The BigScreen Cinema Guide Now Showing The Marquee Gift Shop Search Help
 
Have an Account? E-Mail Address Passcode
| Register Now


Remove ads with our VIP Service
Opened in Theaters: Friday, December 19th, 1997

Directed by Roger Spottiswoode

Share This Page

Add to FacebookDigg ThisSave to del.icio.usSave to GoogleSubmit to Yahoo
Tomorrow Never Dies

PG-13

Starring Pierce Brosnan, Jonathan Pryce, Michelle Yeoh...  View more >

Looking for more opinions?

Check out our Featured Movie Reviews for Tomorrow Never Dies.

Please Note: Reader Reviews are submitted by the readers of The BigScreen Cinema Guide and represent their own personal opinions regarding this movie, and do not represent the views of The BigScreen Cinema Guide, or any of its associated entities.

Please Note: Reader Reviews are submitted by the readers of The BigScreen Cinema Guide and represent their own personal opinions regarding this movie, and do not represent the views of The BigScreen Cinema Guide, or any of its associated entities.

[--- See Now! ---]by Shandril Jan 25, 2000

A typical Bond flick meets the new era after the cold war has ended... and everyone said it couldn't be done. Pah! With lots of action, GREAT lines (the SOLD OUT audience at the opening night feature I saw was quite amused), a handsome leading man and beautiful bombshells, this movie meets all the criteria of a good Bond movie.

Oh, and did I say that he's finally meeting the 20th century (not the technology, that was already met a long time ago, butsocially) with women who are as dangerous out of bed as in it (if not more).

By the way, this review is written by a female, and I loved the movie.

SEE IT NOW!!!

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Paul Buchholz Jan 25, 2000

I watched "From Russia with Love" a few days ago with a friend. I thought it was a masterpiece; the best Bond movie ever. As an aspiring 007 fan I was curious about the new film "Tomorrow Never Dies". I really didn't think it was possible to have a good 007 film in the 90's, ecpesially after the mindless "Goldeneye". Needless to say, I was wrong. Pierce Brosnan was more like Sean Connery than in Goldeneye, and he was witty and made use of his gadgets this time around. Good use. The villain, played by Jonathan Pryce, was standard issue, and was entertaining. The plot was innovative, and the movie was a lot of fun. As an action movie, it succeeded. As a Bond film, it proved that the franchise is not dead and ready to get up. As a plus, there was a woman who could do a lot more than be saved. The Bond girl really did something. If you like Bond films and are not too critical on accuracy, go see Tommorow Never Dies. Even the opening sequence is reminiscent of the older Bond films, with the theme sung by Sheryl Crow, and quite well. I liked it, and if you can take a little innovative action, I'm sure you will too.

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Andy Leef Jan 25, 2000

An excellent film, the best Bond film yet, I hope to see more of him

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Richard LaFreniere Jan 25, 2000

Critics call this film "the best bond film ever made" and "Tommorow Never Dies is a classic Bond adventure" I must aggree with these statements. I didn't see any of the "old" bond films, but I have seen Goldeneye and Tommorow Never Dies. I must say, I was blown away from the effects and the SDDS sound in the theater. The machine gun fire was all around me as well as Bond's new BMW which is full of technology including missles, rocket launchers, machine guns, and a state of the art, NO ENTRY car alarm system.No one and nothing can get into the car except bond himself. He uses a Ericson Cellular Phone as his primary "toy". Combined with all the usual love scenes, bond's primary objective is to stop power and media crased Mr Carver from taking over the world. Just your typical Bond flic. Go see this movie now. You will be on the edge of your seat the whole way through. And if you get time at the end, be sure to get yourself one of those cars! a phrase "I got to get me one of those" was my remark at the sight of it!

 

[--- Good ---]by Ron Higgins VIP MemberJan 25, 2000

Bond is back, and this time there's more action!

<A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Brosnan%2C+Pierce">Pierce Brosnan</A> reprises his role as James Bond, secret agent. Also returning are <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Llewelyn%2C+Desmond">Desmond Llewelyn</A> as "Q", <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Dench%2C+Judi">Judi Dench</A> as "M", <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Bond%2C+Samantha">Samantha Bond</A> as Moneypenny, and <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Baker%2C+Joe+Don">Joe Don Baker</A> as Jack Wade.

New to this installment of the classic film series is <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Pryce%2C+Jonathan">Jonathan Pryce</A> playing Elliot Carver, a media mogul, his wife Paris played by the lovely <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Hatcher%2C+Teri">Teri Hatcher</A>,and Bond's new sidekick, <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?Yeoh%2C+Michelle">Michelle Yeoh</A>.

The deal this time around is that Elliot Carver and his media empire are coming up a little short on good news stories, so they set out to create a few on their own. The problem is that they've upped the stakes a bit and are trying to create an international incident, all in the name of news and money.

