HULK VS. JAMES BOND - DAY 3

READ DAY 1 HERE AND DAY 2 HERE.

HULK VS. JAMES BOND: STARING INTO THE ID OF A BONER INCARNATE - DAY 3

WE'RE BACK FOR HUMPDAY!

GET IT? WEDNESDAY? HUMPDAY? JAMES BOND ? HUMPING? ... LIKE... FUCKING?

(HULK IS STILL JUST SO SO SORRY).

ANYWAY...

12. FOR YOUR EYES ONLY (1981)

WE OFFICIALLY HAVE HIT THE 80'S FULL-STOP!

WHICH ALSO MEANS WE HAVE HIT THE JOHN GLEN ERA.

NOW, UNLESS YOU'RE OVER-FAMILIAR WITH BOND SERIES THAT NAME PROBABLY MEANS NOTHING TO YOU. AND WOULDN'T YOU KNOW IT, BUT THE MAN HAS DIRECTED MORE BOND FILMS THAN ANY OTHER DIRECTOR ON THE PLANET. HE WAS HIRED FOR FOR YOUR EYES ONLY BECAUSE HE HAD WORKED AS AN EDITOR ON THREE PRIOR BOND FILMS (ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, THE SPY WHO LOVED ME AND MOONRAKER... AND YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED, BUT HULK REALLY LIKED THOSE THREE FILMS). AND ONCE AGAIN, WE HAVE A CASE WHERE THE BROCCOLI FAMILY HIRED SOMEONE FROM INSIDE THE BOND FAMILY. WHICH MEANS YOU COULD CALL THE DECISION TO HIRE GLEN A SAFE AND FUNCTIONAL ONE, BUT IT WHOLLY PAID OFF TO THAT PURPOSE. THERE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ANY TRUE HIGH POINTS TO THE COMING YEARS, BUT THE GLEN ERA WAS MARKED BY AN EVEN KEEL, CAUTIOUS APPROACH AND SOLID TONE WORK. THERE WAS A SAFETY AND FAMILIARITY TO THE NOW-ESTABLISHED STYLE AND GLEN REALLY SEEMED TO CLUE IN TO HOW GILBERT SAW ROGER MOORE FILMS WORKING.

BUT BOY DID IT GET OFF TO A ROUGH START...

NO, NOT THE ENTIRE MOVIE. THE MOVIE ITSELF IS MOSTLY PRETTY OKAY.

HULK IS TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT FOR YOUR EYES ONLY HAS THE SINGLE WEIRDEST OPENING OF ANY FILM EVER... THIS IS NOT HYPERBOLE, BUT IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND WHY YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT.

FOR STARTERS, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE WHOLE INTENT OF EYES WAS TO GET BACK TO THE WHOLE "REALISM" THING. THIS IS, OF COURSE, JUST PART OF THE NOW-FAMILIAR DYNAMIC WHERE EVERY BOND FILM IS AN OVERREACTION TO THE LAST FILM. AND THIS TIME THEY WANTED TO GET AWAY FROM THE LOGIC-STRETCHING SCI-FI ELEMENT OF MOONRAKER AND GET BACK TO A MORE "CLASSIC BOND" APPROACH. AND AT THIS POINT, YOU MAY HAVE REALIZED THAT THAT TERM DOESN'T ACTUALLY MEAN ANYTHING AND IT NEVER REALLY DID. YOU COULD SAY "CLASSIC BOND" IS DR. NO, BUT THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH VARIATION SINCE THEN THAT IT REALLY MEANS DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. IT'S GONE. AND ALL WE REALLY HAVE IS THE ALTERNATIONS IN SWING OF A PENDULUM OF INTENTION, AND IN THE END, IT ALWAYS JUST ENDS UP BECOMING ITSELF. BUT WHAT EYES REALLY DOES CAPTURE IS A NICE SENSE OF EMOTIONAL REALISM AND QUIET ACTION STAKES. IT'S NOT TRYING TO MAKE CLASSIC BOND. IT'S TRYING TO MAKE A CLASSIC MOVIE - EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THE OPENING STARTS WITH BOND GETTING TRAPPED IN A REMOTE CONTROL HELICOPTER THAT IS OPERATED BY NONE OTHER THAN...

A WHEELCHAIR-RIDDEN ERNST BLOFELD, WHOSE FACE WE WILL NEVER SEE!

HE JUST APPEARS OUT OF NOWHERE. YOU KNOW, AFTER BEING DEAD AND FORGOTTEN SINCE DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER. HE JUST FUCKING SHOWS UP IN THE MIDDLE OF MOORE'S RUN FOR, LIKE, NO REASON. AND THERE'S NO GRAND ENTRANCE. NO GRAND REVEAL. THEY'RE JUST LIKE "OH, IT'S BLOFELD AGAIN!" AND HE TRAPS BOND IN THE HELICOPTER AND JUST SORT OF FUCKS WITH HIM. NONE OF THIS IS EVEN EXPLAINED AND WHILE WE'RE STILL SCRATCHING OUR HEADS, BOND TAKES CONTROL OF THE COPTER AND QUICKLY DISPATCHES BLOFELD IN A COMPLETELY SILLY FASHION AND THEN... THE ENTIRE EVENT IS NEVER REFERENCED AGAIN, NOR IS BLOFELD EVER REFERENCED AGAIN. SO, NOT ONLY IS IT OUT OF PLACE, BUT IT COMPLETELY RENDERS THE MOVIE TO FOLLOW A NONSENSICAL HEAD-SCRATCH OF INTENTION. AND WORSE IS JUST THE KARMIC JUSTICE OF IT ALL - THE GREATEST VILLAIN IN THE BOND CANON, AND THEY... THEY DO THIS:

WAIT, DID YOU NOTICE THE END WHEN HE STARTS TALKING LIKE TRIUMPH THE INSULT COMIC DOG? 

THE WHOLE THING IS JUST... UGH.

YOU HAVE TO ASK "WHY WOULD THEY EVER DO THAT?" - OR PERHAPS THE BETTER QUESTION TO ASK IS "WHY DID THEY STILL COMMIT TO DOING THIS?" BECAUSE AS THE LEGEND GOES, MOORE'S CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WEREN'T GOING SO WELL, SO THEY THOUGHT THEY WOULD ACTUALLY BE CASTING A NEW BOND. AND THUS, TO "BRIDGE THE GAP" THEY WANTED TO INCLUDE BLOFELD TO TIE THE NEW BOND INTO THE OLD TRADITION AND THUS THEY WROTE THIS SCENE. WHY IT WOULD BE WRITTEN LIKE THIS HULK CAN'T TELL YOU, BUT THAT WAS THE THINKING AT LEAST. BUT THEN MOORE CAME BACK ON AND, FOR SOME REASON, EVERYONE WAS COOL WITH KEEPING THIS TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE IDEA AS THE OPENING OF THE FILM. HULK MEAN ... BUT WHY WOULD THEY BRING THE CHARACTER BACK JUST TO DO SUCH A MEANINGLESS SCENE? WHY WOULD THEY NOT JUST MAKE HIM THE BAD GUY FOR THE ENTIRE PLOT, OR SOMETHING? IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE ON ANY IMPORTANT LEVEL. IT'S NOT EVEN FUN. WE SHOULD JUST ALL PRETEND THAT IT NEVER HAPPENED.

LUCKILY, THE FILM PRETENDS THE SAME THING!

BECAUSE AFTER THAT SILLY OPENING, THE MOVIE GETS RIGHT BACK ON TRACK WITH ITS PREROGATIVE AND ACTUALLY DOES SOMETHING KIND OF NEAT... YOU SEE, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY IS KINDA SORTA MAYBE AN ACTUAL SPY MOVIE! AT LEAST IN THE SENSE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF INTRIGUE AND PLOTTING AND BETRAYALS AND STUFF THAT ARE FAMILIAR TO THAT GENRE (AND USUALLY ABSENT FROM BOND FILMS). IT ACTUALLY MAKES FOR AN INTERESTING EFFECT. HULK WOULD EVEN WAGER THAT THIS IS THE FIRST BOND FILM WHERE YOU FEEL A LITTLE "HEFT" IN THE PROCEEDINGS. PERHAPS JUST A HOLDOVER FROM THE LATE 70'S EXPLOSION OF ARTFUL REALISM. SURE, THE PLOT ITSELF JUST CONCERNS SOME MACGUFFINY CODE TRANSLATOR THAT CAN ORDER MISSILE STRIKES OR SOMETHING, BUT IT'S ALL ABOUT THE TONE AND EXECUTION. MOST NOTABLY THROUGH THE FILM'S LOOK, WHICH LARGELY ABANDONS THE SUMPTUOUSNESS OF THE TWO PREVIOUS EFFORTS FOR SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE "SMOKY" AND GRAINY-LOOKING, ALL THANKS TO NEW CINEMATOGRAPHER ALAN HUME, WHO WOULD NOT ONLY GO ON TO DO THE NEXT COUPLE OF BOND FILMS, BUT ALSO SHOOT RETURN OF THE JEDI! BUT IT ALL REALLY DOES MAKE FOR A STRANGE NEW EFFECT IN THE SERIES. BECAUSE UNLIKE THE COMIC AND INSULTING GRIMINESS OF LIVE AND LET DIE, THERE IS SOMETHING MORE PURPOSEFUL GOING ON HERE. ADMITTEDLY, SOMETIMES THIS NEW TONAL REALITY TO THE LOOK MAKES THINGS WEIRD (AFTER ALL, THIS IS THE FILM WHERE Q APPEARS AS A FAKE PRIEST), BUT STILL IT FINALLY FEELS LIKE WE'VE ARRIVED AT WHAT LIVE AND LET DIE WANTED TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE. EVEN THE BAD GUYS IN THIS ONE ARE JUST GLORIFIED SMUGGLERS AND ALL ABOUT MONEY AND STUFF. AND YEAH THEY WANT/HAVE THE MISSILE DEVICE, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE SOME CRAZY PLAN OR AXE TO GRIND WITH SOCIETY. THEY AREN'T SUPER-PROPER AND ERUDITE VILLAINS WITH CRAZY-EXPENSIVE LAYERS, THEY JUST WANT TO GET THEIRS... WHICH IS FITTING SINCE WE'VE ENTERED THE 80'S HULK SUPPOSES?

NOW, IN ORDER TO FULLY TALK ABOUT THIS EFFORT BEYOND MATTERS OF TONE, HULK WANTS TO GO BACK TO ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, WHEREIN HULK ARGUED THE REASON THAT FILM IS SO GOOD IS THAT THEY BUILT THE TRADITIONAL MOVIE AROUND IT, THEN AMPED UP THE ROMANTIC ANGLE IN A MEANINGFUL WAY WHILE ALSO RELYING ON STRONG (AND PROGRESSIVE) BOND GIRLS. AND HULK FEELS LIKE FOR YOUR EYES ONLY WAS REALLY TRYING TO CAPTURE THOSE EXACT SAME QUALITIES... BUT IT DOESN'T QUITE GET THERE. THAT WHOLE "TRADITIONAL MOVIE" ANGLE RESULTS IN THE AFOREMENTIONED "ACTUAL SPY MOVIE" PLOTTING, AND AGAIN, HULK ADMITS THERE'S THIS NICE, MURKY MOOD TO ALL OF IT, BUT THERE STILL ISN'T A LOT OF FUNCTIONAL DRAMA. MEANING THERE'S NO TENSION TO BE DERIVED FROM MYSTERY (AS IN IT'S NOT PURSUING ANY) AND IT DOESN'T REALLY GO FOR DRAMATIC IRONY ANGLE THAT USUALLY COMES WITH THAT CHOICE, EITHER. GIVEN THAT, THE FILM SHOULD BE DEFINITELY USING SUCH CLARITY TO ROOT THE MOTIVATION IN OPPOSING CONFLICTS... BUT IT DOESN'T DO THAT EITHER. EVEN THE SEQUENCE WITH BOND'S AFFAIR, FOR ALL ITS TEXTURE, JUST SORT OF SAUNTERS ALONG WITHOUT PROPULSION (WHICH JUST HIGHLIGHTS A WEIRD REALITY THAT ANY TIME BOND FILMS TRY TO BE TOO LIKE "REAL MOVIES" IT JUST ENDS UP HIGHLIGHTING WHAT MAKES BOND MOVIES SOOOOOO DIFFERENT IN THE FIRST PLACE).

AND AS FAR AS THE CORE ROMANTIC ANGLE GOES, YES, THE FILM IS ON FIRMER FOOTING, BUT UNLIKE OHMSS, THE BOND GIRLS HERE JUST AREN'T STRONG ENOUGH TO CARRY THE WEIGHT OF THOSE AIMS (BOTH ON THE PAGE AND IN PERFORMANCE). BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME INTERESTING CONVERSATIONS STILL TO BE HAD ABOUT IT:

FIRST UP IS CAROLE BOUQUET. THE FIRST THING YOU CAN'T HELP BUT NOTICE ABOUT HER IS HOW SHE HAS THIS INCREDIBLY UNIQUE, TRADEMARK LOOK. SHE'S GOT THESE THIN, ELLIPTICAL EYES WITH LONG, STICK-STRAIGHT HAIR AND A STATUESQUE ELEGANCE. HOWEVER THOSE THINGS ADD TOGETHER, THERE'S JUST SOMETHING ABOUT HER ESSENCE. IT'S AS IF TRAGEDY JUST SEEMS TO HANG ABOUT HER. AND PERHAPS IT'S THE FACT THAT SHE WAS JUST A FEW YEARS OUT FROM THE BUÑUEL MASTERPIECE THE OBSCURE OBJECT OF DESIRE, WHICH ABSOLUTELY SHOWED OFF THIS SAME CURIOUS ATMOSPHERE. THERE'S JUST SOMETHING NATURALLY ALLURING AND MYSTERIOUS ABOUT HER, BUT SOMETHING EQUALLY HAUNTING. MAYBE THE LANGUAGE BARRIER INSPIRED MORE CINEMATIC FOCUS, BUT THE FILM ALMOST SEEMS OUTRIGHT FIXATED WITH HER. BUT DOING SO IN A VOYEURISTIC ART FILM IS ONE THING AND DOING THE SAME IN A MAINSTREAM BOND FILM IS QUITE ANOTHER. SO REALLY THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THAT SHE JUST HADN'T HIT HER STRIDE AS AN ACTRESS YET. HECK, EVEN WHEN SHE DID HIT HER STRIDE IN THE LATE 80'S, SHE WAS DOING IT IN MOSTLY FRENCH FILMS (HER NATIVE TONGUE) AND DOING SO IN VERY, VERY DIFFERENT KINDS OF ROLES THAT FAR BETTER FIT SAID NATURAL ATMOSPHERE... AND IN UNCOUTH ADMISSION, SHE ALSO TOOK OFF HER CLOTHES A LOT AND IF WE ARE GOING TO MENTION THESE KINDS OF THINGS IN A SUBDUED, NON-IMPORTANT CAPACITY, THEN GOOD GRANOLA WAS SHE PURDDY.

