What!?! Being a great film is not a means to an end! I said I wasn't going to comment on this any more, but holy crap. That statement right there, is so perfectly illustrative of every thing I have said in previous posts. In this case it has NOTHING to do with your opinion of the the jokes or movies. It has everything to do with your lack of comprehension. Again, there is nothing wrong with that, but you keep arguing a point that you clearly don't understand.
What the heck are you talking about? I was responding to HH (and not you) and my comment has everything to do what what he said! Clarky, I have decided long ago not to respond to you. All you do is insult me and this post is clearly no exception. Please return the favour and stop responding to me.
I don't mean to make this personal, but you feel so compelled to ignore what is being said by several other member and just out and out repeat yourself trying to qualify it by saying it your opinion.
First of all, you are making it personal. Don't give me 'no offence' clarifications; to you, it is clearly personal. I have no idea what I have done to you; however you should get over it as not only is not your concern but HH can certainly take care of himself if he thinks I've been ignoring what he said. But seriously, if you don't like what I say, then stop responding. Because I don't like what you say to me in the slightest.
You are not grasping the concept of what is being said to you, Stephanie Broadchest joke be damned.
The Stephanie Broadchest joke is history. I'm through with that. Now please, STOP responding to me! X-(
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
The Humor in Bond started with Young and Connery improvising and snowballed into stupid lines designed to make 12 year old schoolboys snicker...
I for one enjoy a lot of the stupid lines and really like the Moore films. I guess it may be due to the fact that I was around 12 when some of the Moore Bond films were coming out. I probably still enjoy them because I am inmature.:D
CR'06 is not without humor, it has several very amusing sequences (gags?) but they are I believe more sophisticated than previous films
I agree that CR'06 didn't lack humor; it was just a different, subtler humor. I think each actor puts his own mark on Bond. I enjoyed Moore's version, and I enjoy Craig's too. I think it would be a mistake to change Craig's Bond too much. He has established his style, it has been a big hit, and I would hate to see that messed up. Craig's Bond seems to be a perfect fit for the current times.
"A blunt instrument wielded by a Government department. Hard, ruthless, sardonic, fatalistic. He likes gambling, golf, fast motor cars. All his movements are relaxed and economical". Ian Fleming
I am glad that someone can still laugh at RM's jokes, I am sure he would be grateful for that ( if he even thinks about oo7 these days). If they take you back to your early teens then by Gosh those are special films!
I used to like the humor, but it got out of control and lead me to abandon the series to the extent that i did not go see DAD in the theatre - that's something for a long time devoted fan!
I have recently watched DAD, and found it "passable" as a film. What struck me was that the end it was a "big mac" movie - just another assembly line product full of stuff we don't need.
After trying to re-watch AVTAK, I have less respect for Connery/Young because of what their humerous style developed into. That said, it's pretty odvious their contribution was a "mega" one and resulted in the 1960's Spy Craze and made Bond what it is today - warts and all.
I found the subtle humor of CR'06 refreshing and this film did more to re-interest me in the Bond films than anything made since 1966.
and my comment has everything to do what what he said!
Furthermore, I didn't dispute what you had to say regarded HH. Your statement that maybe tone had less to do with CR being successful than it being a great movie is what I am responding to. I repeat: Being a great movie is not a means to an end. Meaning: You can't just say it "I'm going to make a great movie." and hey presto, a great movie. A great movie is made up of elements. Writing, tone, humor, cinematography, et cetera combined make fora a great movie.
Clarky, I have decided long ago not to respond to you. All you do is insult me and this post is clearly no exception. Please return the favour and stop responding to me.
I am the one that decided to stop responding to you because I thought therewas no way to get through to you, not the other way around. If all you can see is me insulting you in my comments, then you continue to support my arguments.
First of all, you are making it personal. Don't give me 'no offence' clarifications; to you, it is clearly personal. I have no idea what I have done to you; however you should get over it as not only is not your concern but HH can certainly take care of himself if he thinks I've been ignoring what he said.
