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!
Why?
Because Sir Rog still looks no older than 49! I even made a thread comparing his youthful appearance to that of DC's in another thread, which you have failed to read.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
No, read that, he looked 40 years older than Craig.
Your threads are priceless - absurd and ridiculous but FUNNY! Oh my, I almost split my cup of tea when I read that!
NMS
Here is an example of a GOOD forum member -{ though I assure you I am quite serious in my assertion that Sir Rog be given the role once more PLUS he deserves a lifetime achievement award too!
Your threads are priceless - absurd and ridiculous but FUNNY! Oh my, I almost split my cup of tea when I read that!
NMS
Here is an example of a GOOD forum member -{ though I assure you I am quite serious in my assertion that Sir Rog be given the role once more PLUS he deserves a lifetime achievement award too!
Comedy gold, if only the BBC had you as a comedic writer they'd be able to replicate the success of classics such as Steptoe & Son )
Your threads are priceless - absurd and ridiculous but FUNNY! Oh my, I almost split my cup of tea when I read that!
NMS
Here is an example of a GOOD forum member -{ though I assure you I am quite serious in my assertion that Sir Rog be given the role once more PLUS he deserves a lifetime achievement award too!
Comedy gold, if only the BBC had you as a comedic writer they'd be able to replicate the success of classics such as Steptoe & Son )
I THINK (because of my right to free speech) that if the filmmakers are going to remake such a REALISTIC classic like Moonraker, they should definitely take Daniel Craig's Bond into a plotline involving the megalomaniac supervillian Steve Jobs unveiling his iTime, a fully working time machine. Then 007 can be thrust into the future where he meets his older self (Roger Moore's glorious return to the franchise) and together they put an end to the Machine's rule and save Zion. Done. Oscar worthy?
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.
Loeff, this quote was overlooked due to the more intense exchange between TheScashMan and SirMiles.
However, it is of due note to mention it.
First of all, not only are you thinking economically (half-price...ruddy brilliant btw) but also looking out for Sir Rog's legacy. Who wants to be represented by a two-bit robot when the real thing is the finest example of God's creation? Certainly not Rog. Since the real Moore was absolutely faultless (per TheScashMan's impenetrable opinion) why would we want Sir Moore's animatronic replica to be anything different. Of course, something will have to be done to get the exact tone of his liver spots, wouldn't want to miss those on the re-create. I think they could be described as "raw umber" or maybe even "chamoisee."
I admire ThescashMan. Not only does he see the 75 - 82 Bond films as the truly realistic pieces of espionage drama that they are, he also see's Roger Moore as Fleming's true vision of James Bond. Who can argue with Roger Moore's physical prowess, his weapon handling, fighting skills and brilliance at delivering subtle humour... :v
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
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.
Loeff, this quote was overlooked due to the more intense exchange between TheScashMan and SirMiles.
However, it is of due note to mention it.
First of all, not only are you thinking economically (half-price...ruddy brilliant btw) but also looking out for Sir Rog's legacy. Who wants to be represented by a two-bit robot when the real thing is the finest example of God's creation? Certainly not Rog. Since the real Moore was absolutely faultless (per TheScashMan's impenetrable opinion) why would we want Sir Moore's animatronic replica to be anything different. Of course, something will have to be done to get the exact tone of his liver spots, wouldn't want to miss those on the re-create. I think they could be described as "raw umber" or maybe even "chamoisee."
):)):)):)):)) just imagine the blu-ray screen captures
LoeffelholzThe 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.
Loeff, this quote was overlooked due to the more intense exchange between TheScashMan and SirMiles.
However, it is of due note to mention it.
First of all, not only are you thinking economically (half-price...ruddy brilliant btw) but also looking out for Sir Rog's legacy. Who wants to be represented by a two-bit robot when the real thing is the finest example of God's creation? Certainly not Rog. Since the real Moore was absolutely faultless (per TheScashMan's impenetrable opinion) why would we want Sir Moore's animatronic replica to be anything different. Of course, something will have to be done to get the exact tone of his liver spots, wouldn't want to miss those on the re-create. I think they could be described as "raw umber" or maybe even "chamoisee."
):)):)):)):)) just imagine the blu-ray screen captures
Thanks, guys {[] I may not be a genius on the magnitude of our new friend (who is?!?), but thankfully I still have my moments...
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
As I type this from sunny Afghanistan I still cannot believe Thescashman just keeps on coming with his homo-erotic fantasies about the Bond "comedy era" of Roger Moore. I'm off to the caves soon to see if I can find scashman holed up with a VHS player with the 72-85 video tapes of RM. Not sure what "back to basics" of RMs films stick to, the basics of ruining a great literary character perhaps, crow barring in gags. You'll have to give me the run down my friend
As I type this from sunny Afghanistan I still cannot believe Thescashman just keeps on coming with his homo-erotic fantasies about the Bond "comedy era" of Roger Moore.
I'm hoping you ment that in the nicest possible way .....8-)
Number 24 - of course !! I love Roger Moore, I love the gags, the one liners, I love his Bond films, He was a wonderful Bond, but BEST Bond ? of course not. I don't think anybody but our friend The scashman would like to see that style back, like many members here I am a huge fan of Daniel Craig and I think he is perfect for our modern times whilst being reminiscent of the serious Connory films.
Oh no I meant that, there is some serious deep rooted Sir Roger fantasies there, I am talking like Jed from "I am Alan partidge" episode 5 "To Kill a mocking Alan"
It's the Dada thread. Up is down, black is white, day is night, Roger Moore is the 'best Bond'...
Bond was supposed to be a Bad Ass(c).
He was in WWII.
He had a scar down his cheek.
He 'smiled grimly' when he found a pick up weapon.
Fleming used lots of good adjectives for Bond: dangerous, cruel, ruthless, cold etc.
Funny how silly, foppish and clownlike are not among them.
Daniel Craig looks dangerous.
Roger Moore looks...not so dangerous, even in his day.
To answer the title of the thread: I care about Bond 23 because I want more Bond movies.
Not Moore Bond movies. )
There are literally dozens of actors who could play James Bond, just as there are dozens who could play Doctor Who. James Bond is not a difficult or demanding role for an actor, its more physically demanding than anything else.
So lets not get hung up on who the best Bond is - they all have their strengths and weaknesses. If anything we need to focus on the WRITERS of Bond films who are responsible for its successes and more recently, its total failures.
I like Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan and even Craig, though I draw the line at Lazenby.
I find it hard to list the writers I like and those I do, wrote the earlier films for the most part.
The original formula for Bond was very simple: ACTION + SENSUALITY. Recently the sensuality has gone out the window and instead we have ACTION + PSYCHOANALYSIS which is an awful combination and much better explored by the Bourne films IMO.
If you want the Bond we all know and love to come back tell the writers to bring back the SENSUALITY so that Bond can once more be an escapist fantasy instead of a tortuous psychodrama.
If I want grim reality I'll go outside or watch the evening News.
I thought there was plenty of sensuality in CR. More so than in any Bond film in decades. I dont consider the crude and juvenile sex jokes and melodrama of the Brosnan era to be sensual.
I thought there was plenty of sensuality in CR. More so than in any Bond film in decades. I dont consider the crude and juvenile sex jokes and melodrama of the Brosnan era to be sensual.
I agree, sensuality does not equal crude jokes and one night stands...just ask my wife. ;%
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!
What do you describe as a "real" Bond fan- someone with floppy red shoes, a big squeaky nose and a room temperature
IQ?
I thought there was plenty of sensuality in CR. More so than in any Bond film in decades. I dont consider the crude and juvenile sex jokes and melodrama of the Brosnan era to be sensual.
I agree, sensuality does not equal crude jokes and one night stands...just ask my wife. ;%
Disagree, CR had little sensuality in it because the relationship between Bond and Vesper was poorly written and was the worst pat of the film. Bond and Vesper start out arguing and dismissing each other's importance, then they happen to select each other's evening wear, how cute. Then Vesper shows weakness and Bond cuddles and consoles her, then they are madly in love. Hogwash!
Where was the sensuality, sucking Vespers finger, cuddling in the shower? Don't think so, because not for a minute did I believe their love for each other.
I agree the sexual jokes that were prevalent in the 70's were not sexy or sensual or even funny for the most part. However, many Bond movies, FRWL, GF, TB, OHMSS, GE, TWINE had scenes that were very sensual. Not because Bond was madly in love with the woman character and was going to marry her, but because Bond loves women and he displays that love for females when alone with them. He wants to give them pleasure, because he enjoys the act. This is a man that takes pleasure where he can find it, in his food, his drink, his automobile and his women. This is a part of Bond that needs to rediscovered.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I thought there was plenty of sensuality in CR. More so than in any Bond film in decades. I dont consider the crude and juvenile sex jokes and melodrama of the Brosnan era to be sensual.
I agree, sensuality does not equal crude jokes and one night stands...just ask my wife. ;%
Disagree, CR had little sensuality in it because the relationship between Bond and Vesper was poorly written and was the worst pat of the film. Bond and Vesper start out arguing and dismissing each other's importance, then they happen to select each other's evening wear, how cute. Then Vesper shows weakness and Bond cuddles and consoles her, then they are madly in love. Hogwash!
Where was the sensuality, sucking Vespers finger, cuddling in the shower? Don't think so, because not for a minute did I believe their love for each other.
