78 replies to this topic

[B5Erik2]

Well, since there is now a pro-DAD-ers club, I thought I'd just see how many LTK fans there are.

LTK is a movie that Ian Fleming would have been proud of, and Timothy Dalton gave a fantastic performance as the world's best known secret agent/assassin. (The 00's ARE basically assassins, or, if you prefer, "problem eliminators.")

Who's with me?

[Carver]

I agree with yoy here Erik, LTK is a classic examply of Fleming's original dark, killing Bond, and, although LTK was given and over-the-top 15 rating, and its unecessary swearing, it is a brilliant film, and I'll be happy to join to Pro-LTK club:D

[Loomis]

I'm definitely with you, B5Erik2. LICENCE TO KILL is just about the best Bond film ever made, in my opinion.

Dalton is superb as a tough, mean, deeply flawed James Bond with whom we engage on a much deeper level than usual. The other characters are also three-dimensional and involving. Robert Davi gives us a truly menacing villain (easily the best-written bad guy of the series), with a sadistic streak that Fleming would have approved of. Carey Lowell and Talisa Soto are also excellent.

The action scenes are nothing short of awesome, the locations exotic and the sets the best the franchise has given us since the days of Ken Adam. The film's visual aspects are magnificent.

There are moments of genuine suspense (I don't think there have subsequently been any in the series), for instance Bond's botched assassination attempt on Sanchez.

LICENCE TO KILL takes what now seem unthinkable risks with the character of Bond and the series. It is a masterpiece.

[Dr. Tynan]

I've written before that DAD may now be my favourite Bond and not LTK.

However LTK is definitely either my second favourite or my favourite still.

Can I join, even though LTK is probably now my second favourite?

At least it's definitely in my top two.

[Carver]

Well, DAD and LTK are so alike, and I think it is good that films show Bond's weaker side, rather than him being some sort of superman, just don't go over the top with his weaknesses. BTW, Dr.T, 4 more posts and you're in the 4DC! I'm glad you make it before another certain member who has rapidly advanced in post numbers during these recent weeks, and that you've shaken off their dangerous postings. lets hope you can make it to the 4DC tonight, just ahead of Christmas!

[Loomis]

Who are you referring to? What "dangerous postings"?

[Dr. Tynan]

Originally posted by Carver
BTW, Dr.T, 4 more posts and you're in the 4DC! I'm glad you make it before another certain member who has rapidly advanced in post numbers during these recent weeks, and that you've shaken off their dangerous postings. lets hope you can make it to the 4DC tonight, just ahead of Christmas!

Cheers Carver

I'm gonna wait a bit further into Christmas day, before I post my 1000th

[1q2w3e4r]

LTK club? Count me in.

[Dr. Tynan]

Post 999 I'm nearly there....woo hoo hoo.

[B5Erik2]

Now, there are some ground rules/requirements for this group.

The Pro-LTK Club is merely a loose coalition of Bond fans who recognize that Ian Fleming created the greatest/most entertaining character of all time, and that LTK is a shining example of that vision (for the many reasons stated on this thread).

The first 60-75 minutes of DAD fit in perfectly with that vision. The last 45-50 minutes do not. You have to be willing to admit that to join the Pro LTK-ers Club.

(There have got to be SOME ground rules about "double agents" who are in both the Pro DAD-ers Club and this one....)

[Dr. Tynan]

oops this one is number 999, not that one 2 posts up

[SeanValen00V]

Favorite James Bond film LTK alongside TLD. Cubby makes Bond films to last as Robert Davi-Sanchez says, in repeat viewing I would hungre for Licence to Kill and The Living Daylights straight away, Dalton great Bond, LTK club-I'm in.

[Sir James]

Originally posted by B5Erik2
:DLTK is a movie that Ian Fleming would have been proud of

While that may be true, how do you really know? I mean, Fleming could have really hated the major American influence on the film. Or, he could have had problems with the "Miami Vice" feel of the whole movie. Yeah, Fleming liked the tough, gritty Bond, but I highly doubt he wanted him to sacrifice the class that he did have to that. That itself is clearly demonstrated with the excessive swearing and overall gorrnies with the film.

But I am not saying that you are wrong, after all, neither of us can speak for Fleming.

