Why Do You Even Care About Bond23?

TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
in Skyfall - Bond 23 (2012)
Seriously, Bond23 will be a let down. Just another pointless action flick with no sense of drama or realism.

The only decent Bond films were filmed between 1972-1985. That era alone should set the benchmark for future films. There is no point even watching Bond23 UNLESS the crew start using the old methods of filming and bring back Roger Moore, Christopher Lee and Richard Kiel (at the bare minimum!).

Bond23 is going to be terrible. Yes, going by the poor excuses that have passed for Bond films after 1985, this is a certainty. Ian Fleming (I am certain of this) would have been appalled to see his franchise treated with such flippancy.

I am also confident he would have been disgusted at so-called ''fans'' who lap up these poor excuses of films and rate them highly on renowned websites like imdb, amazon etc. Unless Eon go back to basics, Bond will be seen a pathetic franchise in the minds of REAL fans!
«13

Comments

  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
    TheScashMan wrote:
    I am also confident he would have been disgusted at so-called ''fans'' who lap up these poor excuses of films and rate them highly on renowned websites like imdb, amazon etc.

    I'm sorry I disgust you, Mr Fleming :(

    I'm a bad, bad boy :#
    YNWA 97
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    TheScashMan wrote:
    I am also confident he would have been disgusted at so-called ''fans'' who lap up these poor excuses of films and rate them highly on renowned websites like imdb, amazon etc.

    I'm sorry I disgust you, Mr Fleming :(

    I'm a bad, bad boy :#

    I'm not Fleming :)) :)) :))

    But seriously, this so-called reply to my excellently written OP is sub standard. I am disgusted!
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Sir Miles wrote:
    TheScashMan wrote:
    I am also confident he would have been disgusted at so-called ''fans'' who lap up these poor excuses of films and rate them highly on renowned websites like imdb, amazon etc.

    I'm sorry I disgust you, Mr Fleming :(

    I'm a bad, bad boy :#

    I'm not Fleming :)) :)) :))

    But seriously, this so-called reply to my excellently written OP is sub standard. I am disgusted!


    I know you are not....I'm apologising to his memory...that you think he will be disgusted by me :#

    I'm just so impressed with your OP....I think I'm more impressed that you managed to smuggle a computer in there and use it rather than use the more usual crayon :))
    YNWA 97
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    I'm just so impressed with your OP

    So am I. It was rather coherent if I do say so myself :D
    Sir Miles wrote:
    ....I think I'm more impressed that you managed to smuggle a computer in there and use it rather than use the more usual crayon :))

    I think I'd be more impressed if you dropped your mod/admin advantages (you're chief of staff, I'm assuming a mod or admin) and see if you can counter-act any points I've made instead of automatically going on the ad hominem.

    Now listen up: Sir Rog was the only actor worthy of playing Bond and I have explained why elsewhere. Bond23 NEEDS to re-instate Moore as he is still alive and well and is clearly able to pull off another round or two (perhaps more!) as made clear via his recent post office ad.

    Care to actually debate the issue or will you be hiding behind your totalitarian ''chief of staff'' status and lock the thread?

    Your move.
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
    I'll go you one better, re: Moore. Some day, the poor chap will shuffle off this mortal coil; happens to us all. Eon ought to commission the Disney amusement park people to construct an animatronic Sir Roger Moore---representing him in his glorious current mature form---and put the robot to work in all future James Bond film installments. The very notion of some young hottie passionately kissing the Permanent Better Than Real Life Roger Moore James Bond ought to put bums in seats on a par with Brozzer's musical triumph, Mamma Mia! :007)
    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
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
    TheScashMan wrote:
    I think I'd be more impressed if you dropped your mod/admin advantages (you're chief of staff, I'm assuming a mod or admin) and see if you can counter-act any points I've made instead of automatically going on the ad hominem.

    There are advantages ?:) :))
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Now listen up: Sir Rog was the only actor worthy of playing Bond and I have explained why elsewhere. Bond23 NEEDS to re-instate Moore as he is still alive and well and is clearly able to pull off another round or two (perhaps more!) as made clear via his recent post office ad.

    Care to actually debate the issue or will you be hiding behind your totalitarian ''chief of staff'' status and lock the thread?

    Your move.

