146 replies to this topic

[chanoch]

Except maybe a bugger of a headache.

Let me see....21 plus...


Y'know, Craig or no Craig, I'm sure we could agree that 23 could still be pretty great. And I do mean that cause I hope it will be.

-chanoch


I had a strange thought about DAF of all films. Might I suggest it is that section where I'll hopefully see some of you again sometime.


Boycott Dave Arnold

[JimmyBond]

I had a strange thought about DAF of all films. Might I suggest it is that section where I'll hopefully see some of you again sometime.

Won't see me there, I really dislike DAF.

[chanoch]

You don't have to be a fan to appreciate this Jimmy. It has more to do with something quite profound hidden within the narrative by the writers. But its not for the squeamish or the Philistines among us.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

I'll just have a word here...firstly everyone is entitled to their own opinion also opinions are like s everyone has one. I didn't say that to offend anyone either. I agree with what a lot of my fellow CBners have said regarding this, but we can't all agree, can we?

Ok. When Daniel Craig was announced as Bond I hated it. I didn't care if he was a good actor or not. I knew he was a good actor because of Road to Perdition. I was a hater. Then I went to see Casino Royale and I loved this movie. Nothing popped into my head about the past movies and how CR stood up to them at that moment. I was no longer the hater I was. I liked Daniel Craig. Watching the movie the hair didn't bother me, his looks didn't bother me but having all this time now I see thing's that do bother me. Chanoch say's -This is not Ian Fleming's James Bond - I agree now that I'm reading the novels I see that Daniel Craig's portrayel is not quite Ian Fleming's James Bond and I would have to say that Timothy Dalton's Bond is the closest.
One thing that bothers me in Daniel's portrayel is the *thug* like behavior of this Bond (going after Le Chiffre with a butter knife, NO-NO-NO... didn't like that), but this is suppoesed to be Bond just starting out and developing into the smooth guy we saw in the other films and that's something that needs to be understood. He made mistakes and is learning and has learned from them. Chanoch: Cubby would be horrified. - Man who knows how Cubby would react to DC and his performance. But, I'm sure Barbera Broccoli knows her father and she said he would love DC. Would he love how they have changed so many traditional aspects of Bond in this film is the question.
Chanoch: Fire David Arnold - I don't really care for David Arnold either, but I did buy the Casino Royale soundtrack and was pleased. I will buy the rest that he's done but I don't really care for him. He's not John Barry, Bill Conti, or George Martin IMO and I wish they would bring someone else in. Chanoch: - Make M a man again - I mean why? They might as well keep her since they've let Judi Dence play M again in Casino Royale. I don't see the logic in this. Let M remain a woman. I wouldn't have been opposed to this if they would have done this when they changed almoset everything else.

So it is what it is. I look forward to Bond 23 and I'll continue to see what happens with this series. THEN I will make my opinions roll like fire when Daniel Craig's tenure is over and it turns out Bad. If not which I hope it doesn't I will be peaceful and hope the next guy is good and the films hold up. But my opinions will be voiced if I see fit and I don't care who likes it or not. I just don't want Bond to stray to far from what has made it work all these years. I want Q, Moneypenny, Traditional Gunbarrels, humor, sophistication, etc., but if it's absent for a film or two I can handle that.

Best Wishes,

Alana

Edited by mrsbonds_ppk, 28 April 2007 - 06:35 AM.

[chanoch]

Thanks Alana

[chris-o]

Perfect statement!

[Dr. Noah]

You don't have to be a fan to appreciate this Jimmy. It has more to do with something quite profound hidden within the narrative by the writers. But its not for the squeamish or the Philistines among us.

Boy, Tom Mankiewicz would be laughing hard if he bothered to read this newsgroup...

[mrsbonds_ppk]

Boy, Tom Mankiewicz would be laughing hard if he bothered to read this newsgroup...

Yes I think Tom would laugh at a lot of threads on this forum. And Your Welcome to those who found my opinins worth reading.