[Melango]

I'd be in on a pro-LTK club for sure, alongside TLD its one of, if not my favourite Bond films. Dalton captured the perfect style for the mood of that film.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Sir James

While that may be true, how do you really know? I mean, Fleming could have really hated the major American influence on the film. Or, he could have had problems with the "Miami Vice" feel of the whole movie. Yeah, Fleming liked the tough, gritty Bond, but I highly doubt he wanted him to sacrifice the class that he did have to that. That itself is clearly demonstrated with the excessive swearing and overall gorrnies with the film.

But I am not saying that you are wrong, after all, neither of us can speak for Fleming.  

It's true that none of us can speak for Fleming, but I imagine he'd have preferred LICENCE TO KILL to, say, MOONRAKER, OCTOPUSSY and A VIEW TO A KILL.

I don't remember any "excessive swearing" in LTK, though. I think Carey Lowell says "s--t" at one point, but that's it (swearing is rare in the Bond series, I admit, but then Mrs Bleeker mouthed "HOLY s--t" way back in 1973!).

No offence, Sir James, but I think the common complaint against LTK that it echoes "Miami Vice" is just lazy and wrong (not having a go at you, but I've read this accusation several times in various threads from various people and it's beginning to annoy). So LTK is partly set in Florida and deals with Latin American drug lords, that hardly makes it "Miami Vice". In terms of storytelling, look and feel, it bears absolutely no relation to that TV show. After all, Bond doesn't walk around in a cream designer suit with the sleeves rolled up and a T-shirt underneath, or wear loafers with no socks. One might as well compare, say, THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH to "Dallas" (both dealing with dysfunctional family dynamics and scheming within the oil industry - dramatically, TWINE is on pretty much the same level as "Dallas" in my book, but that's another post).

However, I do agree with you that LICENCE TO KILL (to an extent, anyway) sacrifices Bond's class and connoisseurship, which could be considered a black mark against the film. Dalton's bond in LTK doesn't look like he'd be able to give advice about wine, for instance. Heck, he's even happy to go about unshaven at various points.

[Turn]

I agree with Loomis on the Miami Vice connection. That is one of the lamest criticisms of LTK and all too common, along with the myth that Dalton's films don't have any humor at all.

If LTK was going to rip off Miami Vice, it would have been during the show's heyday, '85 or '86, not after the show went off the air in May of '89. LTK, like a lot of Bond films, took some background of a real life situation (think the Afghanistan situation in TLD or the breakup of the Soviet Union in GE) and worked it into the screenplay.

The situation, for those who may not have heard of it, was drug kingpin Manuel Noriega, who ran an empire in Central or South America and the DEA tried their hardest to force him out, and they did capture him in late '89, making the screenplay even more relavant. This character was the basis for Sanchez.

I can understand if people don't like LTK for its departure from the Bond formula, just don't tell me it's ripping off Miami Vice.

[1q2w3e4r]

Originally posted by B5Erik2
Now, there are some ground rules/requirements for this group.

The Pro-LTK Club is merely a loose coalition of Bond fans who recognize that Ian Fleming created the greatest/most entertaining character of all time, and that LTK is a shining example of that vision (for the many reasons stated on this thread).

The first 60-75 minutes of DAD fit in perfectly with that vision. The last 45-50 minutes do not. You have to be willing to admit that to join the Pro LTK-ers Club.    

(There have got to be SOME ground rules about "double agents" who are in both the Pro DAD-ers Club and this one....)

Personally. I couldn't agree with what you've said more. I think ya got it spot on with DAD and LTK.

To "Sir James" forgive me for generalising, which is what Im about to do. But have you read Fleming's novels? The American influence you speak of is an underlyling tone throughout any of Fleming's novels set in America. Raymond Chandler went so far as to say Diamond's Are Forever read as if it was written by an American and he was unaware of any other writer capable of adapting the influences and cultures of other countries to his stories so well.

The further point that LTK lacks class because it contains swearing and overall gorrness I can't help but totally disagree with. LTK borrows heavily from Fleming's novel Live And Let Die. The shark sequence involving Felix and the "he disagreed with something that ate him" are pulled straight from Fleming's novel. As is Bond's fight in the warehouse and his feeding to the shark of "the robber" (in the novel) and Leiter's pal in LTK.

The novels and Fleming's view further point toward what was said above by the amount of physical pain OO7 is put in, and the use of swearing in Fleming's novels. It's usually handled with the gentlemanly attitude of a Scottish gentleman but it's there. Bond tells Drax in Moonraker to "go ---- yourself." Which Drax responds, "even I am not capable of that."
He spit's out "a four letter word" quite frequently and cannot under stand how Tiger in You Only Live Twice can make it through the day without his barrage of offensive words (Tiger told Bond there were no swear words in the Japanese language) and OO7 is kind enough to point out "Freddie Uncle Charlie Kate". Or something simular to it as an example. So I'd say LTK accuratly portrays the spirit of Fleming's blunt government instrument

[SeanValen00V]

"Watch the birdy you *******."

[Double-0 Six]

Yep, count me in. LTK is one of my favourites, too.

[Carver]

Originally posted by Loomis
Who are you referring to? What "dangerous postings"?

Well, exactly what this post is Loomis, a dangerous post:mad:

[Loomis]

I'd already gathered you were referring to me back there, Carver. Please tell me what I have done to offend you. PM me if you like. If you think I have been rude to you or another member, please tell me why. If my posts are offensive to you, I'd like you to explain why.

I don't come here to make enemies, Carver, but it seems I have upset you. I'd be sorry if that was the case. We're all Bond fans, and I don't go in for personal attacks on other members. I think my behaviour has been fine on these forums. If you disagree, and it seems that you do, please have the courtesy to explain why.

[Carver]

Of course I have the courtesy to explain why Loomis, I don't just start something and then leave it, thats not me. Before I start, this is not an attack on this member, its just a simple explanation of my behaviour. No Loomis, you have not offended me, not in the way you suggested, I don't take much offense to posts which are meant to be offensive towards me anyway, I usually laugh at them, so no, you haven't offended me in any of your posts, thats not the reason. The reason is, your 'erratic'' postings. Pretty soon (I estimate in about a day, probably less than that) you're going to reach the acclaimed 4 digits club, which usually grants members respect, for how hard they're worked to get this far, and what they have achieved. Now, if you compare your position now to what it was about 2 months ago, there's a big change. From sitting on about 450 posts a few months ago, you've suddenly shot up the members list in a way which has cause to be alarming. Now, there have been cases like this before (no names mentioned here). You go away for a few days, and suddenly, someone has shot up this list yadda yadda. If it was in a way with quality post then fine, so be it, but a large number of your posts have been simply quotes, with a one word reply. This has been slightly annoying, and there are other repected memebrs who have worked hard for this, and they aren't where they should be now, in your position. This does affect me slightly, and this is the reason for my behaviour.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Carver
Pretty soon (I estimate in about a day, probably less than that) you're going to reach the acclaimed 4 digits club, which usually grants members respect, for how hard they're worked to get this far, and what they have achieved. Now, if you compare your position now to what it was about 2 months ago, there's a big change. From sitting on about 450 posts a few months ago, you've suddenly shot up the members list in a way which has cause to be alarming. Now, there have been cases like this before (no names mentioned here). You go away for a few days, and suddenly, someone has shot up this list yadda yadda. If it was in a way with quality post then fine, so be it, but a large number of your posts have been simply quotes, with a one word reply. This has been slightly annoying, and there are other repected memebrs who have worked hard for this, and they aren't where they should be now, in your position. This does affect me slightly, and this is the reason for my behaviour.

My goodness, someone's taking this whole FDC pecking order thing a little seriously. Believe it or not, Carver, it's not my burning ambition in life to break the thousand-post barrier, and I don't end every day rubbing my hands with glee that I've kept other - as you put it - "respected" members down.

I don't care about getting into some kind of Bond fans' Internet hall of fame. In fact, staff members, feel free to delete as many of my past posts as you please, take me right back to a low figure, I don't care.

Why don't I care? BECAUSE I COME HERE TO FIND INFORMATION ON AND DISCUSS JAMES BOND, that's it. I don't give a damn about rankings or hierarchies.

It seems I'm the new Bondpurist in your eyes, Carver, spamming away to the detriment of this site. I could of course answer that I don't believe every single one of YOUR posts, Carver, is "quality". However, for me the fundamental point is this:

These are public forums, and you do not have the right, Carver, to lecture other users on how they should be using them.

I have nothing to apologise to you for. I don't see why I should have to answer to you for how many posts I am making. How dare you take me to task over this? Heavens, you're not even a staff member.

