'Licence to Kill' - High-Def Digest Review - High-Def Digest Forums
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-01-2009, 12:42 PM
Attebery's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,716
Default 'Licence to Kill' - High-Def Digest Review

'Licence to Kill' - High-Def Digest Review

Josh has reviewed 'Licence to Kill.' He says this is one of the most underappreciated entries in the 007 franchise. (Editor's Note - 20 years later I'm still terrified of watching it again because of that decompression chamber scene.) This Blu-ray looks great, sounds great, and has some great extras. Highly recommended.

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2166/licencekill.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-01-2009, 01:08 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5
Default

great review!

I always liked this one a lot!

After True Romance, I will pick this one up
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-01-2009, 01:24 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4
Default Four Stars? You've got to be kidding....

I take issue with the way this reviewer attempts to speak so authoritatively about films. Not all of the Moore outings were dumb and a steady slide downhill -- far from it. For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy both have solid plots, complex villains, great reversals, and first-rate action. It was only with the abominable "View to a Kill" that the Moore era sunk back into Moonraker antics that Mr. Zyber cites as indicative of the entire 80s run.

Dalton was disliked because he was priggish, haughty, and couldn't deliver the lines with the right savoir faire. Zero charisma for the part. Thank God they got rid of him.

License to Kill has an unbelievably cheesy opening credit sequence, the villain is a total bore, and the extreme violence seems more akin to a Tarantino film than something to come from the pen of Ian Fleming. I would suggest reading some of the original books, and it will become very clear that the constipated, bufoonish Dalton, and the clunky "License to Kill" contain little of the high-flying espionage that made the books so memorable. And those pun-inspired names were all in the spirit of the original author.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-01-2009, 01:34 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 37
Default

Count me as one of Dalton's fans. But, with friends & family, I'm alone in this. We get into heated debates about the best Bond and best movies in the franchise. To them, Dalton is boring and w/o good looks or charm. No doubt, Connery was perfect as Bond, but to me, Dalton is 2nd best. I'd rate Moore last. He was okay in 'The Man with the Golden Gun' and 'For Your Eyes Only', but those movies were better as Bond movies go. Also agree 'License to Kill', like Dalton, is underrated. Could've done w/o the Wayne Newton bits, but this is an edgy, no frills, highly entertaining Bond flick. Hopefully, more audiences will discover the movie and Dalton's Bond on Blu.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-01-2009, 01:42 PM
horrorbusiness's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,145
Default

I'm not really a Dalton fan, but I do like this one.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-01-2009, 01:53 PM
ack_bak's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,623
Default

I really enjoyed this film and I prefer Dalton to Moore and put him very close to Brosnan. I do agree with Josh in that I think the producers and studio really tried to reboot the franchise here and get away from the campiness that plagued many of the Moore movies. They were just too soon.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-01-2009, 01:55 PM
Mandrake's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ludovico View Post
I take issue with the way this reviewer attempts to speak so authoritatively about films. Not all of the Moore outings were dumb and a steady slide downhill -- far from it. For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy both have solid plots, complex villains, great reversals, and first-rate action. It was only with the abominable "View to a Kill" that the Moore era sunk back into Moonraker antics that Mr. Zyber cites as indicative of the entire 80s run.

Dalton was disliked because he was priggish, haughty, and couldn't deliver the lines with the right savoir faire. Zero charisma for the part. Thank God they got rid of him.

License to Kill has an unbelievably cheesy opening credit sequence, the villain is a total bore, and the extreme violence seems more akin to a Tarantino film than something to come from the pen of Ian Fleming. I would suggest reading some of the original books, and it will become very clear that the constipated, bufoonish Dalton, and the clunky "License to Kill" contain little of the high-flying espionage that made the books so memorable. And those pun-inspired names were all in the spirit of the original author.

Yea? Well, that's just like--your opinion, man.
I prefer The Living Daylights to this one but the film has its appeal and so does Timothy Dalton, who represented a more serious take on the character than any of the actors in the series' 45-odd year span up until Daniel Craig. Despite the implausible scenarios one tends to find oneself in when one is James Bond, Dalton came off to me as more credible, if perhaps less entertaining, than his peers.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-01-2009, 02:00 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 113
Default

Just watched this one with my wife after not having seen it since '89. I was impressed with the presentation. We both thought was Licence was somewhat similar to the latest Bond, except that since the action scenes aren't filmed so up close you can actually tell what was happening in them.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-01-2009, 02:04 PM
ack_bak's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,623
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ludovico View Post
I take issue with the way this reviewer attempts to speak so authoritatively about films. Not all of the Moore outings were dumb and a steady slide downhill -- far from it. For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy both have solid plots, complex villains, great reversals, and first-rate action. It was only with the abominable "View to a Kill" that the Moore era sunk back into Moonraker antics that Mr. Zyber cites as indicative of the entire 80s run.

Dalton was disliked because he was priggish, haughty, and couldn't deliver the lines with the right savoir faire. Zero charisma for the part. Thank God they got rid of him.

License to Kill has an unbelievably cheesy opening credit sequence, the villain is a total bore, and the extreme violence seems more akin to a Tarantino film than something to come from the pen of Ian Fleming. I would suggest reading some of the original books, and it will become very clear that the constipated, bufoonish Dalton, and the clunky "License to Kill" contain little of the high-flying espionage that made the books so memorable. And those pun-inspired names were all in the spirit of the original author.
Everybody has an opinion and I can see where some people are put of by Dalton, but I do agree with Josh in that Moore (and more specifically the writers, studio, producer, etc) had drug the franchise down. "For Your Eyes Only", and "Man With The Golden Gun" and "Live and Let Die" were highlights for me of the Moore franchise while "Moonraker", "View To A Kill". "Octopussy" were just bad... Octopussy? Ughh. Not a highlight for me at all with Bond wearing clown suits, gorilla suits, the ridiculous Tarzan scene, etc, etc.

And I do agree with Josh in that Moore was never believable as a brawler. Many of the hand to hand scenes with Moore are just not even close to being believable. He did bring charm and wit to the character, but he was just rarely, if ever, believable as a top British Secret Service Agent. He was anything but tough and intimidating. Dalton was much more believable as a secret agent (I think Daniel Criag is the most believable).
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-01-2009, 02:05 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4
Default Specifics of the review.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bak View Post
I really enjoyed this film and I prefer Dalton to Moore and put him very close to Brosnan. I do agree with Josh in that I think the producers and studio really tried to reboot the franchise here and get away from the campiness that plagued many of the Moore movies. They were just too soon.
I'm not debating the producer's intentions or the tendency towards campiness in the Moore era. It was a good idea for a re-boot of the character. But Mr. Zyber says a lot more than that -- dismissing an entire body of work. And I believe it is too simplistic an analysis to say the studio was "just too soon"; License to Kill would be a turkey if it hit theaters today. They bungled the entire affair by choosing a clod as the new 007. Never could a Bond film done so poorly had they done it with style.

Please somebody try and address the specifics of what Mr. Zyber writes and stop making excuses for his sloppy generalizations. It sounds like most of you agree with my main point -- and it's an important one -- that this review unjustly trashes on some good films in an attempt to make a persuasive argument.

Last edited by ludovico; 07-01-2009 at 02:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
'Kill and Kill Again' is coming October 3 Landy Blu-ray Software General Discussion 0 08-15-2017 03:30 PM
'Bond 50: Licence to Kill' - High-Def Digest Review Attebery Blu-ray Software General Discussion 18 12-21-2012 09:16 PM
Faster, Pussycat! Kill!! Kill!! Jaskoen Blu-ray Wish Lists 0 08-17-2011 05:40 PM
Licence to Kill, Wall Street, and Me, Myself, and Irene Blu-rays for sale thelwig14 Blu-ray Disc Exchange 0 05-14-2011 12:36 PM
Digital Distribution didn't kill CD, it won't kill Blu-Ray. theBishop HD Digital Downloads (NEW!) 46 01-13-2008 02:00 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off