I didn't initially mean to make this personal. Frankly, I don't care if are offended or not. You bring up points that I have counter points to. I hate to correct you again, but this is an open forum and I am a James Bond fan and have been for years. I have an reasonable right to say what I like about the topic, as long as I'm not thread jacking. I am certainly not taking up for HH. I feel confident he can make his own statements just fine. There is nothing for me to get over. I am highlighting points that I feel are important just as you feel yours are.
You are not grasping the concept of what is being said to you, Stephanie Broadchest joke be damned.
The Stephanie Broadchest joke is history. I'm through with that. Now please, STOP responding to me!
You just repeated what I had said. That's what I meant by the Stephanie Broadchest be damned. It means I'm not talking about that joke anymore, or your lack of comprehension of it.
This thread seems to have degenerated into personal attacks, and that is sad!
I think if you feel someone hasn't understood your post, then restate it - politely. We are all here to have fun - not argue like kids.
Dan Same and I disagree over CR'06, but thats the fun of this forum! There is only so much anyone can write about this stuff, so opinion is whats keeping this forum going.
I am not carrying anyone's water here, just asking that we keep it a might more civil and less cranky!
Your statement that maybe tone had less to do with CR being successful than it being a great movie is what I am responding to. I repeat: Being a great movie is not a means to an end. Meaning: You can't just say it "I'm going to make a great movie." and hey presto, a great movie. A great movie is made up of elements. Writing, tone, humor, cinematography, et cetera combined make fora a great movie.
You know, if you had said this instead of attacking me, maybe I would have responded to you. 8-) The whole idea of what makes a great movie and whether it is a means to an end is interesting, but no, you had to make it personal and attack me.
I am the one that decided to stop responding to you because I thought therewas no way to get through to you, not the other way around. If all you can see is me insulting you in my comments, then you continue to support my arguments.
) Very mature. Fine, it is you that decided to stop responding to me. 8-)
I will repeat what I said; I have decided long ago not to respond to you. All you do is insult me and the last post was clearly no exception. Please return the favour and stop responding to me.
I didn't initially mean to make this personal. Frankly, I don't care if are offended or not. You bring up points that I have counter points to. I hate to correct you again, but this is an open forum and I am a James Bond fan and have been for years. I have an reasonable right to say what I like about the topic, as long as I'm not thread jacking. I am certainly not taking up for HH. I feel confident he can make his own statements just fine. There is nothing for me to get over. I am highlighting points that I feel are important just as you feel yours are.
You don't mean to make it personal? Give me a break. Your whole post was nothing but personal.
You mentioned highlighting points; the whole post was nothing but an attack on me! You didn't highlight anything but confirm why I had intitially decided to stop responding to you!
Oh, BTW, I couldn't care less whether you are a Bond fan; it doesn't give you the right to be offensive; bu what would you care? 8-)
You just repeated what I had said. That's what I meant by the Stephanie Broadchest be damned. It means I'm not talking about that joke anymore, or your lack of comprehension of it.
Whatever. 8-)
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Dan, do you not read the posts? I was not attacking you. The only difference between what I said in the previous post and this last post was I had to spell everything out for you.
As for making it personal, I had no intention of making the discussion personal. Initially, you explained your understanding of a joke. I tried to explain, based on your own words, why you were missing the point. Rather than trying to consider what I and other people were trying to convey to you, you decided that I was attacking you and you began to qualify your statements by saying that it was your opinion. This is not a question of opinion. Your opinion is completely valid and I am NOT disputing your opinion. What I have been trying to get at is, the Broadchest joke aside, it could have been any joke in that vane is you were continually disregarding what was being said to you. You were lacking the recognition of why not only I but other people were making their statements about why you were missing it.
This sir, is where things get personal. This is where it would behoove you to re-examine the propitiousness of your counter points and response. For you to truly appreciate an intelligent argument it has to be dumbed down to a point in which the nuances and semantics of the vocabulary are not clear enough to ever make sense to any half educated member of this newsgroup. Furthermore, I feel if there has been any attack it has been against me. You make statements that misstate and misquote me and have the utter gall "to return the favour" and ask me not to respond. Are you daft? What reason would I have to let you have the last word on something that you have misappropriated, misinterpreted, misunderstood, and are completely incapable of responding to intelligently.
