurriedly took Judy Dench as a bold actress and a brave character, and it was possible to open champagne. There was a new Miss Moneypenny, played by Samantha Bond. Well, here the whole surname speaks for itself, maybe it is not better than the initial actress Lois Maxwell, but not worse, and, I emphasize, with such a name it was destined to be on the set of “bonds”.
Sean Bean? And Sean Bean, as always, is accustomed to such roles. He auditioned for the role of James Bond, but did not become one, still found himself in the spy saga, playing a former friend of Bond and also a special agent MI6. The truth is formed plot his character gave some profanation, what Cossacks, and here the Second World War. It's a pretty crazy idea. The girlfriend of the harsh days on the next task of a super spy, the Russian girl was played by the Polish Isabella Skorupko. Spectacular model, what can you say here, I think more than one man salivated about it. This has often happened in other Bond films. But one girl rarely does and there is also Dutch Famke Janssen, the future star of “Hostage” and “X-Men”. It was more like a model for fetishists, and the characteristics of her character spoke about masochistic inclinations. Well, someone does not like it, but that is the style of her character, so she is remembered.
"Golden Eye" has become clearly more technically equipped. A combination of stunt stunts along with computer graphics propelled Golden Eye, making the franchise entirely running alongside advanced film production. Looks bravo, in one breath, and Pierce Brosnan tried to make the appearance of the indomitable James Bond all the same adventurous-dazzling, a little familiar, but fearless, which he managed.
Films about the famous 007 agent James Bon sooner or later everyone will watch, because films about him are shot on a large scale and quality, and they are played by excellent Western movie stars. Golden Eye is a spectacular and beautiful action movie about 007, which turned out to be a rich, frenzied and bright film. In this part, we see James Bond on a mission in the USSR, and then a few years later in Russia. As always, he fights with the “bad guys” and saves the girl, but his main goal is the mysterious “golden eye”.
I have a double impression of this film. His positive qualities lie in the fact that the movie was really filmed spectacularly, and they did not spare money for it. The plot is twisted, and there are unexpected moments for the viewer. The cast pleases the eye: Pierce Brosnan plays Bond simply chic, and he is perfect for this famous role. Famke Janssen is very enthusiastic and clearly plays the main negative role, and her fatal and rabid heroine I remember most of all. And Judy Dench played top believably and cleanly. The negative qualities of this picture is that some of the shootings of the city of St. Petersburg, which took place in the studios, were implausible and felt false. There were fake houses and streets and some cars, which at that time did not exist in Russia. But of course, most of the viewers will not even notice, because everything was filmed quickly, and the footage changed. The fact that a Western agent can infiltrate a military base and then blow it up, in the Soviet Union, and then years later in Russia, and by the way, kill almost everyone and stay alive, fly off beautifully is pure, Western fantasy and dream. This could not be and cannot be one hundred percent, but in the West, directors like to dream that it is feasible. Apart from this stupid fact, which was presented to us so beautifully and spectacularly, the film is quite possible to watch. This movie used to look really cool. Now this part is no longer relevant and clearly feel the errors of the film. And so of course it is a beautiful, explosive and exhilarating, slightly slick action movie.
"There is no substitute"
Yes, of course, how much is written everywhere, how many interesting facts, stories and conjectures, but of course “Golden Eye” could be completely different with Timothy Dalton, and I would like to see this film, well, what can be done, and the original film is very good. Although for me personally there are some disadvantages, although by and large, these are minor faults.
First of all, in such a large-scale and good film, a terrible soundtrack, Serra is the worst composer in Bond, although tolerant. Secondly, Martin Campbell is certainly a strong director, but a very rare reformer, even before Casino Royale, the image of Bond and the universe of 007, has undergone not weak changes, although Judy Dench is still grateful to him, she clearly shares with Bernard Lee the title of the best M. Well, there is a feeling that something was written and conceived under the former actor, and in such moments you understand that Pierce does not suit at all.
