Watch Die Another Day For Free

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

One can understand why this might be his least favorite James Bond film that Pierce Brosnan made. "Die Another Day" resembles more the hodgepodge of modern action films than it does the secret agent thrillers created by Ian Fleming. The hodgepodge being nearly constant action films devoid of any acting. While this entry in the 007 series has considerable plot, with complicated subplots, the nearly nonstop action has so few pauses that the film seems to be three or four stories pieced together. Besides the action scenes, this film has more of just about everything. That includes the gadgets and gimmicks. The dialog is rife with sexual innuendo. And, it's also the most graphic Bond film with vivid sex scenes. The filmmakers just put too much in this film that weighed it down. This is a classic example that more often is not better. This is also the first film in which a female character has a huge part of the action. Halle Berry's Jinx Johnson seems to have as much action time as does Brosnan's Bond. When the mole in MI6 is finally uncovered, it proves Bond right. Let's see if M doesn't follow his hunches and advice in the future. Most of the Bond films have as antagonists a global conspiracy or terrorist group. This is one of the few that also involves a foreign government hostile to the free Western world. Here, it's North Korea, where Bond is being tortured after being captured in the opening credits sequence. A couple of interesting notes about this film. A real Bond is in it - Samantha Bond is Moneypenny, and has played that part in all the Bond films that star Pierce Brosnan, beginning with Goldeneye in 1995. As with Brosnan, this was her last Bond film. And, John Cleese finally gets promoted to the post of Q. His banter with Bond in this film is the best of the exchanges between the two characters in more than 20 films.Unfortunately, the few good aspects of this film can't elevate it above a ho-hum action movie. The six stars are mostly for the tremendous sets, camerawork and varied shooting locations.

James Bond is sent to investigate the connection between a North Korean terrorist and a diamond mogul who is funding the development of an international space weapon.There are some cheesy moments in this Bond film. Mostly the strange use of CGI or green screen or whatever makes Brosnan look like he is floating in places he obviously is not really. Or Halle Berry's dive into the water. If you cannot find a stunt person and cannot make good effects, why do it? Beyond that, this is a pretty good film. I really enjoyed the focus on North Korea, which is not your usual Bond nemesis. I am not at all convinced that the real North Korea has technology as good as is shown in the film, but I suppose that is part of the Bond fantasy.

Strange Pierce Brosnan finale this was. A 140 m $ show that was meant to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the James Bond legacy, but failed in my opinion. Yes, it's a 007 movie all right, but runs with an unnecessary roaring V8 muscle engine. A solid, faithful 4-cylinder was all that was needed. Makes an attempt to run on champagne, when it could have been in a reclined way, with a nice cold beer instead. Nice opening scene and some fun flashbacks is not enough for this kind of event.The makers fools away the good 007 spirit with too much "make-up" and flashy, garish scenes in such speed that a good seat belt was needed when you entered the cinema chair at your local theater in 2002.The use of flashbacks to the old movies is way too obvious and silly. Diamonds and lasers was already expended stuff, and the cast of Halle Berry was strange to me even back then. A good actress that wasn't really Bond stuff to me. Acted tough and cocky in a most annoying way, just getting along to the end. (Dr. No bikini scene rip-off is spoofed many times since.) Musician lady Madonna's cameo part is just there to fill up her ego. Of course, she had to spoil the good theme song tradition too, by performing a "modern" hard core dance track that isn't Bond material at all. (The worst 007 track that was, since Duran Duran's 1985 "A View To A Kill.) Why couldn't Robbie Williams been asked at the time, to do a soft tune instead?The cast is, by the way, quite good anyway. I think Rosamund Pike is one of the best villain girls in the Bond history, an elegant beauty with the ordinary lethal skills. A woman to be close to, rather than the opposite. Head villain Toby Stephens does it good too, but lacks of some aura to make a full-filled 007 evil enemy.And the running time of 133 minutes is way too much. Some action scenes could have been cut in half - instead of hitting the brakes unnecessary - for a better flow. (The Icelandic chase scene which ends up quite silly is one example.)So, do I think this 007 flick is the most bad of them all? Some days, yes....but none of the Bond movies is an absolutely disaster. Brosnan was not sacked because of this, he was just running out of James Bond fuel, and got the leave message by rumors, I've read. (Not directly from the office of Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli.)It just was time for a change in the James Bond calendar. The basic stories of one Ian Fleming was ended long time since, and the responsible crew was to think things over. What to do for pushing the 007 legacy forward, once again?Former Bond actors Sean Connery and Roger Moore was questioned about their opinion, where to go with the MI6 agent. Connery said that he cared quite deeply about the whole Bond package, and what things that would happen to a thing that he was part of creating in the beginning. Moore was more of easy going - as always - and was hankering for a villain part in a James Bond movie. (Why did they not listen to the man? Make it happen before he's gone; he deserves it better than any other former Bond actor, coming back three times when he was already condemned, because of his respected and sometimes criticized age, last appearance 57 years old.)Timothy Dalton was professionally modest, and proclaimed that the Bond machine was to run for several ages to come, surely. I think he was the most "awake" Bond actor of them all.One-timer George Lazenby (1969) seemed not to care that much, once spoiling his chances as an immortal Bond actor because of bad decisions, and some wrong advisers at the time. Once the Brosnan era was over, plans for a continuation began to take shape... The Bond fans of the world was held on the gridiron for four long years.

I have to admit, I have a soft spot for this film because this is the first James Bond movie I ever saw. However, looking at it objectively, I'll have to admit that it is one of the weaker Bond films out there.Pierce Brosnan is as good as ever in his final outing. He supposedly quit after this one because he didn't want to become the next Roger Moore. Halle Berry's Jinx was attractive, but the character is badly written with a lot of her lines being genuinely cringe-worthy. Rosemund Pike's Miranda Frost isn't that great, either.Gustav Graves, played by Toby Stevens, is a pretty lame villain. He's rather uninteresting and is not at all menacing. Zao, his partner, isn't much better.People, of course, have criticized the story and action-scenes as stretching the limits of plausibility. I'm gonna have to agree with them. There is such a thing as too ridiculous even for Bond, and this movie crosses that line.The opening hovercraft chase is spectacular, but the subsequent action scenes are far too cartoonish for my taste. The CGI effects also don't hold up that well, as shown in many scenes such as the stupid surfing scene.However, I really appreciate the references to previous Bond films. They did this because it was the franchise's 40th anniversary.The film has a few good parts, but it can't make up for the extremely silly and bloated nature of the film as a whole. It's one of the franchise's worst, but I still rank it ahead of "The Man With The Golden Gun." Too bad they would take the fun out of the franchise in the next couple of films.RATING: C