74 replies to this topic

[dchantry]

Something funny happened yesterday.
I was sat in the house watching Sky movies at 8pm and QOS came on.
I thought I'd watch the 1st 1/2 hour and then turn off, but that’s the strange thing. I watched the whole thing and really enjoyed it.

Just to set things straight, I'm a 43 year old Bond fan that’s been what you would call an avid fan since I saw Spy on the big screen in 77. I enjoy the occasion of a Bond film when it comes out and usually judge how good and bad they are by the number of times I see them in the Cinema, especially now I’m a little older and harder to please.

Sir Rog went from being Bond I grew up with to being my hero as my appreciation to what he brought to the series grew. Tim gave us 2 of my favourites and Brozza, for all the hidings he gets on any forums, gave me some enjoyable moments and films. When CR came out it automatically went high up the list of favourites (5 times at cinema) and I saw QOS twice at the cinema (once was the premiere too so doesn’t really count) so I say no more.

Anyway, back to the original point. I started reading Flemings books again a while back and when I watched QOS last night, the look and feel of some of the film were spot on as a real reminder of what the literary Bond was meant to be. The film is very short, just like any of the books which actually seem too short when compared to most novels of today. It has some great real Bondian moments that I’d never thought of before.

- The whole of the opera scene, my favourite from the film.
- Getting drunk on the plane (In fact all of the scenes with Mathis) and reflecting what he needs to do.
- The scene in the hotel room with M and escaping the building after (OK, so apart from knocking 4 agents unconscious with a couple of head buts)
- The end scene in Russia.
- Bonds respect for M and his take it or leave it attitude where he doesn’t care if they get rid of him if something happens that people don’t agree with.

All of these small scenes are just like the Bond from the book and this is probably as near as the literary Bond that we’ve seen since up on the screen since the source material started to get ignored or just deemed inappropriate for the big screen and this may have something to do with how badly it was received in some quarters in 2008. It’s funny, but for years we have all harped on for years for Bond on screen to come back down to earth a little and be more down to earth and like the one from the book yet when it happens we all moan or vote with our feet. I certainly appreciated it more after looking at it in a different light, but I guess that’s my own opinion.

[Col. Sun]

Something funny happened yesterday.
I was sat in the house watching Sky movies at 8pm and QOS came on.
I thought I'd watch the 1st 1/2 hour and then turn off, but that’s the strange thing. I watched the whole thing and really enjoyed it.

Just to set things straight, I'm a 43 year old Bond fan that’s been what you would call an avid fan since I saw Spy on the big screen in 77. I enjoy the occasion of a Bond film when it comes out and usually judge how good and bad they are by the number of times I see them in the Cinema, especially now I’m a little older and harder to please.

Sir Rog went from being Bond I grew up with to being my hero as my appreciation to what he brought to the series grew. Tim gave us 2 of my favourites and Brozza, for all the hidings he gets on any forums, gave me some enjoyable moments and films. When CR came out it automatically went high up the list of favourites (5 times at cinema) and I saw QOS twice at the cinema (once was the premiere too so doesn’t really count) so I say no more.

Anyway, back to the original point. I started reading Flemings books again a while back and when I watched QOS last night, the look and feel of some of the film were spot on as a real reminder of what the literary Bond was meant to be. The film is very short, just like any of the books which actually seem too short when compared to most novels of today. It has some great real Bondian moments that I’d never thought of before.

- The whole of the opera scene, my favourite from the film.
- Getting drunk on the plane (In fact all of the scenes with Mathis) and reflecting what he needs to do.
- The scene in the hotel room with M and escaping the building after (OK, so apart from knocking 4 agents unconscious with a couple of head buts)
- The end scene in Russia.
- Bonds respect for M and his take it or leave it attitude where he doesn’t care if they get rid of him if something happens that people don’t agree with.

All of these small scenes are just like the Bond from the book and this is probably as near as the literary Bond that we’ve seen since up on the screen since the source material started to get ignored or just deemed inappropriate for the big screen and this may have something to do with how badly it was received in some quarters in 2008. It’s funny, but for years we have all harped on for years for Bond on screen to come back down to earth a little and be more down to earth and like the one from the book yet when it happens we all moan or vote with our feet. I certainly appreciated it more after looking at it in a different light, but I guess that’s my own opinion.

I'm with you, I think QOS is excellent and captures many aspects of Fleming's Bond.

Let's all hope Craig is back in the tux as soon as possible and that Bond 23 continues the excellent work of CR and QOS.

[Mr. Blofeld]

YES! Finally! A couple of users who appreciate what QOS did, and don't try to bash it at every opportunity!

Let's get some more fans over to our side, shall we?

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I really like QoS. In fact I think I prefer it to Casino Royale.
There is loads I like about the film but particularly it's mis en scene, which is outstanding. Craig is great, it's well written and well directed. I hope future Bonds are as good as this one.

[onedotshort]

As the latest Felix Leiter would say "Amen to that, brother"!! I LOVED the movie. It was Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond in CR that finally got me interested enough to read Ian Flemming's books and for that I shall be eternally grateful! I'm a FIFTY-three year old fan who grew up watching the Bond movies...("Dr No", at the drive-in, hanging over the back seat of the car choking on my parents cigarette smoke).
Going to see each "Bond" movie as it came out was just something my generation DID...automatically... if you wanted to be in on the dinner conversation! 'Bonds' came and went and were discussed and debated and loved or hated. But through all those years I had no idea Ian Flemming was such a wonderful and solid story-teller!
I was a stalwart "Sean Connery" gal (accepted all the others with grace), and then Daniel Craig came along, and WOW...what a movie! I figured that there had to be something more to the 007 canon that I hadn't noticed before, so started in on the books! Surprise...Ian Flemming could WRITE! I ran around trying to tell everyone (who sadly really didn't particularly care) that Ian Flemming was really a writer...REALLY...and Daniel Craig was the closest 'Bond' to the books, and that had Ian Flemming met Daniel Craig, he would have written Bond Blond!

And then QOS! I didn't think anyone else liked it as much as I do. Love all those scenes you mentioned. Would add the scene where Bond, Fields, and Mathis arrive at the hotel Fields had selected. Bond walks in, cursery look around, strides out, manfully tells Fields to get in to the car, they drive off to the best hotel in town, Bond tells the concierge in Spanish that they are teachers on sabatical who have just won the lottery.
I think it may go down as the most 'poignant' of Bond movies. I dare say that Ian Flemming would have clapped loudest at the end of this movie. His 'Bond' wasn't all "Dahling" and a cardboard 'quip' cut-out, like some 'Bonds' became; he was definitely flesh and blood, he 'felt' and bled and suffered, and although he had to do it sometimes, he actually detested killing. That's what makes Craig's characterisation in QOS so incredibly touching. It's the only glimpse we get of how much Vesper's death has really affected him...he kills just about everything in his path!
Now at the end of the movie, whith his 'Solace' achieved, we will see a better, albeit battered Bond emerge from the ashes to fight another day!
This is why we love movies! *sigh*

[byline]

I agree with all of the above. I know that a lot of people are still honked off by the editing -- my husband is one of them -- but on second and subsequent viewings, and especially when I watched it on Bluray, it really captured my imagination as a Fleming-esque Bond story. I still don't love it quite as much as "Casino Royale" . . . but I consider it a highly satisfying companion piece showing the origins of Bond, the man, and his career as an MI6 agent.

Edited by byline, 05 July 2010 - 11:11 PM.

[Guy Haines]

I still have my doubts about some, but not all, of the direction and editing decisions made about QoS. That said, if I didn't enjoy it, it wouldn't be in my personal top ten, displacing some old favourites from way back.

I take the points made about this being close to Ian Fleming's version of Bond. Somebody wrote about Casino Royale that it wasn't so much a "James Bond film" as a "film about James Bond". There is a difference - CR concentrated on Bond becoming Bond, and QoS took it a stage further. Oddly enough, Christopher Wood, in one of his adaptation novels of the two Bond movies he scripted, described 007 as a man who "drank too much and smoked too much and lived on borrowed time", and smoking ban excepted, this is one aspect that emerges in QoS.

Bond has got Vesper and all the events surrounding her demise out of his system. I'd like to see Craig's Bond continue as the confident, self assured Bond, like the Bond of the books but also the Bond we saw in the classic 1960s era, though obviously tailored for the times we live in today.

[onedotshort]

Bond has got Vesper and all the events surrounding her demise out of his system. I'd like to see Craig's Bond continue as the confident, self assured Bond, like the Bond of the books but also the Bond we saw in the classic 1960s era, though obviously tailored for the times we live in today.

Yup...this is what I want too! Just hoping and praying studio troubles get sorted out and we get to see more!

Craig is so much a 'Bond' for the 21st Century, and QoS was so totally a 'Bond movie' for the 21st Century! Just hoping the 21st Century gets to see more Bond!!!

[jamie00007]

Agreed with you all.

[Messervy]

Agreed with you all.

As do I.
I think QoS is a very good Bond movie, which gets better everytime you watch it.
I positively love the car chase at the beginning (the way we get closer and closer to the tunnel in relative silence, the choreography of the cars, etc.). I love the Opera fight scene. I love the hotel scenes. I love M's portrayal. Etc.

Though I always thought that to go from very good to truly great, QoS lacks a few more in-depth look at 2 characters: the villain and his henchman.
Dominc Greene should have been more developped. He's a good character (and a great actor), but we don't see/understand him enough. I liked the way he handles the negociation in the hotel by the end of the movie, but we should have had more of that stuff so as to better portray him. His dealing with the discussion at the Opera being interrupted could have been expanded a bit, for instance. Grenne's self-esteem and self-insurance should have been developped, in order to better have it shattered by Bond. We get a glimpse of it by the end, when he's left alone in the desert like a poor old devil, but it could have appeared even more disturbing for us audience had the film developped our love-hate relation to him.
Same thing for the henchman, way too shallow.

Apart from that, I truly enjoyed QoS.
I think that now, on bases as sound as CR and QoS, we should move on and get our typical Bond back. No more "who am I? What am I for? Do I really belong here?". Now is the time for some good old Bond show.

[dchantry]

Some good thoughts there.
It's funny, I love the opening atmosphere and the music build up over the lake, but the whole chase is a little spoilt by the editing and is over too quick.
This in contract to the palio roof chase which could have probably done with ending before all of the swinging around on ropes.
Be nice to have a next film full stop. Whatever they decide to do

[Jeao007]

Awesome reflection on the film. I must admit that after reading your thoughts on it I have come to appreciate the film even more.

[Carver]

Awesome reflection on the film. I must admit that after reading your thoughts on it I have come to appreciate the film even more.

Same here. I'm still not happy with the editing of the film, especially considering how well CR flowed and how QOS did just seem like a lot of action with not much plot. However, those scenes you've picked out do shine. Craig's portrayal of Bond is very close to Fleming's, but I'm afraid the general cinema-going public don't actually view Bond as a cold-blooded spy, but more of the gimmicky fun figure the 70's era gave us.

[Gogol Pushkin]

That's a brilliant write up dchantry, very well written and I identified with a lot of what you wrote (Dalton was my first Bond and I have always enjoyed those two movies, LTK is a favourite, whilst Brosnan was during my teen years and TND was my first big screen Bond so I've often been defensive of that era), as for QoS, I went to see it on the big screen and loved it, thought it was a tremendous movie and had a lot going for it, and whilst I understand why some have issues with it, I have never had those issues, the only one I ever see eye to eye on is the editing, that really should have been rained in a bit, there are way too many quick cuts that it does become a bit headache inducing to watch some of the action sequences, but to me the film is very much a modern action film, but still apart of a cinematic legacy that has been running for nearly 50 years, and I think Craig's rendition of the character is a tremendous one, his performance is gripping one mainly because I love how the story that unfolds over QoS, having begun in CR is truly an emotionally engaging one that allows Bond to be a flesh and blood person, something that has always made me love LTK. Having watched QoS again this week in a double bill with CR I realised I don't need to have a fresh perspective on the movie. It is the same as it was on a rainy Saturday night in November of 2008 and that is that QoS is a terrific movie.

[blueman]

You're all singing my song. QOS is a great taste-of-Fleming Bond film, yep.

[dchantry]

Thank you gogol pushkin. I'm glad I managed to create a worthwhile discussion. Its also nice to talk to a fellow Tim fan.
I love LTK, certainly one of my favourites. I'm a bit of an 80s dude too so the fact that its so far etched in that era of Miami Vice only adds to the appeal to me.
LTK is also very similar to QOS in the way people were a little lukewarm to it at the time and its nice to see it getting the appropriate appreciation. Not that I remember, but OHMSS probably had similar reaction in 69 and now everyone and not just us hardcore fans acknowledge its a classic. Who knows, in 20 years people may look back and say the same about QOS.

