Licence to Kill : Blu-ray Review

The Movie Itself is directed by John Glen (For Your Eyes Only, Octopussy, A View to a Kill, The Living Daylights)

It seems like a happy coincidence that the film released alongside The Man With The Golden Gun, is yet another director's swan song. Much like Hamilton, John Glen had a longstanding relationship with the James Bond character, but Glen alone holds the record for directing the most Bond films, in addition to directing the most consecutive Bond films. He worked his way up the ranks, until he was bestowed the honor of directing his first Bond picture back in 1981, For Your Eyes Only. From there, he saw through the end of Roger Moore's tour of duty as 007, and he did the same with Timothy Dalton in 1989's, Licence to Kill.

So taking Glen's intimate knowledge of the character, and experience with the production of a Bond picture into consideration, how does his exit film compare to the rest of the lot, and was it an appropriate end note?

The answers to those questions are quite complex. Personally I don't find it to be as cut and dry as others make it out to be. The reason being that James Bond is -- and will forever be -- a character in a state of change. He will never be static. Both through marketing concerns, and the evolution of the political/espionage climate, his chances for stasis are slim to none. Therefore -- given his contemporary limitations/structure, he will always be a product of his time period -- for better or worse.

We're seeing the same sort of backlash now with Quantum of Solace that fell upon Licence to Kill. There were people that felt that Dalton didn't have that certain something that made the other Bonds tick, that he didn't possess the charisma or the likability of his predecessors. Many simply thought he was too vengeful. Too cold.

Beyond the issues with Dalton, fans and audiences alike also felt that the Bond's missions had taken a turn for the worse, that the stories were too grim and gritty. Many of which cried out for a change, a return to form. They would see their wishes come true, but it would be a long six years -- due to legal disputes over the ownership of the franchise -- before James Bond returned to the silver screen in Goldeneye. So, in a roundabout way, the critics of Dalton got their wish.

I belong to the school of thought that Timothy Dalton was dealt a poor hand. I also believe that Dalton made for an exceptional James Bond -- and that there would be no framework for Craig to weave his magic if it weren't for Dalton's work years prior. He was a very stoic Bond, but I think it was appropriate given the time period, and the narrative territory that the films were exploring. If anything is at fault, it would be the grittier subject matter, as the villains of Dalton's time moved away from diabolical world domination plots in favor of real-world, contemporary issues: illegal arms dealing, and drug trafficking. Still though, one could argue that trafficking and arms dealing have always been at home in the Bond franchise, and they'd be right, but I think for critics, it was less about the subject matter than it was the execution and the framing of the story. They simply thought it didn't fit quite right.

While I understand their objections, I don't think it takes away from the quality of the film, and I feel much the same way about Quantum of Solace. The films are a departure from tradition, but their vengeful cores make them so much more intense and compelling than the more casual entries throughout the Bond history. I mean, after all is said and done, this guy is supposed to be ruthless, isn't he? And his thirst for vengeance is a real character flaw that allows him to be more human than superhuman. Both Licence and Quantum got that right, but oddly enough, they remain as two of the more controversial Bond films for the same reason -- they bring Bond down to our level. And as we've seen then in 1989 and now twenty years later, the writers effectively polarized the viewership with their decision to showcase a truly aggressive Bond, with little to no reserve.

Still though, no matter what the creative forces do, there will always be fans, and there will always be critics, for no two Bond fans are ever alike, and few fans are as critical as a Bond fans.

That being said, I really like this film. It may not be my favorite, but it's far from the weakest film in the series.