With more action than the last Bond film (GoldenEye), I felt that this film contained all of the necessary elements for a good James Bond film. However, I was slightly disappointed with Teri Hatcher's character, thinking that it should have been more involved, and slightly disappointed with the number of cool gadgets from "Q".

Michelle Yeoh adds a dimension that is sometimes lacking. She kicks butts as well as Bond in this film, and I enjoyed the interaction between the two characters.

Overall, I liked the film and thought it makes a decent addition to the series. There wasn't much split-surround sound in the theater that I saw the film in, therefore if you don't make it to a digital showing, you won't miss too much.

I enjoyed the cinematography, and liked the score as well. Overall, a solid thumbs up.

<I>Copyright 1997 - Ron Higgins No unauthorized publication or distribution without the consent of Ron Higgins.</I>

 

[--- Wait for Rental ---]by Mark Spiering Jan 25, 2000

"The name is Bond...James Bond." And so marks the return of everyone's favorite super-spy in _Tomorrow Never Dies_, the 18th Bond film to date. As always, there are plenty of bad guys, cool gadgets, beautiful women, witty one-liners, and lots of action. Unfortunately, a solid plot is lacking from this latest installment of the 007 series.

Pierce Brosnan reprises his role as Ian Flemming's James Bond. I must say that Brosnan is tremendously better than Timothy Dalton ever was (I never thought Dalton was quite right for the part). Brosnan bringsa harder, more ruthless facet (almost to the level of Sean Conery) back to the Bond personality. I was very pleased that Bond's dialog is much more developed in this film than in _GoldenEye_. Also, it wasrefreshing to have a "Bond girl" (Michelle Yeoh) who could hold her own and didn't have to rely on being saved (or seduced!) by him.

The car-chase scene is the highlight of the movie! It was very exciting and exhilarating! Bond has some real fun with Q's latest creation as he thwarts some bad guys in the process. The motorcycle-chase scene is almost as good, and has some truly spectacular stunts!

While there were some great moments, the film overall lacked the bravado and creativity of past Bond films. The "diabolical scheme" was, for the most part, weak and laughable. I was very disappointedwith the villian. He was not the cold, calculating criminal like Auric Goldfinger or Blofeld. Instead, he seemed very amaturish and unexperienced. I was also disappointed that more locations were not visited during the story. It added to the adventure when Bond was jet-setting all around the world! For example, _Moonraker_ takes you to California, Italy, Rio De Janero, and even outer space! This film happens essentially all in one place (south China). But most disappointing, and frustrating, to me was the over use of gun-play during the climax of the film. I have grown very weary of action/adventure movies today because it seems like Hollywood has given up on imagination and has resorted to the old "shoot 'em up as much as you can" tripe. Unfortunately, _Tomorrow Never Dies_ continues this disheartening trend.

The cinematography was exquisite. Shot in Panavision, the picture was always razor-sharp and crisp, with rich and vivid color saturation. A few splices were a little dirty, but not distracting. I saw it inDTS at the Ridge Theater (stadium seating, of course!). The sound quality was rich and well balanced. The dialog was always distinguishable and clear, and the sound effects were not too loud or obnoxious. I was somewhat disappointed with the lack of music at times during the film, though.

I rated this film as "Wait For Rental", but it would be worth seeing it at a budget theater. I would not pay even matinee prices at a first-run theater to go see it again, however.

Fear not James Bond fans, for as the end credits promise, he will return. Hopefully, he'll bring a better script with him next time!

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Tiffany Too Jan 25, 2000

It's a great movie don't wait to see it! I really liked it because it had great sound and visual effects! I also think Pierce Brosnan is a good actor.

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Ryan Martinez Jan 25, 2000

I am one of the biggest Bond fans you will ever meet, and was very moved by this movie, this movie had the same old bond formula, the same that hasn't really been captured since "You Only Live Twice" No, I'm not some old fan (I'm only 17) but trust me, I'm very keen on my Bond skills. Blending action with dialogue and of course, the good old gadgets, you couldn't of seen a better bond film, I was enthralled by the gadgets, and absolutely stunned by by the actions sequences, must see, you must see it now!

 

[--- Wait for Rental ---]by The Doctor Jan 25, 2000

"Tomorrow Never Dies" dir. Roger Spottiswoode review date: 4 JAN 1998 2100 review site: cinema multiplex, non-Dolby surround rating: 5/10

Drat.

Being a long-time aficionado of the exploits of Commander James Bond, I was prepared for a good flick from TND, or at least a good flight of fancy. Unfortunately, I was disappointed on both counts. TND never seems to rise above the typical "save-the-world-by-destroying-everything-in-sight" mindset. In this, it ranks barely above the "Rambo" movies.