    I think you'd still install Sir Rog even if he were dead :))

    And there is no need to lock this thread...it gives great entertainment on a Bank Holiday Weekend -{ :D
    YNWA 97
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Loeffelholz wrote:
    I'll go you one better, re: Moore. Some day, the poor chap will shuffle off this mortal coil; happens to us all. Eon ought to commission the Disney amusement park people to construct an animatronic Sir Roger Moore---representing him in his glorious current mature form---and put the robot to work in all future James Bond film installments. The very notion of some young hottie passionately kissing the Permanent Better Than Real Life Roger Moore James Bond ought to put bums in seats on a par with Brozzer's musical triumph, Mamma Mia! :007)

    Sir Rog will probably be around until well past 100. He is in great shape and can still handle the role.

    Everyone on his forum should be ashamed they have not united to petition Eon with hundreds of signatures DEMANDING Eon re-make every Bond film that Moore was not involved with, and to re-instate him immediately. That way, we get all of Flemings works delivered with the finest Bond of all. Plus, bringing back legends like Lee and Jaws would also be of use, as well as reverting back to the old style of Bond filming: more realism, less CGI.
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    I think you'd still install Sir Rog even if he were dead :))

    Now you are just being insulting!
    Sir Miles wrote:
    And there is no need to lock this thread...it gives great entertainment on a Bank Holiday Weekend -{ :D

    That's your take on it.

    Here's mine: there is no reason to lock this thread because doing so smacks in the face of free debate and discussion.
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
    Well, they could recreate Nick Nack (the late Herve Villechaize) at a fraction of the cost of animatronic Sir Roger, if Moore is good to go until the century point...this way, they can work all possible bugs out of the mechanics by the time they finally need to replace the lead actor.
    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
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Sir Miles wrote:
    I think you'd still install Sir Rog even if he were dead :))

    Now you are just being insulting!

    No I'm not...you should see me when I really get started :))
    The ScashMan wrote:
    Sir Miles wrote:
    And there is no need to lock this thread...it gives great entertainment on a Bank Holiday Weekend -{ :D

    That's your take on it.

    Here's mine: there is no reason to lock this thread because doing so smacks in the face of free debate and discussion.


    I like smacking faces :))

    Discussion..?...this is a direct quote of yours...

    "There can be no room for debate as far as I am concerned. No room at all."

    -{
    YNWA 97
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:

    "There can be no room for debate as far as I am concerned. No room at all."

    -{

    Yes, as far as I am concerened (note the context of opinion). Now, I did not say it couldn't be debated in principle (i.e. via restrictive measures such as thread locking/abusing mod privilages etc), so, in the context of our exchange, your argument falls rather flat here.
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Sir Miles wrote:

    "There can be no room for debate as far as I am concerned. No room at all."

    -{

    Yes, as far as I am concerened (note the context of opinion). Now, I did not say it couldn't be debated in principle (i.e. via restrictive measures such as thread locking/abusing mod privilages etc), so, in the context of our exchange, your argument falls rather flat here.

    Yes...but by intonation you REFUSE to enter into any debate at all...therefore that negates the possibility of doing so...either in principle or not...

    ...arguement ?:) ...what arguement...?...I haven't argued with anybody -{
    YNWA 97
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Sir Miles wrote:

    "There can be no room for debate as far as I am concerned. No room at all."

    -{

    Yes, as far as I am concerened (note the context of opinion). Now, I did not say it couldn't be debated in principle (i.e. via restrictive measures such as thread locking/abusing mod privilages etc), so, in the context of our exchange, your argument falls rather flat here.

    Yes...but by intonation you REFUSE to enter into any debate at all...therefore that negates the possibility of doing so...either in principle or not...

    ...arguement ?:) ...what arguement...?...I haven't argued with anybody -{

    Wrong on both counts.
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
    I'd rather get on with the notion of Sir Roger in a Q-Equipped wheelchair in Bond #27...
    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
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Seriously, Bond23 will be a let down. Just another pointless action flick with no sense of drama or realism.

    The only decent Bond films were filmed between 1972-1985. That era alone should set the benchmark for future films. There is no point even watching Bond23 UNLESS the crew start using the old methods of filming and bring back Roger Moore, Christopher Lee and Richard Kiel (at the bare minimum!).

    Bond23 is going to be terrible. Yes, going by the poor excuses that have passed for Bond films after 1985, this is a certainty. Ian Fleming (I am certain of this) would have been appalled to see his franchise treated with such flippancy.

    I am also confident he would have been disgusted at so-called ''fans'' who lap up these poor excuses of films and rate them highly on renowned websites like imdb, amazon etc. Unless Eon go back to basics, Bond will be seen a pathetic franchise in the minds of REAL fans!


    Is this post for real.

    "unless EON go back to basics" Hmmm like Casino Royale, which is one of the best Bond films ever.

