There are moments when....( a personal rant/exploration)

chrisisall

as a long time & early fan of James Bond where I want to just throw out all my Moore, Lazenby & Craig DVD's because of the silly & the faux 'realism'.
IMO, Connery, Dalton & Brosnan are the pinnacle of Bond; Lazenby was a barely adequate stand-in for an actual actor in the role, Moore was too 'Saintly', and Craig is so severe that I sometimes think I'm watching a Terminator.

Then, I chill & realize that all takes on the character are good in their own way.

Anyone else here ever have times where they want to dismiss parts of the franchise due to momentary personal preference intensity?

Any here dismiss parts of the franchise permanently?

hehadlotsofguts

I don't watch Craig's films as i think he is too much like Bourne if that makes sense.

Personally i don't like the way the films are structured now (gun barrel being at the end of the film. It was fine with Casino Royale as that meant Bond had earned his licence to kill but it seems pointless in the following movies.)

AlphaOmegaSin

James Bond vs The Terminator. Now there's an Idea...

0073

Yes there are those moments. I have a very hard time sometimes watching Moore Bond movies through. I liked DC in the CR then in QS his relationship with his clothes started to bother me; you know: he's all fought up and bloody when he gets out of Port au Prince on a chartered jet, he steals a tux and then escapes evil hench men in that tux only to notice that he has no working credit cards. So what happens next? He arrives in Italy wearing same make and model shoes, same make and model but different colour jeans and expensive as hell cardigan. It would have been fun to see how he got those clothes as he had no money. Furthermore DC makes his Bond to be the quite a clothes horse, when on the chase and with no credit he is still that meticulous with clothes. And here I though that Moore was the one with unpractical sartorial choises...

Thunderbird 2

I sort of see where you are coming from 0073, you highlight one of the plot errors that makes QoS a dead duck for me.


For me the rules of Canon went out the window with the Star Trek reboot. The Abrahms team have effectively said anything can happen in any way in any version of the Trek universe. Ie if you think its crap, and choose to ignore it, that's your perogative.

Along those Lines QoS did not happen for me except the opening and closing scenes. I also consider each Bond actor to exist in heir own universe with some cross continuity where passed events are directly referenced. CR-67 a Universerse all by itself, as is Skyfall due to certain discontinuity elements with CR-06.

I hope all that makes some sense!

Blackleiter

I sometimes have a tough time watching the Roger Moore Bonds, especially the fight scenes, but I still return from time to time because it's Bond.

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

I sometimes have a tough time watching the Roger Moore Bonds, especially the fight scenes, but I still return from time to time because it's Bond.

Quite! -{

Silhouette Man

Once you bring the complexities of continuity into James Bond it's time to take a breather. It's one of the most complicated franchises there is for this. Perhaps only Batman is more convoluted!

Smiert-Spionam

I tend to overlook some of the Moore films. Moonraker I'm looking at you! But as has been pointed out previously, I always come back to every film in the series because it's Bond. It should be celebrated in all its absurdity

chrisisall

Smiert-Spionam wrote:

I tend to overlook some of the Moore films. Moonraker I'm looking at you! But as has been pointed out previously, I always come back to every film in the series because it's Bond. It should be celebrated in all its absurdity

Between the Star Wars lasers, the totally phony zero-G & Jaws' love affair, Moonraker is the ONLY Bond on my 'never again' list.

Smiert-Spionam

chrisisall wrote:

Smiert-Spionam wrote:

I tend to overlook some of the Moore films. Moonraker I'm looking at you! But as has been pointed out previously, I always come back to every film in the series because it's Bond. It should be celebrated in all its absurdity

Between the Star Wars lasers, the totally phony zero-G & Jaws' love affair, Moonraker is the ONLY Bond on my 'never again' list.

Haha I still haven't been able to watch MR all the way through since I brought the box set 2 years ago. To be honest even DAD has had more viewings and I'm that films biggest critic!

Blackleiter

Wow! I don't even hate AVTAK that much! )

chrisisall wrote:

Smiert-Spionam wrote:

I tend to overlook some of the Moore films. Moonraker I'm looking at you! But as has been pointed out previously, I always come back to every film in the series because it's Bond. It should be celebrated in all its absurdity

Between the Star Wars lasers, the totally phony zero-G & Jaws' love affair, Moonraker is the ONLY Bond on my 'never again' list.

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

Wow! I don't even hate AVTAK that much! )

IMO, AVTAK is an eminently worthy Bond film, and even DAD is more than acceptable when compared to MR!
MR had many good elements but in the end pandered to the kiddie Star Wars crowd in a way that made me yearn for the more adult exploits of Derek Flint.
My dislike of the film Moonraker knows no end.... X-(

raptors_887

I don't stay away from a particular actor but I am never in the mood for Moonraker, DAF, FYEO, and Thunderball. Those are the only 4 that I actually don't like.

chrisisall

raptors_887 wrote:

I don't stay away from a particular actor but I am never in the mood for ...... Thunderball.

Pardon my "blown awayed-ness". )

Barbel

chrisisall wrote:

raptors_887 wrote:

I don't stay away from a particular actor but I am never in the mood for ...... Thunderball.

Pardon my "blown awayed-ness". )

"Thunderball" is my personal favourite from the early 007 films. Sure, it has slow patches but there is so much to enjoy here- Fiona Volpe is surely one of the most delectable femmes, the one-liners haven't been bettered, Connery commands the screen, and John Barry is on top form throughout. It oozes the essential James Bond charisma; high-living, glamourous locations, danger and sex. Lots of sex. I grant that it has dated in the nearly 50 years since it came out, but it's still a wonderful entertainment,

chrisisall

Barbel wrote:

"Thunderball" is my personal favourite from the early 007 films.

Mine as well. Excess within control, as it were. -{

Charmed & Dangerous

chrisisall wrote:

Barbel wrote:

"Thunderball" is my personal favourite from the early 007 films.

Mine as well. Excess within control, as it were. -{

Me Three. It's always been my favourite. And Claudine Auger is just beautiful, the script is one of the best in the series, Adolfo Celi makes a memorable and menacing villain, and the underwater stuff is tremendous. "Wait til you get to my teeth" - wish I had a pound for every time I've used that line )

Muston

chrisisall wrote:

as a long time & early fan of James Bond where I want to just throw out all my Moore, Lazenby & Craig DVD's because of the silly & the faux 'realism'.
IMO, Connery, Dalton & Brosnan are the pinnacle of Bond; Lazenby was a barely adequate stand-in for an actual actor in the role, Moore was too 'Saintly', and Craig is so severe that I sometimes think I'm watching a Terminator.

Then, I chill & realize that all takes on the character are good in their own way.

Anyone else here ever have times where they want to dismiss parts of the franchise due to momentary personal preference intensity?

Any here dismiss parts of the franchise permanently?

A while ago I gave away most of my Connery & Moore films but have since re-bought the collection again. I have nothing against DC as I think he is the right kind of Bond to follow Brosnan. It's a bit like when Dalton took over from Moore. Both Dalton and Craig are gritty agents when compared with Moore and Brosnan's super-spy take on the character. However I still love some of the things both Moore and Brosnan did.

IMO one of the problems of the later Brosnan films and so far all of Craig's has been M getting too involved with the story. Dench's M had become to damn annoying (they really should have replaced her when Brosnan left) and now hopefully we'll see a more traditional M now Ralph Fiennes is in the role.

Dalkowski110

Thunderball is not my personal favorite, but it's sixth (or fifth; it alternates with OHMSS). I personally liked FRWL (my favorite Bond) and DN better of the early Connery Bonds. I usually rank GF higher for the simple reason it was the film that introduced me to Bond and basically formulated my image of what Bond the character should be like, and call the film what you will, but at the very least, Connery's Bond as a character doesn't change much between GF and TB. By the way, was I the only one who thought TB's greatest weakness was having a Felix Leiter that didn't seem credible? The physicist also seemed shoehorned in, but from my understanding, he had more spoken lines in the script that got cut, so you can't blame original intent.

Blackleiter

Lots of good points about Thunderball, and you've stated them well. -{

Barbel wrote:

chrisisall wrote:

raptors_887 wrote:

I don't stay away from a particular actor but I am never in the mood for ...... Thunderball.

Pardon my "blown awayed-ness". )

"Thunderball" is my personal favourite from the early 007 films. Sure, it has slow patches but there is so much to enjoy here- Fiona Volpe is surely one of the most delectable femmes, the one-liners haven't been bettered, Connery commands the screen, and John Barry is on top form throughout. It oozes the essential James Bond charisma; high-living, glamourous locations, danger and sex. Lots of sex. I grant that it has dated in the nearly 50 years since it came out, but it's still a wonderful entertainment,