At least TND stars a serviceable Bond in Pierce Brosnan. His predecessor, Timothy (Prince Barin) Dalton, was never quite suited for the role - he lacked the suave grace & charm that Brosnan brings to the role, though he seemed oddly appropriate to the merciless blood-bath that was "Licence to Kill". Roger Moore started well but was overcome by terminal jokiness by the end of his run; seemingly, he couldn't tie his shoes without spewing one-liners like a manure spreader. George Lazenby, keeper of the flame foronly one feature (On Her Majesty's Secret Service), played the role well - and did his own stunts (take that, Roger Moore!) - but suffered by following the man most viewers identify as Bond, Sean Connery. Poor George was never given the time to make the role his own - given the drop-off in receipts from "You Only Live Twice" to "O.H.M.S.S.", United Artists never even gave him the chance. Imagine Jay Leno taking over the Tonight Show from Johnny Carson, but given only one month to prove himself before Johnny stepped backin (as Connery did in the regrettable "Diamonds Are Forever"), and you can appreciate Lazenby's spot. (Can you tell I rank "O.H.M.S.S." as my favorite Bond film?)

Unfortunately, Brosnan's co-stars let him down. For the most part, their characters are never developed. Some characters are simply laughable - witness Vincent Schiavelli as the firearms & forensic expert Dr. Kaufman, sporting the *worst* German accent this side of Benny Hill.

Additionally, some of the stunts strain the limits of credulity. Take, for example, the scene where a helicopter hovers down a Vietnamese outdoor market *rotor-first", disintegrating the market in the process. Now, suspend for a moment the physical fact that a helicopter can not hover in a rotor-first position without crashing to the ground. I am surprised that the rotor never caught a solid structural cross-member, which would have splattered the helicopter all over the market!

Where TND really disappoints is in its' derivative script. How so? Let me count the ways:
* Megalomanic plans to take over the world (most of the films) or some facet thereof (Goldfinger-gold market, Live & Let Die-U.S. drug market)
* Plan involves a trick boat (Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me)
* Plan involves nuclear energy (Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, Octopussy, Goldeneye)
* Plan involves a Communist power (From Russia With Love, You Only Live Twice, The Spy Who Loved Me, Octopussy, Goldeneye)
* more specifically, the Chinese (Goldfinger, The Man with the Golden Gun)
* but first, let's sink/capture a British ship (The Spy Who Loved Me, For Your Eyes Only; if airplanes are included, also include Thunderball)
* Bond Girls introduced to give a plot facet and then die (take your pick)
* SFX & stunts run away with the show (Moonraker, Goldeneye)
As a standard "shoot-'em-up" flick, TND is worth a rental. But as a Bond flick, it's no better than average. Memorable Bond bombs like "Diamonds Are Forever" keep this flick out of the cellar. But it's sad - this film could have been so much more.

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Terry Crouse Jan 25, 2000

The notion of bringing Bond into modern times has always struck me as sort of an oxymoron, sort of like playing Arena Football outdoors on a regular football field. After all, the James Bond character himself doesn't really ever age in the series, so why should his surroundings?

This has been sort of a dilemma for me with the last three Bond movies. I loved "License to Kill," yet Bond seemed much more like a contemporary action hero than the timeless 60's icon he was originally created to be. "Goldeneye" and "Tomorrow Never Dies" have been more of the same. Thus, it is difficult to compare these "updated" Bond movies to the more traditional ones.

I liked this movie -- it is, after all, an OUTSTANDING action movie. Most of the traditional Bond elements are still firing on all thrusters, especially my favorite, the super-charged "Bond mobile!" (The car chase scenes are always the most exciting sequences, getting to watch all the latest gadgetry being employed while Bond makes his wisecracks. And "Tomorrow Never Dies" definitely doesn't disappoint in this department.) All in all, I think this is one of the most exciting movies I've seen lately, and is an extremely enjoyable couple of hours. But still, it just doesn't seem to have that "old Bond feel" to it.

I wish there was a way to push the series back to its original time, but I doubt it will ever happen, especially with the box-office plunder that this one is hauling home. Oh well. As long as they keep the tempo at its current pace and Pierce Brosnan continues to grow into the role, I think Bond will be alive and well for many more years to come, the 21st century, and beyond.

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Ryan Cowle Jan 25, 2000

This movie ruled! I have watched almost all of the Bond movies, and this one is the best one in along time. I strongly recommend it for all viewers. The whole movie was like Bond was just going to the laundromat without a care in the whole world. Except for the usual psychopathic killers, double crossing wackos, and an abundance of just plain out-in-the-blue-kill-everyone-it's-my-job-because-i-am-an-islamic-terrorist sort of people. I think it deserves 5 stars anyday.

 

[--- Good ---]by Don Wozniak Jan 25, 2000

I haven't seen a Bond movie in the theatre for a while. This one made me glad that I saw a Bond movie on the big screen. Lots of action, typical "coolness" by Pierce Brosnan as 007. You will not be disappointed by this one!