But all these shortcomings overlap the fat advantages, including an excellent action and geography of filming, 007 on a tank in St. Petersburg, this is epochal. Campbell is already skilled at filming action scenes. An excellent cast including an excellent Sean Bean in the role of 006, Orumov, well, how good is Ksenia Sergeevna, and in addition to them there is a beautiful Skorupko, and unexpectedly interesting in not typical images of Coltrane and Joe Don Baker.
A recent review on Blue Ray confirmed that Golden Eye cinema is strong, iconic for the series, but not my favorite, as the subsequent adventures of 007 I love more.
8 out of 10
There’s probably no more long-running and popular franchise in history than a series of films about a devoted spy in Her Majesty’s service, Agent 007, better known as James Bond. It is difficult to assess how much the franchise has made not only a huge contribution to the development of spy films, but also cinema as such. Despite the obvious instability of the franchise at the beginning of its path.
Hence, it is not surprising that the invariable creator of the franchise Albert Broccoli even decided to close the bench and send the English spy to a well-deserved retirement, but the daughter of the producer Barbara Broccoli obviously made it clear that it is too early. Since 6 years after the release of the previous film, the franchise not only perfectly continued, but also amazingly restarted in favor of a new era of spectacular cinema and a more sophisticated viewer.
Here the appointment of Martin Campbell as a director was the ideal solution. Martin always knew how to create truly spectacular and at the same time tense shots. Which he perfectly reflected here. Whether it’s an incredible Bond trick with an airplane at the very beginning of the film, or a tank chase through the streets of Moscow. You don't see that every day. Including the abundance of action scenes in the face of numerous chases, fights, shootouts, explosions and other attributes of action scenes with maximum destructibility in the frame, which still gives great pleasure when viewing.
Actually, as well as the stunning opening credits, which have always been the main highlight of the series, and in this case, it appeared surprisingly magnificent against the background of the magnificent song Golden Eye performed by Tina Turner. That’s certainly worth admitting that she managed to perform perhaps one of the best Bond songs.
But as the directors and other film crew were not praised, the main treasure of the picture was the appointment of Pierce Brosnan to the main role. It was he who became perhaps the most perfect Bond since Sean Connery and allowed to doubt whether Sir Sean Connery is really the best Bond after that. Pierce perfectly captures the moment when he should joke, when to shine with beauty, when to hit on a nearby beauty and when to hit the enemy on the fifth number. This is the perfect performance of an insanely colorful cinematic character.
Sean Bean is damn good in the image of the main antagonist of the tape. Actually, as well as Famke Janssen, who always had images of fatal and strong women. But it is the image created by her in this picture that can be called one of the best embodiments of this axiom. Well, if Isabella Skorupko did not become the perfect Bond girlfriend, then at least she managed to shine with beauty and play at a satisfactory level.
8 out of 10
Golden Eye is a worthy start to a new era of adventures of James Bond, which has not yet been replaced by a reboot in the face of Casino Royale. Actually - a classic film about James Bond, colorful, stylish, spectacular, dynamic and insanely exciting.
The vendetta, arranged by Timothy Dalton in License to Kill, did not attract much attention of the audience, so the bondian was temporarily frozen and postponed until 1995. The deadline is not that giant, and as the Golden Eye shows, during this time nothing special happened. Bond, now with the face of Pierce Brosnan, is once again fighting the evil of the world, simultaneously seducing the ladies and, naturally, confronting the Russians (echoes of the Cold War are echoes of the Cold War). Of course, outwardly, Bond got prettier and gained the dynamism of the nineties, but in spirit it remained the same good old story about the indispensable superspy.
However, something important happened during the downtime of Bond: in 1991, the designer of the opening credits, Maurice Binder, who gave a gallery of charming and virtuoso screensavers, died. Nevertheless, here his baton was picked up by Daniel Kleinman, making an excellent screensaver in the best traditions of Binder, besides using newfangled computer graphics. It is safe to say that this aspect of the painting was put in the right hands. What can you say about music? She's not bad, she's just not memorable like Barry's orchestration. However, the opening song performed by Tina Turner is quite good.
Oh, yeah, the new Bond. So Pierce Brosnan virtuoso entered the series, taking second place in my top screen Bonds. He did not have to “swing”, he immediately showed himself a worthy successor to Connery’s chips – charm, dedication and arrogance. You can only be happy for him. As for the other roles, the new Bond girl here was performed by Natalia Semyonova performed by Isabella Skorupko. What to say here is not bad, but nothing extraordinary. A much larger class shows Famke Janssen, who played the killer Xenia Onatopp, but you can't call her a Bond girl. Nevertheless, she is not the only villain here - Sean Bean performed well as 006 - Alec Trevelyan, and Gottfried Jon as General Urumov.
On the side of "our" replenishment - now Judy Dench is in the M chair. I must say, it’s a good fit – not Bernard Lee, of course, but somewhere along with Robert Brown for sure. She has very little screen time. Good old Desmond Luelin once again pleasing to the eye as Q, plus joined Joe Don Baker as American agent Jack Wade. But in "Sparks from the eyes" he played a villain!
In general, the picture is quite good images and acting work, but it is better to talk about special effects. They are bigger (budget corresponds), brighter. Basically, Bond didn’t often demand anything other than “real” stunts like shootings or chases, but demanded the same. And it's top-notch. Spectacular hand-to-hand, spectacular shootouts (although with a one-goal game, i.e., with a single-goal game). Bond pretty easily knocks a bunch of people, great chases (especially the legendary ride on the tank). Regarding gadgets and vehicles, from the first there is a belt with a cable and an exploding pen, from the second there is a lot of things that explode immediately after Bond lands there. Only the BMW Z3 and, uh, ZAZ-965 remain intact. Bond and Wade looked pretty cute in it. Well, it is worth mentioning a dozen unloaded tank Russian cars like "Zhiguly" or "Muscovites".
It's not all cloudy, though. A couple of minuses. A few blunders (in one of the scenes Bond leans binoculars to the left eye, and in the next frame - to the right), stamps (Trevelian stubbornly does not want to shoot Bond at once, although the possibilities were hell knows how many). Russian soldiers speaking broken English, falling in packs under a hail of Bondovsikh bullets, some grotesque kitels and papahis – all this is appropriate, and in large numbers. But here you can advise to spit out these bones when viewing, and there is the fish itself.
And the fish was delicious. A good sequel is a reboot, in which Brosnan became like a flood into the place of the Glavhero. With flaws, with flaws, but Bond became still on the rails of the nineties, which led her on a damn similar, but still somewhat different path than in the seventies and eighties. A lot of cranberries, a lot of just strange moments (how in the beginning Bond not only caught up in the air falling plane, but also managed to pull it back?), but so everything is bright, noisy and generally competent.
8 out of 10
Having finished writing a novel, I return to the publication of reviews. Having lost my way among the endless number of films, I began to conquer Bondiana herself! It so happened that I recently settled on 17 and 18 films in the official British spy franchise. Everything in order:
So, the main role was this time Pierce Brosnan. As a result, the winner was not only the actor himself, but also the audience. Pierce is certainly not Roger Moore or even Sean Connery. His Bond is individual and perfectly fits into the style of the action movie of the late 90s. Sometimes comical, sometimes romantic, Pierce amazes with his high-quality acting!
Girls have always played a crucial role in Bondian. Here and here Izabello Skorupko pleases the eye. And from Famke Janssen turned out to be an excellent opponent of Bond. She is so energetic and sexy that you can not take off the screen. Sean Bean also coped with himself and kept flawless. That’s the kind of villains Bondiana lacked!
The main action of the film takes place after the collapse of the USSR. The creators broke the tradition and now the second agent with two zeros has a significant role to play. Unexpected move. But it is because of him that the viewer finally understands why James Bond is doing his duty and that friendship or work is more important to him.
For England, James?
-Nope. To me.
There's a lot of scenes. The chases, the shootouts, the explosions — all in the style of the previous parts. There is no such thing as the absurdity of what is happening. Well, that's Bond's signature. Music has undergone a small innovation, which could not but please the ear.
Over. We have an impressive and high-quality action movie that everyone needs to see. Look and feel the spirit of Bond. Pierce Brosnan made a great debut. And I think it’s no coincidence that I have my favorite films of the franchise: “From Russia with Love” and “For Your Eyes Only”.