ANYWAY. THE POINT OF BRINGING ALL THIS UP IS SPEAKS TO A VERY INTERESTING DYNAMIC IN BOND GIRL-ISM. THE WHOLE STANDOFFISH "WOMEN OF MYSTERY" ANGLE IS A HUGE PART OF CINEMA (TO THE POINT OF ITS BEING UNFAIR AND UNHELPFUL TO THE WHOLE OF CULTURE), BUT PERHAPS A LOT OF THIS COMES OUT OF THE FACT THAT WOMEN-OF-MYSTERY HAVE ADMITTEDLY ALWAYS SERVED A CERTAIN STORY FUNCTION FOR TRADITIONAL MALE PROTAGONISTS (STORY FUNCTION BEING THE RENDERING OF AN ENTIRE GENDER INTO MERE TRIGGERS / OBSTACLES / ETC. AND NOT ACTUAL PEOPLE FOR THE SAKE OF A DUDE REALIZING SOMETHING OBVIOUS ABOUT HIMSELF). BUT THE FUNNY THING IS THAT THIS PARTICULAR ARCHETYPE OF MYSTERY-WOMAN DOESN'T MAKE FOR THE BEST BOND GIRLS. FOR ONE, THE BOND PLOTTING WORKS BEST WITH THE "TO ADVENTURE!" APPROACH SO THEY'RE USUALLY CONSTRUCTED AROUND REVEAL OF SCOPE, NOT THE ALLURE OF THE UNKNOWN. AND TWO, BOND MOVIES OPERATE WITHIN A CERTAIN KIND OF UNIVERSE AND HAVE A CERTAIN SET OF RULES FOR HOW BOND HAS TO BEHAVE, SO THAT MEANS THE FEMININE ALLURE BEST COMES OUT WHEN THE FEMALE CHARACTERS SHOW PERSONAL CONSTITUTION AND A SENSE OF MISCHIEF, OFTEN BECAUSE THAT MAKES THE CORE CONFLICT COME OUT IN THE FORM OF ENTERTAINING DIALOGUE WHEREIN BOND GOES TOE-TO-TOE WITH THESE LADIES FOR SOME WITTY BANTER. WHICH NOT ONLY MEANS THAT MYSTERY IS A PROBLEM, BUT IT ALSO MEANS THAT THE LONG SEXIST PARADE OF PORTRAYING THESE WOMEN AS AIRHEADS AND NOT CARING WHAT HAPPENS TO THEM ALSO RAN DIRECTLY COUNTER TO THEIR OWN STORYTELLING GOALS. WHICH IS WHY MOST OF THESE FILMS FELL WELL SHORT OF THEIR BEST POSSIBLE FUNCTION. AND SADLY, CAROLE BOUQUET JUST ENDS UP BECOMING ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE WHO WAS THERE FOR AESTHETIC PRETTINESS (I.E. WHAT THEY WANTED), BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T QUITE FIT THE MOLD OF WHAT THE BOND STORY REQUIRED (IE. WHAT THEY NEEDED). SENSING A RETURN TO THEME HERE?

ANYWAY, THE FILM DIDN'T HAVE ANY BETTER LUCK WITH THE PORTRAYAL OF THE OTHER LADIES, EITHER.

CASSANDRA HARRIS PLAYS THE COUNTESS LISL VON SCHLAF (WHICH MEANS "SLEEP" ACCORDING TO A LOOSE GOOGLE TRANSLATION). HER ARCHETYPE IS "MAIN BAD GUY'S PAWN-LIKE MISTRESS." AND SINCE SHE IS CLEARLY HIS PROPERTY OR WHATEVER, THE BAD GUY ASKS HER TO SEDUCE BOND AND FIND OUT ABOUT HIS MISSION. ONLY INSTEAD OF THAT HAPPENING, SHE GETS TO BEHOLD THE WONDERS OF JAMES BOND'S MAGIC PENIS (YES, WE'RE BACK TO THAT) AND THUS GETS WRAPPED UP IN, WELL, BEING OWNED BY BOND INSTEAD. AND SINCE SHE WON'T BETRAY A MAN WITH SUCH AN EXQUISITE PENCHANT FOR SCHLAFFING, SHE THEN GETS RUN OVER BY A DUNE BUGGY FOR HER INSOLENCE.

TRUE JUSTICE!

NOTE: DESPITE BEING MOVIES THAT ARE JUST DRIPPING WITH EVERY FORM OF SEXUALITY, IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT THE BOND FILMS HAVE NOT ACTUALLY EVER HAD ANY TRUE-BLUE NUDITY IN THEM. OH THERE'S PLENTY OF SKIMPY BATHING SUITS, SUGGESTED NUDITY, SIDE-BOOB, SILHOUETTES, FLESH-COLORED BODYSUITS AND OBSCURED VISIONS OF SEXUAL IMAGERY, BUT THERE IS NO FULL-BLOWN NUDITY. THESE ARE "FAMILY FILMS" AFTER ALL!!! (*LAUGHS HYSTERICALLY*). REALLY, IT SPEAKS TO THE WHOLE ARBITRARY WAY WE MAKE RULES. FOR THERE ARE NO FILMS MORE PSYCHOLOGICALLY HARMFUL TO THE SHAPING OF KID'S MINDS THAN THE BOND SERIES, BUT YOU CAN'T SHOW THEM A BEAUTIFUL FILM ABOUT HUMANITY AND THE LESSONS THEY NEED TO LEARN TO BE BETTER PEOPLE BECAUSE IT MAY SHOW A BOOB OR A BUTT, I.E. THOSE THINGS THAT EVERY PERSON HAS AND ARE HARMLESS. AND IF THERE IS ANY FACT THAT MEANS WE SHOULD BE MORE AWARE OF INDULGENCE IT'S THAT ONE. BUT HULK JUST MENTIONS ALL THIS IN ORDER TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT FOR ONE SPLIT-SECOND OF A FRAME, YOU CAN SEE CASSANDRA HARRIS' BOOB IN THIS FILM.

NOW. HULK SPENT A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT BOND FORUMS FOR RESEARCHING THIS THINGY AND TWO THINGS BECAME CLEAR 1) NOTHING WILL CONFIRM HULK'S "EXPECTANT INDULGENT" CHARACTERIZATION OF THESE FILMS MORE THAN SAID FORUMS AND 2) FOR THE SAME REASON OF INDULGENCE, THESE "YOU CAN SEE SO-AND-SO'S BOOB" IS THE KIND OF THING THAT PEOPLE GO NUTS OVER IN THESE FORUMS (ALONG WITH THE NAKED PICTURES OF EVERY ACTRESS WHO EVER SHOWED UP IN THESE THINGS... MEANWHILE, THERE IS VERY LITTLE CURIOSITY ABOUT SEEKING OUT BOND-DONG AND HULK THINKS THAT SHOULD BE EQUALLY REQUIRED)

EXTRA NOTE: CASSANDRA HARRIS DOES HAVE AN INTERESTING BEHIND-THE-SCENES WRINKLE IN THAT IS SHE WAS PIERCE BROSNAN'S WIFE, A FUTURE JAMES BOND HIMSELF. IN FACT, THERE ARE LOTS OF STORIES THAT ACCREDIT HER FOR BEING THE ONE WHO GOT BROSNAN TO MEET THE PRODUCERS, BUT THERE ARE CONFLICTING STORIES OF THEIR MEETING PRIOR. THE LAST PART TO MENTION ABOUT CASSANDRA HARRIS IS THAT SHE ALWAYS THOUGHT BROSNAN SHOULD PLAY THE ROLE, ONLY SHE SADLY DID NOT LIVE TO SEE IT. SHE DIED OF OVARIAN CANCER IN 1991 AT AGE 43.

FUCK CANCER.

SORRY FOR THAT WHIPLASH-INDUCING SERIES OF ASIDES THERE, WHICH ONLY FEEL ALL THE MORE INAPPROPRIATE GIVEN THAT WE STILL HAVE TO TALK ABOUT ONE MORE BOND GIRL IN THIS FILM...

SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE WHOLE BIBI DAHL UNDERAGE ICE SKATING PLOTLINE, BECAUSE HONEST TO GOD HULK CAN'T FIGURE OUT THE INTENTION OF IT. LYNN-HOLLY JOHNSON PLAYS THE ROLE OF BIBI DAHL, AN ICE SKATER BEING SPONSORED BY THE BAD GUY'S RIVAL TO WIN MEDALS AT THINGS (SHE JUST SEEMS TO DO A BUNCH OF SPORTZ). SHE SHOWS UP IN A BUNCH OF SCENES AND ACTS ALL SMILEY, BUT HER ONE MAIN SCENE IS WHEN BOND WALKS INTO HER HOTEL ROOM TO ACCOMPANY HER TO A BIATHLON AND FINDS BIBI WAITING IN A TOWEL. SHE THEN TAKES IT OFF AND GETS INTO BED AND TELLS BOND TO JOIN HER. HE POLITELY DECLINES AND SHE SEEMS IN HUFF. NOW, HULK HAS WATCHED THE SCENE A DOZEN TIMES TO FIGURE IT OUT. IS IT A COMMENTARY ON HOW EARLIER BOND MOVIES WERE GUILTY OF INFANTILIZATION AND OUR MOORE IS A MORE MODERN FIGURE? IS IT SAYING THAT THE MODERN AUDIENCE IS GUILTY OF INFANTILIZING, NOT PAST MOVIES? WAS IT NOT A POINTED COMMENTARY WHATSOEVER AND THIS WAS THEIR ONLY EXCUSE TO SHOW A CHEAP TITILLATING THRILL OF UNDERAGE SEXY-TIME, BUT THERE WERE EVEN LINES THAT THE BOND MOVIES WOULDN'T CROSS? HULK IS INCLINED TO GO WITH THE LAST OPTION, AS IT IS THE NATURAL INCLINATION, BUT FROM A CINEMA-LANGUAGE PERSPECTIVE HULK HONESTLY CANNOT TELL. YOU'RE WELCOME TO THROW IN YOUR TWO CENTS.

ANOTHER RANDOM ASIDE: HULK WAS TALKING ABOUT THIS FILM WITH A FRIEND AND HE WAS CURIOUS WHY HULK WAS SPENDING SO MUCH TIME DISSECTING EACH OF THE BOND GIRLS AND WHAT THEIR RELATIVE PORTRAYALS MIGHT SAY AND BARELY SPENDING ANY TIME TALKING ABOUT THE VILLAINS. WELL FIRST OFF, HULK JUST FEELS LIKE IT'S JUST A MORE INTERESTING CONVERSATION THAN WHATEVER NONSENSE THING THE BAD GUYS ARE DOING. HECK, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT HULK BARELY EVEN MENTIONED THE BAD GUY IN THE SPY WHO LOVED ME AND THAT'S JUST BECAUSE UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING PARTICULARLY COMPELLING OR GOOD ABOUT THEM. THEY ALL HAVE VARIATIONS IN CALIBER OF PERFORMANCE, BUT THEY ARE ALL PRETTY MUCH BUILT WITH THE EXACT SAME INTENTIONS. AND YEAH THEY'RE OFTEN CRAZY AND THERE MAY BE A LOT TO DESCRIBE IN THEIR PLOTS, BUT THERE'S NOT A LOT TO DISCUSS. MEANWHILE, THERE'S SO MUCH TO DISCUSS WITH FEMININE PORTRAYALS IN THESE MOVIES. NOT ONLY ARE WOMEN THE VARIABLE IN OUR EQUATION, BUT LIKE HULK SAID EARLIER...

IT'S LIKING STARING INTO THE ID OF A BONER INCARNATE.

ANYWAY, BACK TO FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. THERE ARE OTHER LITTLE THINGS ABOUT THIS MOVIE THAT MAKE THIS A MORE SOLID BOND ENTRY THAN YOU'D THINK. THE ACTION IS SURPRISINGLY STRIPPED-DOWN AND FUNCTIONAL, WHICH AGAIN IS LARGELY AN OVERREACTION TO MOONRAKER, BUT TRUTH BE TOLD THE CAR CHASE AND THE SKI SEQUENCE ARE BIT TOO REPETITIVE OF PAST BOND GLORIES. INSTEAD, HULK IS ALL ABOUT THE FILM'S SUPER-TENSE SEQUENCE WHERE THEY ARE DRAGGED BY A BOAT OVER A CORAL REEF, WITH THE SHARK CHASING THEM TO BOOT! ODIN BLESS THOSE BRAVE STUNT-PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS ONE, AND THEY ARE SO REWARDED BY THE FACT THAT GLEN DOESN'T OVER-SHOOT IT AND JUST USES THIS GREAT SOUND-DESIGN WHERE THEY BUILD UP THE QUIET BEFORE CORAL IMPACT, ALLOWING THE SCENE TO PLAY WITH SERIOUS TENSION. AND EVEN THE SKIING SEQUENCE HAS THIS GREAT STUNT WORK WHERE BOND SKIS DOWN A BOBSLED TRACK. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE BEST SKI SEQUENCE EVER WERE IT NOT JUST SO DARN CLOSE TO THE OTHERS. AND WHILE ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE GOOD...

HULK'S SAVED THE BEST PART OF THE FILM FOR LAST.

NO, THIS ISN'T THE BUILD-UP TO SOME IRONIC JOKE. HULK'S ABSOLUTE FAVORITE PART OF FOR YOUR EYES ONLY IS WHEN THE LAST ACT JUST RANDOMLY TURNS INTO A FRENCH RESISTANCE MOVIE FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER. REALLY, THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS. AND IT'S FREAKING AMAZING. IT'S BOTH COMPLETELY OUT OF NOWHERE AND YET STUNNINGLY FUNCTIONAL, AS IT PUTS BOND AS POINT-MAN IN THIS WHOLE MEN-ON-A-MISSION FINALE. AND SINCE YOU KIND OF KNOW EVERYONE INVOLVED THERE'S, LIKE, ACTUAL STAKES AND IT'S NOT JUST BOND AGAINST THE WORLD. THERE ARE ACTUAL OTHER PEOPLE WHO CAN GET HURT! PLUS, THERE ARE ALL THESE QUIET DELIBERATE VISUAL BEATS OF STEALTH AND TAKING OUT GUARDS AS THEY ASCEND TO A CLIFFSIDE FORTRESS (IT'S AMAAAAAAAZING LOCATION WORK). IT'S THE KIND OF STUFF YOU RARELY SEE IN A BOND MOVIE, LET ALONE A BOND FINALE. IT EVEN INCLUDES SOME OF THE BEST ROPE-WORK AND ROCK-CLIMBING STUNTS EVER PUT IN FILM, SO THAT'S A PLUS. IN FACT, IT'S SOME POSITIVELY BADASS STUFF AND THE WHOLE THING LEFT HULK WONDERING: WHY HAVEN'T WE SEEN MORE OF THIS KIND OF THING? WHY HAVEN'T MORE BOND FILMS TRIED THE WHOLE LAST-ACT MEN ON A MISSION THINGY BEFORE? HOW COME THEY HAVEN'T REALLY SINCE? IT WORKED SO BEAUTIFULLY HERE AND IS PROBABLY ONE OF HULK'S FAVORITE THINGS IN THE ENTIRE BOND SERIES!

AND WITH THAT, LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT MOVIE EIGHT-PUSSY!

WHAT, WHAT'S IT CALLED?

OH, FU-

13. OCTOPUSSY (1983)

LET'S BE HONEST, THE BEST THINGS THAT EVER CAME OUT OF OCTOPUSSY WAS THE HOMER SIMPSON QUOTE... EXTRA POINTS IF YOU KNOW IT.

THE SECOND BEST THING WAS THE INSANITY ON DISPLAY ON WITH THIS CHOICE:

BUT THE THIRD BEST THING THAT CAME OUT OF THE FILM IS... MIDGE.