    If Fleming had seen the films between 72 and 85, no doubt he would have sued, or got drunk, or both.

    You obviously have never read a Bond book. Or any book not published by Ladybird for that matter.
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,746Chief of Staff
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Sir Miles wrote:
    TheScashMan wrote:

    Yes, as far as I am concerened (note the context of opinion). Now, I did not say it couldn't be debated in principle (i.e. via restrictive measures such as thread locking/abusing mod privilages etc), so, in the context of our exchange, your argument falls rather flat here.

    Yes...but by intonation you REFUSE to enter into any debate at all...therefore that negates the possibility of doing so...either in principle or not...

    ...arguement ?:) ...what arguement...?...I haven't argued with anybody -{

    Wrong on both counts.


    Oh well...that's told me then ! :#
    YNWA 97
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Asp9mm wrote:
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Seriously, Bond23 will be a let down. Just another pointless action flick with no sense of drama or realism.

    The only decent Bond films were filmed between 1972-1985. That era alone should set the benchmark for future films. There is no point even watching Bond23 UNLESS the crew start using the old methods of filming and bring back Roger Moore, Christopher Lee and Richard Kiel (at the bare minimum!).

    Bond23 is going to be terrible. Yes, going by the poor excuses that have passed for Bond films after 1985, this is a certainty. Ian Fleming (I am certain of this) would have been appalled to see his franchise treated with such flippancy.

    I am also confident he would have been disgusted at so-called ''fans'' who lap up these poor excuses of films and rate them highly on renowned websites like imdb, amazon etc. Unless Eon go back to basics, Bond will be seen a pathetic franchise in the minds of REAL fans!


    Is this post for real.

    "unless EON go back to basics" Hmmm like Casino Royale, which is one of the best Bond films ever.

    If Fleming had seen the films between 72 and 85, no doubt he would have sued, or got drunk, or both.

    You obviously have never read a Bond book. Or any book not published by Ladybird for that matter.


    Frogwash! Fleming would have been disgusted with CR! As are REAL Bond fans!
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Asp9mm wrote:
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Seriously, Bond23 will be a let down. Just another pointless action flick with no sense of drama or realism.

    The only decent Bond films were filmed between 1972-1985. That era alone should set the benchmark for future films. There is no point even watching Bond23 UNLESS the crew start using the old methods of filming and bring back Roger Moore, Christopher Lee and Richard Kiel (at the bare minimum!).

    Bond23 is going to be terrible. Yes, going by the poor excuses that have passed for Bond films after 1985, this is a certainty. Ian Fleming (I am certain of this) would have been appalled to see his franchise treated with such flippancy.

    I am also confident he would have been disgusted at so-called ''fans'' who lap up these poor excuses of films and rate them highly on renowned websites like imdb, amazon etc. Unless Eon go back to basics, Bond will be seen a pathetic franchise in the minds of REAL fans!


    Is this post for real.

    "unless EON go back to basics" Hmmm like Casino Royale, which is one of the best Bond films ever.

    If Fleming had seen the films between 72 and 85, no doubt he would have sued, or got drunk, or both.

    You obviously have never read a Bond book. Or any book not published by Ladybird for that matter.


    Frogwash! Fleming would have been disgusted with CR! As are REAL Bond fans!

    Hmmm, the evidence would suggest you are wrong. International box office hit. Fleming fans like myself loving it. etc etc. Point me in the direction of this gaggle of REAL Bond fans in uproar against the film.
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
    Asp9mm wrote:
    Point me in the direction of this gaggle of REAL Bond fans in uproar against the film.

    Perhaps those are the high-minded fellows from danielcraigspicturenexttoamonkey.com, the ones who executed that brilliant boycott of CR back in '06.
    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
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
    Loeffelholz wrote:
    Asp9mm wrote:
    Point me in the direction of this gaggle of REAL Bond fans in uproar against the film.

    Perhaps those are the high-minded fellows from danielcraigspicturenexttoamonkey.com, the ones who executed that brilliant boycott of CR back in '06.


    Aaah, quite. The vocal minority that are scared of blonde actors :))
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Asp9mm wrote:
    Loeffelholz wrote:
    Asp9mm wrote:
    Point me in the direction of this gaggle of REAL Bond fans in uproar against the film.

    Perhaps those are the high-minded fellows from danielcraigspicturenexttoamonkey.com, the ones who executed that brilliant boycott of CR back in '06.