8 out of 10
Pierce Brosnan was not lucky. When he took up the post of secret agent 007, all the most interesting stories about this character were already filmed. What writers began to invent after Fleming’s books does not stand up to any criticism. Better action movie "without admixture" like "License to kill" than fabulous and frankly kitschy "Golden eye", which is so generously seasoned with "cranberries" that it looks not even a parody, and outright mockery of our long-suffering country.
Let’s be honest: Brosnan had a very, very difficult mission – to add something new and original to the already familiar viewer for so many years. Yes, agent 007, and with him the viewer, used to change the movie faces, but the thing is that these faces were not ordinary. For all the benchmark Bond Connery — Roger Moore brought in the image of a secret agent of all time a lot that the viewer, if not immediately, but accepted and now is also ready to rank as a standard. Dalton's contribution, and even more so Lazenby's contribution, was, of course, less significant, but it is customary to reckon with it. Brosnan had to sum up all the strengths and weaknesses of previous Bond incarnations and derive the formula of the ideal agent 007. The funny thing is, he almost succeeded! And this despite the fact that for Brosnan it was the debut series of “bonds”. It is for the efforts of the Irish actor that the film deserves extra points.
Unfortunately, in addition to Brosnan in the film, there is no one especially to highlight. Sean Bean, personally I have always been suspicious of negative roles. There is nothing frightening or frightening about it. And the role of a traitor in Golden Eye is no exception. Getting constantly on the first place in various tops of “female villains” Ksenia Onotop (well, what a name!) performed by Famke Janssen is seriously annoying with her unrestrained sexual aggression and more like a patient of a psychiatric hospital who managed to escape to the wild. This image could be played interestingly, but the screenwriters are not up to it, they are more concerned about the tank chase in St. Petersburg, which is staged, albeit spectacularly, but which no resident of the Northern capital is able to watch without a smile. The route on which Bond moves on a tank is so ridiculous and comical that you involuntarily want to find the authors of the script and poke them into the map of the city on the Neva. Let them try to repeat this movie in real life!
Who really pleased in the picture is the unfading Q performed by the unchanged Desmond Llewellin. Here he usually appears only for a couple of minutes with the presentation of the next gadgets, but these episodes cut into memory for a long time, unlike most of the main episodes of the seventeenth James Bond film. It was also a fun role for Joe Don Baker. In "Sparks from the Eyes" he, I remember, played arms dealer Brad Whitaker - here he appears as CIA resident Jack Wade. Deliberately, the authors gave the actor to play two different roles in Bondian or not – it is unclear, but it turned out to be funny.
Surprisingly, after the Golden Eye franchise continued to exist. It would seem that a more tortured and incomprehensible story for Bond was difficult to come up with. However, the creators were smart enough to carry out “work on mistakes” and try to correct themselves in subsequent films. And I think Pierce Brosnan was particularly grateful for that.
Bondian was shaking. Most of all, it resembled a hangover syndrome, and this at such a young age (there were still a couple of episodes before the windy girl came of age)! The cheerful buffoon, headed by the Broccoli family, has long lost the features of a gentleman's show and increasingly resembled a mad capito. And all right, it was not the most charismatic Bond from Dalton or the crisis of Fleming ideas. These problems can be solved to some extent. But no. The Soviet Union, showing the Hollywood world yet another of its insidiousness, collapsed, burying the sinister and ubiquitous committee of state security. And a crushing blow was caused by the fashion for personal computers. Now people wanted to watch a movie about hackers.
However, such material could play a good performance. We do not quite obvious castling Dalton-Brosnan, take on the main villain of some computer prodigy, twist for greater joy a couple of beauties on both sides of the barricades. And then the recipe: "Mix, but not shake." However, the muse responsible for the sense of proportion in the writers, clearly went into all seriousness. As a result, we have on the screen: a deceased British intelligence agent, representatives of the Russian mafia organization Janus, a command post for the control of a top-secret combat satellite in remote and snowy Siberia, where Russian computer specialists are amused by inventing riddles, and one secret villainous plan that combines all the terms into one equation. For more fun in the plot weaves a tank race in St. Petersburg, a battering train, a giant parabolic antenna and a grenade handle. And all this flows under the general joyful “luli-razlili”. I'm sorry, what can I do? It will explode anyway.