Sincerely,
Christian "Clarky" Clark
P.S. Someone, anyone PM me if you understand what in bloody hell I'm talking about.
This thread seems to have degenerated into personal attacks, and that is sad!
I think if you feel someone hasn't understood your post, then restate it - politely. We are all here to have fun - not argue like kids.
Dan Same and I disagree over CR'06, but thats the fun of this forum! There is only so much anyone can write about this stuff, so opinion is whats keeping this forum going.
I am not carrying anyone's water here, just asking that we keep it a might more civil and less cranky!
You're right. I don't love getting angry however when someone attacks me, I tend to take it personally.
Oh, and BTW, we also disagree over Kananga.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
One thing that DC would be glad about is that his comments are being taken seriously and for the most part no one is whining about his hair color or inability to drive a stick shift!
One thing that DC would be glad about is that his comments are being taken seriously and for the most part no one is whining about his hair color or inability to drive a stick shift!
Quite the reversal, as it were. Good for him and the franchise. {[]
If Craig had any idea how much fuss his little comment made he wouldn't know if to laugh or cry...
It just shows how little we have to do nowadays.
Too right. We've got another year and a half of this...
Nah...once cameras start to roll in December, there'll be lots more to argue about )
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited August 2007
[Hardly worth its own thread, at this point, so here goes:]
In the break room at my work there was a copy of the Weekly "In Touch" magazine...
[for those who aren't aware of this paragon of journalism, it's a gossip rag that makes "People" magazine look like the Wall Street Journal! Its bread and butter is Brad and Angelina---and the perils of Paris, Lindsay and Britney ]
In a page of "short take" stories was a blurb about Bond 22: Not only are they regurgitating the Craig quote that the next Bond "will be a lot funnier," they're adding a rumour that John Leguizamo is being looked at as a possible villain, with locations in South America also being considered (!?). Certainly news to me...
Take it for what it's worth...admittedly, not much ;%
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Comments
First of all, you are making it personal. Don't give me 'no offence' clarifications; to you, it is clearly personal. I have no idea what I have done to you; however you should get over it as not only is not your concern but HH can certainly take care of himself if he thinks I've been ignoring what he said. But seriously, if you don't like what I say, then stop responding. Because I don't like what you say to me in the slightest.
The Stephanie Broadchest joke is history. I'm through with that. Now please, STOP responding to me! X-(
I for one enjoy a lot of the stupid lines and really like the Moore films. I guess it may be due to the fact that I was around 12 when some of the Moore Bond films were coming out. I probably still enjoy them because I am inmature.:D
I agree that CR'06 didn't lack humor; it was just a different, subtler humor. I think each actor puts his own mark on Bond. I enjoyed Moore's version, and I enjoy Craig's too. I think it would be a mistake to change Craig's Bond too much. He has established his style, it has been a big hit, and I would hate to see that messed up. Craig's Bond seems to be a perfect fit for the current times.
I am glad that someone can still laugh at RM's jokes, I am sure he would be grateful for that ( if he even thinks about oo7 these days). If they take you back to your early teens then by Gosh those are special films!
I used to like the humor, but it got out of control and lead me to abandon the series to the extent that i did not go see DAD in the theatre - that's something for a long time devoted fan!
I have recently watched DAD, and found it "passable" as a film. What struck me was that the end it was a "big mac" movie - just another assembly line product full of stuff we don't need.
After trying to re-watch AVTAK, I have less respect for Connery/Young because of what their humerous style developed into. That said, it's pretty odvious their contribution was a "mega" one and resulted in the 1960's Spy Craze and made Bond what it is today - warts and all.
I found the subtle humor of CR'06 refreshing and this film did more to re-interest me in the Bond films than anything made since 1966.
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
Furthermore, I didn't dispute what you had to say regarded HH. Your statement that maybe tone had less to do with CR being successful than it being a great movie is what I am responding to. I repeat: Being a great movie is not a means to an end. Meaning: You can't just say it "I'm going to make a great movie." and hey presto, a great movie. A great movie is made up of elements. Writing, tone, humor, cinematography, et cetera combined make fora a great movie.