    Aaah, quite. The vocal minority that are scared of blonde actors :))

    They do have a valid point though: daniel craig is not a worthy candidate for Bond. Only Moore is, but they seem not to have discovered that revelation yet.
  • PendragonPendragon ColoradoPosts: 2,640MI6 Agent
    poor Bond franchise...been around (since the books were first written) for about 57 years...pity no one cares about it. 8-)
    Hey! Observer! You trying to get yourself Killed?

    mountainburdphotography.wordpress.com
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
    TheScashMan wrote:
    Asp9mm wrote:
    Loeffelholz wrote:

    Perhaps those are the high-minded fellows from danielcraigspicturenexttoamonkey.com, the ones who executed that brilliant boycott of CR back in '06.


    Aaah, quite. The vocal minority that are scared of blonde actors :))

    They do have a valid point though: daniel craig is not a worthy candidate for Bond. Only Moore is, but they seem not to have discovered that revelation yet.

    From that post, it would seem that you have little realisation of what a valid point is.

    Why do Bank Holidays always draw the kids who have their first bits of freedom in being able to stop up late on a Sunday.
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • walther p99walther p99 NJPosts: 3,416MI6 Agent
    Roger Moore is WAY past his prime now, there is no way he could play 007, he could barely play him in his last few Bond films. Daniel Craig is more like Flemings Bond anyway, Roger was just a well-suited clown.
    @deanwdunlevy
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    walther p99 wrote:
    Roger Moore is WAY past his prime now, there is no way he could play 007, he could barely play him in his last few Bond films. Daniel Craig is more like Flemings Bond anyway, Roger was just a well-suited clown.

    Hogwash! Sir Rog still looks 49 and not a day older. Craig looks 59 and that's on a good day.
  • Asp9mmAsp9mm Over the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
    TheScashMan wrote:
    walther p99 wrote:
    Roger Moore is WAY past his prime now, there is no way he could play 007, he could barely play him in his last few Bond films. Daniel Craig is more like Flemings Bond anyway, Roger was just a well-suited clown.

    Hogwash! Sir Rog still looks 49 and not a day older. Craig looks 59 and that's on a good day.

    In your opinion, and it really is only your opinion. Christ, you really have not met him lately then. He looks good, but he looks like a grandad.
    ..................Asp9mmSIG-1-2.jpg...............
  • TheScashManTheScashMan Posts: 111MI6 Agent
    Asp9mm wrote:
    In your opinion, and it really is only your opinion. Christ, you really have not met him lately then. He looks good, but he looks like a grandad.

    ^ Waffle. Every word of it!
  • JarvioJarvio EnglandPosts: 4,241MI6 Agent
    I'm a huge Roger Moore fan, but AVTAK was a good one for him to end on.

    One thing I like about Bond is the diversity of the different actors that played Bond.

    Daniel Craig is great and hope he sticks around for a couple more.
    1 - LALD, 2 - AVTAK, 3 - LTK, 4 - OP, 5 - NTTD, 6 - FYEO, 7 - SF, 8 - DN, 9 - DAF, 10 - TSWLM, 11 - OHMSS, 12 - TMWTGG, 13 - GE, 14 - MR, 15 - TLD, 16 - YOLT, 17 - GF, 18 - DAD, 19 - TWINE, 20 - SP, 21 - TND, 22 - FRWL, 23 - TB, 24 - CR, 25 - QOS

    1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
    Jarvio wrote:
    One thing I like about Bond is the diversity of the different actors that played Bond.

    Daniel Craig is great and hope he sticks around for a couple more.

    With you there, Jarv. Each successive actor contributes to the notion of Bond alluded to by Kingsley Amis in The James Bond Dossier: "The man who is only a silhouette." B-)
    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
  • PendragonPendragon ColoradoPosts: 2,640MI6 Agent
    Jarvio wrote:
    I'm a huge Roger Moore fan, but AVTAK was a good one for him to end on.

    One thing I like about Bond is the diversity of the different actors that played Bond.

    Daniel Craig is great and hope he sticks around for a couple more.

    agreed whole heartedly, Jarv. Danny should stick around for a few more at least!

    Bond is a young man's game. poor Sir Rog wouldn't fair too well, and it would be such a shame to lose a man who does SO much these days for UNICEF.
    Hey! Observer! You trying to get yourself Killed?

    mountainburdphotography.wordpress.com
Sign In or Register to comment.

Copyright ajb007.co.uk 1998 - 2024

James Bond TM 007 and related James Bond Trademarks © 1962-2024

Danjaq LLC and United Artists Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

This website is a fan site and is in no way related to the official production companies.

All users are responsible for the content of their posts, by using this website you agree to the terms of use.