Bond did kill Greene at the end, even if they didn't show his actual demise. Bond wanted to have him suffer the way Vesper did...
Actually, no. Bond wanted Greene to suffer the way Fields did. Hence, the oil.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 07:21 PM
Bond did kill Greene at the end, even if they didn't show his actual demise. Bond wanted to have him suffer the way Vesper did...
Posted 19 November 2008 - 07:43 PM
Funny you should mention that.Don't listen to over-wrought, tightly wound Bond fans who secretly miss Roger Moore's cartoon Bonds, but just don't want to admit it.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 07:45 PM
Thanks for making that connection, Mr. *. I had missed it. (Did you mention it in your review? If not, you should have.) It helps elevate the concept too, because I wasn’t (and still amn’t) sure if I like the fact that they report Greene dead with oil in his stomach.Bond did kill Greene at the end, even if they didn't show his actual demise. Bond wanted to have him suffer the way Vesper did...
Actually, no. Bond wanted Greene to suffer the way Fields did. Hence, the oil.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 07:54 PM
Nope QOS was not OHMSS, it was much better.
Kindly put away the crack pipe.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 07:59 PM
Nope QOS was not OHMSS, it was much better.
Kindly put away the crack pipe.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 07:59 PM
re-posting to bump the thread past that previous exchange of crap* and back to my relevant question/concern/thought.Thanks for making that connection, Mr. *. I had missed it. (Did you mention it in your review? If not, you should have.) It helps elevate the concept too, because I wasn’t (and still amn’t) sure if I like the fact that they report Greene dead with oil in his stomach.Bond did kill Greene at the end, even if they didn't show his actual demise. Bond wanted to have him suffer the way Vesper did...
Actually, no. Bond wanted Greene to suffer the way Fields did. Hence, the oil.
It seems a bit contrived in trying to make his demise more dramatic. Why would Greene take the oil with him? He knows it’s not going to help and that it would only hurt. Why wouldn’t he leave it before starting his long, dry journey?
Unless of course that’s what he did do, and then when dehydration forced survival instincts to override reason, he returned to the oil can to drink it. That would be quite chilling. But if that were the case, I’d have liked to hear about it.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 08:43 PM
Sorry, doublenoughtspy, but Q0S is a cut above OHMSS.
First, Lazenby is the worst actor to play James Bond. Period. No surprise because he was only a tv commercial model. He moves like a panther. But so does Craig. In the acting stakes, Craig destroys Lazenby. They are not even on the same plane.
Second, not a single woman I know buys the fact that Bond falls in love two hours after behaving like Hugh Hefner up at Piz Gloria. To thinks that he does so after he gets caught trying to shag one of three girls again, is a conceit. Only a near teenage boy would buy it. Or an idiot.
Another idiot is Blofeld. Since Blofeld is a "must" with Bond, why does such a smart person as written by Fleming not recognize Bond given that he (Bond) blew up his volcano rocket base in the previous mission/outing. They're not strangers...Ernst is a "must" for James, after all.
Further, Mike Myers has reduced the cat-stroking Blofeld to parody. Anyone between 12 and 25 laughs everytime I have a pussy-stroking Blofeld James Bond film on dvd. Dr Evil has had it's effect on OHMSS. We get no animal as Dr Evil in Q0S. The menace in Amalric's eyes alone is more than any menace projected from Telly Savalas.
Speaking of embarrassments, OHMSS was exactly that for years after 1969.
We know that OHMSS was a failure. It's a fact that OHMSS took a while to make it's money back and turn a profit for the studios. Why? Because it had a downer of an ending and had a terrible actor playing the lead. Eon was ashamed of the movie for years and years after, and you know it - or *should* know it. It was the black sheep of the Eon family.
Fine, it has a great score and fine cinematography and Rigg is perfect and is based on a very good Fleming novel. But it does not even come close to Quantum. If they got rid of the Dr Evil-like cat-stroking so that the new generation wouldn't laugh, it would start approaching it, but then what do you about Lazenby's amateur performance? How do you digitally alter it?
Posted 19 November 2008 - 08:46 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 08:59 PM
Another idiot is Blofeld. Since Blofeld is a "must" with Bond, why does such a smart person as written by Fleming not recognize Bond given that he (Bond) blew up his volcano rocket base in the previous mission/outing. They're not strangers...Ernst is a "must" for James, after all.
OHMSS came before YOLT in the novels. Peter Hunt ignored that YOLT had been filmed. Did your keen eyes notice that there were no YOLT gadgets in Bond's desk and no other reference to the film? Plenty of Bond films ignore/change/reboot continuity. Why does CR get praised for it but OHMSS sucks because of it?
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:02 PM
Another idiot is Blofeld. Since Blofeld is a "must" with Bond, why does such a smart person as written by Fleming not recognize Bond given that he (Bond) blew up his volcano rocket base in the previous mission/outing. They're not strangers...Ernst is a "must" for James, after all.
OHMSS came before YOLT in the novels. Peter Hunt ignored that YOLT had been filmed. Did your keen eyes notice that there were no YOLT gadgets in Bond's desk and no other reference to the film? Plenty of Bond films ignore/change/reboot continuity. Why does CR get praised for it but OHMSS sucks because of it?
Come on, DNS, you of all people ought to know that there are clips from YOLT in the OHMSS opening credits sequence. Or did Hunt have no control over that?
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:06 PM
But Lazenby has a leg up on Craig in that he actually resembles the man Ian Fleming wrote about.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:12 PM
Why bash the old to defend the new? I love OHMSS, Laz and all
But Lazenby has a leg up on Craig in that he actually resembles the man Ian Fleming wrote about.
Craig doesn't resemble the man Ian Fleming wrote about? From CASINO ROYALE, I give you:
(Bond's) last action was to slip his right hand under the pillow until it rested under the butt of the .38 Colt Police Positive with the sawn barrel. Then he slept, and with the warmth and humour of his eyes extinguished, his features relapsed into a taciturn mask, ironical, brutal and cold.
Don't you think that Craig fits that facial description to a T? I do. And more so than any of the other actors.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:17 PM
Why bash the old to defend the new? I love OHMSS, Laz and all
Me, too. For me, OHMSS, CR and QoS are now the three peaks of the series. It's true that the new dynamic, stimulating Craig Bonds make it slightly harder for me to sit through the older Bank Holiday romp-Bonds (despite my being in my 40s); but I still love them like one does a well-loved old pet who now seems a bit more creaky than he once did.
Edited by avl, 19 November 2008 - 09:18 PM.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:19 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:21 PM
Why bash the old to defend the new? I love OHMSS, Laz and all
Me, too. For me, OHMSS, CR and QoS are now the three peaks of the series. It's true that the new dynamic, stimulating Craig Bonds make it slightly harder for me to sit through the older Bank Holiday romp-Bonds (despite my being in my 40s); but I still love them like one does a well-loved old pet who now seems a bit more creaky than he once did.
Add in the Daltons and I'm right there with you. Mind you, Moonraker was the perfect film for a 10 year old to watch on the big screen And I mean that as a compliment as I was the 10 year old in question!
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:26 PM
Another idiot is Blofeld. Since Blofeld is a "must" with Bond, why does such a smart person as written by Fleming not recognize Bond given that he (Bond) blew up his volcano rocket base in the previous mission/outing. They're not strangers...Ernst is a "must" for James, after all.
OHMSS came before YOLT in the novels. Peter Hunt ignored that YOLT had been filmed. Did your keen eyes notice that there were no YOLT gadgets in Bond's desk and no other reference to the film? Plenty of Bond films ignore/change/reboot continuity. Why does CR get praised for it but OHMSS sucks because of it?
Come on, DNS, you of all people ought to know that there are clips from YOLT in the OHMSS opening credits sequence. Or did Hunt have no control over that?
Maurice Binder filmed the gun barrel and the credit sequence.
Hunt really didn't like YOLT at all. He's quoted as saying it wasn't a Bond film.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:29 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:34 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:34 PM
Another idiot is Blofeld. Since Blofeld is a "must" with Bond, why does such a smart person as written by Fleming not recognize Bond given that he (Bond) blew up his volcano rocket base in the previous mission/outing. They're not strangers...Ernst is a "must" for James, after all.
OHMSS came before YOLT in the novels. Peter Hunt ignored that YOLT had been filmed. Did your keen eyes notice that there were no YOLT gadgets in Bond's desk and no other reference to the film? Plenty of Bond films ignore/change/reboot continuity. Why does CR get praised for it but OHMSS sucks because of it?
Come on, DNS, you of all people ought to know that there are clips from YOLT in the OHMSS opening credits sequence. Or did Hunt have no control over that?
Maurice Binder filmed the gun barrel and the credit sequence.
Hunt really didn't like YOLT at all. He's quoted as saying it wasn't a Bond film.
If you go by what James Bond actually says to M in OHMSS that (paraphrasing from years and years of watching the movie) "...but, Sir, Blofeld is a bit of a must for me", where he reiterates his desire to go after Blofeld after having had "two years" (M's words), then I think it's intellectual dishonesty to suggest that Bond and Blofeld have never met.
It's stupidity!
Sorry, I know you "love" OHMSS, but I just put six bullets into it and you couldn't even come back without talking about "pop culture", the exact so-called "pop culture" that classified OHMSS as a failure.
Listen, I think Barry's score is awsome, Rigg is awsome, cinematography is awsome, it's based on a Fleming story...all great things. But you're judgement is clouded and you haven't moved on. Who cares if Laz himself thought anyone could fall for Rigg...the question was why should we believe James Bond falls for Tracy only two hours after he tries to shag Ruby again - Ruby being one of, let's say, three girl he's ing at Piz Gloria?
This movie has been a Christmas staple at my home for years and years. I think highly of OHMSS but it's not as good as QOS.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:36 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:40 PM
I'm kind of glad that a OHMSS skirmish has broken out in a QoS thread. Because my point about QoS is that the great Bonds do lead to this kind of debate. What I mean is, OHMSS is, IMHO, a cut-above, but I realise it's not to everyone's taste. I'm not sure QoS is up there, but at least there is a lot of back and forth about it, which has to be a good thing for the series in general. OP for example, or YOLT, don't generate this kind of passion, so while I think QoS is flawed, I'm glad that it's differences from the rest of the series, are leading us to take such strong viewpoints.
I just got back from watching it again, and I'll say this - it's a much better film second-time around, and I was just pleased that having reached middle-aged, that I was, like CR before it, finally watching a Bond that was aimed at an older age-group. Unlike say, well, I won't go there. But if nothing else, the last two films have proved that EON have lost the urge to make "family entertainment." Whether they succeeded in making good "adult" entertainment is all personal taste and opinion, but watching QoS again, I'm glad that they've tried.
Oh, and one-liner fans "He didn't smoke" is exactly the kind of "humour" I've been waiting for. Rather than, oh god, where does one start.......
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:40 PM
Last night was five right after a martini party...with about 30-odd others in a smaller viewing room where the audio quality was much better eventhough it was a smaller screen.
The record was six for Casino Royale and GoldenEye.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:40 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:45 PM
Last night was five right after a martini party...with about 30-odd others in a smaller viewing room where the audio quality was much better eventhough it was a smaller screen.
The record was six for Casino Royale and GoldenEye.
Well, swipe me. God bless you, sir, and all who sail in you - especially as it hasn't even been out for a week where you live, unless I'm mistaken.
I think my own record for theatrical viewings of the same film is four, for both THE BOURNE SUPREMACY and DIE ANOTHER DAY. I wanted to see CASINO ROYALE on the big screen more than the three times I actually did, but never got round to it.
I daresay I'll clock up a couple more QoS screenings in the fullness of time. As it stands, though, I've seen it just once.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:47 PM
I'm kind of glad that a OHMSS skirmish has broken out in a QoS thread. Because my point about QoS is that the great Bonds do lead to this kind of debate. What I mean is, OHMSS is, IMHO, a cut-above, but I realise it's not to everyone's taste...
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:54 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 09:58 PM
Posted 19 November 2008 - 10:02 PM
Sorry, doublenoughtspy, but Q0S is a cut above OHMSS.
Keep dreaming.First, Lazenby is the worst actor to play James Bond. Period. No surprise because he was only a tv commercial model. He moves like a panther. But so does Craig. In the acting stakes, Craig destroys Lazenby. They are not even on the same plane.
You don't find Lazenby believable in the action scenes? I do.
You don't find Lazenby believable in the love scenes? I do.
Sure - Craig is better at straight dialog than Lazenby - years of TV/Theatre/movies will do that.
But Lazenby has a leg up on Craig in that he actually resembles the man Ian Fleming wrote about.Second, not a single woman I know buys the fact that Bond falls in love two hours after behaving like Hugh Hefner up at Piz Gloria. To thinks that he does so after he gets caught trying to shag one of three girls again, is a conceit. Only a near teenage boy would buy it. Or an idiot.
Lazenby is quoted as saying that Rigg was so gorgeous that "acting" like he loved her wasn't a stretch. What red-blooded male wouldn't fall instantly in love with her?
The novel has Bond sleeping with other women while at Piz Gloria. Why are you blaming Lazenby/Hugh Hefner/whoever?Another idiot is Blofeld. Since Blofeld is a "must" with Bond, why does such a smart person as written by Fleming not recognize Bond given that he (Bond) blew up his volcano rocket base in the previous mission/outing. They're not strangers...Ernst is a "must" for James, after all.
OHMSS came before YOLT in the novels. Peter Hunt ignored that YOLT had been filmed. Did your keen eyes notice that there were no YOLT gadgets in Bond's desk and no other reference to the film? Plenty of Bond films ignore/change/reboot continuity. Why does CR get praised for it but OHMSS sucks because of it?Further, Mike Myers has reduced the cat-stroking Blofeld to parody. Anyone between 12 and 25 laughs everytime I have a pussy-stroking Blofeld James Bond film on dvd. Dr Evil has had it's effect on OHMSS. We get no animal as Dr Evil in Q0S. The menace in Amalric's eyes alone is more than any menace projected from Telly Savalas.
So because people who don't have a clue about cinema/pop culture/the character's history don't know the difference - any film with Blofeld sucks? Pathetic.Speaking of embarrassments, OHMSS was exactly that for years after 1969.
We know that OHMSS was a failure. It's a fact that OHMSS took a while to make it's money back and turn a profit for the studios. Why? Because it had a downer of an ending and had a terrible actor playing the lead. Eon was ashamed of the movie for years and years after, and you know it - or *should* know it. It was the black sheep of the Eon family.
I realize that film is commerical art - but I don't judge a film's merit's based on the money it makes or didn't make. So High School Musical 3 is a better film than Citizen Kane by your standards. Interesting and laughable.
If it was so "lame" and the blacksheep - why would Eon make casual and overt references to OHMSS in TSWLM, FYEO, and LTK?
The "downer" of an ending is straight from the book. You are familiar with Ian Fleming's work?Fine, it has a great score and fine cinematography and Rigg is perfect and is based on a very good Fleming novel. But it does not even come close to Quantum. If they got rid of the Dr Evil-like cat-stroking so that the new generation wouldn't laugh, it would start approaching it, but then what do you about Lazenby's amateur performance? How do you digitally alter it?
I'm glad you like the score and Rigg. At least we agree on a few things.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 10:03 PM
Nope QOS was not OHMSS, it was much better.
Kindly put away the crack pipe.
Posted 19 November 2008 - 10:17 PM
If you go by what James Bond actually says to M in OHMSS that (paraphrasing from years and years of watching the movie) "...but, Sir, Blofeld is a bit of a must for me", where he reiterates his desire to go after Blofeld after having had "two years" (M's words), then I think it's intellectual dishonesty to suggest that Bond and Blofeld have never met.
It's stupidity!
Sorry, I know you "love" OHMSS, but I just put six bullets into it and you couldn't even come back without talking about "pop culture", the exact so-called "pop culture" that classified OHMSS as a failure.
Listen, I think Barry's score is awsome, Rigg is awsome, cinematography is awsome, it's based on a Fleming story...all great things. But you're judgement is clouded and you haven't moved on. Who cares if Laz himself thought anyone could fall for Rigg...the question was why should we believe James Bond falls for Tracy only two hours after he tries to shag Ruby again - Ruby being one of, let's say, three girl he's ing at Piz Gloria?
This movie has been a Christmas staple at my home for years and years. I think highly of OHMSS but it's not as good as QOS.
Sorry, my dear fellow, but I think you're having a tough time moving on. You're stuck and you have no interest in having a balanced view on the matter. You're mind was made up years and years ago, so there's little point in making you look at things a bit more even-handedly.