 

[--- Good ---]by Rick Gagliano Jan 25, 2000

First of all...I liked it. I thought this was one of the more entertaining and enjoyable James Bond films in the series. Now you have to admit, that any movie that can still be this popular after making ninety of these films has got to be doing something right. Okay maybe there hasn't been ninety James Bond films, but it sure seems like there have been. Well, if you are not a die-hard James Bond fan or you outgrew his films about twenty years ago, well go ahead and take another look. Pierce Brosnan is easily my favorite James Bond and Judi Dench is the best M ever. Jonathan Pryce is your typical James Bond villain who wants to take over the world, but thank God for the British, because they are always able to thwart those efforts with the help of Jimmy. Well, I don't want to give too much of the story line away, I want it to be a surprise (what? You have seen a James Bond film before...okay, so the story line won't surprise you.) Bottom line...it was entertaining, it was fun, it was James Bond!

 

[--- Wait for Rental ---]by Glen Kimberley VIP MemberJan 25, 2000

First of all let me start by making it very clear that I am big fan of Bond movies.

I always look forward to them with their larger than life characters, diabolical world domination schemes, funny one liners, great chases and gorgeous women.

Unfortunately this one does not live up to it's predecessors in any way.

The plot has more holes in it than OJ's alibi, the dialogue is pathetic, the "one liners" crass and an insult to peoples intelligence, the villain laughable and totally unbeleivable and the chases too over the top.

It wasn't total rubbish but I was very disapointed and left the cinema feeling that I had been ripped off by a movie that had, in my opinion, been made in a rush with no thought to overall content.

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Travis(the man)Else Jan 25, 2000

This is an action packed thrill ride with a perfect cast and an original plot. Pierce Brosnan is the only bond to come close to Sean Connery and he's at his best here. The plot is surprisingly original. Instead of unrealistic bad guys that plan on world domination, this is an original bad guy that plans to get his power by his newspaper company, Carver enterprises. All he has to do is start the war, then provide the pictures in his paper. Goldeneye, to me, was kind of a rehash of previous bond movies, this one is much better. ***1/2 out of ****

 

[--- See Now! ---]by Devin McMackin Jan 25, 2000

Tommorow Never Dies rules! At first, I was skepticle about Pierce Brosnan in the role of James Bond, as I did not like him in the movie Goldeneye. He just did not seem right for the part. As I was watching Goldeneye, I caught myself saying,"This isn't Sean Connery. Where the hell is Sean Connery?" In Tommorow Never Dies, Brosnan has worked out all the kinks he experienced in Goldeneye, and really given a great performance as the cool, sophisticated James Bond. The action is great, and it has a well thought out storyline. The remote control car scene was amazing. Go see it right now!

Two thumbs up! Way up!

 

[--- Wait for Rental ---]by Jason Whyte Jan 25, 2000

What is it with movies that never really explain the plot fully? As if we don't really care what the story is about? "Tomorrow Never Dies", the umpteenth Bond installment, is not only noisy and boring, but it is so poorly told. The last great Bond film was "Octopussy", which features a handsome Roger Moore as he battled bad guys on trains, planes and at a circus. Since then, the whole series has went through some kind of demographic shifts: Bond doesn't really care anymore, and the spectacle seems dull.

I barely even know the plot, about a newsman who wants to corrupt the world with fake news or something like that. For 119 minutes, all "Tomorrow Never Dies" does is just blow up every set and shoot nothing but 120db of Dolby Digital into your ears (I saw "Titanic" on the same day, and trust me, my ears were ringing as I went home). You never really care about what goes on in this movie, all it tries to do is just satisfy you with overkill.

Grade: C

Tech Review:

Picture: 5 A startling picture, dynamic colors, beautiful contrast and fine blacks. A clear picture that is really easy on the eyes.

Sound: 2 (DD), 5 (dts): Telling by the noisy idiocy of Dolby Digital, seeing this movie in dts will be much more satisfying. I saw the film in DD, and let me tell you that it is the most noisest film in history. dts will obviously make sense out of the whole soundfield, so please trust in dts if possible. There is no SDDS track.

Photography: 4 Again, try panning and scanning Bond!

Length: 119 minutes. jwhyte2@hotmail.com ICQ- 4339199

 

[--- Good ---]by wetback39906 Jun 24, 2013



Home - About Us - Ad Info - Feedback
Journal/Blog - The Marquee - Movie Links - News and Events - Now Showing - Reader Reviews
Customize - VIP Service

The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a service of SVJ Designs LLC. All graphics, layout, and structure of this service (unless otherwise specified) are Copyright © 1995-2014, SVJ Designs. The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a trademark of SVJ Designs. All rights reserved.

'ACADEMY AWARDS®' and 'OSCAR®' are the registered trademarks and service marks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.