Like many of us, I have recently posted much more than I used to, for the obvious reason that DIE ANOTHER DAY finally came out and there was so much more than usual to discuss.

Anyway, you, Carver, have no authority whatsoever to attack me. In the future, I may post just as much as I have been doing recently, I may make fewer posts, or I may stop visiting this site altogether. It's my choice, not yours.

[WarBird]

Well I just watched LTK again and well, that the only Bond movie where I reallly don't like the Bond actor too much and the plot seemed to........Americian. When I watch Bond I want to see problems outside of the U.S.(yes, I know every country has drug problems but I'm starting to hear about it alot again) with countries the normal people don't get to go to and cars we drive only when we win a million bucks or something. Well, it seemed to be centered in one place. So I guess you can count me as trailing the band wagon, cause I not really opposed to the movie.

[zencat]

Originally posted by Carver
Of course I have the courtesy to explain why Loomis, I don't just start something and then leave it, thats not me. Before I start, this is not an attack on this member, its just a simple explanation of my behaviour. No Loomis, you have not offended me, not in the way you suggested, I don't take much offense to posts which are meant to be offensive towards me anyway, I usually laugh at them, so no, you haven't offended me in any of your posts, thats not the reason. The reason is, your 'erratic'' postings. Pretty soon (I estimate in about a day, probably less than that) you're going to reach the acclaimed 4 digits club, which usually grants members respect, for how hard they're worked to get this far, and what they have achieved. Now, if you compare your position now to what it was about 2 months ago, there's a big change. From sitting on about 450 posts a few months ago, you've suddenly shot up the members list in a way which has cause to be alarming. Now, there have been cases like this before (no names mentioned here). You go away for a few days, and suddenly, someone has shot up this list yadda yadda. If it was in a way with quality post then fine, so be it, but a large number of your posts have been simply quotes, with a one word reply. This has been slightly annoying, and there are other repected memebrs who have worked hard for this, and they aren't where they should be now, in your position. This does affect me slightly, and this is the reason for my behaviour.

You've both made good points, and you're both excellent CBNers, but maybe we should bring the conversation back to LTK.

[Loomis]

Just one more thing. (Apologies to B5Erik2, who started this thread. Maybe the exchange between Carver and myself should be moved, but I promise to write no more on the subject after this.)

Carver,

I want you to know that I have contacted CBn staff to tell them that as far as I am concerned, they are quite welcome to delete as many of my posts as they see fit, indeed the whole lot of them if they wish.

I did this not because I feel that I have anything whatsoever to apologise to you for, or because I agree with you in your view that I have been spamming this site. I most certainly do not.

However, I want to prove to you that I come here to find information on and discuss James Bond, and that's it, not to enter into some kind of childish dick-swinging contest over who can achieve the largest number of posts. There are more important achievements in life than that. Membership of the hallowed FDC - and attaining some kind of spurious supremacy among complete strangers in cyberspace - is not my main aim in coming here, which is to chat about Bond in a civil manner, so try not to boil over with anger if and when I pass the thousand-post figure, because I assure you that I myself won't be cracking open the bubbly, since it isn't the be-all-and-end-all, and it certainly isn't the reason I use this site.

All of which said, no hard feelings, I hope.

Loomis

[B5Erik2]

Apology accepted, now can we get back to the topic at hand? And that topic happens to be one of the greatest Bond films of them all. The thread is also about the fans who support Timothy Dalton, John Glen, Michael G Wilson, etc, as we show our appreciation for the classic film Licence To Kill.

LTK is the real deal.

[RITZ]

Originally posted by B5Erik2


Well, since there is now a pro-DAD-ers club, I thought I'd just see how many LTK fans there are.

LTK is a movie that Ian Fleming would have been proud of, and Timothy Dalton gave a fantastic performance as the world's best known secret agent/assassin.  (The 00's ARE basically assassins, or, if you prefer, "problem eliminators.")

Who's with me?

Count me in!


My signature says it all.....

[Carver]

This will be my last post on this thread on the other topic in hand. I couldn't quite finish my post last night in the way I wanted, my mum wanted me to ''switch the bloody machine off!'';). Ok, back to the ''other'' topic. What I wanted to say is: Loomis, as Zencat put it, and I agree with him, is a very good member of the site, and I was going to say, so many of his posts have been of the highest standard, such as ones in threads about DAD. I am not saying I have the right to take away any of your posts or anything like that Loomis, and please staff members, don't delete any of his posts to make me shut up, becuase I won't be too happy either, as Loomis has worked hard here and he should be where he is now. The only problem I have is with a few of his posts, such as some being just a quote and then a sentence, or a one word answer, thats all, maybe he could have explained a little bit more with his answers, I'm not saying write a whole essay on it, just say his true feelings, rather than just put one word or sentence up. I'm not thinking you're the ''new Bondpurist'' Loomis, that is kind of a nasty thing to say, becuase I don't hate everybody on this site who posts a lot, becuse I do whenever I'm online, and I'm not slamming Dr.Tynan for him quickly advancing to the 4DC either, I congratulated him in fact. The Bond purist thing was a whole different matter Loomis, but I won't go into it now, I made up with him, and he's ok now (although I'd like to know where he got to, he hasn't been around of late). So the only problem I have, or had, was the fact the a few of your posts only had a few words in them, and were not really a other to write. I'll take back my ''spamming'' remark, as that was a bit over-the-top and I am also one of the members who portest against heated arguements on this site, as we only come here to discuss Bond, and not to make enemies. I am sorry if I have made you life hell lately Loomis, I am sorry, I was just annoyed at how your post total rose, but as you put it, and it is the truth, that DAD is something big to talk about, and that your post totals do rise (mine hasn't, my ma says no to the net;)). Please, do notstop visiting the site becuase of my ranting, and do not ask the staff members to delete your posts, that would be silly, and you should carry on posting as you are, I'll just sit in the corner and watch, whilst mumuring to myself in a voodoo chant (joke:p). The only thing that now bothers me is why you sent me 2 PM's, and then cancelled then, could you clear that up for me, thanks.
Apologies to both Loomis and BsErik (for mucking up his thread),

Carver

[Loomis]

Okay, I know that I promised I wouldn't write anything more on this topic, but since this is already a public matter, as it were, I'll finish it publicly. Apologies again to B2Erik5 and to everyone checking in for a thread on (the magnificent) LICENCE TO KILL. It really wouldn't be a bad idea for staff members to move this exchange between Carver and myself (but then I guess a fair few people are finding it quite entertaining;)).

Firstly, Carver, thanks for coming back to explain things. I must admit that I did feel a little hurt by your original post, because I don't feel that I make a habit of nasty posts or rambling, meaningless ones. I do try to behave myself, and I'd hate to be thought of as someone who comes here just to troll or rack up huge numbers of posts just for the sake of it. However, you've now made it clear that you don't think of me that way.

Everything is cool between us, no hard feelings at all, and I respect the way that you have returned to explain things more clearly. For my part, I apologise if I came over as too defensive and/or hotheaded back there.

That said, I knew where you were coming from, and I freely admit that I have been posting a heck of a lot recently, and perhaps spending rather more time here than is good for me (some of us have unrestricted Internet access, which is not necessarily always a good thing, and one does occasionally have to say to oneself, to quote Connery in GOLDFINGER: "Discipline, 007, discipline.":D). I've been thinking of cutting back on my posts a little, which is nothing to do with you or any other member, but certainly now that we've had the lengthy DAD postmortems, I doubt that I'll be posting at quite the same rate as before (this is not a farewell speech, by the way, but I'm sure you get where I'm coming from).

But I certainly wouldn't have stuck around here as long as I have done unless I'd felt that just about everyone who posts here is intelligent and decent, with interesting things to say, and that goes for you too, Carver. Besides, I could never dislike anyone who writes that he likes LICENCE TO KILL.

As for the cancelled PMs, the content was identical to my last two posts on this thread. Having sent them, I decided that on balance it would be better to respond to you publicly rather than privately, so don't worry, you've just read the two PMs. There are no angry hate letters that I've censored!

You know what, I also wonder where Bondpurist is. I know that there were controversies during his era, but I miss his contributions to this site, and I bet I'm not the only CBner who does. I thought he was pretty sharp, and I enjoyed his passion for Dalton. I really hope we haven't seen the last of him.

Anyway, Carver, thanks again for coming back to help clear the air. No hard feelings, water under the bridge, etc., and I wish you a Happy New Year.