GoldenEye

Given that I am gradually watching all the Bond films, it was, of course, time for "GoldenEye," even though I skipped ahead a bit in chronological order because my girlfriend wanted to see the Brosnan Bond films. After Roger Moore, this is such a disappointment, with so many inconsistencies that it becomes annoying at times. And I can't help it, Pierce Brosnan may have charm, but he lacks the right charisma. His Bond is quite dull, and Natalya Simonova only fell for him because it was in the script. The action and plot are interesting, but the execution is not that great. (10/03/2014)

GoldenEye is a colorful, spectacular Bond movie packed with great action and sexy women. And an excellent cast. There’s no trace of the traditional Bond atmosphere of the classics starring Sean Connery, but I don’t have a single complaint in terms of its entertainment value. (11/04/2002)

Brosnan’s and my first Bond. Back when I was a nine or ten-year-old squirt, I liked seeing 007 demolishing Russia in a tank, using a watch to drill holes in the floor, reeling out one perfect line after the next. And you know what? I still like it. That’s one thing that hasn’t changed and probably won’t change. And it stands to reason, Martin Campbell is simply good at Bond movies. He began with GoldenEye and then brought Bond back to the top with Casino Royale and that deserves some recognition. As a bonus, we see my personal favorite BondGirl Famke Janssen, ravishing, unhinged. I have a soft spot for her. (14/02/2007)

The new Bond concept is decent. Campbell serves up some ethereal action that gives the agent a respectable coat. Unfortunately, it loses steam in building the dramatic arc, and thus the plot drags on for a long two hours. But who cares. The Soviet Union fell, leaving Bond a respectable legacy. The new era demanded a sharper dose of action, which GoldenEye fulfills to a tee, and I enjoyed that tank in St Petersburg more than anything I've seen in a long time! (27/05/2007)

I don't like Bond movies, and GoldenEye only confirmed that for me. A simple story, a tank ride through St. Petersburg, the gallant Brosnan, the nasty Gottfried John, and a dishevelled Famke Janssen having an orgasm while firing a machine gun, it all sounds and sometimes actually looks awfully cool, yet I couldn't stop shaking my head at how a film with an A-grade production and cast could look so B-grade and unoriginal. I had fun, no question about it, but the pile of clichés and unrealistic heroics kept popping into my head far more often and, more importantly, more unpleasantly than would have been appropriate. I just have to stick with 3* because, for example, Skyfall, which I gave 4* to, is a much better and more sophisticated piece of filmmaking. Otherwise Brosnan is probably the best Bond, Connery fans don't get mad at me... (25/02/2013)