OKAY SO, PERHAPS WE HAVE TO QUALIFY THIS ONE, SO FORGIVE A WEIRD TANGENT AS HULK TALKS OF THE GLORY OF MIDGE! BUT WHEN HULK WAS WATCHING OCTOPUSSY FOR THIS COLUMN, THERE WAS THIS WEIRD MOMENT THAT SEEMINGLY CAME OUT OF NOWHERE. SO MAUD ADAMS PLAYS OCTOPUSSY, RIGHT? THIS JEWEL SMUGGLER / WEALTHY BUSINESSWOMAN WHO LEADS AN "OCTOPUS CULT" (BECAUSE WHY NOT) AND THE THING ABOUT HER OCTOPUS CULT IS SHE HAS ALL THESE TALL, STATUESQUE MODEL-Y TYPE WOMEN TO DO HER BIDDING (BECAUSE WHY NOT). ANYWHO, THERE'S THIS MOMENT WHERE SHE'S BEEN ADDRESSING ALL THESE TALL MODEL WOMEN AND ALL OF A SUDDEN SHE TURNS TO THIS IMPOSSIBLY TINY, SLIGHTLY-WEIRD-LOOKING-FOR-THE-ROOM WOMAN WITH HUGE HAIR RIGHT BESIDE HER AND SAYS "MIDGE, WOULD YOU... BLAH, BLAH, BLAH" HULK FORGETS EXACTLY. AND MIDGE ONLY RESPONDS WITH AN EXAGGERATED FACIAL EXPRESSION AND A NOD.

THIS IS MIDGE.

AND HULK JUST BURST OUT LAUGHING.

HULK DIDN'T LAUGH FOR SOME TERRIBLE REASON AND IT'S NOT LIKE HER APPEARANCE IS A JOKE. IT'S JUST THE FACT THAT SHE LOOKS SO DIFFERENT FROM ALL THE PEOPLE AROUND HER AND THE MOMENT IS CONSTRUCTED SO HILARIOUSLY AND CLUNKILY. AND THE BEST PART IS THAT MIDGE JUST PROCEEDS TO STAND AROUND IN THE BACKGROUND THE REST OF THE MOVIE AND DO SO RATHER AWKWARDLY. AS A RESULT OF THIS, HULK WAS GIGGLING FOR PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF OCTOPUSSY AND IT PROBABLY CONTRIBUTED TO HULK'S ENJOYING IT TWICE AS MUCH AS HULK SHOULD HAVE.

THE BEST PART IS THAT MIDGE COULDN'T HAVE BE AN ACCIDENT. THE ATTENTION DRAWN TO HER IS SO SPECIFIC, SO STRANGE AND SO NOTICEABLE THAT HULK IMMEDIATELY BEGAN A WHOLE SERIES OF MUSINGS. WHERE DID MIDGE FROM? WHY IS SHE THERE?  WAS SHE THE WIFE OF A PRODUCER? WHAT HAS LED THE FILMMAKERS TO MAKE THIS PARTICULAR DECISION? AND IN ALL THIS TIME HULK NEVER EVEN BOTHERED TO SIMPLY LOOK IT UP AND THUS FOR THE LAST YEAR "THE LEGEND OF MIDGE" HAS JUST GROWN IN HULK'S BRAIN SINCE HULK WATCHED THE MOVIE.

BUT WHEN IT FINALLY CAME TIME TO WRITE THIS COLUMN FOR REALSIES, HULK FINALLY BROKE DOWN AND JUST LOOKED HER UP. EVEN IF IT DESTROYED THE MYSTERY, IT JUST SEEMED LIKE THE RESPONSIBLE THING TO DO. AND TURNS OUT THAT MIDGE IS NONE OTHER THAN... CHERRY GILLESPIE.

DAMMIT, HULK SHOULD HAVE FIGURED IT OUT EARLIER. HULK EVEN KNEW GILLESPIE FOR POOP'S SAKE! AND IN CASE YOU DON'T KNOW HER, SHE WAS A REASONABLY FAMOUS DANCER FROM PAN'S PEOPLE, OFT NOTED FOR HER DISTINCTIVE HAIR AND SMALL FRAME. SO SHE WAS A (RELATIVELY) FAMOUS FIGURE AND THAT TOTALLY EXPLAINS A GOOD DEAL OF THE DIRECT ATTENTION HER CHARACTER RECEIVES IN THE FILM. TO THIS DAY, HULK HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIGURE OUT HOW SHE GOT INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT OR WHO SHE KNEW, BUT NAMING HER MIDGE WAS KIND OF A MASTERSTROKE. STILL... HULK SORT OF PREFERS THE VERSION OF THE STORY IN HULK'S BRAIN WHERE SHE IS SIMPLY MIDGE, A LEGEND, A BOND ENTITY UNTO HERSELF... THIS MIGHT A LIFE OF PI SITUATION.

ANYCRAP, REALLY-LONG MIDGE-RELATED TANGENT OVER!

WHICH IS GOOD BECAUSE OCTOPUSSY REALLY ISN'T THAT BAD? AT LEAST IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S ANOTHER MIXED BAG (WHICH IS KIND OF GLEN'S M.O.). ON ONE SIDE WE HAVE THE DELIGHTFULLY LAME: THE CLOWN ASSASSINATION, THE FABERGE EGG THEFT (BLEEDING GUMS WOULD BE SAD... SECOND SIMPSONS REFERENCE IN ONE CHAPTER!), A COMPLETELY PHONED-IN PERFORMANCE FROM LOUIS JOURDAN AS THE BAD GUY (HE HAD A GOOD CAREER TOO! FROM HIS EARLY FRENCH WORK, TO GIGI, TO SWAMP THING! MORE TROUBLING HOWEVER IS THAT HE PLAYS THIS GENERIC INDIAN/MIDDLE EASTERN MAGNATE KNOWN AS KAMAL KHAN AND IN REAL LIFE JOURDAN IS FRENCH WITH A LITTLE BIT OF TURKISH HERITAGE... OOF). BUT THERE'S ALSO A BUNCH OF WEIRD-GOOD STUFF IN THIS FILM. SOME OF IT EVEN GOES A LITTLE BACK TOWARDS THE "BONKERS-BUT-PLAYED-KINDA-STRAIGHT" TONE OF MOONRAKER.

AND RATHER THAN HULK SUMMARIZING THE PLOT, IT'S BETTER THAT YOU SEE THE INSANITY FOR YOURSELF IF YOU WATCH THE TRAILER (WHICH HULK WILL START FOR YOU AT THE 52 SECOND MARK) BECAUSE IT SHOWS OFF EXACTLY WHAT KIND OF MOVIE YOU ARE IN FOR:

THIS TRAILER EDITS THE FILM LIKE ONE LONG CHASE... KINDA NEAT, RIGHT?

AND YEAH, IT'S ALL INESCAPABLY RIDICULOUS, BUT A LOT OF IT STILL WORKS THIS GO-ROUND. LIKE YES, THAT WAS FAMOUS TENNIS PLAYER VIJAY AMRITRAJ AND YES HE DOES HIT PEOPLE WITH A TENNIS RACKET AS A WEAPON. AND YES THAT WAS THE OCTOPUSSY CULT ATTACKING A COMPOUND IN SCANTILY CLAD CLOTHING OR ORANGE JUMPSUITS (HULK JUST CAN'T EVEN). AND YES MAUD ADAMS IS IN THIS DESPITE THE FACT SHE WAS ALREADY PLAYING ANOTHER CHARACTER IN THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN (PERHAPS THEY DO THIS JUST TO GET YOU COMFORTABLE WITH CHANGING BOND ACTORS?). AND YES THAT WAS A MAN ON THE BACK OF A PLANE PERFORMING ANOTHER INCREDIBLE STUNT!!!!!!!!! IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED YET, HULK LOVES PROPER STUNT WORK AND THE BOND SERIES CONTINUES TO BE THE MOST DEPENDABLE FILM SERIES IN THAT REGARD. HOLLYWOOD SHOULD ALWAYS BE ABLE TO GIVE US THE THRILLS AND AWES THAT THE BOND SERIES DOES, AND IT'S AMAZING HOW MUCH CGI TAKES AWAY FROM THE NOTION OF "AMAZEMENT"... WHICH IS WHY GREAT STUNTWORK SHOULD ALWAYS BE THE BEST THAT HOLLYWOOD HAS TO OFFER.

MEANWHILE, ON THE BOND GIRL FRONT, WE HAVE ANOTHER SEMI-MIDDLING ENTRY. THE FILM COULD CERTAINLY DO WORSE, BUT IT AT LEAST INTRODUCES US TO A NEW ARCHETYPE - WHICH IS "THE WOMAN WHO SEEMS LIKE THE MAIN BAD GUY UNTIL IT TURNS OUT SHE'S A PAWN IN SOME OTHER BAD GUY'S MUCH MORE EVIL SCHEME!" WHICH IS ONLY THE MOST MINOR OF VARIATIONS. AND THAT LITTLE BIT OF DISSUADING PLOTTING ASIDE, MAUD ADAMS' OCTOPUSSY IS PRETTY FUNCTIONAL AS AN INDEPENDENT COHORT WHO DIRECTLY PLAYS INTO THE PLOT OF THE MOVIE. AND FOR THE BOND SERIES THAT AIN'T NOT HALF BAD!

HULK REALLY WANTS HER BATHROBE THOUGH...

SLIGHTLY MORE INTERESTING IS THE APPEARANCE OF KRISTINA WAYBORN AS MAGDA. MORE INTERESTING IN THE SENSE THAT SHE PLAYS ONE OF OCTOPUSSY'S HENCHWOMEN AND THE WHOLE FIRST ACT OF THE PLOT SORT OF DEPENDS ON HER TERSE INTERACTIONS WITH BOND. AND RATHER THAN JUST LEAVE HER FOREVER OR KILL HER ONCE HER MAIN PLOT FUNCTION IS DONE, SHE KEEPS SHOWING UP IN THE FILM TO HAVE THESE NEAT LITTLE COME-BACK MOMENTS. HULK FINDS THIS CURIOUS BECAUSE SHE'S JUST A GENERIC HENCHWOMAN WITHOUT HER OWN MOTIVATIONS OR CHARACTERIZATION OR WHATEVER, BUT IT'S REFRESHING THAT SHE'S SORT OF GIVEN A LOT TO DO (DESPITE A LOT OF THAT STUFF OFTEN INVOLVING HER BEING THE BUTT OF THE JOKE). ULTIMATELY, HULK'S NOT SURE IF THE WHOLE PORTRAYAL IS GOOD OR BAD, BUT IT DOES MARK AN EVOLUTION OF THIS KIND OF ROLE IN THE SERIES, WHERE THE WOMEN GO FROM BEING TOTALLY DISPOSAL TO SOMEWHAT INTEGRAL AT LEAST? ... MAN, IS THAT REALLY WHAT MAKES FOR AN EVOLUTION HERE? YIKES.

BUT IN THE END, WE ARE STILL LEFT WITH OCTOPUSSY AS ANOTHER MIXED BAG ENTRY. IT COMPILES A SERIES OF MOMENTS THAT, IN AND OF THEMSELVES, COULD BE CONSTRUED AS COMPELLINGLY GOOD OR COMPELLINGLY BAD, BUT IT STILL DOESN'T ADD UP TO ANYTHING SIGNIFICANT. UNLIKE SOME OF THE OTHER FUN MIXED BAG ENTRIES IN THIS SERIES, THIS FILM DOESN'T REALLY HAVE A BEATING HEART, OR EVEN ITS OWN VOICE OR PERSONALITY OR SOUL TO IT. THE ONLY WAY TO POSSIBLY CHARACTERIZE OCTOPUSSY ON THE WHOLE IS THAT IT IS THE FILM THAT SHOWS OFF "THE RANGE" OF THE ENTIRE MOORE ERA. SOMETIMES IT'S FUN. SOMETIMES IT'S LAME. SOMETIMES IT'S OFFENSIVE. SOMETIMES IT'S JAW-DROPPINGLY ENTHRALLING (AGAIN, THE STUNTS). AND SOMETIMES IT'S TOTALLY BORING. LIKE MOORE'S ENTIRE OEUVRE, THIS ONE RUNS THE GAMUT OF THAT EXPERIENCE WHILE SOMEHOW TYPIFYING ITSELF.

WHICH MEANS THAT ONLY ONE QUESTION REMAINS...

WHERE'S MIDGE?

THE ANSWER IS IN OUR HEARTS.

ENTRY #X. NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN (1983)

SO HULK DOESN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS MOVIE.

WHICH MAY SOUND STRANGE GIVEN THAT HULK HAS TALKED ABOUT ALL THESE SUCKERS IN IMMENSE DETAIL AND NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN IS TECHNICALLY ONE OF THE WEIRDEST "BOND MOVIES" EVER. FOR ONE, IT HAS CONNERY RETURNING TO ROLE OF BOND AFTER TWELVE FUCKING YEARS. IT'S NOT MADE BY THE BROCCOLI FAMILY OR EON PRODUCTIONS, WHO ARE ALWAYS THE BOND PRODUCERS (AS THEY HAVE THE CENTRAL RIGHTS). IT'S EVEN DIRECTED BY THE GREAT IRVIN KERSHNER (OF EMPIRE STRIKES BACK FAME!). AND IT'S NOT EVEN A NEW INDEPENDENT STORY, BUT JUST A REMAKE OF ONE OF CONNERY'S OLDER FILMS THUNDERBALL (WHY DO THAT? BECAUSE IT'S THE ONLY BOOK WHERE THE COPYRIGHT LAWS ARE SPLIT AND THUS THEY COULD USE IT FOR A NEW ADAPTATION). THIS FILM EVEN STARS ONE OF HULK'S CHILDHOOD CRUSHES IN KIM BASINGER. HECK, IT MIGHT EVEN BE WORTH TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE IT HAS SOME REALLY WELL-FILMED ACTION AND GREAT KINETIC CAR SEQUENCES, MAYBE SOME THAT ARE BETTER THAN THE OTHER BOND ENTRIES. ON THE SURFACE THIS ALL SOUNDS FASCINATING AND WORTHY OF LENGTHY DISCUSSION... BUT THAT'S JUST ON THE SURFACE.

BECAUSE ON THE INSIDE, IT'S NONE OF THOSE THINGS.

HULK CAN'T DESCRIBE IT IN ANY CLEAR WAY, HULK CAN ONLY DESCRIBE THIS FILM WITH A VAGUE TERM OF SPECIFICITY: THIS FILM IS SOULLESS.

FIRST, HULK GUESSES THAT WE JUST HAVE TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT MOVIES HAVE SOULS. THEY LIVE AND BREATH AND INTERACT WITH US AND WE HAVE CONNOTATIONS OF WHAT THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY MEAN... AND THIS FILM? THIS FILM IS IS JUST SUCH A HOLLOW IMITATION OF EVERYTHING WE HAVE COME TO EMBRACE ABOUT THE CHARACTER, NO MATTER HOW MUCH OF "THE SAME" IT MAY SEEM. IT'S STILL "OFF-BRAND" CONTENT. IT'S ALMOST A NOTHING MOVIE. IT'S LIKE WATCHING YOUR FAVORITE TV SHOW DUBBED FOR ANOTHER COUNTRY.

AND WHEN HULK PAUSES TO WATCH IT FOR THIS COLUMN'S PURPOSES, RIGHT WHEN HULK IS ON THIS HUGE RUN AND EXAMINING THE TWILIGHT OF THE MOORE ERA? WITH ALL DIFFERENT ACTORS PLAYING M AND SUCH? IT JUST MAKES FOR A WEIRD, HOLLOW AND ULTIMATELY ANGER-INDUCING EXERCISE. IT EVEN GETS TO THE ROOT OF JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING WRONG WITH HOLLYWOOD'S APPROACH TO RECYCLED PROPERTIES AND STAND-IN CHARACTERS. AS LIBERAL IN CASTING AND CONTINUITY AS THE BOND FILMS CAN BE, THEY WERE NEVER OUTSIDE OF THE BROCCOLI INPUT. THEY WERE NEVER THE OTHER. THEY WERE NEVER THIS.

AND SO THE REASON HULK DOESN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN IS BECAUSE IT JUST MAKES HULK SAD.

IT REALLY, REALLY DOES.

SO LET'S TALK ABOUT CHRISTOPHER WALKEN INSTEAD!

14. A VIEW TO A KILL (1985)

SO THIS PARTICULAR BOND FILM HAS A REPUTATION OF BEING ONE OF THOSE "SO BAD IT'S GOOD," ENDLESSLY-ENTERTAINING-YET-WHOLLY-TERRIBLE AND BEYOND-BATSHIT FILMS THAT HAS TO BE SEEN TO BELIEVED!

... ACTUALLY, IT'S MOSTLY BORING.

AND THE REASON IT'S REGARDED AS THE MOST BATSHIT OF THE BOND SERIES HAS A LOT TO DO WITH HULK'S OLD TANGIBLE DETAILS THEORY. THE IDEA BEING THERE'S LOTS OF INDIVIDUAL MOMENTS TO LATCH ONTO THAT SCREAM "THIS IS BAD!" OR "THIS IS WEIRD!" BUT THOSE MOMENTS MIGHT NOT HAVE MUCH TO DO WITH THE OVERALL FILM'S CONSTRUCTION OR TRUE FAILINGS. NO, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT LOTS OF PEOPLE LOOK AT THIS  FILM AND GO "Christopher Walken as a Bond villain!??!?! And he has super-strength!?!?!??! That has to be awesome!!!!!" AND YES, SOME MOMENTS ARE, BUT THE SAD TRUTH IS HE'S ONLY IN LIKE THIRD-GEAR WALKEN MODE FOR MOST OF THIS FILM (WE'VE SEEN MUCH, MUCH, MUCH MORE WALKENY STUFF FROM HIM, ESPECIALLY HIS STELLAR WORK IN HIS HEYDAY). HECK, HE'S NOT EVEN REALLY GIVEN A LOT TO DO EXCEPT GO ON AND ON AND ON ABOUT HIS WEIRD PLANS. THERE ARE ONLY THESE FEW WEIRD MOMENTS.

SERIOUSLY THAT'S, LIKE, IT.

BUT IT'S NOT JUST WALKEN. PEOPLE ALSO LATCH ONTO ANOTHER TANGIBLE DETAIL AND GO "Whoa, Grace Jones is in this!?!? She's all strange and stuff!!!" AND YEAH SHE'S IN IT AND GOES ALL GRACE JONES-Y, BUT IT'S SAME EXACT PROBLEM. ASIDE FROM THE BIZARRO WRESTLING SCENES, SHE AND WALKEN REALLY GIVEN A CHANCE TO GO ALL THAT CRAZY AND EAT SCENERY LIKE A NINE-COURSE MEAL. THEY MOSTLY JUST STAND THERE AND LOOK THE PART. HECK, EVEN ALL THE CRAZY PLOT-BASED ELEMENTS OF THIS STORY SEEM LIKE THEY SHOULD ADD UP TO MORE. YOUR BRAIN GOES: "Racing horses on steroids!!? Silicon Valley thievery???!?! Compooters!?!?!!" BUT THEY'RE ALL EQUALLY DULL. THE FILM'S FUN IDENTITY IS A COMMON MISTAKE, A MERE SYMPTOM OF ALL ITS SEEMINGLY FUN TANGIBLE DETAILS (AND A COMMON OCCURRENCE WITH MOST OF "SO-BAD-IT'S-GOOD" MOVIES IN GENERAL).

ON PAPER, A VIEW TO A KILL SHOULD EITHER BE CRAZY IN A GOOD WAY OR CRAZY IN A BAD WAY, BUT INSTEAD IT'S JUST BAD IN A BAD WAY. NOW, WE USE THIS KIND OF DESCRIPTION ALL THE TIME, BUT IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY TELL US ANYTHING ABOUT WHY IT'S BAD. IT'S JUST A VAGUE STATEMENT OF OPINION. SO HERE IT IS: WHEN YOU GO BACK THROUGH A VIEW TO A KILL, YOU REALIZE THE FILM BARELY HAS A PULSE. THIS IS THE FIRST BOND FILM THAT ALMOST MEANDERS, RESULTING IN THE LONGEST-FEELING, LEAST-PROPULSIVE BOND MOVIE, WHICH IS CERTAINLY NOT HELPED BY THE FACT THAT IT HAS THE LONGEST-FEELING, LEAST-PROPULSIVE ENDING IN THE SERIES' HISTORY (THIS IS THE WHOLE MINE-THING. THE GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE CAPER IS ALMOST A SAVING THROW, BUT EVEN THAT UNDERWHELMS). AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CRAFT OF FILMMAKING, OR PACING, OR EDITING (THOUGH IT IS CERTAINLY LAX IN THOSE DEPARTMENTS). IT HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THE FILM IS WRITTEN WITH ALMOST NO SENSE OF PURPOSE. WE WANDER INTO SCENES WITH NO TOUCHSTONE OR OBJECTIVE. THINGS JUST HAPPEN AND THEN WE START OVER. IT FEELS LONG BECAUSE WE NEVER KNOW WHERE WE ARE GOING. AND FOR THAT REASON ALONE IT ENDED UP BEING THE FIRST REAL PUBLICLY "DISAPPOINTING" ROGER MOORE FILM, BOTH IN TERMS OF RESPONSE AND FINANCIAL SUCCESS. BUT OF COURSE, THAT'S NOT HOW POPULAR HISTORY TOOK IT. NO, THE LIE AGREED UPON WAS THAT THE FILM WAS BAD BECAUSE IT WAS CRAZY... NOT BECAUSE IT WAS SIMPLY INERT.

WHICH IS REALLY DISAPPOINTING ON A FEW LEVELS, THE FIRST OF WHICH IS THAT WE ONCE AGAIN HAVE SOME OF THE BEST STUNTS IN THE ENTIRE MOORE ERA ALL OFFERED IN THIS MOVIE. HECK, LET'S JUST GO BACK AND WATCH THE MIDDLE PART OF THE THEATRICAL TRAILER FOR THIS ONE, WHICH SHOWCASES THE THE NOW-FAMOUS EIFFEL TOWER JUMP AND HOW IT DIRECTLY LEADS INTO A NEAT CAR SEQUENCE, COMPLETE WITH CASUAL NATIONALISM AGAINST THE FRENCH!

LOOK HOW MUCH OF THAT SHORT BURST WAS PRACTICAL! DAMMIT, THERE'S JUST NOTHING LIKE THAT TODAY. IT MAKES FOR A SAD HULK!

ALSO MAKING FOR A SAD HULK IS DURAN DURAN'S OFFERING OF THE MOST DURAN DURAN-LIKE BOND TITLE SEQUENCE IMAGINABLE:

IN CASE WE DIDN'T REALIZE WE WERE IN THE 80'S!

SORRY, NOW THINGS ARE GETTING A LITTLE HECTIC. WHAT COULD MAKE HULK FEEL BETTER ABOUT ALL THIS? WELL, HOW ABOUT THE FACT THAT THIS FILM WAS DOLPH LUNDGREN'S FIRST MOVIE APPEARANCE!

HOORAY!

OKAY, LET'S MOVE INTO THE BOND GIRL STUFF.

SO, STICKING WITH THE THEME OF THE FILM, TANYA ROBERTS IS ALSO REALLY, REALLY BORING IN THIS FILM. HULK BELIEVES THE INTENTION WAS TO SET HER UP AS A LIKEABLE CIVILIAN CAUGHT UP IN ZORIN'S SCHEMES (HER FATHER WAS AN OIL TYCOON AND NOW ZORIN IS TRYING TO BRIBE HER FOR $5 MILLION OR SOME "PALTRY" SUM). BUT AN UNFORTUNATE SIDE EFFECT OF HER CIVILIAN-NESS AS THAT IT JUST BECOMES AN EXCUSE TO STRIP HER OF BASICALLY ANY INDEPENDENCE. AND IT'S NOT LIKE THIS IS HER FAULT REALLY AS SHE SEEMS TO SPEND MOST OF THE RUNNING TIME LOOKING CONFUSED AND YELLING "HELP ME JAMES!" AND THEN OLD MAN MOORE SORT OF FUMBLES AROUND TRYING TO SAVE HER. SERIOUSLY, THAT'S LIKE MOST OF THE RUNNING TIME. IT'S KIND OF AMAZING, REALLY. SO MUCH SO THAT RIGHT AFTER WATCHING THIS MOVIE, ALL HULK'S NOTES SAID ABOUT HER WAS:

"TANYA ROBERTS - ???"

SORRY TANYA. WE'LL ALWAYS HAVE BEASTMASTER.

NEXT UP, IT'S JENNY FLEX, FEATURING THE DEBUT OF ALISON DOODY! STAR OF MAJOR LEAGUE II EVERYONE!!!

... WHAT'S THAT? ALISON DOODY WAS THE LEAD IN INDIANA JONES AND LAST CRUSADE? OH, RIGHT. WELL SOME OF US REFER TO MAJOR LEAGUE AS "THE TRILOGY," SO...

OKAY, OKAY. HULK WILL STOP WITH RUN-ON, PUERILE JOKES.

...

... HEHE. DOODY.

ALL RIGHT, ACTUALLY SORRY. THIS THING IS LONG AND HULK NEED TO ENTERTAIN HULK-SELF SOMEHOW. AND WHAT BETTER WAY THAN WITH DIRECT COMMUNICATION TO YOU! BUT HULK REALLY DOES WANT TO GET AT SOMETHING SERIOUS FOR A SECOND AND IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY IMPORTANT IN OUR DISCUSSIONS OF GENDER - AND IT'S ALSO PERSONAL.

IT'S TIME FOR A BIT OF A RUEFUL ADMISSION: WHEN LITTLE-HULK FIRST SAW THIS MOVIE,  WELL, LITTLE-HULK WAS CONFUSED BY GRACE JONES. WHO IS SHE? WHY IS SHE LIKE THAT? WHY DOES SHE HAVE SUCH MASCULINE QUALITIES? WHY DOES LIL HULK FIND HER SO THREATENING? IT'S NOT REALLY SURPRISING BECAUSE A WHOLE BUNCH OF ADULTS DIDN'T EVEN REALLY KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH GRACE JONES, EITHER. BUT WHEN YOU'RE YOUNG AND YOUR WEE LITTLE BRAIN IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE BASICS OF BOTH GENDER AND RACIAL NORMS (WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE BEST TIME TO LEARN THEM WITH MORAL SIMPLICITY) YOU CAN GET FUCKED WHEN A) PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY DONE A REALLY BAD JOB OF EXPLAINING THEM TO YOU AND MAKE YOU THINK STUPID, GENDER NORMATIVE THINGS AND B) THE BOND FILMS ARE PRETTY DEPLORABLE FOR THIS STUFF. SO SEEING A PERSON LIKE GRACE JONES WILL CHALLENGE ALL THOSE CONVENTIONAL PRE-SET NOTIONS IN YOUR BRAIN. AND HULK WAS CERTAINLY NO EXCEPTION... BUT GUESS WHAT, FOLKS?

THAT ENDS UP BEING A VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY GOOD THING.

BECAUSE THE SECOND YOU CAN ABANDON THE CONCEPT OF WHAT PEOPLE SHOULD LOOK LIKE AS A YOUNG PERSON IS THE MOMENT YOU EMBRACE THOSE SILLY CONCEPTS LIKE INDIVIDUALITY AND PERSONAL DISTINCTION. WHAT MAKES GRACE JONES SO COMPELLING IS NOT THAT SHE LOOKED LIKE THIS OR THAT, BUT THAT SHE'S AN ENTITY UNTO HERSELF. IT WASN'T JUST HER LOOK. IT WAS HER EMBODIMENT: STRONG, STRIKING, UNCONVENTIONAL IN VIRTUALLY EVERY SENSE. AND SHE WAS A HUGE PUBLIC FIGURE BECAUSE OF THAT. GO BACK AND WATCH THE MARKETING AND YOU'LL SEE HOW MUCH OF THE MOVIE THEY WERE SELLING REVOLVED AROUND HER AWESOMENESS (AND NOT SO MUCH WALKEN). SURE IT WAS 1985 AND ANDROGYNY HAD A MORE VITAL CULTURAL PRESENCE IN THE WAKE OF BOWIE, ETC. BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT SHE DID FOR LIL HULK'S BRAIN. THE POINT OF ALL OF THIS IS THAT SOMETIMES CONFUSING LITTLE HULKS IS THE BEST THING YOU CAN DO ON THE PLANET. AND THIS ISN'T TO MAKE IT SOUND LIKE GRACE JONES IS SOME EXTREME EXAMPLE ON THE SPECTRUM OF HUMANITY, BECAUSE SHE REALLY ISN'T AT ALL. BUT SHE WAS DEFINITELY THE PERSON WHOSE SEMI-ANDROGYNOUS LOOK ENDED UP SERVING AS A GATEWAY TO MORE ENLIGHTENED THINKING FOR THIS HULK.

AND THAT IS REALLY WORTH CELEBRATING.

CUZ GRACE JONES IS AWESOME.

AND JUST LIKE THAT, WE REACH THE END OF THE ROGER MOORE ERA.

PERHAPS IT WAS TIME. HIS CONTRACT WAS UP. HE SPENT MOST OF A VIEW TO A KILL LOOKING KIND OF OLD AND TIRED. THE MOVIE WAS AS NOT AS MUCH OF A SUCCESS BECAUSE IT WAS SLOW AND PLODDING, BUT EVERYONE STILL BLAMED IT ON THE TANGIBLE DETAIL WEIRDNESS AND MOORE BEING OLD. STILL, THROUGHOUT MOORE'S SEVEN MOVIES HULK STILL HASN'T TALKED ALL THAT MUCH ABOUT HIM. WHY IS THAT?