One of the main ingredients of the James Bond cocktail has always been intrigue. Remember in what series showed the face of the head of “Spectra”. Here the fellow writers tried to keep the secret of the main bad guy to the last. That’s why he was invited to one of the key roles of Sean Bean, mindful of his ability to die in every film. And Agent 006 died, as it should, in the first ten minutes after the cherished view "through the barrel of a gun." No one believed it except Bond. He doesn't have time. Pierce Brosnan is diligently trying to prove that he is a better conerizable and muroequivalent than Dalton. Therefore, the name Janus did not stir anything in his analytical brain. Well, it seems that this time Sean Bean will exceed the plan for meetings with the bony.
"Golden Eye" had everything to become a big ribbon. Tenure fans, a big name, serious actors, a stylish title composition, a strong plot and the first human surname of the Russian general (Pushkin and Gogol remained in the past, but that is why the Cossack has not quite the typical surname Travelyan). It didn't work. Instead of a martini, the viewer was given cranberry juice. It is still necessary to try to incite so many absurdities per unit of celluloid meter. Stanislavsky did not even shout this time. Just spit, waved and walked out. Period? Not exactly. There is at least one interesting fact that turns the idea of the Golden Eye on its head.
As an accompanying product under this label, a video game for the Nintendo 64 console was released. So this very game became a real milestone in the game and is rightfully considered one of the best console games not only in the Bond series, but in general. Now take a good look at the movie. See? Separate episodes break up into beautiful rides-missions conditionally connected by dubious logic. It's probably very cool to play, but pretty boring to watch. Ironically, the extra product overtook the original. And now, not the game, but the film is destined to be the fate of an entertaining accompanying product, equalizing it in rights with Pierce Brosnan's plastic doll, bending at six points. The requirements for creations of this kind are quite different. After all, how many good games do you know? So let’s assume that the Golden Eye is such a picture. And the fact that it came out a little earlier than the game is an annoying temporary mistake that you can close your eyes to.
This film was the first where Bond played Pierce Brosnan, his dream came true, because the role of 007 he was offered in “Sparks from the Eyes”, but then he was busy shooting in another project.
The problem before the creators was big: on the one hand, it was necessary to revive the franchise, on the other hand, to give Bondiana the features of a modern action movie, because the 90s came, and the last picture is dated 1989. And when the shooting started, everyone was interested in one thing: Will "Golden Eye" drop the brand of past films?
The picture was really difficult to shoot, especially the famous chase through the streets of St. Petersburg. The back injury Brosnan received during filming also made adjustments to the shooting process. The film became the most anticipated blockbuster of 1995 and for good reason.
In Monte Carlo, a state-of-the-art military helicopter is stolen at a presentation and an attack on a Russian space weapons control station immediately occurs, as a result, access codes to military satellites disappear. Bond takes a trail and goes in search of a mysterious mafia named Janus.
Having such a plot, Martin Campbell took up his adaptation and shot the tape, which revived the bondian.
The picture I am a set of everything that could be seen in action films, but the atmosphere in it is also taken into account. Filmed in gloomy tones and supplemented by the music of Eric Syera.
The soundtrack is really great, every moment of the film is perfectly spelled out by Syera and even the famous James Bond Theme sounds mystically gloomy in his interpretation.
Music is a very strong side of Bond and became a cult and very hit song "Goldeneye" performed by Tina Turner confirmation of this. It just couldn't have been better written.
Bond, played by Pierce Brosnan, is absolutely amazing. He plays this role and Bond plays this image. Looking at the screen, it is believed that Bond himself is in front of us, and not the actor who plays him.
Isabella Skorupko, in my opinion, is not the best Bond girl, however, her Natalia turned out very bright.
Sean Bean is great, he has always managed villains and this case is no exception.
The film, in general, is almost a standard action movie and does not let go until the last minutes.
Conclusion: One of the best Bond paintings. Everything that should be in a quality entertainment movie is in this film.
9 out of 10