[LadySylvia]

I personally find the spirit of Goldfinger over the top for my Bondian taste. It needs not always be like that adventure.

I certainly find the "spirit" of GOLDFINGER over-the-top for my tastes. As for Craig's "thuggish" quality, he seemed no more thuggish than the other Bond actors when they go into "gritty mode". I had found this out recently, while viewing old Bond movies. As for the style he had created in CASINO ROYALE, I hope that he sticks to it until his last Bond movie. It suits him.

[00Twelve]

Indeed. Suits the character entirely, IMHO.

[tdalton]

I personally find the spirit of Goldfinger over the top for my Bondian taste. It needs not always be like that adventure.

I certainly find the "spirit" of GOLDFINGER over-the-top for my tastes. As for Craig's "thuggish" quality, he seemed no more thuggish than the other Bond actors when they go into "gritty mode". I had found this out recently, while viewing old Bond movies. As for the style he had created in CASINO ROYALE, I hope that he sticks to it until his last Bond movie. It suits him.

Agreed. I love what Craig did with his performance in Casino Royale. Truthfully, while I can find plenty of flaws with the film itself, I can't find many, if any, flaws in Craig's performance.

[chanoch]

Yes, and if they were to recapture the spirit of Goldfinger, then we might could say that we find few flaws, if any, in the film itself as well.

While it may not be my personal favorite, it is a pillar that the entire series rests upon. In that film, more so than in many others, there is a secret winning mixture.

[00Twelve]

I'll give the disclaimer (as always) that I'm talking purely out of my subjective Bondian tastes, but I can find more flaws with Goldfinger the film than Casino Royale the film (if I'm really looking).

The secret winning mixture of Goldfinger was a little bit of a pandering mixture, IMO. Little bit of cream & sugar added because the populace assumedly couldn't handle the black coffee that is Fleming. Granted, Goldfinger surpassed its novel by improving the Fort Knox plan, but that's mostly it, IMO.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

I personally find the spirit of Goldfinger over the top for my Bondian taste. It needs not always be like that adventure.

I certainly find the "spirit" of GOLDFINGER over-the-top for my tastes. As for Craig's "thuggish" quality, he seemed no more thuggish than the other Bond actors when they go into "gritty mode". I had found this out recently, while viewing old Bond movies. As for the style he had created in CASINO ROYALE, I hope that he sticks to it until his last Bond movie. It suits him.

Indeed. Suits the character entirely, IMHO.

It seemed more "thuggish" to me that particular scene I pointed out more than anything else in the film . Yeah it does fit perfectly, but i'm just saying I don't like that particular scene in CR.

Edited by mrsbonds_ppk, 03 May 2007 - 08:33 PM.

[00Twelve]

S'all good.

[chanoch]

Bond films that are not over the top:

-From Russia with Love

-Casino Royale

Bond films that are over the top:

-Every single other

Over the top = Bond

Not over the top = (yawn)

FRWL = exception to the rule

[00Twelve]

Casino Royale = Ian Fleming

Dan Craig = Ian Fleming's James Bond

Faithfulness to Ian Fleming = the top (as far as 00Twelve is concerned)

Ian Fleming & 00Twelve = People too boring for chanoch

[jgw007]

I guess to each his own - its funny the two best BOnd Movies in my opinion were From Russia with Love and then now Casino Royale

Chanoch - GREAT counter review. I seriously do appreciate your opinion - but I would simply ask yourself this question and answer honestly:

If the soundtrack was John Barry, would you have a completely different opinion about the movie? I believe you would.

I actually LOVE David Arnold's composing and think he brings it into a more modern era with a nod to John Barry.

Maybe its the dream like Barry orchestrations that provide that extra sense of the fantastic.

And on a completely different subject - you want the one I despise? View to A Kill. I just saw it for the first time in 15 years and it is AWFUL - Roger looks like his face lift was pulled too tight, his acting is HORRIBLE his dialogue is even worse - if it wasn't for Tanya Roberts, he would have been exposed as the worst job ever - thankfully her performance is even worse!

Oh and nice rehash of Goldfinger with microchips. Yikes.

[chanoch]

Not true on all points, o'12

Purvis & Wade + David Arnold = bore

Daniel Craig + a better haircut in 22 = potential Ian Flemming's Bond

Cinema Bond - Dame Dench = less pretentious

Faithful to fun = the top

Casino Royale = under the top

[dodge]

Bond films that are not over the top:

-From Russia with Love

-Casino Royale

Bond films that are over the top:

-Every single other

Over the top = Bond

Not over the top = (yawn)

FRWL = exception to the rule

So then, only 17 posts and you've settled all issues forever!

Thanks for dropping by again.

[chanoch]

Thanks jgw.

You might be on to something with the music point. I really do mourn the loss of the art of film scores. Older films in general are so well scored. I'm just not feeling it with the new cats. I appreciate the insight.

But I also feel that a persons general character is pretty firmly "set" at a young age. And in CR, I didn't see an early Bond. It was someone else. This can be corrected, but it should not have ever been changed.

As for AVTAK, what can I say, I've always liked it. Walken is the man in it. Moore is the image of a Bond on one of his final missions. Barry is in top form. It is an attempt at another Goldfinger, I realize. But, as with almost every single film in the series, it is very watchable and nostalgic to me.

There is more to a movie star than youth.



ALL ISSUES FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you, dodge. ALL ISSUES FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dr. Noah]

As for AVTAK, what can I say, I've always liked it. Walken is the man in it. Moore is the image of a Bond on one of his final missions. Barry is in top form. It is an attempt at another Goldfinger, I realize. But, as with almost every single film in the series, it is very watchable and nostalgic to me.

You like AVTAK and DAF, and you think the invisible car in DAD is believable. You think John Barry's score for AVTAK is some of his finest work.

Are you a movie critic in the bizzaro universe?

[StrangleTheCat]

Hello, I haven't posted here since probably TWINE when balance, discontent and sanity were alive and well in those days.

This has been an interesting run with the world of Bond this time out. Quite surprising, really. But unlike a well paid critic, I'm not blown away.

I've followed the series since I saw Moonraker in the theaters when I was 7. And though stones may be cast, I must in good conscience ensure that these boards represent a wholly inclusive reflection of authentic reaction, even from an admited simpleton. See, I didn't even spell admitted right.





I despised Casino Royale.

This should not be inflammatory. I take no pleasure in saying that. Well, maybe alittle.

My review could not be up to the current CBN standard if I tried and would only resemble a perceived trolling which would result in endless disection, point by point. Good fun I might add, if the deck were not so stacked against me here. Why is that?

To qualify my rant, being my first post here in a while, I wanted to go on record, not to piss on anyones clean clothes here, but rather to just say I love Bond films, I was blown away when I first saw OHMSS at age 18, a long time ago. Particularly because I avoided it for so long. Lazenby grew on me in the first act. I was in the theater when Moore bowed out and likewise when Dalton had his first close-up. I endured the legal desert that followed LTK. Moore was my Bond as a kid yet Goldfinger my favorite film. Picking one over the other was redundant even as a kid. I thought Brosnan was the best choice at the time even though I've never walked out of a Brosnan Bond entirely satisfied. Not like when I've just finished watching FYEO. Point is, I never gave up on him or said something so stupid as to suggest putting the series to pasture. Only from the visionless do we here that particular sentiment. And I support him still, although my fervor is now running on fumes. I'm not the enemy when I say... (or maybe I am)...

...I despised Casino Royale.

I loathed almost everything about it. Even DC. Sorry chaps, this is the counterfeit Bond in its fullest manifestation. My opinion is that THIS IS NOT FLEMINGS CHARACTER AND CUBBY WOULD BE HORRIFIED.

I am in knots over how to spare Mr. Craig's feelings and yet voice that I find his Bond incorrect. Daniel Craig belongs in a Bond movie, undoubtedly, BUT NOT AS BOND.

I do applaud the courage to rethink the series and as Pierce might have said, "give it a kick in the pants". But dear blokes, this was arguably the dreariest affair I've ever witnessed. It's pretty obvious to me that the makers really no longer understand what we see in those old films. Nor do they understand the all important coolness factor in context with the times they inhabit. Cigarettes and alcohol are far more edgy and politically incorrect now days than blood and thunderous scores. Dark is clique if the truth be told. It's as clique as Bond going on another personal vendetta. Edgy would be to go against everyone's jaded parodies and make another SPECTRE story. Ah, but that would be a little TOO realistic, wouldn't it? Fire Dave Arnold. Please. His music is not good. It's not even music really. Barbara, instead of replacing the next Bond, replace yourself. You've made your point. A strange fate for Bond to be on the marrionette strings of a woman. Still, I believe he'll get out of this one, he always does.

And on a related note, make M a man again. Enough already. We need him now more than ever.

And the real reason I am posting is not to stir the storm of controversy but rather to voice my utter disbelief at the appalling lack of constructive and uncompromising appraisal. The vibe here is like a Brazilian election and reminiscent of a message board in Stepford. It's decideldly un-Bond. And I really do expect more from this fraternity. Are we now making Bond films for Philistines AND THEIR WIVES. Is this really what you wanted? Really? Not me. I actually despised Casino Royale. So for what its worth, and for all the intolerance to any views to the contrary, ...HERE'S TO BOND 23!

Talk to you later, Chanoch.

I thinks this guy likes the sound of his own words.

The way I gage a Bond film is if it makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end.

Here's a list of the ones that do:

OH, they all do, I'm a Bond fan!!!

[00Twelve]

Well, at least the challenge never gets boring!

I hear your opinion about DC not being Fleming's Bond, but I honestly cannot get it. I read the Fleming novels over and over frequently, because they're that suspenseful and engrossing (don't worry, I read more academic writers too . Craig's Bond is the utmost closest thing I've seen to Fleming's Bond. There's not a thing that FlemingBond had that CR Bond doesn't, except dark hair, a scar, and a couple of more years experience.

Allow me to explain my observances of FlemingBond's "style."

- Always wears a standard lightweight suit. Not terribly cheap nor terribly expensive, and pretty well tailored. Navy with a slim black tie. Very 1950s. Only wears a tux on occasion, like the opportunity to gamble at a social club, or less frequently, on assignment. Would have worn one more frequently as they were more of a standard in 1950s London.

- Does not always eat the finest foods under the sun. Eats hearty meals, especially breakfast, but only gourmet when available (not at the MI6 canteen, and May was not a gourmet), like on assignment, or when he wanted to celebrate. Detests gluttony and the need to always have the finest food that money can buy (read about his meal with DuPont in Goldfinger). Knows his liquors extremely well. Chain smokes.

- Spends his money (and time) on his car and on gambling and on (many) drinks, and sometimes fine food to go with it. Knows he could be dead next week, so he never saves his money. Only gets to go overboard when on assignment, b/c MI6 gets the bill.

- Is known to change hairstyles on assignment as needed. Got a crew cut for LALD. Changed his look to meet Saye in DAF. Cut his hair in Japanese male tradition in YOLT. Hair was not a huge deal to him.

- Spends time honing his shooting and combat skills. Physically very capable of assassination, with or without a weapon. Always pushes himself. Knows his soul is slowly burning out on this job. Doesn't love that, but his dedication to duty is indefatigable, except when he really falls in love (Vesper & Tracy).

- Did not always behave in gentlemanly manner, except with Messervy and is generally polite in the office. Known to curse harshly when hurt, scared, frustrated, angry, etc. Had no respect for incompetence or criminals who embodied it. Longed to throw his weight around with foes, especially when ordered to blend in with them. Thought of women as little more than homemakers and sources of pleasure. Slept with willing married women while at home who had unfulfilling marriages, as did the other (two) 00s. Very dry, subtle (not overt) sense of humor.

Okay. THAT's how I, 0012, prefer to see Bond, because he's (somewhat) normal, and I can believe and invest in his character.

Except for the dark hair, scar, and cigarettes, I believed that Craig's Bond fit all the rest like a glove. Say what you want about height, but there is no way to tell that he's one inch (if that) shorter than the literary 6' standard because of camera angles and casting. And, incidentally, I can source all of the stuff I mentioned in the Fleming books. And the dark hair, scar, and cigarettes are not all that important to me compared to the character himself.

The script was the most "normal," least bloated one I've seen since long before I was born (in '82). The casting was excellent, IMHO, and I too hope to see Messervy back in the saddle, but I don't mind Judi, only because she's playing M differently now, and she's NEVER boring.

Moneypenny and Q are dispensable, and as far as this fan's concerned, EON can keep their jetpacks and ejector seats.

And btw, Ian Fleming could have definitely "rolled in his grave" at some of Harry and even Cubby's decisions over the years, though I still love Cubby.

[Dr. Noah]

Here's how Fleming described Bond in TSWLM -- she thinks he's a gangster thug:

At first glance I inwardly groaned—God it’s another of them! He stood there so quiet and controlled and somehow with the same quality of deadliness as the others. And he wore that uniform that the films make one associate with gangsters—a dark blue belted raincoat and a soft black hat pulled rather far down. He was good-looking in a dark, rather cruel way, and a scar showed whitely down his left cheek. I quickly put my hand up to hide my nakedness.....

He was about six feet tall, slim and fit looking. The eyes in the lean, slightly tanned face were a very clear gray blue and as they observed the men they were cold and watchful. The narrowed watchful eyes gave his good looks the dangerous, almost cruel quality that had frightened me when I had first set eyes on him, but now that I knew how he could smile, I thought his face only exciting, in a way that no man’s face had ever excited me before. He wore a soft looking white silk shirt with a thin black knitted tie that hung down loosely without a pin, and his single breasted suit was made of some dark blue lightweight material that may have been alpaca. The strong, rather good hands lay quietly on his crossed arms on the counter, and now he reached down to his hip pocket and took out a wide, thin gunmetal cigarette case and opened it. “Have one?"


I think Craig fits that nicely.

[MarkA]

I agree with you on three things. Goldfinger is the film on which the series rests. Though not necessarily the best. David Arnold is a pretty terrible composer and needs replacing. I also hate the political correctness that pervades the series. Bond should smoke, M should be a man and Felix Leiter should be a white Texan. But that

[chanoch]

Don't sell yourself short Marka.

0'12 & Noah, that was interesting. But the dark hair, scar and cigarettes would actually go a long way if we're really going for literary purity.

[00Twelve]

0'12 & Noah, that was interesting. But the dark hair, scar and cigarettes would actually go a long way if we're really going for literary purity.

But my point is that the purity of character was achieved. Laz's apt description of Bond is "A nice bastard." That easily sums up Bond as seen in CR. Would dark hair, a faint scar, and a smoking habit really change his attitude, personality, and habits (Other than giving him something to do with his hands, of course)? Don't see it muhself, but just me.

I think, and it's only my opinion, that it might be a good idea to try and open up to some of the possibilities that lie with taking Bond out of the box that Sean Connery and crew built, in terms of Bond's cinematic stylistic standards, and imagine him as a more of a person than an icon. But hey, Ejector seats and eyebrows are what some folks love about the character, and I won't dare belittle them for it. But I expect not to be belittled or otherwise ridiculed for wishing Bond to be the version that he was originally intended to be. (Which is what I see in CR more than any other Bond film, yes, even Tim's. Not his fault; the scripts'.)

[Dr. Noah]

Don't sell yourself short Marka.

0'12 & Noah, that was interesting. But the dark hair, scar and cigarettes would actually go a long way if we're really going for literary purity.

Yeah, don't go by acting ability -- go by hair color.

[Milovy]

Are we now making Bond films for Philistines AND THEIR WIVES.

What in the hell is that supposed to mean?