BECAUSE, WELL, IT'S ALL RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF YOU, ISN'T IT? WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET WITH ROGER MOORE. HIS BOND IS DEBONAIR, SILLY, CHARMING AND COMING AT YOU LIKE A WIDE-EYED BIT OF LIKEABILITY. AND IT'S ALL ON THE SURFACE. WHICH CAN OFTEN BELIE THE NATURE OF ROGER MOORE, THE PERSON. WHILE HULK CAN'T SPEAK TO IT PERSONALLY, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN AGREEMENT THAT ROGER MOORE WAS EVEN MORE FAMOUS FOR BEING A GREAT PERSON; LIKE REALLY, JUST ONE OF THE KINDEST AND MOST WELL-MANNERED PEOPLE WHO JUST SO HAPPENED TO GO ON TO BECOME AN INTERNATIONAL STAR. AND EVER SINCE THE LOCATION SHOOTING OF OCTOPUSSY, WHEREIN HE REALLY HAD A GREAT DEAL OF INTERACTION WITH THIRD WORLD NEEDS, HE HAS BEEN EXTREMELY DEVOTED TO HIS WORK TO UNICEF. AND EVEN THOUGH HIS FILM CAREER WAS ALMOST ENTIRELY DEFINED BY HIS PLAYING JAMES BOND, HE HAS SHOWN HIMSELF TO BE REMARKABLY AT PEACE WITH THAT REALITY. HE HAS ALWAYS EMBRACED HIS IDENTITY AS BOND AND ESPOUSED THAT HE WAS ONE OF THE LUCKIEST, MOST GRATEFUL PEOPLE ON THE PLANET FOR THAT HONOR. HE EVEN RECENTLY WROTE WROTE WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A CHARMING BOOK (WHICH HULK HAS YET TO READ, ODDLY ENOUGH) CALLED "BOND ON BOND" ABOUT HIS JOURNEY WITH THE CHARACTER AND THE OTHER BONDS AS WELL.

SO GETTING OUTSIDE OF OF OUR PERSONAL OPINIONS ON WHO ARE OUR "FAVORITES" OR WHO WE THINK DID THE BEST JOB WITH THE ROLE, IT IS KIND OF HARD TO ARGUE THAT NO ONE WAS MORE DESERVING OF GETTING SEVEN BOND MOVIES THAN ROGER MOORE. AND EVEN HULK HAS TO ADMIT, OUTSIDE OF THE FIRST TWO ENTRIES, WHICH WERE CLEARLY BEYOND HIS CONTROL, HE DELIVERED FIVE REASONABLY CONSISTENT FILMS THAT KEPT THE BOND TORCH ALIVE AND BURNING BRIGHT.

SIMPLY, ROGER MOORE SHOULD ALWAYS BE CELEBRATED...

AND WITH THAT GOODBYE, WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT GENT...

15. THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS (1987)

TWO THINGS UPFRONT:

1. NOW THAT'S A POSTER.

2. GET READY FOR SOME GUSHING, BECAUSE HULK FREAKIN LOVES THIS MOVIE.

THAT'S RIGHT. HULK LOVES IT. AND WHILE MOST BOND FANS CONSIDER THIS ONE TO BE A BIT OF A MIXED BAG (FOR REASONS THAT PROBABLY MAKE SENSE), HULK'S TAKE ON IT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. THOUGH HULK SHOULD ALSO MENTION THAT HULK WAS SUPER NERVOUS ABOUT GOING BACK TO RE-WATCH THIS ONE. HULK LOVED ALL OF THE BOND MOVIES AS A KID AND THIS JOURNEY OF RE-WATCHING THEM HAS INVOLVED A LOT OF DISCOVERY OF THE FACT THAT HALF OF THESE MOVIES WERE KIND OF TERRIBLE (IN THEIR OWN WAYS). AND THUS HULK WAS PARTICULARLY WORRIED BECAUSE HULK REMEMBERED SEEING IT WHEN IT CAME OUT AND BEING SO EXCITED AND THINKING THIS WAS THE GREATEST THING EVER. WHICH WAS OBVIOUSLY JUST DUMB YOUNG PERSON BRAIN. BUT WOULD IT JUST BE AN 80'S HORROR? WOULD ALL THE THINGS THAT SEEMED AWESOME BACK THEN BE TERRIBLE? LUCKILY, IN GOING BACK TO FINALLY WATCH IT HULK DISCOVERED SOMETHING PRETTY DARN COOL:

THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS IS LEGITIMATELY GOOD.

BUT PERHAPS WE SHOULD  SET THE STAGE AS TO WHY: GOING INTO PRE-PRODUCTION FOR THE FILM, THE PRODUCERS WERE IN THE PRECARIOUS POSITION OF FINDING THEMSELVES A NEW JAMES BOND FOR THE FIRST TIME IN A 14 YEARS (IT WASN'T JUST THE AMOUNT, PEOPLE SEEM TO FORGET JUST HOW LONG MOORE HELD THE TITLE). LUCKILY, THEY WEREN'T GOING INTO THIS DILEMMA TOTALLY BLIND OR IN A SENSE OF CRISIS AND THEY SEEMED TO HAVE A GOOD SENSE OF WHAT THEY WANTED: THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY HAD TO ESTABLISH A NEW TONE, ESTABLISH THE DISTINCT NATURE OF THIS NEW BOND, ESTABLISH THAT IT STILL IS BOND, AND THEN SOMEHOW MAKE IT ALL BALANCE IN A (HOPEFULLY) SEAMLESS WAY.

EASIER SAID THAN DONE, OF COURSE.

BUT YOU WILL RECALL THERE HAVE ALREADY BEEN A FEW ATTEMPTS TO MAKE BOND "GRITTIER" OVER THE COURSE OF THE SERIES, ALL TO EITHER DECENT OR MIDDLING RESULTS. BUT BY 1987 THE GRITTIFICATION BECAME A REAL PREROGATIVE FOR THE SERIES GOING FORWARD, AS IT WAS JUST MORE REACTIVE OF THE CHANGES IN MOVIE-GOING TASTE. WE WERE MILES AWAY FROM SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT TERRITORY (AN OBVIOUS INFLUENCE ON MOORE'S FILMS) AND NOW FOUND OURSELVES SQUARELY IN THE ERA OF LETHAL WEAPON. BUT EVEN WITH THE NEED TO KEEP WITH THE TIMES, SIMPLY "GOING GRITTY" IS A MORE TROUBLING ISSUE THAN MOST PEOPLE REALIZE. IT'S SORT OF BECOME THIS CATCH-ALL SOLUTION IN MODERN FILMMAKING, AND WHILE CERTAIN MOVIE-GOERS ARE ATTRACTED TO THAT TEXTURE AND THE ALLURE OF MAKING SOMETHING "ADULT," HULK WORRIES THAT NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE CONSIDER THAT IT MIGHT NOT WORK OR BE APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR AIMS. TONE IS A TRICKY THING; A DELICATE BALANCING ACT WHERE WHATEVER YOU GAIN IN TERMS OF "VALIDITY" BY GOING GRITTY CAN ALSO RESULT IN BRINGING TOO MUCH REALISM INTO A CINEMATIC WORLD THAT ACTUALLY FUNCTIONS BEST WITHOUT IT. WE'VE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY JUST NONSENSICALLY LAYER THESE INFLUENCES INTO BOND'S WORLD (COUGH COUGH LIVE AND LET DIE), SO ONE HAS TO REALIZE THAT MAKING BOND "REAL" CAN WHOLLY UNDERMINE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH HIM IN TERMS OF ELATION IN THE FIRST PLACE. AFTER ALL, HE'S AN INDULGENT FIGURE WHO DEPENDS ON A CERTAIN KIND OF MOVIE WORLD AND STORY EXISTING AROUND HIM. IT'S THE SILLY TOLD SERIOUS. AND IT'S A REMARKABLY DIFFICULT THING TO PULL OFF.

WHICH MAKES IT ALL THE MORE STRANGE THAT THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS GOT SO MUCH RIGHT, RIGHT OFF THE DAMN BAT. HECK, IT EVEN GETS BACK TO SOME OF THE WONDERFUL PURE CINEMATIC THINGS THAT HULK ADORED ABOUT FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. HULK KNOWS THAT'S A PRETTY BIG COMPLIMENT, BUT HULK SINCERELY MEANS IT.

AND SO MUCH OF THAT SUCCESS IS BECAUSE OF TIMOTHY DALTON.

IF EYEBROWS COULD KILL!

DALTON, LIKE A LOT OF BOND CANDIDATES, WAS ACTUALLY APPROACHED ABOUT THE ROLE LONG BEFORE HE WAS CAST. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THE FIRST TIME HE WAS CONSIDERED WAS RIGHT AFTER CONNERY LEFT, BUT DALTON FELT HE WAS FAR, FAR TOO YOUNG FOR THE ROLE. HE WAS THEN APPROACHED AGAIN WHEN THEY WERE HAVING TROUBLE WITH MOORE'S CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS GOING INTO FOR YOUR EYES ONLY (THEY ALSO MET A YOUNG PIERCE BROSNAN!). BUT IT WAS FINALLY WITH THE THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS THAT THE STARS ALIGNED AND HE SIGNED ON. AND WHAT IMMEDIATELY MAKES DALTON'S BOND A LITTLE MORE DISTINCT IS THAT THERE IS A BIT OF NATURAL ANGER THERE. HE'S RESTLESS. PIERCING. YOU COULD EVEN SAY THERE'S A LITTLE MENACE TOO. BUT IT DOESN'T GO SO FAR THAT WOULD OUTRIGHT CLASSIFY HIM PURELY BY ANY OF THOSE DESCRIPTIONS EITHER (AS THAT CLEARLY WOULDN'T WORK). IT'S JUST MORE OF A PALPABLE UNDERCURRENT. HE COMES ACROSS AS DETERMINED. FOCUSED. ADAMANT. AND EVEN WHEN HIS BOND IS BEING FUNNY THERE'S SOMETHING MORE SLY AND DEVILISH ABOUT IT. AND WHEN HIS BOND GETS ROMANTIC THERE'S MORE INTENSITY AND PASSION THERE, OR AT LEAST A LOT MORE THAN WITH THE PREVIOUS BONDS WHO JUST SEEM LIKE THEY WERE GOING ALONG WITH IT.

BUT IN HULK'S ESTIMATION, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ABOUT DALTON IS THAT HE'S A REAL-DEAL ACTOR. THAT ISN'T MEANT TO BE DISMISSIVE TO THE OTHER BONDS, BUT HULK THINKS IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT CONNERY AND MOORE WERE MUCH MORE WHAT WE WOULD CALL "PERSONALITIES." THEY'RE SO NATURALLY CHARMING IN A WAY THAT SEEMS EFFORTLESS, BUT DALTON IS THE KIND OF THEATER GUY WITH SERIOUS SHAKESPEARE CHOPS, WHICH SHOULD BE MORE THAN EVIDENT IN HIS ROLE AS THE GREAT MR. PRICKLEPANTS, (WERE YOU EXPECTING HULK TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE?). BUT YEAH, HA! IT'S PERHAPS MORE EVIDENT THROUGH HIS EARLY AND LATE CAREER WORK ON THE STAGE. AND UNLIKE SO MANY OTHER BONDS, HIS TIMBRE IS ALL BOOMING BASS AND BURNING FIRE. HECK, THOSE EYES COULD MELT STEEL. WHICH ALL ADDS UP TO ONE SIMPLE REALIZATION:

IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A MORE SERIOUS BOND MOVIE THEN DALTON IS THE KIND OF GUY WHO IS PERFECT FOR IT.

FROM THERE YOU JUST HAVE TO HAVE THE FORESIGHT TO BUILD A MOVIE AROUND HIM THAT LETS HIS PERSONALITY DO MOST OF THE HEAVY LIFTING. YOU DON'T WANT TO DOUBLE DOWN. YOU WANT TO OUTLINE THE RANGE OF EMOTION AND JUST LET HIM WORK THE ANGLES. SO WHAT HELPS THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS IS THAT IT TOTALLY PLAYS IT STRAIGHT FOR THE MOST PART. OH, OF COURSE THERE IS SOME SILLINESS IN THERE (BOND USES TWO BREAST-RELATED DISTRACTIONS!), BUT THE STRAIGHTNESS WORKS BECAUSE DALTON CARRIES US THE WHOLE WAY THROUGH. IT'S AS IF DALTON SUDDENLY MAKES IT OKAY FOR A BOND MOVIE TO BE ABOUT ARMS DEALS, THE OPIUM TRADE, SPY DEFECTION AND / OR DUELING SNIPERS. HE IMBUES IT WITH A SENSE OF, WELL, NOT SERIOUSNESS, PER SE, BUT GRAVITAS. WE'RE BACK TO HAVING CINEMATIC STAKES AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF. AT CERTAIN TIMES THERE'S EVEN A GORGEOUS SPARSENESS TO THE ACTION, AT OTHER TIMES IT IS DENSE WITH DETAILS, AND AT OTHER TIMES STILL IT HEARKENS BACK TO THE ROMANTIC FILMMAKING ON DISPLAY IN THE TERENCE YOUNG ERA... JUST WITH MORE 80'S MUSIC AND BAD HAIRCUTS.

LET'S PLAY A GAME: 80'S OR SILVER LAKE?

BUT THE REAL THING THAT ELEVATES THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS TO THE UPPER ECHELON OF BOND FILMS IS THAT THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TO DO WITH MARYAM D'ABO. IT'S NOT THAT D'ABO IS THE KIND OF BLISTERING ACTRESS WHO CHEWS THE SCENERY (WE ALL CAN'T BE DIANA RIGG), BUT MORE THE FACT THAT THEY UNDERSTAND HOW TO MAKER HER ROLE INTEGRAL TO THE FILM'S FUNCTIONALITY. HULK KEEPS TELLING YOU: THE BEST BOND FILMS ARE ROMANCES; ONES WITH ACTUAL ARCS AND FEMALE CHARACTERS BEING INVOLVED IN THE PLOT IN A WAY THAT LENDS TO GENUINE STAKES. IT'S JUST GOOD OL' FASHIONED STORYTELLING. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. AND HECK, WE'VE ALREADY PROVED A BOND GIRL CAN BE A SUCCESSFUL CHARACTER ON THIS SLIDING SCALE IF THEY JUST AVOID MASSIVE INDULGENCE AND DO ANYTHING ELSE BUT THE OBLIGATORY "I'M GOING TO FALL INTO YOUR LAP IMMEDIATELY" THING.

AND LUCKILY FOR US, THEY GO MUCH FURTHER THAN THAT. D'ABO'S STORY IS EVEN PRETTY NEAT. THEY START IN AN OPERA SETTING AS BOND VOYEURISTICALLY WATCHES A LADY CELLIST (OUR GAL), WHO THEN TURNS OUT TO BE HIS ENEMY SNIPER HE'S THERE TO TAKE DOWN. IT'S SOMETHING RIGHT OUT OF A HITCHCOCKIAN SET-UP. AND WHILE IT DOESN'T HAVE THE MASTER'S STYLINGS (LET ALONE TERENCE YOUNG'S), HOW COOL IS IT THAT A REAL, DIRECT FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE NOD IS IN THERE FROM THE BEGINNING? ALSO, WAIT!!! IS IT HULK OR COULD BRIAN DE PALMA HAVE MADE THIS THE BEST BOND MOVIE EVER??? HULK KNOWS HE'S AMERICAN AND THUS INELIGIBLE (SOMETHING PEOPLE CONSTANTLY FORGET WHEN FANTASY CASTING / DIRECTING), BUT STILL, HE TOTALLY WOULD. SORRY, HULK GOT LOST IN THOUGHT THERE. BACK TO THE TWO SNIPER LOVE BIRDS! THEIR STORY TOGETHER WEAVES IN AND OUT FOR THE ENTIRE NARRATIVE AND THIS GETS US INTO AN IMPORTANT COMPARISON. WHILE IT'S TRUE THAT SHE'S DEFINITELY NOT THE PINNACLE OF A STRONGLY-WRITTEN FEMININE CHARACTER (AS SHE'S LARGELY A PAWN IN A BIGGER GAME OF POWER), THE SILVER LINING IS THAT SHE APPEARS TO BE A SOMEWHAT HUMAN ONE. MEANING SHE AT LEAST STILL HAS SOME INNER CONFLICTS AND PERSONAL WANTS THAT ARE EXPRESSED IN A MEANINGFUL MANNER. SHE HAS HER OWN AGENCY. SHE'S SOMEONE WHO FEELS LIKE REAL AND MAKES IT SEEM LIKE SHE IS REALLY IN LOVE. OVERLY FRAGILE PAWN? YES, BUT A HUMAN ONE. AND IN A SERIES WHERE THE BASICS OF HUMANITY ITSELF IS SCARCE THEN IT AUTOMATICALLY HAS TO PUT HER ON THE SHORT LIST OF BEST BOND GIRLS EVER. ALSO TRY SPELLING HER NAME OFF MEMORY. IT'S HARD.

