So what makes Bond different than competitors like Bourne and why can't filmmakers pull that uniqueness off anymore...

So what makes Bond different than competitors like Bourne and why can't filmmakers pull that uniqueness off anymore? Spectre honestly felt like the movie equivalent of a funeral for the series.

Bond has eras which correspond to changes in film production. Bourne came in when Bond was on hiatus and influenced future bond movies. The problem with Bond is that Bond is still seen as a symbol of masculinity despite attempts to subdue and subvert that.

Take Goldeneye (1995?) as an example. The movie opens with a trippy and iconic sequence that symbolizes the end of communism because the villain is a rogue remnant of soviet russia. But it also features nude dancers silhouetted in shadow light. Thanks to bluray HD, seeing their nipples and bare skin is very easy. Then the movie appears to be a return to what made Bond great but it has weird moments like when Bond is talking to M and Moneypenny and there's literal blatant references to sexual harassment and misogyny. Both of those terms are used in dialogue. M in particular calls bond a misogynist. Bond doesn't give a fuck and they move on. What makes this important? The seeds for the emasculating Daniel Craig era of Bond movies were planted way back in the 90s.

Poor Brosnan was tricked into making 3 subsequently shitty Bond movies after a decent Goldeneye revival. Craig got the same treatment with Casino Royale. Compare Goldeneye and Casino Royale and see which is closer to a Bond movie and which is just a spy movie. I have no idea what Craig's politics are but I wager he hated being Bond not just for the physical demands but for the political ones. Especially Skyfall.

Skyfall which was made to commemorate 50 years of Bond was fucking tame and pathetic. Featuring a "muh sex slave" subplot, a gay semi-flamboyant villain, retarded hacker shit with a guy as Q who looks like he has no testosterone. And lastly Bond implying he's fucked guys as a quip with the villain.

I think the main difference between the two is that Bond is a tower under siege while Bourne is a series that is mainly untouched and delivers on its own merits. Bond will continue to be tame and under siege until politics change. Bourne is going its own way I guess.

why are they all white?
eww

...

Female M was a mistake.

The Dalton movies didn't perform as well as they'd hoped and they were also mired in legal issues. Even though Goldeneye was conceived as a Dalton movie it was used as a sort of reboot like Casino Royale.

Austin Powers is closer in spirit to Bond than Daniel Craig.

The earlier Bond movies are male wish fulfillment, men want to be him and women want to be with him etc.

In the current climate that type of material is seen as "problematic".

There are so many of them, at least some of them are bound to be good.

Trevelyan was a cossack-born british agent

The thing that makes Bond different are his context and image
Bond movies themselves are not really good, only 2 Connery films were halfway decent (Goldfinger is not one of them) and later on the ones who could do the job were pushed with even more shit for the greed of it, but there's something about it
The image, as in the character swagger performed by pretty decent actors, even the much maligned Moore and the shitposting car salesman… And the context, the sets and trips are very well made, Bond had easily some of the best set designers of the biz in the majority of their movies
Seeing a manly son of a gun going around slappin butts while kicking enigmatic, sometimes as manly "bad guys" in exotic areas is cool overall, something that doesn;t happen these days anymore, or becomes a complete parody

Last decent/headcanon Bond flick was The World is not Enough, last official Bond is Die Another Day. Reboot is non-canon and should not be taken into account in the original series.
But the problem with the new movies is the Bond itself, Craig is a piss poor election since day one, the sets are very average or unoriginal, the bad guys are just shit (with maybe the exception of >Le Chiffre) and the Moore-tier plots, with shit girls or parodies themselves (russian-slut-saved-by-wannabe-bond girl is a prime example of this)

Like said, Austin Danger Powers did what Bond did, cool character, hot broads who are just tools or quick entertainment for the guy, great looking places and compelling villains (maybe not so much Goldmember)
And without getting ridicolous, unlike nu-Bond, with the deconstruction of Bond rules and story. With Goldmember and Die Another Day we saw Bond getting more silly and stupid than the parody itself. With Spectre and even Skyfall, it was all a joke, but one that doesn't make you laugh or get your dick hard, because until the negress Powers had only hot as hell chicks, especially in the first movie

I even dare to say DAD/Skyfall/Spectre seems to be a very dense, deadpan parody of Austin Powers, more than Bond sequels. Think about it, the girls (nigger Moneypenney against Beyonce, Dr. Evil being family along Waltz' Blofeld being Bond's long lost brother, angry mama's boy M, Madonna as theme song, over the top takes on classic villains with retarded plot points)

You best shoot yourself in the head, don't miss.

