142 replies to this topic

[Zorin Industries]

He is a liar and a sneak thief

You forgot "murderer" and "political pawn" and "drunkard".

He's just super, isn't he?

A liar and a sneak thief? I say that nails what a secret agent is...

[byline]

Sounds like you've got it figured out, byline.
You also clarify some of the reasons why I dislike this new take on the characters of Bond and M. He is a liar and a sneak thief, and she is a nagging den mother who follows him around the globe. Their interaction is not believable either as spies or as the characters Ian Fleming wrote. I want the old Bond and the old M back only better.

Well . . . different strokes, and all that. Whether their behavior is believable is a matter of opinion. I enjoy their exchanges, and hope they continue in future films.

[HildebrandRarity]

He is a liar and a sneak thief

You forgot "murderer" and "political pawn" and "drunkard".

...and an "adulterer"...

[DamnCoffee]

Bond never mentions the car chase to M when he delivers White to the underground meeting place.

Uh...so? Bond doesnt mention a lot of things to M, and not just in this film. Why should he mention a car chase to M?

Quite. How would the dialogue have gone?

BOND (to White): Don't bleed to death. (to M): Sorry I'm late. Had a bit of a car chase on the way here.

M: Do you know, Mitchell and I were listening to the radio while waiting for you to turn up with White, and the news mentioned some kind of car chase near here, with gunshots fired. I thought it might be you. How extraordinary!

BOND: Yeah.

MITCHELL: But then it occurred to us it might not be anything to do with you at all. I mean, you know what Italian drivers are like!

BOND: Ha! ha!

M: Ha! Ha!

MITCHELL: Ha! Ha!

M: Hee! Hee! How's your car?

BOND: Badly damaged, I'm afraid.

M: Oh, dear. We'll have to get it repaired. No, wait, let's just buy you a new one.

BOND: That's unusually generous of you, M.

M: Yes, well, it's coming up to the end of the financial year and we still haven't spent our budget. We need to do so, otherwise the Treasury won't give us the same again.

BOND: Good thinking.

M: Heh heh. I'm not the head of this organisation for nothing. And how are you?

BOND: Slight whiplash. Pretty bad headache. Bit of a nosebleed. Some ringing in my left ear from when a bullet went----

M: Oh, you poor diddums. You're a Double-O, get used to it.

WHITE: Look, can we get on with it?

LMFAO!

[byline]

LMFAO!

Yup, that laugh made my day. Thanks, Loomis!

[Major Tallon]

I'll join in that, Loomis. Brilliant!

[Richard]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

[Mr. Blofeld]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Let us not assassinate dear Zor further, Richard; you've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you no decency?

Now, let's get back on topic.

[Jim]

Becoming a bit silly now.

It was a film. That's all it was.

[JimmyBond]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Why not try to debate his posts (directed towards you, I might add) instead of insulting him? He brings up some good points and I dare say, love to see you rebute them instead of what you just did.

[Richard]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Why not try to debate his posts (directed towards you, I might add) instead of insulting him? He brings up some good points and I dare say, love to see you rebute them instead of what you just did.

Because he insulted me where I made an innocuous post that did not address him specifically, that's why, or didn't you notice? His "points" are put-downs and put-downs are not worth rebutting.Any response would be greeted by more of the same.

Richard

[JimmyBond]

Forgive me than, but it sounds like you're giving up.

If he's insulting you what better way to get him back than by debating him? Or

[DamnCoffee]

Oh, come on! This is getting tedious!

Can we just drop it please, and get back on topic!?

[Mr. Blofeld]

I already made that request; nobody's listening.

[Jim]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Why not try to debate his posts (directed towards you, I might add) instead of insulting him? He brings up some good points and I dare say, love to see you rebute them instead of what you just did.

Because he insulted me where I made an innocuous post that did not address him specifically, that's why, or didn't you notice? His "points" are put-downs and put-downs are not worth rebutting.Any response would be greeted by more of the same.

Richard

Always those who dish it out who can't take it, isn't it?

Broccoli and Wilson are rank amateurs

You hit on the key factor in problems with recent Bond films and with Quantum of Solace in particular.
Bad writing.
Inept writing.
Unprofessional writing.
Purvis and Wade are amateurs with an extremely limited talent. Many professional script writers think they have no talent. Others think they're a joke. I know dozens of professional screenwriters who can do a better job than Purvis and Wade. Actually, Purvis and Wade were hired to write the last four Bond film because they provide Broccoli with the character deconstruction that she wants and with the simplistic mentality that she understands.

I've worked hard in production all life, and I don't have to prove anything to some ranting internet clown. You're one of those popular motor-mouths who just keeps typing and typing. You don't don't nothing about film administration or film production and you don't know nothing about how the Bond films are made. This forum gives you the place to shoot your stupid mouth off, but you're a nothing who talks about nothing, so carry on and enjoy yourself.

Wilson is generally regarded within the industry as a hack

The best thing that could happen to the franchise would be to get rid of Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson. They are bean counters who impose creative controls that they are not qualified to make. Wilson has been wrecking the Bonds for a long time, and now Babs is out to outwreck her stepbrother. They know how to organize and administrate, but they don't nothing about the creative disciplines, and they have no talent for writing, directing, or acting. They are the worst enemy of the series.

Get rid of them!

Of course, those two monkeys Babs and Michael would have to stop imposing their dumb creative controls for anything worthwhile to be achieved.

Right now James Bond is in the hands of a pair of monkeys. They'll never let go of it, and they'll let brighter minds make the creative decisions. They'll just keep dumbing it down and screwing it up.

Purvis and Wade are barely competent. I blame them for most of what's wrong with the series.

Hmm. Hostility and ridicule.

If you're choosing not to reply to Zorin Industries, given the tone and nature of your contribution to the forum I would say that he's had an extremely lucky escape.

[Zorin Industries]

To quote Dame Diana Of The Rigg... "I hope my back end will stand up to this..."

And all this because Dame Judi Of The Dench didn't betray her petrol-head leanings and insist on a three minute observation about a battered Aston Martin in order to fill in all the gaps of logic in a messy, under-budgeted, under-written.

I wonder if Richard saw POLICE ACADEMY 8 by mistake? Maybe he is confusing M for CALLAHAN... ("Yes Maam!!"). She ALWAYS notices the condition of someone's automobile....

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Why not try to debate his posts (directed towards you, I might add) instead of insulting him? He brings up some good points and I dare say, love to see you rebute them instead of what you just did.

Because he insulted me where I made an innocuous post that did not address him specifically, that's why, or didn't you notice? His "points" are put-downs and put-downs are not worth rebutting.Any response would be greeted by more of the same.

Richard

Always those who dish it out who can't take it, isn't it?

Broccoli and Wilson are rank amateurs

You hit on the key factor in problems with recent Bond films and with Quantum of Solace in particular.
Bad writing.
Inept writing.
Unprofessional writing.
Purvis and Wade are amateurs with an extremely limited talent. Many professional script writers think they have no talent. Others think they're a joke. I know dozens of professional screenwriters who can do a better job than Purvis and Wade. Actually, Purvis and Wade were hired to write the last four Bond film because they provide Broccoli with the character deconstruction that she wants and with the simplistic mentality that she understands.

I've worked hard in production all life, and I don't have to prove anything to some ranting internet clown. You're one of those popular motor-mouths who just keeps typing and typing. You don't don't nothing about film administration or film production and you don't know nothing about how the Bond films are made. This forum gives you the place to shoot your stupid mouth off, but you're a nothing who talks about nothing, so carry on and enjoy yourself.

Wilson is generally regarded within the industry as a hack

The best thing that could happen to the franchise would be to get rid of Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson. They are bean counters who impose creative controls that they are not qualified to make. Wilson has been wrecking the Bonds for a long time, and now Babs is out to outwreck her stepbrother. They know how to organize and administrate, but they don't nothing about the creative disciplines, and they have no talent for writing, directing, or acting. They are the worst enemy of the series.

Get rid of them!

Of course, those two monkeys Babs and Michael would have to stop imposing their dumb creative controls for anything worthwhile to be achieved.

Right now James Bond is in the hands of a pair of monkeys. They'll never let go of it, and they'll let brighter minds make the creative decisions. They'll just keep dumbing it down and screwing it up.

Purvis and Wade are barely competent. I blame them for most of what's wrong with the series.

(Thanks for the quotes Jim).

Are any of these directed at Zorin Industries? Only - this would make a day at the orifice pass so much more quickly if I were allowed to respond...

For the record, I actually think Zorin was remarkably restrained on this thread. Sometimes I can see myself next Tuesday, other times I am not interested enough to care...but I will ALWAYS defend badly thought out and unfounded arguments when it comes to Bond films, films and how they are created.

[Zorin Industries]

I would be interested to hear just how "Richard" think he knows how Bond films are made and the real personalities and abilities of the producers. Zorin is intrigued...

In fact I would like to know if indeed he knows ONE person who has ever even worked for Eon Productions.

[dee-bee-five]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted.

That's most odd because he's never been less than respectful, intelligent and witty in my dealings with him.

And as other, wiser heads than me have said, do try to relax - it's only a film, dear...

[Zorin Industries]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted.

That's most odd because he's never been less than respectful, intelligent and witty in my dealings with him.

And as other, wiser heads than me have said, do try to relax - it's only a film, dear...

An "I HEART ZORIN INDUSTRIES" badge is in the post...

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted...

And believed to be over-edited, under-written, lacking in exposition and not a patch on Zorin Industries comments in the 1960's...?

[byline]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Why not try to debate his posts (directed towards you, I might add) instead of insulting him? He brings up some good points and I dare say, love to see you rebute them instead of what you just did.

Yup. Pretty much the very same comment I directed at another poster in another thread. As several others have suggested, can we please dial back the personality clashes and get back on-topic?

Edited by byline, 27 May 2009 - 04:22 PM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Yep; quoting all of Richard's "hostility and ridicule" was a fait accompli, so...

...the topic, then.

[blueman]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Why not try to debate his posts (directed towards you, I might add) instead of insulting him? He brings up some good points and I dare say, love to see you rebute them instead of what you just did.

Yup. Pretty much the very same comment I directed at another poster in another thread. As several others have suggested, can we please dial back the personality clashes and get back on-topic?

Therein lies the catch: so much of the "debate" seems to stem around some pretty incredulous points of discussion, at least IMHO. Hard not to get a bit itchy when somebody posits an outlandish stance, then demands you engage around it and accuses you of hostility when you don't or when you try to alter the context to something less silly. And, not lost is that this POV is shared on both sides of the fence... perhaps self-imposed segregation is wisest?

[byline]

Zorin Industries, your hostility and ridicule is noted. Your posts are not worth the dignity of a reply.

Richard

Why not try to debate his posts (directed towards you, I might add) instead of insulting him? He brings up some good points and I dare say, love to see you rebute them instead of what you just did.

Yup. Pretty much the very same comment I directed at another poster in another thread. As several others have suggested, can we please dial back the personality clashes and get back on-topic?

Therein lies the catch: so much of the "debate" seems to stem around some pretty incredulous points of discussion, at least IMHO. Hard not to get a bit itchy when somebody posits an outlandish stance, then demands you engage around it and accuses you of hostility when you don't or when you try to alter the context to something less silly. And, not lost is that this POV is shared on both sides of the fence... perhaps self-imposed segregation is wisest?

Possibly. I'm not sure what the solution is, except that we all need to remember this is just a message board, and try not to read too much into things, and try not to inject too much into things. As many have pointed out, these are just films, after all. Films of a beloved character, to be sure. But still just films.

I would like to get back to the complaint that somebody made, and to which I replied -- sorry, it's late, and I'm too lazy to go back through the entire thread -- about the opera being edited out of sequence. While it may well be true, "Quantum of Solace" is hardly the first film to use the technique of having an opera serve as a backdrop or prop for the plot occurring in the film at that point. "The Godfather III" did it, and I'm sure there are many other examples that people can come up with. So, taken in that context, I'm not sure that "Tosca"'s lack of a literal chronology within "Quantum of Solace" really carries much weight as a criticism of the film.

Edited by byline, 28 May 2009 - 03:33 AM.