I think the biggest sin of this one is that it feels and plays like a generic 80s action flick, at the tail end of the 80s. For all those who like that specific genre, it offers a great ride, as some of the Bond staples are still factors here (particularly the budget, even if it was relatively low, and some of the stunt work). But in all honesty, it's about the greatest sin a Bond movie can commit: generic anything is sure not what I'd expect when I sit down to watch one. The core vendetta couldn't be any more basic, and thus hardly believable as a Bond plot (particularly as the "victim" ends up surviving anyway), and it doesn't expand into anything more than a simple drug lord with too much money, either. There's also some rather gratuitous gore, which I wouldn't say belongs in a Bond movie. The only thing that might elevate it somewhat is the "villain's lair" final showdown location/sequence, which is definitely bigger than in "normal" movies.

As for the cast... Dalton, who was ok in Living Daylights, has nothing going for him here, just like Bond himself could be any random (hell, nameless) rogue cop from any other movie - certainly in the hundreds more that have been made since. Carey Lowell has nothing on Honor Blackman, same as Pam Bouvier has nothing on Pussy Galore - barely even does any _piloting_ until the very end, as if someone suddenly remembered they still had to feature that. I can't even remember Felix, or indeed any of the other "good guys" at all. Talisa Soto feels like a trophy acquisition (I realise that sounds weird, all context considered); and all the rest of the "bad guys" come off as extremely typecast who barely have to do any acting per se. Q gets to do some "field work", which would be a nice little bonus, but it's so marginal, it might as well not be a thing.

All in all, it's Bond as americanised as it could ever get - as it never should get, to be quite frank; also going on for over two hours, as per usual... which, for an 80s action flick, is just too damn long. It's no wonder I can never really recall this one, nor do I really feel like rewatching.

I was just not a fan of Timothy Dalton's "007" and so can't say I was looking forward with much enthusiasm to this. Sadly, it didn't surprise - it's a really far fetched, frankly rather unpleasant, outing for Ian Fleming's deadly agent that sees him on the trail of an evil drug lord who fed "Felix" (David Hedison) to a shark whilst doing away that man's new wife. What now ensues is just a series of unremarkable set-piece escapades that have precious little jeopardy to them. Anthony Zerbe just doesn't cut it as the supposedly menacing "Milton Krest" (surely a milk-shake?) nor does Robert Davi as baddie-in-chief "Sanchez". Not that it's unusual for a "Bond" film - but this one really does play a bit too much to stereotype without any of the fun; the tongue-in-cheekiness or any charisma at all from the star very much on the wain here. As adventure films go, it is entertaining enough - there are gadgets; but the banal dialogue grates after a while and this one somehow appears much less "British" than many of it's forebears - certainly it is grittier and more violent. Adequate, but I would not say anything for the far classier and engaging Connery or Moore to worry about.

This 007 film stays true to its motif.
This begins an era of "no fun" 007 films, where the wit is very minimal and every scene is whiplash brutal.
However, unlike most later 007 films, this one stays true to its design. It doesn't try to "contrive" the story. Instead, there is a flow.
One interesting aspect is that we see something worse than "death", as is pointed out earlier, with David Hedison getting brutal treatment in his recurring Felix role.
We see the beginning of an era where evil is in charge of the world. No longer is there anyone to be trusted outside of a few men like James and Felix.
There is a "darkest before the Dawn" scenario here, but it isn't "contrived" the way later 007 movies do it.
There is a lot going for this one. Unfortunately, it set the style for "no fun in 007 films", which ultimately saw the writing and directing get worse and worse. But this one works. Bond is still a genuinely okay guy, and that's what always keeps 007 films going.

_**A different kind of Bond**_

Released in 1989, "Licence to Kill" always struck me as the most atypical Bond film. In this one James (Timothy Dalton) goes rogue after a good friend's bride is murdered and the friend is half-eaten by a shark. Stripped of his authority, Bond vengefully goes after the responsible drug lord, Sanchez (Robert Davi).

The opening act drives home that "Licence to Kill" is a more serious and brutal Bond flick. Although there's still a lot of "yeah, right" moments, the comedic edge of past Bond films is all but gone. And the violence is so savage and merciless compared to past films that it almost comes off shocking.

In addition, the spectacular globe-trotting locations are absent in favor of a more one-dimensional setting -- the Florida Keys and Mexico (where the film was shot). Although they do fine with these limited locales, the change is noticeable.

The women are below par as well. Carey Lowell works best as the "Bond girl," but she pales in comparison to, say, Lois Chiles, Luciana Paluzzi and Claudine Auger. Talisa Soto is also on hand as Sanchez' girl and, briefly, Priscilla Barnes.

The opening stunt sequence is alright, but it's unmemorable compared to past Bond films, like "The Living Daylights," "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker."

Furthermore, there's an under-developed subplot about a cult guru and the film seems overlong at 133 minutes.

But the movie scores points with effective villains (it wouldn't be right to say "good villains", would it?), particularly Davi and a young Benicio Del Toro, both cruel and sadistic.

FINAL SAY: The fun might be over, but at least they tried something different to stir things up. Unfortunately, it didn't quite work. "Licence to Kill" performed weakly at the box office and ranks with the lesser Bond flicks. Still, it's interesting as an atypical part of the series -- darker and grittier, albeit still comic booky. Plus Dalton is striking as the vengeful protagonist and, if you can hang around till the final act, it's totally kick-axx.

GRADE: B-

When personal loyalties conflict with his MI6 limitations, Bond turns in his credentials and goes rogue to smoke out a fugitive drug lord. Continuing the darker trend established in Timothy Dalton's first turn, 1987's The Living Daylights, this entry borrows several recurring themes from the then-tapering 1980s action boom. Our cocaine kingpin is lifted straight from the set of Scarface, reckless and bloodthirsty but insulated behind a wall of cash, and the revenge fantasy that motivates all the fireworks is, typically, pretty shallow. Not nearly as shallow as the pool of actors, mind you; a good sixty-percent of the cast must've been chosen for their pin-up potential alone.

The action scenes fare well, especially the climactic eighteen-wheeler chase along winding, mountainous roads, but those often feel like easy distractions while more substantial pots boil unwatched in another room. The premise of an outlaw 007, dodging cronies and his own jilted former handlers alike, seems ripe with fresh potential. Shame it's never exploited for more than an odd sniper scene at the Hemingway House, then mindlessly hand-waved off after the bad guy's dealt with.

Licence to Kill has moments, but too often it feels like it's straining to be something it's not. Are those growing pains, as the franchise storms into its fourth decade, or desperate attempts to keep up with the times?