Skip to main content

The World Is Not Enough



With a slightly typical but nonetheless immensely entertaining opening sequence, The World Is Not Enough promises to adhere to Bond formula from the very start. And adhere to formula it does. However, it does manage to stay entertaining enough, and just barely unique enough that it holds your attention.

As the film goes on, it seems to become more and more unremarkable. Brosnan’s Bond films were never known for their originality, and this one is certainly no exception. The plot is typical, the villain is rather typical, and the quips and puns follow in regular fashion. Ultimately, it just feels like everything we’ve seen before. So am I saying I hated it? No, surprisingly enough. (Spoilers will follow, for those of you who haven’t seen the movie.)

The film manages to stay afloat, largely due to the charisma of Brosnan in the starring role. Additionally, Elektra being a villain was something rather new, especially to the Bond franchise. The main villain’s motivations were a bit more grounded this time around, even if he himself was rather cliché. The action is very well done, and still holds up, even by today’s standards. And now we come to the performances. Pierce Brosnan, as always, plays Bond to perfection. Sophie Marceau does a perfectly acceptable job of playing Elektra. And while Denise Richards certainly doesn’t give an Oscar-worthy performance as Christmas Jones, I didn’t find myself regularly cringing whenever she was on screen. I seem to be the only person who wasn’t, however, so perhaps I just missed something. The score, composed by David Arnold, is good, but certainly not his best.


So, what’s the final consensus? To me, the film was simply unremarkable, and I think that’s mostly how it’s remembered. While it’s not an absolute train wreck of a movie, it feels like the writers phoned this one in. Nearly everything in it is something we’ve seen before, and the unique parts about it seem to get lost in all of the clichés. It’s nearly 100% formula, pure and simple. If that’s what you want from a Bond film, then this is the one for you. If you want originality, that’s here in small quantities, and may ultimately make the movie worth watching for you. So, do I recommend it? Sure. It’s not the best Bond movie, or even remotely close to being such, or even one of the better action movies in (somewhat) recent memory. But if you’re in the mood for a formulaic Bond movie, or just want to have a fun time, give it a shot. You might like it. I’m giving it 3 out of 5 stars.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Revenge of the Sith Review

I’m sure you’ve probably heard that Revenge of the Sith is just slightly better than The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. In my opinion, that is completely untrue. Revenge of the Sith is a masterpiece. Let me explain why I think so. First of all, the plot here is just so much better. Even the dialogue is greatly improved. It’s still not perfect, but it’s only cringe-worthy in a few scenes. That in and of itself is a huge improvement. Secondly, George Lucas has the power of his own legendary original trilogy behind him this time. Finally, we get to witness Anakin become Darth Vader. And it’s glorious. We finally get a little bit of believability when it comes to why Anakin turned to the dark side. This time, it’s not just because he was an arrogant brat. We’re finally able to believe that he was pushed over the edge. On a technical level, everything is flawless, and the CGI still looks incredible today. The acting is far better this time around, and Hayden Christensen i...
Post a Comment
Read more

Thor: Ragnarok

Thor: Ragnarok is the third and final film in the Thor series. The movie finds Thor humbled, hammer-less, and in a desperate race against time to save Asgard. Ragnarok finds Taika Waititi taking over directorial duties, Kenneth Branagh having directed the first in the series and Alan Taylor having directed the second. Both Branagh and Taylor played the first two films dreadfully seriously. While the first had intermittent, light humor, the second film was oppressively dark and grim. Waititi corrects this problem in only five minutes. Ragnarok’s prologue alone contains more lighthearted fun than both of the previous films combined. Waititi has a bit of a reputation for his oddball sense of humor, but it works wonders for Ragnarok . Waititi suggested that much of the film’s dialogue be improvised, and it does a great deal to reinforce the film’s themes of uncertainty and insecurity. The randomness and off-the-wall quality of the jokes makes...
Post a Comment
Read more

Casino Royale Review

Back when this film came out in 2006, there wasn't much hope for the future of Bond. The last few films had been train wrecks when it came to getting a good critical response. With the exception of Goldeneye and two or three Roger Moore films, there hadn't been a truly good Bond movie since Sean Connery gave up the role. That was all about to change. Eon Productions brought back Martin Campbell to direct Casino Royale, his last Bond film having been Goldeneye. What little hope there had been for Casino Royale was completely demolished when it was announced Daniel Craig would be playing Bond. It was a huge gamble. (No pun intended.) The film opens in the classic Bond manner, with Bond on a random mission which leads into a chase. Once we finally get to the actual story, we learn that a gambler named Le Chiffre (I'm still not sure how that's accurately pronounced) is joining a high-stakes poker game, and Bond is sent to join the game and beat him. It's immedia...
Post a Comment
Read more