Schmaltz.

The old Bond movies had tonnes of Schmaltz and could go wacky and camp, where Rebond can't ever show a hint of a smile or a nod to it's own viewer. We don't have movies that are movies anymore, there all so caught up in "What if it was in the real wurld!1" that nobody bothered to ask if they should.

Fuck you, Jeff Goldblum.

Uhh, fuck you.

I get better dubs then you in my sleep

You have to mark an ending, even if a shitty one
A complete mess of an episode is still part of a series, unlike a non-episode of a long gone series, like a rehash or badly-made special, craiglover

Bond was my first action movies, growing up watching Connery, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan being funny, quick badasses was fun. Bond-movies was never this super-serious ultra-grim psychology-deep movies that the current ones are.

Beyond that not only is Craig a shitty bond, he's boring as fuck, pouts his lips like a teenager whore looking for attention and all of that would be somewhat ok, they could be half-decent bond-movies if they weren't so utterly forgettable.

And you can really see they panicked after the reboot bombed with the Quantum of Solace-movie, by going by overly nudging you at nostalgia "Look, we've got an Auston Martin!" "Look it's a male M" "Look, Q is back with gadgets for you!" etc, etc. Which only makes things worse since they are only there to remind you that the previous movies were way more fun and enjoyable.

I don't think the people involved think Bond is just throw-away entertainment? They seem to take it way too seriously, like it's high-drama.

The rest is spot-on, especially the shitty reminders in the lasts ones, much especially Spectre with a raped Blofeld (now a nazi instead of the hideous jew he was)
Let's face it, Bond retired after shafting Elektra
or he might also died in that Ninja aftermath in License to Kill if you're an oldfag/Taffer-hater

Check out these french spy comedy kinos. Easily the best "Bond" movies since 1963.

John Wick>Bourne>Spy kids>Bond
prove me wrong

Pretty good indeed but it is comedy.

Spy Kids 3D > Spy Kids 1 > Spy Kids 2 > Golgo 13 > John Wick 1 > John Wick 2 > Austin Powers Trilogy > Bourne Trilogy > Every Bond
Fixed that for you

Casino Royale was one of the best movies ever, though.

They try to be, with them trying to portrait Bond as some mentally disturbed psycho or whatever shallow grave of the human mind the kikes thought up.

Not really, it was forgettable and dull.

This guy thinks he is on Continental grounds.
His mistake.

no?

The spy who loved me is the best bond movie.
also on her majesty's secret service is pretty good.

You mean Moonraker.

moonraker is okay but i'm not memeing im being srs

...

The song, the poster, the car, the main henchmen and the bachelor's pad were the only decent things of the movie
Now it's not the worse by far due to the aforementioned things, but For Your Eyes Only does a better Moore Bond job, bar the literal jew exploit done in the casting that can be felt strongly, along with Bond being a huge cunt as always but suddenly a huge fag at times too

wow that's a good point

Roger Moore is the best bond despite octopussy and a view to a kill being ass.
Consider that sean connery was in at least 2 turds (diamonds are forever, never say never again)

I should have expected that this board would like For Your Eyes Only, because it has a tranny in it.

What

The rest of the movie is ridiculous, but even as a kid I couldn't get my head around this. Honestly, I found A View to a Kill more believable at the time, and that has a literal Commie Nazi with a master plan of killing his customers

I've never seen a bond or borne film.

...

look it up nigga. One of the background bikini "'girls'" at the pool party is a tranny that has the kleinfelters deformity so people act like being a dude with boobs is somehow more passable.

true fact they shot like the whole movie and then someone found out that there's a Zoran industries in real life that also manufactures semiconductors. As in some retard never googled the name to see if they'd get sued.

It also really bothers me how roger moore got plastic surgery between octopussy and a view to a kill. Before that he actually looked great for 55, but then he has his face dicked with and he looked like a wax figure and they removed his birthmark as well as did something to his eyes and it just was so jarring for me when i saw a view to a kill. if he hadnt done that, he wouldnt have looked so fucking old.