FUN FACT: PART OF THE PROBLEM OF NOT BEING ABLE TO SAY/SPELL THAT NAME IS THAT FOR MOST OF HULK'S LIFE, HULK THOUGHT SHE ALSO PLAYED KEVIN ARNOLD'S SISTER ON THE WONDER YEARS THUS MAKING HER HULK'S YOUNG CRUSH. BUT NOPE! THAT WAS HER COUSIN OLIVIA D'ABO. HULK SERIOUSLY THOUGHT THEY WERE THE SAME PERSON FOR, WAY, WAY TOO LONG.

BACK TO BOND: EVEN WITH THE INCLINATION TOWARD 80'S GRITTINESS, THE GREAT THING ABOUT THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS IS THAT IT STILL REFLECTS ALL THOSE ROMANTIC NOTIONS ABOUT THE CHARACTER WE'VE COME TO LOVE, JUST IN A DIFFERENT CONTEXT. THERE'S STILL A SENSE OF SCOPE AND GRANDEUR TO EVERYTHING. FROM THE SILLY TUBE-BASED DEFECTION SCENE (THAT'S BOND'S VERSION OF A LE CARRE SEQUENCE), TO THE SERIOUS INTRIGUE OF THE PLOTTING, TO THE MAGNIFICENT SETTINGS IN TANGIERS (COMPLETE WITH REAL-DEAL REFERENCES TO FOUR FEATHERS AND DOCTOR ZHIVAGO, HULK SHIT YOU NOT), TO THE FERRIS WHEEL HOMAGE RIGHT OUT OF THE THIRD MAN, TO THE FACT THAT IT HAS THE AUDACITY TO MAKE A WHOLLY DIFFERENT KIND OF MOVIE WITH THE LAST HALF IN AFGHANISTAN. SO MUCH OF THE "GRITTINESS" COULD HAVE HAD A COLD AND STERILE EFFECT, BUT THE WHOLE ARMS/OPIUM/80'S MODERNITY GETS FILTERED RIGHT BACK INTO AN OLD SCHOOL KIND OF MOVIE THAT'S JUST SWEEPING AND KIND OF PERFECT. IT'S LIKE IT MAY CONTAIN THOSE MODERN THINGS, BUT IT IS NEVER ABOUT THOSE MODERN THINGS.

AS A BIG WIN IT EVEN HAS (IN THIS HULK'S OPINION) THE "CORRECT" BRAND OF 80'S MUSIC AESTHETIC! AS IN ONE THAT ACTUALLY AGES OKAY! AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT,  A-HA DID A TOTALLY PASSABLE MAIN TITLE SONG!

... THE FACT THAT JOHN BARRY HELPED ON SAID SONG COULDN'T HAVE HURT.

BUT THE ONE HILARIOUS/AWFUL/DESTRUCTIVE WRINKLE OF ALL OF THIS GLOWING ANALYSIS IS THAT THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE 80'S MOVIES WHICH, IN THE GRAND TRADITION OF RAMBO III, TEAMS UP ITS WESTERN HEROES WITH SOME PLUCKY YOUNG AFGHANI UPSTARTS TO FIGHT THE RUSSIAN BAD GUYS...

YES, HULK IS TALKING ABOUT THE TALIBAN:

OOF.

LOOK. HULK WOULD SAY SOMETHING SNARKY ABOUT HINDSIGHT BEING 20/20, BUT THE EVEN SADDER TRUTH IS THAT THERE WERE PLENTY OF FOLKS WHO HAD FORESIGHT TO SEE HOW THAT SITUATION WAS GONNA GO BACK THEN. SO IF ANYTHING SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT OUR BRAZEN ATTITUDE TOWARD NON-NUANCED POLITICS IN THE MIDDLE EAST DURING THE 1980'S, IT'S PROBABLY THIS.

AWKWARDEST-TRANSITION-POSSIBLE: THIS IS THE FIRST BOND FILM THAT SHOWED FULL-ON SIDEBOOB WITH NIPPLE MAKING IT THE ONLY TECHNICALLY PLANNED NUDITY IN THE ENTIRE SERIES. DO WITH THIS INFORMATION AS YOU MAY, BUT SOME PEOPLE FREAKED OUT.

BECAUSE HOW DARE YOU PUT BOOB IN A MOVIE ABOUT TREATING WOMEN AWFULLY AND KILLING! WELL, SINCE WE CAN'T HAVE NUDITY THAT MEANS SOMETHING, YOU BETTER AT LEAST MAKE IT A THROWAWAY MOMENT WHERE IT'S NOTHING BUT GROSS VOYEURISM AND A SPEECHLESS FEMALE CHARACTER! THESE MOVIES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE INDULGENT, AFTER ALL!

PERHAPS MUCH MORE INTERESTING THAN THE MERE EXISTENCE OF BOOB IS THE FACT THAT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE HAVE OUR FIRST NEW MONEYPENNY.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

THIS IS SIMULTANEOUSLY A BIG AND SMALL DEAL, FOR HULK CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THE DALTON ERA WENT DIFFERENTLY. FOR ONE, YOUNG HULK'S CRUSH ON CAROLINE BLISS COULD HAVE CONTINUED INDEFINITELY. BUT LOOKING BACK, HULK'S NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF THAT ADORATION WAS A PROJECTION ON HULK'S PART AND HOW MUCH WAS HER. ON THE SURFACE THEY ARE JUST SO CLEARLY GOING FOR THAT "SEXY LIBRARIAN" ARCHETYPE AND HER RUN WAS SO SHORT-LIVED THAT WHO KNOWS WHAT YOU COULD HAVE REALLY DONE WITH THE ROLE (OR WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE GIVEN HER). BUT IN RE-WATCHING HULK REALLY STANDS BY THE IDEA THAT CAROLINE BLISS REALLY HAD SOMETHING TO HER. SHE HAD A REAL SENSE OF INTERPLAY AND THIS ALLURING, KNOWING SMILE. WHO KNOWS? MAYBE IT WAS JUST A SYMPTOM OF THE 80'S NOT HAVING A HECK OF A LOT TO OFFER IN THE WAY OF LADIES WITH BOND.

BUT LET'S BE HONEST... HOW COULD ANYONE NEW EVER LIVE UP TO LOIS MAXWELL? HULK KNOWS THAT HULK HASN'T TALKED ABOUT HER MUCH IN THESE COLUMNS, BUT THAT'S JUST BECAUSE SHE WAS ONE OF THE CONSTANTS. LIKE BERNARD LEE OR DESMOND LLEWELLYN, SHE WAS A RELIABLE BACKBONE OF PERFECT DELIVERY FOR THE NEEDS OF THE ROLE. SHE REALLY IS MONEYPENNY. AND HULK MAINTAINS THAT IT WILL TAKE YEARS AND YEARS BEFORE WE WILL EVER COME TO DEFINE MONEYPENNY BY SOMEONE ELSE TOO. LOIS MAXWELL WORKED ON MORE BONDS THAN ANY OTHER ACTOR (SAVE ONE). AND WHILE EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO FIGHT NOT TO BE A FOOTNOTE, THERE'S A REASON SHE STANDS OUT EVEN TODAY... SHE WAS A NATURAL.

BUT PERHAPS A BIGGER QUESTION REMAINS, ONE THAT HULK TEASED LONG, LONG AGO: DESPITE SIMPLY BEING A "CONSTANT," WHY IS MONEYPENNY SO IMPORTANT IN THE JAMES BOND MYTHOS?

WELL, HULK HAS THIS VAGUE THEORY THAT (MOST OF THE TIME) MONEYPENNY REPRESENTS THE MOST FUNCTIONAL WAY THAT "REAL WOMEN" SHOULD TREAT AND REGARD JAMES BOND. TO EXPLAIN: MONEYPENNY IS OBVIOUSLY A SMART, SELF-POSSESSED, CAPABLE PERSON, RIGHT? WHILE THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW DIRECTORS WHO HAVE PLAYED HER BEING AS BEING SECRETLY-YET-OVERTLY IN LOVE WITH JAMES (OR EVEN SECRETLY JEALOUS OF HIS OTHER LADIES), MORE OFTEN THEN NOT, THE PORTRAYAL OF MONEYPENNY HAS BEEN THAT SHE WAS THE ONE WHO WAS ABOVE ALL OF JAMES' BULLSHIT, YET COULD STILL PLAY HIS GAME, YET STILL REGARDED HIM WITH KIND OF AN EYE-ROLLING SENSE OF AFFECTION. THE BEST RESULT OF WHICH BEING SOME INNOCENT-YET-POINTED FLIRTING. SHE FINDS BOND INCORRIGIBLE. SHE MAY EVEN INDULGE HIM FOR A MOMENT. BUT RARELY, IF EVER, DOES SHE LET HIM PHASE HER. RARELY DOES HE LET HIS BULLSHIT STAND. RARELY DOES SHE LET HIM HAVE CONTROL OVER THEIR DYNAMIC.

AND TO HULK THIS SAYS EVERYTHING.

DOES THIS RELATIONSHIP NOT MAKE SENSE AS A WAY TO ACTUALLY DEAL WITH JAMES BOND'S OVERT MALENESS? ISN'T THIS THE BEST WAY FOR SMART, CAPABLE WOMEN TO BEST "TOLERATE" BOND? NOW. PLEASE UNDERSTAND HULK ISN'T SAYING THIS TOLERANCE IS A GOOD THING, NOR IS HULK TRYING TO UNDERMINE ALL THE PROBLEM OF JAMES BOND'S MALE INDULGENCE IN THE SLIGHTEST. AFTER ALL, IT HELPS THAT WITH MONEYPENNY HE'S OFTEN ON HIS BEST BEHAVIOR AND NOT DOING THE OTHER THINGS HE'S DONE BEFORE, LIKE DATE-RAPING OR BEING A MISOGYNIST TOOL BAG - I.E., WOULD HE EVER, EVER, EVER SAY ANYTHING LIKE "MAN TALK" TO MONEYPENNY? OR WOULD HE TRY TO BLACKMAIL HER INTO SEX BY THREATENING TO GET HER IN TROUBLE AT WORK? OF COURSE NOT (WHICH JUST MAKES THE DIRECTORS THAT RUIN MONEYPENNY'S NORMAL DYNAMIC ALL THE MORE EGREGIOUS). AND SO ULTIMATELY THE CHARACTERIZATION OF THEIR RELATIONSHIP IS WHAT BEST CRYSTALLIZES THE CINEMATIC WAY TO HANDLE THE EGO, THE RIDICULOUSNESS, THE CHARM AND ULTIMATELY THE ROMANTIC FUNCTION OF JAMES BOND:

NOT TOO SERIOUSLY, JOYFULLY, KNOWINGLY AND AT ARM'S LENGTH.

WHICH IN PART MAKES HER A ROSETTA STONE FOR HOW THE FILM'S DIRECTOR FEELS ABOUT THE PARTICULAR GENDER ISSUES. BUT WHEN ON POINT, IT'S ROOTED IN FUNCTION. THERE'S THIS GREAT PART IN ATOM EGOYAN'S WHERE THE TRUTH LIES WHERE KEVIN BACON'S PRANKSTER CHARACTER TALKS ABOUT WHY COLIN FIRTH'S STRAIGHT MAN CHARACTER MATTERS SO MUCH TO THEIR COMEDY ROUTINE. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE STRAIGHT MAN "MAKES THE AUDIENCE OKAY WITH LIKING A GUY LIKE ME." AND SO OF COURSE MONEYPENNY IS A CONSTANT IN THIS FILM SERIES.

SHE'S THE ONE WHO MAKES IT OKAY TO LIKE A GUY LIKE JAMES BOND.

16. LICENSE TO KILL (1989)

WELL, IF THE LAST ENTRY WAS AN EXAMPLE OF THE 80'S GONE RIGHT...

... LET'S TALK ABOUT THE 80'S GONE WRONG.

* * *

SO BY THIS POINT, HULK HAS FIRMLY ESTABLISHED THAT JAMES BOND FILMS ARE HIGHLY REACTIVE, WHETHER IT IS TO THEIR OWN SUCCESSES OR DEFEATS, OR THE LARGER CULTURAL INFLUENCES BEYOND. AND IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S BLAXPLOITATION OR STAR WARS, THEY JUST SOMETIMES GET THE HANKERING TO SHY AWAY FROM "THE CLASSIC BOND" I.E. THE WORLD OF SPECTRE AND EVIL LAIRS AND ALL THAT, AND INSTEAD CHOOSE TO IMBUE THE SPIRIT OF THE FILM WITH SOMETHING GOING ON IN EITHER THE CURRENT CINEMA OR "REAL LIFE" CLIMATE. SOMETIMES THIS INCLINATION WORKS OUT...

AND SOMETIMES YOU GET LICENSE TO KILL.

THE FILM WAS RELEASED IN 1989, AND UNLIKE THE CLASSICALLY ROMANTIC MILIEU OF THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS (WHICH AGAIN, WAS A SUCCESSFUL HYBRIDIZATION OF BOND WITH A MORE GRITTY EMPHASIS), THEY SEEMED TO TAKE THAT FILM'S SUCCESS AS AN EXCUSE TO GO HOG-WILD AND COMPLETELY CAVE TO THE ESSENCE OF 80'S ACTION FILMS, ALL OF WHICH SEEMED TO HAVE THAT HARDER EDGE (THINK LETHAL WEAPON. ROBOCOP. 48 HOURS. ETC). THEY ABSOLUTELY EMBRACED THAT ENTIRE AESTHETIC...

AND BOY HOWDY DOES IT NOT WORK.

SO WHY DO IT? PERHAPS THEY DIDN'T REALIZE. PERHAPS THEY LEARNED THE WRONG LESSONS FROM DAYLIGHTS. PERHAPS THEY THOUGHT THE MODERNITY WAS WHAT MADE THE FILM FUNCTIONAL INSTEAD OF THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ACTUALLY TELLING A PRETTY CLASSIC STORY. ALL OF WHICH MAKES IT NOTHING BUT THE AGE-OLD PROBLEM OF MISTAKING FORM FOR FUNCTION. IS THAT WHAT THEY THOUGHT PEOPLE WANTED? IS THAT WHY ALBERT BROCCOLI WAS SO KEEN TO FINALLY GO IN THAT DIRECTION? AFTER ALL, IT WAS WORTH NOTING THAT THIS WAS NEAR THE END OF BROCCOLI'S INCREDIBLE RUN AND WELL... WHO KNOWS, REALLY. MAYBE HE WASN'T EVEN THAT BIG ON THE IDEA. BUT HULK HAS THIS THING WHERE SOMETIMES HULK WORRIES ABOUT "OLD MEN" (A RELATIVE TERM) TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH THE GOINGS-ON OF POPULAR CULTURE. NOT IN THE SENSE OF TRYING TO CONTEXTUALIZE THEMSELVES WITHIN IT, BUT IN ACTUALLY TRYING TO REFLECT IT. IT JUST SO OFTEN GOES AGAINST THE NOTION OF WISDOM. WHEN YOU LOOK AT MARTIN SCORSESE, HE'S ONE OF THE ONLY GREAT AMERICAN FILMMAKERS OF HIS AGE WHO IS STILL COMPLETELY ROCKING IT. AND THAT'S BECAUSE HE'S ACTUALLY EMBRACING ALL THAT IS NON-CURRENT (BECAUSE THE KIDS ARE JUST SCREAMING FOR HOWARD HUGHES, GEORGE MÉLIÈS AND LATE 80'S / 90'S WALL STREET?). GOING FOR CURRENT RELEVANCY DOESN'T WORK IF IT IS COMING FROM A PLACE OF INSINCERITY OR FEAR... AND OFTEN IT RESULTS IN MISGUIDED EFFORTS.

AND LICENSE TO KILL IS THE DEFINITION OF A MISGUIDED EFFORT.

HULK WOULD ACTUALLY ARGUE THE PROBLEMS START WITH ITS GETTING TOO CLOSE TO "THE LIE" OF ITS CORE IDENTITY. TO EXPLAIN THE IMPLICATION OF THAT STATEMENT: HULK'S ALREADY MADE FUN OF HOW PEOPLE LOVE TO TALK ABOUT "IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND" AS IF IT'S SOME SORT OF STANDARD FOR THE CHARACTER. WHEN REALLY, THEY ARE JUST TRYING TO SAY THE CHARACTER THAT "FEELS REAL" OR "RINGS TRUE" TO THEM. AND NOT TO RESTATE IT FOR THE 1000TH TIME BUT HULK HAS HOPEFULLY MADE IT QUITE CLEAR BY THIS POINT THAT HULK HAS PROBLEMS WITH FLEMING AND WOULD ACTUALLY GO SO FAR AS TO SAY THAT MOST PEOPLE WHO SAY THAT PROBABLY HAVE NEVER ACTUALLY READ IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND (OR AT LEAST DIDN'T READ HIM CLOSELY). BECAUSE IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND IS EASILY THE MOST MISOGYNISTIC, HOMOPHOBIC, AWFUL, BAD-AT-HIS-JOB, JERKFACE ASSHOLE VERSION OF THE CHARACTER POSSIBLE. SO UNLESS THAT'S WHAT THEY MEAN, THEY ARE MAKING AN ERROR OF ASSUMPTION. BUT LUCKILY FOR US, EVERY SINGLE ON-SCREEN REPRESENTATION OF BOND HAS BEEN A MUCH BETTER VERSION OF THE CHARACTER THAN "IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND" (OR AT LEAST A MORE DIGESTIBLE ONE). AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'VE ALL CARRIED SOMETHING THAT MAKES THE BOND DISPOSITION MUCH MORE FUNCTIONAL AND ENGAGING. WHETHER IT WAS CHARM OR SENSITIVITY OR A PENCHANT FOR HUMOR, THE ACTORS SOFTENED THE EDGE TO MAKE IT ALL WORK IN A BETTER SPIRIT OF ROMANTICISM. BUT OUT OF ALL THE BONDS THAT WERE WRITTEN FOR THE SCREEN, THE COMBINATION OF DALTON'S NATURAL MENACE AND SOMEONE FINALLY THROWING IN SOME DOWNRIGHT MEAN-SPIRITED WRITING BEHIND IT, ALL MEANT THAT WITH LICENSE TO KILL WE GOT THE CLOSEST APPROXIMATION OF "IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND" THAT WE'VE EVER HAD ...

AND THE PUBLIC REALIZED THAT THIS IS A TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE THING.

* * *

THERE'S A POPULAR MYTH THAT LICENSE TO KILL IS THE FILM THAT ALMOST KILLED THE JAMES BOND SERIES. THE NARRATIVE GOES THAT THE FILM'S DARK TONE AND UNDER-PERFORMANCE AT THE (US) BOX OFFICE MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO CONTINUE MAKING BOND MOVIES, WHICH, PREVIOUSLY, WERE COMING OUT EVERY 2-3 YEARS. BUT THE TRUTH BEHIND THIS MYTH IS THAT IT WAS JUST THE SAME BORING OLD ISSUES THAT STOP A LOT OF FILMS FROM BEING GREENLIT - AND THAT'S BASIC FINANCE ISSUES AND PRE-PRODUCTION STALLS AND RIGHTS NEGOTIATIONS GETTING TIED UP IN LEGAL HELL (THESE ACTUALLY BEING SOME OF THE SAME RIGHTS ISSUES THAT ALLOWED FOR THE NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN FIASCO). STILL, THE END RESULT OF THIS IS THAT ALBERT BROCCOLI SPENT SIX YEARS AFTER LICENSE GETTING A LITTLE TOO OLD, EVENTUALLY GETTING SICK AND HAVING TO PUT THESE WORRIES ON THE BACK BURNER. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION FILLED IN THAT GAP BELIEVING LICENSE SOMEHOW DID SO BADLY THAT THE BOND SERIES WOULD NEVER RECOVER... IT WASN'T TRUE, OF COURSE, BUT THERE'S THAT OLD SAYING ABOUT PERCEPTIONS AND REALITY AND IT FUELED THIS PARTICULAR MYTH. AND OF COURSE, IT WAS THIS SAME MYTH THAT WOULD LATER ALLOW GOLDENEYE TO BE CONSIDERED A FILM THAT "SAVED THE FRANCHISE."

BUT GOING BACK TO WATCH LICENSE TO KILL ALL THESE YEARS LATER WAS A VERY INTERESTING EXPERIENCE, BECAUSE UNLIKE PRETTY MUCH EVERY OTHER FILM IN THE BOND SERIES, WHICH HULK HAD WATCHED NEARLY A DOZEN TIMES OR SO AS A YOUNGIN, HULK HADN'T SEEN THIS FILM SINCE THAT ONE TIME IN THE THEATER (THAT WAS 25 YEARS AGO FOLKS... GULP). MEANING THERE WERE ONLY VAGUE MEMORIES OF THE MOVIE ITSELF AND THE SAD FACT THAT HULK BELIEVED THAT SAME POPULAR NARRATIVE ABOUT THE FILM'S DARKNESS KILLING JAMES BOND. BUT IN ACTUALITY, RE-WATCHING THE FILM WITH CLEAR EYES, HULK WAS STRUCK BY A LOT OF THINGS THAT FIT OUTSIDE OF THAT POPULAR NARRATIVE. LIKE THE FACT THAT THE DARK AND VIOLENT MOMENTS AREN'T SO PARTICULARLY BOTHERSOME IN AND OF THEMSELVES (THEY'RE JUST THE TANGIBLE DETAILS THAT STICK OUT). AND REALLY IT'S MORE THE PROBLEM THAT THOSE VIOLENT MOMENTS SO READILY JUXTAPOSE AGAINST THE FLAT COMEDIC TONE THAT DOESN'T FIT IT EITHER. MORE THAN ANYTHING, IT'S A TREMENDOUSLY AWKWARD MOVIE WHERE ALL THE HAPHAZARD WRITING MAKES IT SEEM LIKE PEOPLE AREN'T EVER REALLY BEHAVING CORRECTLY WITHIN THE WORLD OF THE FILM, WHETHER IT'S DUE TO POOR CHARACTER MOTIVATION OR EVEN THE CHARACTER LOGIC ITSELF. AND TO ILLUSTRATE ALL THE INCONGRUENT THINGS THAT HULK IS TALKING ABOUT, HERE IS A LIST OF THE 11 CORE PROBLEMS THAT HULK FOUND WITH THE MOVIE.

1. SO DID THEY SEE EACH OTHER?

OKAY, YOU KNOW HULK ISN'T THE BIGGEST LOGIC GUY, RIGHT? BUT THERE IS THIS WEIRD THING IN LICENSE TO KILL WHERE THE ENTIRE PLOT IS SOMEHOW PREDICATED ON THE FACT THAT BAD GUY SANCHEZ DOESN'T RECOGNIZE JAMES BOND... WHEN BOND WAS THE DUDE WHO SPENT THE ENTIRE OPENING OF THE FILM CAPTURING HIM (IT APPEARS THEY DEFINITELY SEE EACH OTHER, AND EVEN THEN, ONCE CAPTURED YOU WOULD READILY EXPECT A FACE TO FACE IMMEDIATELY AFTER) - NOW, IT WOULD NORMALLY NOT BE A BIG DEAL IF THEY EVEN JUST EXPLAINED THIS AWAY FOR A SECOND, BUT INSTEAD THE SCENES JUST PLAY OUT IN SUCH A CONFUSING WAY LATER ON WHERE YOU HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S HAPPENING - YOU LITERALLY SPEND THE ENTIRE TIME WATCHING THEIR SCENES TOGETHER GOING "WHY DOESN'T HE RECOGNIZE HIM? THEY'RE JUST PRETENDING, RIGHT?!? THIS IS A TRAP, RIGHT?!??!" IT IS ALSO RATHER KARMIC THAT HULK WROTE A GIANT PLOT-HOLES COLUMN AND DAGNAMMIT IF TWO WEEKS LATER HULK RE-WATCHED THIS ONE AND FOUND A LEGITIMATELY GOOD EXAMPLE OF A DYSFUNCTIONAL PLOT-HOLE. IT CERTAINLY FITS ALL THE CRITERIA, AS IT'S NOT REALLY A "BUT WAIT" THING THAT COMES UP LATER, BUT SOMETHING THAT FLIES DIRECTLY IN THE FACE OF MOMENT-TO-MOMENT EXPECTATION. EVEN EXPLANATIONS OF "MAYBE THEY NEVER SAW EACH OTHER?" REALLY FLY IN THE FACE OF WHAT WE SEE ON SCREEN. AND WORSE, IT'S SOMETHING THAT UNDERMINES ALMOST EVERY MOMENT OF THE MOVIE BECAUSE THEY WAIT TILL THE VERY END OF THE MOVIE TO REVEAL TO SANCHEZ THAT BOND IS ACTUALLY A GOOD GUY WHEN THE WHOLE TIME IT PLAYS CONFUSINGLY. AGAIN, THE EFFECT ON THE ENTIRE EXPERIENCE IS JUST BIZARRE.

2. PROBLEMS WITH PERFORMANCE

UGH, HULK ALWAYS FEELS BAD SAYING THINGS LIKE THE FOLLOWING, ESPECIALLY IN A SERIES THAT NEVER GIVES FEMALE CHARACTERS ANYTHING TO DO, BUT THE ACTRESSES IN THIS FILM JUST DO NOT COME ACROSS THAT WELL. WHICH ISN'T TO SAY THEY'RE TERRIBLE ACTRESSES, JUST THAT THEY'RE KIND OF TERRIBLE HERE. MAYBE THEY WERE POORLY DIRECTED. MAYBE CAREY LOWELL WAS JUST TOO YOUNG, BUT SHE REALLY COMES ACROSS AS STIFF AND HOLLOW. AND TALISA SOTO SEEMS LIKE SHE'S IN ANOTHER MOVIE ENTIRELY. THE THING THAT KIND OF STINKS IS THAT CAREY LOWELL IS HALF-WRITTEN AS A TOUGH, INDEPENDENT CHARACTER TYPE AND YOU ARE LEFT TO WONDER IF SOMEONE ELSE COULD HAVE MADE THAT TÊTE-À-TÊTE ELEMENT WORK? KEEP IN MIND, HULK SAYS "HALF-WRITTEN" BECAUSE THE OTHER HALF OF THE CHARACTER IS UNDERMINED ON THE PAGE BY TAKING ALL THAT TOUGH-TALK WHILE EVENTUALLY RENDERING HER A LOOPY, INEFFECTUAL, SILLY OLD FEMALE! (A THROWBACK ARCHETYPE WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT MUCH SINCE THE GUY HAMILTON ERA) UGH, JUST EVERY CHOICE FEELS WRONG, FROM THEIR HAVING SEX IMMEDIATELY AFTER A BOAT CHASE (THE WAY THE PACING TURNS ON A DIME IS HILARIOUS - SERIOUSLY IT IS THE FASTEST SEX TURN YOU'VE EVER SEEN - LOOK FOR IT) TO THE FACT THAT BOND IS BASICALLY A HUGE ASSHOLE TO BOTH BOND WOMEN AT ALL TIMES IN THIS FILM - LEAVING NO ROOM FOR THE SENSITIVE HALF THAT MAKES THE CHARACTER WORK ON SCREEN. AS A RESULT, THE FILM SPENDS TIME HAVING THE TWO LADIES GET CAUGHT UP IN A JEALOUS GAME OF BACK AND FORTH OVER ASSHOLE-BOND, WHEN NEITHER HAS A REASON TO REALLY GIVE A SHIT ABOUT HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE. THEIR PERFORMANCES ARE INCONGRUENT WITH WHAT IS WRITTEN. AND LIKE EVERYTHING IN THIS MOVIE, THAT NONSENSE BACK AND FORTH LIMPS ALONG RIGHT TO THE END OF THE MOVIE, WHERE DALTON INSINCERELY LEAVES SOTO WITH THE PRESIDENT / GENERAL AS A CONSOLATION PRIZE (CAUSE CLEARLY WHAT SHE NEEDS AFTER BEING A DRUG DEALER'S GIRLFRIEND IS TO BE SO OBVIOUSLY DROPPED OFF INTO ANOTHER POWERFUL, CONTROLLING MAN'S ARMS?), ALL TO CHASE AFTER LOWELL'S CHARACTER. THE WHOLE DEPICTION OF FEMININITY FROM TEXTUAL IMPLICATIONS TO ACTUAL EFFECT IS BAD, BAD, BAD.

AND DON'T EVEN GET HULK STARTED ON THE IMPOSSIBLY WEIRD BOND - DELLA - FELIX RELATIONSHIP WHERE THEY ALL KISS EACH OTHER A BUNCH.

IT'S REALLY WEIRD!

3. EFFECT OF TONE...

THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH THE BAD PERFORMANCES IN THIS FILM IS THAT THEY INSTANTLY MAKE IT A LOT HARDER TO MAKE THIS COME ACROSS AS A SERIOUS MOVIE. TO WIT, THE MOVIE MAY BE BAD ON THE WHOLE BUT WHEN THE ACTING IS BAD IN SOMETHING LIKE DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER, YOU'RE MORE WILLING TO GO ALONG WITH IT ON A TONAL LEVEL. HECK, THE AIRY DIALOGUE FROM PLENTY O'TOOLE EVEN MAKES SOME KIND OF SENSE TO THE FILM'S UNIVERSE. BUT WHEN IT'S IN A SERIOUS FILM WHERE WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE THIS WORLD IS GRUESOME, GRITTY AND DANGEROUS, WITH REAL-DEAL STAKES? PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU'RE GOING UP AGAINST A STRONG ACTOR LIKE DALTON? OOF. THE BAD PERFORMANCES JUST HURT YOU SO MUCH MORE. AND IN THE END IT MAKES BOTH THE ACTRESSES AND DALTON SEEM WORSE THAN THEY ARE. AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF EXECUTION HERE BUT IT ALL GOES BACK TO THE CORE PROBLEM OF INCONGRUITY.