I am the one that decided to stop responding to you because I thought therewas no way to get through to you, not the other way around. If all you can see is me insulting you in my comments, then you continue to support my arguments.
I didn't initially mean to make this personal. Frankly, I don't care if are offended or not. You bring up points that I have counter points to. I hate to correct you again, but this is an open forum and I am a James Bond fan and have been for years. I have an reasonable right to say what I like about the topic, as long as I'm not thread jacking. I am certainly not taking up for HH. I feel confident he can make his own statements just fine. There is nothing for me to get over. I am highlighting points that I feel are important just as you feel yours are.
That's just not how it works.
You just repeated what I had said. That's what I meant by the Stephanie Broadchest be damned. It means I'm not talking about that joke anymore, or your lack of comprehension of it.
I think if you feel someone hasn't understood your post, then restate it - politely. We are all here to have fun - not argue like kids.
Dan Same and I disagree over CR'06, but thats the fun of this forum! There is only so much anyone can write about this stuff, so opinion is whats keeping this forum going.
I am not carrying anyone's water here, just asking that we keep it a might more civil and less cranky!
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
You know, if you had said this instead of attacking me, maybe I would have responded to you. 8-) The whole idea of what makes a great movie and whether it is a means to an end is interesting, but no, you had to make it personal and attack me.
I will repeat what I said; I have decided long ago not to respond to you. All you do is insult me and the last post was clearly no exception. Please return the favour and stop responding to me.
You don't mean to make it personal?
You mentioned highlighting points; the whole post was nothing but an attack on me! You didn't highlight anything but confirm why I had intitially decided to stop responding to you!
Oh, BTW, I couldn't care less whether you are a Bond fan; it doesn't give you the right to be offensive; bu what would you care? 8-)
Whatever. 8-)
As for making it personal, I had no intention of making the discussion personal. Initially, you explained your understanding of a joke. I tried to explain, based on your own words, why you were missing the point. Rather than trying to consider what I and other people were trying to convey to you, you decided that I was attacking you and you began to qualify your statements by saying that it was your opinion. This is not a question of opinion. Your opinion is completely valid and I am NOT disputing your opinion. What I have been trying to get at is, the Broadchest joke aside, it could have been any joke in that vane is you were continually disregarding what was being said to you. You were lacking the recognition of why not only I but other people were making their statements about why you were missing it.
This sir, is where things get personal. This is where it would behoove you to re-examine the propitiousness of your counter points and response. For you to truly appreciate an intelligent argument it has to be dumbed down to a point in which the nuances and semantics of the vocabulary are not clear enough to ever make sense to any half educated member of this newsgroup. Furthermore, I feel if there has been any attack it has been against me. You make statements that misstate and misquote me and have the utter gall "to return the favour" and ask me not to respond. Are you daft? What reason would I have to let you have the last word on something that you have misappropriated, misinterpreted, misunderstood, and are completely incapable of responding to intelligently.
Sincerely,
Christian "Clarky" Clark
P.S. Someone, anyone PM me if you understand what in bloody hell I'm talking about.
Oh, and BTW, we also disagree over Kananga.
and one of the funniest moments in CR '06 was when Bond is mistaken for a valet
more "gags" like that, please -{
It just shows how little we have to do nowadays.
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
Quite the reversal, as it were. Good for him and the franchise. {[]
Too right. We've got another year and a half of this...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Nah...once cameras start to roll in December, there'll be lots more to argue about
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
In the break room at my work there was a copy of the Weekly "In Touch" magazine...
[for those who aren't aware of this paragon of journalism, it's a gossip rag that makes "People" magazine look like the Wall Street Journal! Its bread and butter is Brad and Angelina---and the perils of Paris, Lindsay and Britney
In a page of "short take" stories was a blurb about Bond 22: Not only are they regurgitating the Craig quote that the next Bond "will be a lot funnier," they're adding a rumour that John Leguizamo is being looked at as a possible villain, with locations in South America also being considered (!?). Certainly news to me...
Take it for what it's worth...admittedly, not much ;%
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM