I, too, am very curious to read the article. But it's not enough merely to say "he is a great character". What is it about Elvis that is shown in the movie that makes him a "great character"? For those of us who don't see it (and I'm assuming I'm not the only one), enlighten us please.
this is why we are talking about him,he is a great character
not the best Bond henchman that ever lived ,admitted but an integral part of the script
and i for one cant wait fot SM write up about him there must be more too him
than a dreadfull syrup
I'm afraid you'll have to bare with me. I'll watch QoS a few times again and then I'll do the write-up. It will be up on the blog sometime later this month. The wait will most definitely be worth it. I feel the onus has fallen on me to defend Anatole Taubman and Elvis ion QoS and I've taken the barrister'ws wig and cloak for the defence. Any witnesses for the said defence here on AJB? Make your voices heard, one and all.
It'll be proper bo', I tell thee. )
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
I, too, am very curious to read the article. But it's not enough merely to say "he is a great character". What is it about Elvis that is shown in the movie that makes him a "great character"? For those of us who don't see it (and I'm assuming I'm not the only one), enlighten us please.
this is why we are talking about him,he is a great character
not the best Bond henchman that ever lived ,admitted but an integral part of the script
and i for one cant wait fot SM write up about him there must be more too him
than a dreadfull syrup
I'm afraid you'll have to bare with me. I'll watch QoS a few times again and then I'll do the write-up. It will be up on the blog sometime later this month. The wait will most definitely be worth it. I feel the onus has fallen on me to defend Anatole Taubman and Elvis ion QoS and I've taken the barrister'ws wig and cloak for the defence. Any witnesses for the said defence here on AJB? Make your voices heard, one and all.
It'll be proper bo', I tell thee. )
"Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,871MI6 Agent
Well, thank you. Open mindedness is my watchword when it comes to the analysis of Commander James Bond 007, but I'm sure that you knew that already!
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
reply to agent blacklleiter,as i have said in previous posts/threads
we live in a democracy and we are entitled to our opinons like them or not
i for one find Elvis refreshingly different from previous henchmen,
from how he does his very best to be of use to DG even though we can see he is crap,
and to how he is terrified at letting himself being the sacrificial lamb so DG can make his escape
so i find him a great character and that is my veiw on him
reply to agent blacklleiter,as i have said in previous posts/threads
we live in a democracy and we are entitled to our opinons like them or not
i for one find Elvis refreshingly different from previous henchmen,
from how he does his very best to be of use to DG even though we can see he is crap,
and to how he is terrified at letting himself being the sacrificial lamb so DG can make his escape
so i find him a great character and that is my veiw on him
Yes, he's pretty normal. The banality of evil and all that. They don't got in for steel harm, hooks and steel teeth any more. I do hope that my piece will be the final word on Elvis as he's a largely forgotten character amongst the other henchmen in the Bond films - Oddjob, Jaws, Tee Hee and Nick Nack to name just four. He stands out; as you say he's refreshingly duifferent. All the Craig films have had lesser villains in slight roles, Valenka, Elvis, Patrice. In Die Another Day we had Vlad too - remember him? I think not.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
No offense, but I never intended to question your right to that opinion - I was merely asking for a bit of back-up for that opinion, especially since you feel Elvis is "great" as a character. I didn't see anything he did in QOS that made him stand out in any way, much less anything that made him great. But it's entirely possible that I missed something and I was hoping for some enlightenment. I guess I just have to wait for Silhouette Man's treatise.
reply to agent blacklleiter,as i have said in previous posts/threads
we live in a democracy and we are entitled to our opinons like them or not
i for one find Elvis refreshingly different from previous henchmen,
from how he does his very best to be of use to DG even though we can see he is crap,
and to how he is terrified at letting himself being the sacrificial lamb so DG can make his escape
so i find him a great character and that is my veiw on him
The problem with the QoS guy is that like some other of the "minor badguys" he doesn' have much. However unlike some of the other bad guys, he never EVER even looks intimidating. In Skyfall you have the grey haired assassin that shoots depleted U bullets, in Casino Royal you have pretty blond who actually does kill bond (he lucky that Vesper was able to restart him.) In QoS on screen, he never seems a threat, He doesn't show he has smarts, guile, or physicality. Heck, Michael Cera looks more intimidating then "Elvis"
Would Shady Tree qualify as a henchman? He always seemed a bit weird to me. Or that annoying American "money man" sidekick to Sanchez in LTK is oddly annoying/grating.
I find elements of CR '67 enjoyable, but it's WAY to disjointed to be good. I know Sellers was a pain in the @ss on-set, which led to him being written out of the script, but killing off his character really screws up the film. He's been set-up as the character we're supposed to follow. When he gets offed by Vesper, I remember exactly my reaction when I watched it. WTF? I kept waiting for it to be some sort of dream, and that he was going to come back, but it wasn't and he never did.
When you have three or more leads, like LA Confidential or To Live and Die in LA, you can kill off a main character before the end because you've still got other strong leads to keep things going. Equal focus is given to Kevin Space, Russell Crowe, and Guy Pearce, and then for William Peterson, Willem Dafoe, and John Pankow. In CR, not so much. Niven disappears for too long, though thankfully, he's still alive at the film's conclusion to at least get us somewhere, but none of the rest of the cast have characters developed enough to keep the audience interested. The film tries to invest us too much in the happenings of other supporting characters, but then abandons them in favor of other treads and fails to tie them up neatly enough. The Mata Bond sequence could have been completely excised for the amount of good it did to drive the plot.
It's worth watching because, even with limited screen time, Sellers and Niven are great, Ursula Andress does what she can with Vesper, and Woody Allen makes for a fun short role, but that's about it. In the end, it's just a bunch of semi-funny things all thrown together (Although playing that Niven's Bond was a pillar of celibacy was a humorous twist) with no sense of how they all fit. Thus, they don't.
"Semi-funny" is way too kind. I might have gotten a chuckle or two out of Woody Allen's appearance, but that's about it. The fact that the movie is extremely disjointed is obviously a big liability, but my biggest problem is that it commits the cardinal sin for a comedy - IT'S NOT FUNNY!!! And this is coming from a guy who can enjoy the silliness of the Three Stooges and Abbott and Costello, as well as the more sophisticated humor of the later Woody Allen movies or certain Albert Brooks films. It just seems they are trying too hard in Casino Royale, and the harder they try, the less funny the movie becomes (sort of like Spielberg's disasterous "1941"). What a mess of a movie!
I find elements of CR '67 enjoyable, but it's WAY to disjointed to be good. I know Sellers was a pain in the @ss on-set, which led to him being written out of the script, but killing off his character really screws up the film. He's been set-up as the character we're supposed to follow. When he gets offed by Vesper, I remember exactly my reaction when I watched it. WTF? I kept waiting for it to be some sort of dream, and that he was going to come back, but it wasn't and he never did.
When you have three or more leads, like LA Confidential or To Live and Die in LA, you can kill off a main character before the end because you've still got other strong leads to keep things going. Equal focus is given to Kevin Space, Russell Crowe, and Guy Pearce, and then for William Peterson, Willem Dafoe, and John Pankow. In CR, not so much. Niven disappears for too long, though thankfully, he's still alive at the film's conclusion to at least get us somewhere, but none of the rest of the cast have characters developed enough to keep the audience interested. The film tries to invest us too much in the happenings of other supporting characters, but then abandons them in favor of other treads and fails to tie them up neatly enough. The Mata Bond sequence could have been completely excised for the amount of good it did to drive the plot.
It's worth watching because, even with limited screen time, Sellers and Niven are great, Ursula Andress does what she can with Vesper, and Woody Allen makes for a fun short role, but that's about it. In the end, it's just a bunch of semi-funny things all thrown together (Although playing that Niven's Bond was a pillar of celibacy was a humorous twist) with no sense of how they all fit. Thus, they don't.
Just watched TMWTGG two nights ago, and then saw this thread. Have to say KnickKnack here. The sheer physical differences, the bizarre fight at the end when he ends up in a suitcase, his job to find people to kill Scaramanga(Kinda reminded me of PROXY in the Starwars video game "The Force Unleashed"). Funny, but weird.
Beg your pardon, forgot to knock...
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,871MI6 Agent
Just watched TMWTGG two nights ago, and then saw this thread. Have to say KnickKnack here. The sheer physical differences, the bizarre fight at the end when he ends up in a suitcase, his job to find people to kill Scaramanga(Kinda reminded me of PROXY in the Starwars video game "The Force Unleashed"). Funny, but weird.
Yes, the Guy Hamilton Bond films seemed to have their fair share of weird Bond henchmen - Oddjob, Mr Wint and Mr Kidd, Bamby and Thumper, Tee Hee, Baron Samedi, Whisper and Nick Nack. Weirdos all of 'em! )
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
Comments
I'm afraid you'll have to bare with me. I'll watch QoS a few times again and then I'll do the write-up. It will be up on the blog sometime later this month. The wait will most definitely be worth it. I feel the onus has fallen on me to defend Anatole Taubman and Elvis ion QoS and I've taken the barrister'ws wig and cloak for the defence. Any witnesses for the said defence here on AJB? Make your voices heard, one and all.
It'll be proper bo', I tell thee.
we live in a democracy and we are entitled to our opinons like them or not
i for one find Elvis refreshingly different from previous henchmen,
from how he does his very best to be of use to DG even though we can see he is crap,
and to how he is terrified at letting himself being the sacrificial lamb so DG can make his escape
so i find him a great character and that is my veiw on him
Only what we Like and what we Don't like.
Nice Avatar BL, By the way. -{
Yes, he's pretty normal. The banality of evil and all that. They don't got in for steel harm, hooks and steel teeth any more. I do hope that my piece will be the final word on Elvis as he's a largely forgotten character amongst the other henchmen in the Bond films - Oddjob, Jaws, Tee Hee and Nick Nack to name just four. He stands out; as you say he's refreshingly duifferent. All the Craig films have had lesser villains in slight roles, Valenka, Elvis, Patrice. In Die Another Day we had Vlad too - remember him? I think not.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
doesn't seem to strange now, Given the amount of Horse
we've all been eating lately.
1. Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd - couldn't be more unusual with a pair of men of that persuasion. :v
2. Xenia Onatopp - squeezing the life out of her opponents using her legs? Got to be included here. -{
3. Baron Samedi - is he dead? Is he alive? Who knows??
You know what, I watched CR '67 last night for the first time in years, and even with alcohol it was bad!
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I heard they used it to treat a patient in a coma.
He woke up and turned it off.
a screening of QOS, instead.
Truman Lodge
Sounds like a Holiday Resort somewhere.
http://www.trumanlodgewarsawmo.com/
Yes, Truman-Lodge is a real yuppie representative in a late 1980s James Bond film. I think there was more detal on him in John Gardner's novelisation.
It took some courage, but the alcohol helped with that
I tried to watch NSNA today, as I haven't seen it in years, but my DVD doesn't work!
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
When you have three or more leads, like LA Confidential or To Live and Die in LA, you can kill off a main character before the end because you've still got other strong leads to keep things going. Equal focus is given to Kevin Space, Russell Crowe, and Guy Pearce, and then for William Peterson, Willem Dafoe, and John Pankow. In CR, not so much. Niven disappears for too long, though thankfully, he's still alive at the film's conclusion to at least get us somewhere, but none of the rest of the cast have characters developed enough to keep the audience interested. The film tries to invest us too much in the happenings of other supporting characters, but then abandons them in favor of other treads and fails to tie them up neatly enough. The Mata Bond sequence could have been completely excised for the amount of good it did to drive the plot.
It's worth watching because, even with limited screen time, Sellers and Niven are great, Ursula Andress does what she can with Vesper, and Woody Allen makes for a fun short role, but that's about it. In the end, it's just a bunch of semi-funny things all thrown together (Although playing that Niven's Bond was a pillar of celibacy was a humorous twist) with no sense of how they all fit. Thus, they don't.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
Yes, the Guy Hamilton Bond films seemed to have their fair share of weird Bond henchmen - Oddjob, Mr Wint and Mr Kidd, Bamby and Thumper, Tee Hee, Baron Samedi, Whisper and Nick Nack. Weirdos all of 'em!