[Gogol Pushkin]

Thank you gogol pushkin. I'm glad I managed to create a worthwhile discussion. Its also nice to talk to a fellow Tim fan.
I love LTK, certainly one of my favourites. I'm a bit of an 80s dude too so the fact that its so far etched in that era of Miami Vice only adds to the appeal to me.
LTK is also very similar to QOS in the way people were a little lukewarm to it at the time and its nice to see it getting the appropriate appreciation. Not that I remember, but OHMSS probably had similar reaction in 69 and now everyone and not just us hardcore fans acknowledge its a classic. Who knows, in 20 years people may look back and say the same about QOS.

The thing that QoS has got going for it is that unlike OHMSS and LTK, it managed to fair very well at the box office and strike a chord with mainstream moviegoers. Whilst LTK and OHMSS were far from the box office flops that many like to label them (they managed to make a profit and their only crimes were to make a little les money than the movies that came before), it is true that the opinion amongst Bond fans at the time was mixed at best just like QoS and time has seen these two movies come to the forefront more. I would love to see QoS's reputation grow in time, it would certainly deserve it.

[dogmanstar]

Well said, dchantry. QOS certainly gets the 'feel' right and you've labeled some of my favorite scenes from the film.

[Guy Haines]

Thank you gogol pushkin. I'm glad I managed to create a worthwhile discussion. Its also nice to talk to a fellow Tim fan.
I love LTK, certainly one of my favourites. I'm a bit of an 80s dude too so the fact that its so far etched in that era of Miami Vice only adds to the appeal to me.
LTK is also very similar to QOS in the way people were a little lukewarm to it at the time and its nice to see it getting the appropriate appreciation. Not that I remember, but OHMSS probably had similar reaction in 69 and now everyone and not just us hardcore fans acknowledge its a classic. Who knows, in 20 years people may look back and say the same about QOS.

The thing that QoS has got going for it is that unlike OHMSS and LTK, it managed to fair very well at the box office and strike a chord with mainstream moviegoers. Whilst LTK and OHMSS were far from the box office flops that many like to label them (they managed to make a profit and their only crimes were to make a little les money than the movies that came before), it is true that the opinion amongst Bond fans at the time was mixed at best just like QoS and time has seen these two movies come to the forefront more. I would love to see QoS's reputation grow in time, it would certainly deserve it.

Concerning OHMSS, its "main crime" in the eyes of some was the absence of Sean Connery as Bond, at a time when, again for some, Sean Connery was James Bond. For me, it is arguably one of the best films in the series, and the absence of Connery didn't matter on my first viewing because it was the first Bond film I ever watched. It hasn't mattered since.

As for LTK, as the 1980s progressed and the world learned more about the power and pretensions of South America's drug lords, I thought it was only a matter of time before 007 took one on. I can't understand how some critics thought that a villain like Franz Sanchez was unworthy of Bond's attention. I think if Fleming had been around in the era of Manuel Noriega, Pablo Escobar and Carlos Lehder (the three who, I think, were the inspiration for Sanchez), he would at some point have pitted the Bond of the printed page against a drug baron. LTK I enjoyed, but in retrospect the timing of release was not wise - it went into a collision with the likes of Batman, Indiana Jones and Lethal Weapon and didn't fare as well as expected. Interestingly, it was the last time any Bond film was released in the summer.

I am also a Dalton fan, by the way. He is, after all, the "local" lad who became James Bond (his home town of Belper is not too far away from where I live.)

[volante]

You're all singing my song. QOS is a great taste-of-Fleming Bond film, yep.

Suprisingly; I watched QOS again on Friday evening. Now I'm a big fan of the film and of DC's potrayal: so what this thread is reaffiriming is that a lot of fans are starting to warm to the movie. Great, bout time too.

[dchantry]

It seems like we have already started to get QOS more appreciation, about time too.

One comment regarding OHMSS, I think the film actually benefits greatly not having Connery in it. In fact I'd go as far as to say it wouldn't be half the film if he was in it. At least they were allowed to change focus to Story, plot and most of all action which was Lazenby's great asset, he moved like an athlete. Much better performance that Connery's phoned in performance from YOLT.

[Guy Haines]

It seems like we have already started to get QOS more appreciation, about time too.

One comment regarding OHMSS, I think the film actually benefits greatly not having Connery in it. In fact I'd go as far as to say it wouldn't be half the film if he was in it. At least they were allowed to change focus to Story, plot and most of all action which was Lazenby's great asset, he moved like an athlete. Much better performance that Connery's phoned in performance from YOLT.

One of the great "what ifs" of the Bond film series - what if Connery had played Bond in OHMSS? I think it would have been down to the film sequence. If OHMSS had followed Goldfinger or Thunderball, before Connery started looking for an exit from Bond, then it might have been a great performance. But a "phoned in" turn of the kind you mention above would not have worked in that story.

[blueman]

You're all singing my song. QOS is a great taste-of-Fleming Bond film, yep.

Suprisingly; I watched QOS again on Friday evening. Now I'm a big fan of the film and of DC's potrayal: so what this thread is reaffiriming is that a lot of fans are starting to warm to the movie. Great, bout time too.

It's definitely a different cinematic take on Bond than the usual EON product, closer to DN, and to a bit lesser extent OHMSS, than the rest of the EON Bond films. Easy to see why fans of the films aren't too happy with it. What's always struck me as truly remarkable about it is the reaction of average movie-goers, they seemed to accept it as Bond just fine judging by the very Bond-like box office numbers it did. I credit Forster for creating something a bit left-fieldish for Bond yet still identifiable and very, very (at long last) Fleming.

It seems like we have already started to get QOS more appreciation, about time too.

One comment regarding OHMSS, I think the film actually benefits greatly not having Connery in it. In fact I'd go as far as to say it wouldn't be half the film if he was in it. At least they were allowed to change focus to Story, plot and most of all action which was Lazenby's great asset, he moved like an athlete. Much better performance that Connery's phoned in performance from YOLT.

Always been grateful Connery wasn't in OHMSS, agree that it would've been a completely different film with him in it, and not a better one.

It seems like we have already started to get QOS more appreciation, about time too.

One comment regarding OHMSS, I think the film actually benefits greatly not having Connery in it. In fact I'd go as far as to say it wouldn't be half the film if he was in it. At least they were allowed to change focus to Story, plot and most of all action which was Lazenby's great asset, he moved like an athlete. Much better performance that Connery's phoned in performance from YOLT.

One of the great "what ifs" of the Bond film series - what if Connery had played Bond in OHMSS? I think it would have been down to the film sequence. If OHMSS had followed Goldfinger or Thunderball, before Connery started looking for an exit from Bond, then it might have been a great performance. But a "phoned in" turn of the kind you mention above would not have worked in that story.

Agree, had OHMSS been filmed after GF, or perhaps even after TB, Connery would've been great in it.

[Mr_Wint]

It's definitely a different cinematic take on Bond than the usual EON product, closer to DN, and to a bit lesser extent OHMSS, than the rest of the EON Bond films.

You have a vivid imagination. Personally, I can't see how QOS is close to DN or OHMSS. To me it looks more like a rehash of everything we have seen since GE. Actually, most of the things I didn't like in the 90's are here taken to their extreme; Lame villains, Judi Dench, revenge missions, machine guns, non-threatening henchmen, Arnold's noise, over dressed girls, pyrotechnics galore and a Bond that is more John McClane than Bond.

[sharpshooter]

Frankly, QoS is nowhere near as bad as some claim. The positives outweigh the negatives for me, and I find myself watching it quite a bit. I just don't put it in OHMSS and CR territory.

[Gogol Pushkin]

Concerning OHMSS, its "main crime" in the eyes of some was the absence of Sean Connery as Bond, at a time when, again for some, Sean Connery was James Bond. For me, it is arguably one of the best films in the series, and the absence of Connery didn't matter on my first viewing because it was the first Bond film I ever watched. It hasn't mattered since.

As for LTK, as the 1980s progressed and the world learned more about the power and pretensions of South America's drug lords, I thought it was only a matter of time before 007 took one on. I can't understand how some critics thought that a villain like Franz Sanchez was unworthy of Bond's attention. I think if Fleming had been around in the era of Manuel Noriega, Pablo Escobar and Carlos Lehder (the three who, I think, were the inspiration for Sanchez), he would at some point have pitted the Bond of the printed page against a drug baron. LTK I enjoyed, but in retrospect the timing of release was not wise - it went into a collision with the likes of Batman, Indiana Jones and Lethal Weapon and didn't fare as well as expected. Interestingly, it was the last time any Bond film was released in the summer.

