Agreed, it's the little touches like the Rolls Royce, that make it a Bond film. -{
In 1997 I saw TND in the theatre & had fun beyond reason.
In 2015 I saw SP in the theatre & had fun beyond reason.
Is a little fun too much to ask? )
{[]
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Realistically, Scaramanga would have just had the Bond's plane shot by the Chinese .... But then it wouldn't have been a Bond film .... It would be interesting to know what the comments would be if TMWTGG were released now )
Then again how realistic is any spy thriller, to be honest some of the
stuff Jason Bourne walks away from, is pretty unbelievable too.
So who knows, if any of us got to talk to a spy, perhaps Bond is very
realistic.
Next people will be telling me some people don't have super powers.
Here, here. Jason Bourne is more of a super hero than Bond will ever be. Paul Greengrass' use of editing and shacky cam give the Bourne films a pseudo documentary look and feel that creates the illusion of realism. Don't get me wrong, I like the Bourne films. However, truth be told, that type of editing and sped up camera was used in the PTS fights of TB (to good effect IMO) and OHMSS (to lesser effect). Greengrass certainly built on it and perfected it, but Bond pioneered it.
Perhaps it's the New Yorker in me. I lack patience. What makes a good Bond film is subjective. I again echo my distaste for Spectre and contend that it was boring, lacked imagination, or a solid plot line. I maintain that those who are drawn to it have an affinity for yester-century's Bond and an aversion to progress in the wake of more modern franchises (Borne, MI, etc.)
Perhaps it's the Midwestern 'flyover country' yokel in me, but many of us don't take to being talked down to, as many of us are perfectly able to converse in complex sentences and use three-syllable words, and consider notions such as existentialism and the occasional apparent randomness of natural selection.
Indeed, all tastes in Bond are subjective, and I'll counter that you are over-simplifying to maintain that those who enjoy SP despite its flaws are 'stuck in yesterday.' I'm a Fleming aficionado who has championed Craig and his darker, more serious Bond since his announcement as Bond in '05, and I concede that SP's third act is undeniably problematic---however, there is a lot of classic Bond there to enjoy, and I believe that the humour brought back into play this time was not 'over the top' (at least, not to the degree that I object to: i.e., double-taking pigeons, Tarzan yells, slide-whistles, fire-engine ladder gags stolen from the Keystone Cops). The key to Bond's longevity is to stay relevant, and Craig has done that. Box office receipts are proof of it. However, I do not turn my nose up at a bit of fun, as I think Craig's Bond has earned himself a smile or two. This does not mean that I want to cling to my Roger Moore Bonds! If you had any sense of me at all, you would see the fallacy of that.
I'm 53; perhaps a geezer to some, and that's fair. But I have seen the best and worst of Bond in all his forms, dozens of times each, and I know what I like and what I don't. I'm also a screenwriter and novelist, so I know good quality writing and dodgy writing...and in SP, clearly the fellows at the keyboard were not holding up their end. What makes Bond good (or less so) to his fans, in my opinion, is such an extremely complex formula that fans (or fanboys, or what the hell ever---we welcome both here 8-) ) will vehemently disagree from film to film, from actor to actor, and even films within a particular actor's tenure as to what is good, great, what is tripe and what is s**t. But hopefully, in the end, we can grin when we hear the theme.
That said, Bond must and will continue to distinguish himself from his children (and yes, MI and Bourne are his children) with panache and that elusive balance of escapism, action, wit and sex that has kept him alive in cinemas since '62.
That was easily the most well-thought out and interesting response I've read thus far. I respect your opinion and agree with your assessment of the forum. Well stated..
Perhaps it's the New Yorker in me. I lack patience. What makes a good Bond film is subjective. I again echo my distaste for Spectre and contend that it was boring, lacked imagination, or a solid plot line. I maintain that those who are drawn to it have an affinity for yester-century's Bond and an aversion to progress in the wake of more modern franchises (Borne, MI, etc.)
Perhaps it's the Midwestern 'flyover country' yokel in me, but many of us don't take to being talked down to, as many of us are perfectly able to converse in complex sentences and use three-syllable words, and consider notions such as existentialism and the occasional apparent randomness of natural selection.
Indeed, all tastes in Bond are subjective, and I'll counter that you are over-simplifying to maintain that those who enjoy SP despite its flaws are 'stuck in yesterday.' I'm a Fleming aficionado who has championed Craig and his darker, more serious Bond since his announcement as Bond in '05, and I concede that SP's third act is undeniably problematic---however, there is a lot of classic Bond there to enjoy, and I believe that the humour brought back into play this time was not 'over the top' (at least, not to the degree that I object to: i.e., double-taking pigeons, Tarzan yells, slide-whistles, fire-engine ladder gags stolen from the Keystone Cops). The key to Bond's longevity is to stay relevant, and Craig has done that. Box office receipts are proof of it. However, I do not turn my nose up at a bit of fun, as I think Craig's Bond has earned himself a smile or two. This does not mean that I want to cling to my Roger Moore Bonds! If you had any sense of me at all, you would see the fallacy of that.
I'm 53; perhaps a geezer to some, and that's fair. But I have seen the best and worst of Bond in all his forms, dozens of times each, and I know what I like and what I don't. I'm also a screenwriter and novelist, so I know good quality writing and dodgy writing...and in SP, clearly the fellows at the keyboard were not holding up their end. What makes Bond good (or less so) to his fans, in my opinion, is such an extremely complex formula that fans (or fanboys, or what the hell ever---we welcome both here 8-) ) will vehemently disagree from film to film, from actor to actor, and even films within a particular actor's tenure as to what is good, great, what is tripe and what is s**t. But hopefully, in the end, we can grin when we hear the theme.
That said, Bond must and will continue to distinguish himself from his children (and yes, MI and Bourne are his children) with panache and that elusive balance of escapism, action, wit and sex that has kept him alive in cinemas since '62.
That was easily the most well-thought out and interesting response I've read thus far. I respect your opinion and agree with your assessment of the forum. Well stated..
Thanks very much; cheers. And a belated welcome to AJB -{
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
That said, Bond must and will continue to distinguish himself from his children (and yes, MI and Bourne are his children) with panache and that elusive balance of escapism, action, wit and sex that has kept him alive in cinemas since '62.
Watching James Bond films is a bit like supporting England at each world cup. You go in believing they can do it, you leave knowing they failed (with a few exceptions) but you'll go and watch the next one still clinging to that hope they actually do it right.
Watching James Bond films is a bit like supporting England at each world cup.
Cup of what? ?:)
Drinking vessels aside, everyone has an idea of what Bond should be. Every once in a while they nail YOURS. They nailed MINE most recently.
Then again how realistic is any spy thriller, to be honest some of the
stuff Jason Bourne walks away from, is pretty unbelievable too.
So who knows, if any of us got to talk to a spy, perhaps Bond is very
realistic.
Next people will be telling me some people don't have super powers.
Here, here. Jason Bourne is more of a super hero than Bond will ever be. Paul Greengrass' use of editing and shacky cam give the Bourne films a pseudo documentary look and feel that creates the illusion of realism. Don't get me wrong, I like the Bourne films. However, truth be told, that type of editing and sped up camera was used in the PTS fights of TB (to good effect IMO) and OHMSS (to lesser effect). Greengrass certainly built on it and perfected it, but Bond pioneered it.
Could you explain why the Bourne films aren't realistic? The only unrealistic aspect is Bourne's propensity for pain and ability to beat the **** out of people, which isn't actually that unrealistic when you're trained to kill and the amount of drugs they are kept on.
Lets compare that with the baddie sending a RR to Bond in the desert, which Bond gets in, to voluntarily give up his gun, be drilled in the head and then escape via an exploding watch and then kill 95% of the henchmen in two minutes (lets pretend he couldnt have done this in the first place without being drilled in the face)......
Not by me ) , I can only think some reviewers didn't like it, but the best
Judge for a film is " Bums on seats" how many are going to watch it, and
so far Spectre is doing the business.
It may not be your cup of tea, ( then again you might love Bond25 much
Better) on first viewing I hated QOS, took quite a few viewings for me to
See what others had in it.
I'm not saying you will ever like Spectre ( nothing wrong in not liking it) but
Luckily with Bond there are so many films to fit any mood.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Comments
not saying those that do are wrong, just that I can't see them.
It's a great movie. -{
{[]
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
{[]
:v
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
nose in it before killing him. They all have big egos.
A tad over-dramatic I fear 8-)
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Neil doesn't let anyone down!
Here, here. Jason Bourne is more of a super hero than Bond will ever be. Paul Greengrass' use of editing and shacky cam give the Bourne films a pseudo documentary look and feel that creates the illusion of realism. Don't get me wrong, I like the Bourne films. However, truth be told, that type of editing and sped up camera was used in the PTS fights of TB (to good effect IMO) and OHMSS (to lesser effect). Greengrass certainly built on it and perfected it, but Bond pioneered it.
That was easily the most well-thought out and interesting response I've read thus far. I respect your opinion and agree with your assessment of the forum. Well stated..
Thanks very much; cheers. And a belated welcome to AJB -{
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Drinking vessels aside, everyone has an idea of what Bond should be. Every once in a while they nail YOURS. They nailed MINE most recently.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Lets compare that with the baddie sending a RR to Bond in the desert, which Bond gets in, to voluntarily give up his gun, be drilled in the head and then escape via an exploding watch and then kill 95% of the henchmen in two minutes (lets pretend he couldnt have done this in the first place without being drilled in the face)......
Bond seems to do everything I would have done, in the
Same position.
Walks away from. Is Liam Neeson.
Hmmm, not much of a movie series then, eh?
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Judge for a film is " Bums on seats" how many are going to watch it, and
so far Spectre is doing the business.
It may not be your cup of tea, ( then again you might love Bond25 much
Better) on first viewing I hated QOS, took quite a few viewings for me to
See what others had in it.
I'm not saying you will ever like Spectre ( nothing wrong in not liking it) but
Luckily with Bond there are so many films to fit any mood.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS