The World is Not Enough (1999)
The plot: A British oil tycoon is killed in the MI6 HQ. His daughter inherits his fortune along with his precious oil deposits in the Caspian Sea. British super-agent James Bond is assigned for her protection as her father’s killer (who formerly kidnapped his daughter for ransom) is after her. The man is an amoral and quite vengeful man named Renard (Carlyle, The Full Monty), and taking him down proves quite a chore as he has a bullet lodged in his brain that causes him to feel no pain.
The World is Not Enough is a well-directed and lavishly produced chapter in the James Bond series, with some terrific eye-popping stunts (the opening sequence is probably the best I’ve seen in a Bond film to date). While still largely conforming to the conventions of the series, this film has some very nice touches not seen in other Bonds: more insights into M’s character, a goodbye to Q (and an introduction to John Cleese (Silverado) as his replacement), and probably the most vulnerable James Bond portrayed on film. Outside of some obligatory puns and one-liners, the film is the most probably the most serious in tone since For Your Eyes Only, eschewing the tongue-in-cheek cartoon adventure of Brosnan’s (Mars Attacks!, The Thomas Crown Affair) last two outings. However, as good as these things are, it is also the dullest of Brosnan’s tenure as 007, with not much in the way of genuine thrills and chills. Even though the acting is top-notch, the production is the highest of any Bond, and the directing quite competent by the experienced Apted (Agatha, Continental Divide), the overall plot is just not interesting and unfortunately the film does tend to drag as a result.
If there is a legitimate major gripe, it comes from the casting of Denise Richards (Wild Things, Loaded Weapon 1). Suspension of disbelief is a must for all Bond films, and with all of the grandiose stunts and gadgets, nothing in this film shatters the suspension of disbelief more than the notion that a 20-something, well-tanned and athletic woman with a boob job and tattoos also happens to be the world’s top nuclear physicist. I suppose she’s attractive enough to be a Bond girl, but there are so many beautiful women in Hollywood that I’m a bit mystified they couldn’t find one who looked less like a Baywatch babe than a world renowned scientist.
When all is said and done, The World is Not Enough is about as smooth a Bond film as there’s been in a while, but I can only give it a marginal recommendation. The excitement is not enough.
Qwipster’s rating: B-
MPAA Rated: PG-13 for intense sequences of action violence, some sexuality and innuendo
Running time: 128 min.
Cast: Pierce Brosnan, Sophie Marceau, Robert Carlyle, Denise Richards, Robbie Coltrane
Director: Michael Apted
Screenplay: Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Bruce Feirstein
Interesting thoughts, you bring up some good points. Personally, I think that Brosnan’s films tend to be a bit underappreciated. Sure, they have flaws, but I think in an era (the 90’s) where a lot of big-budget movies were mostly style over substance (to put it mildly) and not much more than that, the Bond series in the 90’s at least tried to give us films that were a little more thoughtful and intelligent than your average blockbuster.
I also think that you can also see more of the Daniel Craig-era being hinted at here: like you said, we have a bigger role for M, with her past coming back to haunt her, but also more more nuanced villains, and a plot that while doesn’t always succeed in being exciting is more emotional than usual for the series. Those are elements we saw in Casino Royale and Skyfall.
I feel that with a bit more fine-tuning this could’ve been a great action movie. I similarly about a lot of the more recent films in the series: this one is a little flat in terms of excitement, Goldeneye could’ve used 15-20 minutes of character development, same for Skyfall, Spectre was bloated, Tomorrow Never Dies had interesting ideas but still felt formulaic, etc. I’m partial to The World is Not Enough and would probably give it an A-, but I can understand rating it lower.
Now that the Craig-era has ended with No Time to Die, I wonder how the producers will approach the series, if they’ll find a fresh approach or stick close to the classic Bond formula.