I am also a Dalton fan, by the way. He is, after all, the "local" lad who became James Bond (his home town of Belper is not too far away from where I live.)

Nicely said Guy. I wasn't around in 1969 (it was fifteen years until I made my debut in the world), but from what I've read, there was a lot of animosity towards George which is a shame really. The guy had something really special to him, a noble humanity that was very unique, but that has become my opinion over time though. I was very young when I first watched it and couldn't warm to it at a young age as George wasn't Timothy or Roger (who were the first Bonds I saw, I actually had a similar reaction when I first caught a glimpse of Sean), but as the years have gone on I have come to love the film more and more, it truly is a masterpiece, a glorious piece of work and a stone cold classic to boot.

Oh, can I just say, I think it is so cool you live near Timothy's home town. I bet that's a buzz.

[Mr. Blofeld]

You have a vivid imagination. Personally, I can't see how QOS is close to DN or OHMSS. To me it looks more like a rehash of everything we have seen since GE. Actually, most of the things I didn't like in the 90's are here taken to their extreme; Lame villains, Judi Dench, revenge missions, machine guns, non-threatening henchmen, Arnold's noise, over dressed girls, pyrotechnics galore and a Bond that is more John McClane than Bond.

This is an appreciation thread, Wint, not a bitching thread; take your greedy-voiced ranting elsewhere, while we commiserate.

I'm going to have to make it a point to watch QOS again, soon; I don't think I've viewed it in more than a year...

[coco1997]

You have a vivid imagination. Personally, I can't see how QOS is close to DN or OHMSS. To me it looks more like a rehash of everything we have seen since GE. Actually, most of the things I didn't like in the 90's are here taken to their extreme; Lame villains, Judi Dench, revenge missions, machine guns, non-threatening henchmen, Arnold's noise, over dressed girls, pyrotechnics galore and a Bond that is more John McClane than Bond.

This is an appreciation thread, Wint, not a bitching thread; take your greedy-voiced ranting elsewhere, while we commiserate.

I'm going to have to make it a point to watch QOS again, soon; I don't think I've viewed it in more than a year...

There goes that classic Mr. Blofeld intolerance again. Wint voiced his dissatisfaction with "QoS" in a fairly articulate and civil fashion. Why can't you ever accept that many people actually have different opinions than your own and just move on?

Anyway, I appreciate "QoS" as a product of its time. It was different than any Bond that came before it, and I can't see it bearing resemblance to any Bond film that comes after.

[Safari Suit]

There goes that classic Mr. Blofeld intolerance again.

I also find it amusing that despite his vociferous fanatical defensiveness towards the film, he hasn't actually watched it in over a year.

Mind you, I haven't watched it in over a year, and I am a fan of QOS who posted an unqualified rave when it came out. But it's hard not to find oneself more sympathetic towards the conduct of the anti-QOS brigade around here these days.

EDIT: I realise now posting this wasn't a good idea, but it would be cowerdly to delete it

[Mr. Blofeld]

There goes that classic Mr. Blofeld intolerance again.

Intolerance? Wint has been bashing QOS and promoting the "fun" Bond since '08; I'm completely sick of hearing about it. This is a "new reflection"/reappreciation thread, not a "let's jump QOS all over again" thread, as so many others have turned into...

I also find it amusing that despite his vociferous fanatical defensiveness towards the film, he hasn't actually watched it in over a year.

Mind you, I haven't watched it in over a year, and I am a fan of QOS who posted an unqualified rave when it came out.

Hoist by thine own petard, methinks? Ever heard of a little saying involving glass houses and thrown stones?

(Sorry, went a little overboard; anyway, I've been so busy with college work that, every time I intend to watch CR/QOS as a double-feature, events always get in the way... )

But it's hard not to find oneself more sympathetic towards the conduct of the anti-QOS brigade around here these days.

It is for me; it's probably the only Bond film we'll get for a while, now, so I suggest that, like OHMSS and LTK, we embrace it, as Bond fans are oft to do.

EDIT: I realise now posting this wasn't a good idea, but it would be cowardly to delete it

Cowardly? No, my dear boy; 'twas not "cowardly" -- you were merely expressing your opinion, like a true human being... cowardice has nothing to do with it.