4. BOND WORLD GETTIN SERIOUS!

ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING PROBLEMS OF LICENSE TO KILL IS THAT IT MAKES THE RATHER POINTED (AND MAYBE BRAVE) DECISION TO ACCENTUATE AND ADDRESS THE CORE ICONOGRAPHY AND RELATIONSHIPS AT THE HEART OF THE SERIES. MEANING IT TRIES TO PUT REAL STAKES, CONTEXT AND CHOICES IN THOSE SAME RELATIONSHIPS. FOR INSTANCE, FELIX GOES FROM "BOND'S AMERICAN PAL AND EXPOSITION DEVICE" TO HIS BEST FRIEND WHO IS BRUTALLY ATTACKED AND EVENTUALLY MUST BE AVENGED! AND M GOES FROM "STUFFY BUREAUCRAT AND EXPOSITION DEVICE" TO A GUY WHO MUST FORCIBLY CUT OFF BOND FROM SERVICE FOR GOING A.W.O.L.! THEN MONEYPENNY GOES BEHIND M'S BACK TO ADDRESS HER CONCERN AND PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH BOND! EVEN Q SHOWS UP TO HELP BOND OUT OF NOWHERE, BUT AS A FRIEND AND THUS BECOMES HIS LOYAL FIELD AGENT! (EXCLAMATIONS ABOUND!) NOW, IN ONE WAY, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE DECISIONS IS KIND OF ADMIRABLE. IT'S A REAL SCREENWRITING PREROGATIVE BENT ON IMBUING THE FILM WITH REAL CHARACTERIZATION, MEANING AND IMPORT. AGAIN, THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE BOND UNIVERSE FEEL REAL THROUGH CHARACTER... BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE INCLINATION AS MUCH AS THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T WORK AT ALL HERE. PERHAPS, IT'S JUST ASSOCIATIVE WITH ALL THE OTHER PROBLEMS IN THE FILM, BUT HULK FEELS LIKE THEY MADE ONE DECISION TO "PERSONALIZE" TWO THINGS TOO MANY. BECAUSE THE EFFECT FEELS LESS LIKE A PERSONALIZING TWEAK OR GAINING OF STAKES AND INSTEAD FEELS MORE LIKE AN IRREVOCABLE, UNSETTLING UPHEAVAL OF THE ENTIRE BOND UNIVERSE. YES, IT ALL WAS A NOBLE EFFORT, BUT IN THE END IT REALLY LOSES SOMETHING ABOUT THE KEY BOND DYNAMICS THAT PERPETUATE THE FUNCTIONALITY.

5. "DARLIN' DON'T YOU GO AND CUT YOUR HAIR..."

YES, THAT'S PAVEMENT. ANYWHO, ONE OF THE WEIRDEST MOMENTS IN THE FILM IS WHEN BOND SENDS CAREY LOWELL SHOPPING TO SPRUCE HERSELF UP FOR LOOKING SHABBY (THAT'S NOT REALLY A FUNNY PART AND MORE OF A GENUINELY SEXIST ONE AS THE MOMENT PLAYED REALLY, REALLY MEAN) AND SHE COMES BACK AND THERE'S THIS SPECIFIC CINEMATIC MOMENT WHERE SHE'S SUPPOSED TO WALK IN AND LOOK SUPER GLAMOROUS... AND INSTEAD, WELL, SHE CUT OFF ALL HER HAIR AND IT MAYBE REALLY DOESN'T LOOK AS GOOD, BUT THE HILARITY OF THIS IS THAT BOND'S FACE IS SUPPOSED TO READ "HOT DAMN!" AND INSTEAD IT TOTALLY READS "WHOA, WAIT, WHAT!??!" ... NOW, HULK REALIZES THAT TALKING LIKE THIS MAKES IT SEEM LIKE HULK'S A PART OF THE WHOLE "EW! GIRLS WITH SHORT HAIR!!!" ARGUMENT, WHICH IS OFTEN TWINGED WITH ALL SORTS OF HORRIBLE GENDER NORMATIVE STUFF OF "WHAT GIRLS ARE SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE" OR PEOPLE BEING LIKE "It's just my personal preference!" (WITHOUT REALIZING THAT PERSONAL PREFERENCES OF PHENOTYPE ALONG GENDER NORMS IS JUST LIKE HAVING PERSONAL PREFERENCES ALONG RACIAL LINES... YEAH... IT SPEAKS TO A LARGER ISSUE). SO PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS IS KIND OF THE OPPOSITE OF HOW HULK MEANS IT, IT EVEN GOES BEYOND THE BASIC "SOME PEOPLE LOOK GOOD WITH SHORT HAIR AND SOME DON'T!" GENERALIZATION (IN FACT, LOWELL HAS LOOKED FANTASTIC WITH SOME SHORT STYLES). IT'S JUST THAT THE COMBINATION BETWEEN THE VAGUELY NOT-SO-WELL EXECUTED HAIRCUT AND THE NON-SPECIFICITY OF THE CAMERA LANGUAGE MAKES THE MOMENT WORK SOOOOO WEIRD.  AND WHEN YOU END UP NOT BEING ABLE TO TELL THE INTENTION OF ANYONE IN THIS MOMENT IT JUST MAKES FOR ONE OF THE MOST UNINTENTIONALLY HILARIOUS SCENES EVER. AGAIN, THE INTENT OF EVERYTHING IN THIS MOVIE FEELS OFF... EVEN A HAIRCUT REVEAL.

6. MR. LAS VEGAS

BY THE WAY, WAYNE NEWTON IS IN THIS MOVIE!!!! AND HE'S PLAYING A SEXUAL PREDATOR MEDITATION CULT LEADER WHO IS SECRETLY WORKING FOR THE BIGGEST DRUG CARTEL IN THE WORLD!!!! YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP. ACTUALLY YOU CAN, BUT YOU SHOULD ALSO REMEMBER WHAT KIND OF MOVIE YOU ARE MAKING... THOUGH HONESTLY HULK THOUGHT THE WHOLE FAKE PLEDGE DRIVE BEING A FRONT FOR DRUG PRICING COMMUNICATION IS ACTUALLY A REALLY, REALLY NEAT MOVIE IDEA. BUT LIKE EVERYTHING HERE, IT'S IN THE WRONG MOVIE.

7. DISGUISE CHOICES

SO IN THIS FILM, Q WEARS A MUSTACHE AND PRETENDS TO BE A MIGRANT MEXICAN WORKER WITH A RADIO BROOM...

THIS HAPPENS.

8. BABY BENICIO

OKAY, THERE'S ACTUALLY A GOOD THING! BABY BENICIO DEL TORO IS IN THIS MOVIE!!!! THE BEST PART IS THAT HULK HAD NO IDEA PRIOR TO RE-WATCHING, BUT HULK TOTALLY REMEMBERED HIS CHARACTER SO CLEARLY, TOO. KEEP IN MIND, THIS WAS JUST BEFORE HE WAS "BENICIO DEL TORO" SO HULK'S BRAIN JUST TURNED HIM INTO "THAT WEIRD SKINNY GUY." OKAY NOW THE BAD PART OF THIS OBSERVATION: HE'S STILL PLAYING THE MOST WEIRDLY SCUZZY VILLAIN IN THE ENTIRE BOND SERIES, WHEREIN HE NOT-SO-SUBTLY TALKS ABOUT RAPE AND MURDER  ("WE GAVE HER A NICE HONEYMOOOOON") AND THUS BECOMES THE SHINING EXAMPLE OF HOW THE DARK INCLINATIONS OF THE FILM WENT WAY, WAY TOO FAR. HE'S THE MOST INCONGRUENT OF INCONGRUENT... ALSO THERE'S THE PART WHERE HE BECOMES A HUMAN BURGER.

THIS ALSO HAPPENS.

9. THEY MAKE GOOD ON THE YEARS OF SHARK THREATS

HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT WAS ALSO PROBABLY TOO DARK FOR THE TONE OF THE FILM THEY WERE MAKING? THE PART WHERE GOOD GUY FELIX LEITER GETS HALF EATEN BY A SHARK AND LOSES LIMBS IN THE PROCESS... JUST A THOUGHT!

LOOK. HULK KNOWS THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY A SEMI-DETAIL FROM ONE OF THE BOOKS, BUT THAT'S NOT AN EXCUSE FOR NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT PUTTING THE MOMENT IN YOUR FILM ACTUALLY DOES TO THE FILM. NOT ONLY DOES THE MOMENT "BREAK THE ROMANCE" OF A BOND MOVIE COMPLETELY, BUT IT TAKES THE ROMANCE OUT BACK AND PULVERIZES IT INTO A MILLION PIECES (PS- THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU WORSHIP "IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND" EVERYBODY). IT IS A FULL-MEASURE WHEN A HALF-MEASURE IS NEEDED... OR IT'S A FULL-MEASURE GESTURE THAT NEEDS THE REST OF THE MOVIE TO COME ALONG WITH IT IN THAT DARKNESS, OTHERWISE MAKING THE WHOLE MOVIE SEEM LIKE A HALF-MEASURE... OR MAYBE IT'S... NO, SORRY, FORGET IT. HULK IS GOING TO STOP TALKING ABOUT MEASURES.

10. HEAD GO BOOM

ALSO PROBABLY TOO DARK? THE HEAD EXPLOSION IN THE PRESSURE TANK.

HULK REALIZES THIS SEEMS LIKE THE BEST PART TO MANY OF YOU... AND IT TOTALLY IS. BUT LET US AT LEAST AGREE THAT IF THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE A CERTAIN KIND OF GREAT BOND MOVIE, WELL, IT'S NOT...WORKING.

11. STUNT RUINING

SO, SOMEHOW THIS FILM MADE SOME OF THE MOST INSANELY AWESOME 18-WHEELER TRUCK STUNTS COME OFF SLOPPY AND STILTED.

OKAY, THAT'S ENOUGH REASONS. ONCE YOU POORLY SHOOT THE STUNT WORK IN A BOND MOVIE HULK'S DONE WITH YOU!!!

* * *

THE FUNNY THING IS THAT ALL THIS STILL MAYBE COULD HAVE WORKED IF THE WHOLE MOVIE DIDN'T FEEL SO DAMN AWKWARD ABOUT EVERYTHING. EVEN WITH THESE ELEVEN PROBLEMS, WE CAN'T POINT TO SOME SINGULAR THING THAT COULD HAVE FIXED THE FILM, BUT THAT JUST HIGHLIGHTS THE PROBLEM OF STARTING WITH A BAD INTENTION. HERE WE HAD JOHN GLEN'S LAST FILM (AS HE'S DIRECTED EVERY SINGLE BOND MOVIE OF THE 80'S, WHICH MEANS HE DIRECTED EVERY FILM ON TODAY'S LIST). IT WAS NOT EVEN DALTON'S LAST ENTRY, BUT IT WAS ALSO MAIBAUM'S AND MICHAEL WILSON'S LAST FILM TOO. ALL FOUR OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE MORE THAN PROVEN THEIR BOND CHOPS AND DESERVED A GREAT SEND OFF. THEY WERE ALL TITANS OF THE SERIES. BUT ALL IT TOOK WAS THE SINGLE BAD INTENTION OF GOING FULL-TILT ON THE MODERNIZATION OF 80'S BOND, TO TRY AND KEEP WITH CURRENT INSTEAD OF STAYING TRUE TO WHO THEY WERE. AND AS A RESULT OF THE INCONGRUOUS AIM THE BOND SERIES ENDS UP SUFFERING THE DEATH OF A THOUSAND PAPER CUTS.

AND WHILE WE ARE HERE, ONE SUCH PAPER CUT THAT HULK HAS TO MENTION IS THAT THIS MIGHT BE THE FIRST GENUINELY UGLY ENTRY IN THE SERIES. GOING BACK AND WATCHING ALL THESE FILMS SHOWS OFF JUST HOW PRETTY-LOOKING MOST OF THEM ARE, BUT ASIDE FROM THE OPENING FLORIDA KEYS STUFF, THE WHOLE "LOOK" OF THE THING NEVER, EVER FEELS RIGHT. AND THE WEIRD THING IS THAT D.P. ALEC MILLS WAS A VETERAN OF THE SERIES AND HAD EVEN SHOT DAYLIGHTS JUST BEFORE. SO PERHAPS IT WAS JUST A FUNCTION OF THE WHOLE GRITTY AIM. OR PERHAPS IT WAS THE FILM'S FAMOUS BUDGET ISSUES, WHICH ACTUALLY RESTRICTED LICENSE FROM FILMING IN UK (A FIRST FOR THE SERIES), BUT REALLY IT SEEMED TO EFFECT EVERYTHING. IT JUST FEELS SO MUCH SMALLER THAN OTHER BOND FILMS. EVEN THE BIG CLIMACTIC AZTEC SETS FEEL PEDESTRIAN. HULK HONESTLY CAN'T EXPLAIN THE AESTHETICS ANY BETTER THAN THESE VAGUE CHARACTERIZATIONS, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY JUST BECAUSE EXPLAINING AESTHETICS IS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO DO WITHOUT GETTING INTO THE WHOLE NUANCE OF IT. SO JUST UNDERSTAND THAT THE GRANDEUR AND SCOPE WE LOVE ABOUT BOND FILMS IS JUST...  GONE.

FOR WE ARE IN THE LAND OF THE INCONGRUENT.

AND HULK CAN'T STOP TRYING TO CONVEY HOW HAPHAZARD LICENSE TO KILL IS. THE WHOLE THING JUST WALLOWS IN EVERY KIND OF UGLINESS. IT RUBS YOUR FACE IN THE GRIT. IT RUBS YOUR FACE IN THE OUT-OF-NOWHERE COMEDY. AND IT RINGS FALSE ON EVERY EMOTIONAL BEAT. WHICH JUST ADDS UP TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS MAYBE ONE OF THE MOST UNROMANTIC BOND MOVIES EVER MADE. EVEN THE ONE-LINERS ARE UNIQUELY TERRIBLE AND DON'T FIT THE DARKER TONE AT ALL. WHEN BOND SAYS "Looks like he hit a dead end!" AFTER A GUY IS REVEALED TO BE IMPALED ON A CRANE, IT FEELS LIKE SOMETHING MORE OUT OF A HORROR FILM. THERE IS NO TACT. AT SEEMINGLY EVERY LEVEL, IT'S A FILM CHOCK-FULL OF MISGUIDED DECISIONS THAT EITHER GO WRONG, DON'T WORK TO BEGIN WITH, DON'T WORK WITH EACH OTHER OR JUST JUXTAPOSE HORRIBLY WITH THE FILM'S CORE IDENTITY. AND THE END RESULT IS A MOVIE THAT FEELS LIMP AND UNABLE TO WOO YOU... WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY A PROBLEM WHEN THE BEST BOND FILMS ARE ROMANCES.

AND IN THE END, NO MATTER WHAT YOU CAN ARGUE FOR CONTEXT, THESE CHARACTERIZATIONS OF LICENSE STILL ADD UP TO FUEL A POPULAR MYTH THAT WE STILL REGARD TO THIS DAY:  IT IS "THE FILM THAT ALMOST KILLED JAMES BOND."

ALMOST?

WELL... AS WE ALL KNOW, SIX YEARS LATER ANOTHER FILM CAME TO THE RESCUE...

A GREAT FILM TO BOOT, BUT THAT'S FOR TOMORROW.

AND TOMORROW WE FINISH THE JOB!

(STAY TUNED FOR HULK VS. JAMES BOND DAY 4!)