I agree the sexual jokes that were prevalent in the 70's were not sexy or sensual or even funny for the most part. However, many Bond movies, FRWL, GF, TB, OHMSS, GE, TWINE had scenes that were very sensual. Not because Bond was madly in love with the woman character and was going to marry her, but because Bond loves women and he displays that love for females when alone with them. He wants to give them pleasure, because he enjoys the act. This is a man that takes pleasure where he can find it, in his food, his drink, his automobile and his women. This is a part of Bond that needs to rediscovered.
A now-classic fork in the road between fans and non-fans of CR...I for one did buy the Bond/Vesper relationship, sudden though the transition appears. I found their chemistry immediate on the train...and in the car afterward. For me, the shower scene is pivotal because Bond really steps outside his protective shell and provides comfort to Vesper. Now, Vesper's motivation for falling for Bond so suddenly after his injuries is ripe for examination and debate...personally, I think it might have been part 'rebound' from her treacherous French-Algerian "boyfriend" and guilt over the dawning awareness of her own culpability...so perhaps her love for Bond can be debated---Bond certainly seems to do so internally---but I think Bond completely falls for her, and is prepared (however rashly) to resign from MI6 for her.
In addition, I think the Reviled QoSTM provides the final necessary brick in the building of James Bond's character foundation...so #23 provides a tabula rasa for a fully-developed superagent. Pity we don't know when the film will actually get made
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 MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,749Chief of Staff
A now-classic fork in the road between fans and non-fans of CR...I for one did buy the Bond/Vesper relationship, sudden though the transition appears. I found their chemistry immediate on the train...and in the car afterward. For me, the shower scene is pivotal because Bond really steps outside his protective shell and provides comfort to Vesper. Now, Vesper's motivation for falling for Bond so suddenly after his injuries is ripe for examination and debate...personally, I think it might have been part 'rebound' from her treacherous French-Algerian "boyfriend" and guilt over the dawning awareness of her own culpability...so perhaps her love for Bond can be debated---Bond certainly seems to do so internally---but I think Bond completely falls for her, and is prepared (however rashly) to resign from MI6 for her.
Same for me Loeffelholz...I totally bought their relationship and I thought it was well scripted - and acted - too....
YNWA 97
Bella_docQuantum's next target (Canada)Posts: 51MI6 Agent
Now, Vesper's motivation for falling for Bond so suddenly after his injuries is ripe for examination and debate...personally, I think it might have been part 'rebound' from her treacherous French-Algerian "boyfriend"...
But did Vesper ever find out that he was not really kidnapped? I assumed she thought he was dead at that point, which would - in her mind - give her the all-clear to pursue Bond without all the previous emotional baggage.
Otherwise yes, I too found their relationship and its gradual development believable. Just because it's not a HBO-type drama that plays out over 12+ hours and that can afford to pick over every little detail, it does not make CR's more broad-brush style and necessary cinematic shortcuts any less devoid of feeling or psychological realism or, yes, even subtlety. The challenge for the writers and actors was to make the love story believable in the context of Bond's unbelievable world, and a look back at the days of Electra King says they did that brilliantly.
Oh, and I'd hardly say that the Bond/Vesper relationship is the biggest fork in the road between fans and non-fans... what about the fact Bond's blond, uncouth, impulsive and repeatedly disobeys orders? )
Some great examples of the pivot between action and sensuality in pas Bond films include:
1. In TSWLM Bond and XXX driving off the pier in the white submarine car, destroying the helicopter that was chasing them with a torpedo and then going for a trip alone under water through the coral reefs accompanied by Marvin Hamlish's dreamy music.
2. In LTK, Bond failing to assassinate Sanchez, being attacked by his own people, spirited away, pursued by Sanchez's people, rescued by Sanchez and waking up in Sanchez's palace which is decorated with Jeff Koon's kitsch art.
3. The whole beginning of OHMSS where Tracy Di Vicenzo tries to drown herself and gets rescued by Bond.
4. In TB Bond meeting Domino underwater amid the ancient ruins, Bond removing a sea urchin spine from her foot with his teeth and then spear-gunning Vargus.
Comments
Why?
Because Sir Rog still looks no older than 49! I even made a thread comparing his youthful appearance to that of DC's in another thread, which you have failed to read.
Your threads are priceless - absurd and ridiculous but FUNNY! Oh my, I almost split my cup of tea when I read that!
NMS
Here is an example of a GOOD forum member -{ though I assure you I am quite serious in my assertion that Sir Rog be given the role once more PLUS he deserves a lifetime achievement award too!
Comedy gold, if only the BBC had you as a comedic writer they'd be able to replicate the success of classics such as Steptoe & Son
And Fawlty Towers!
NMS
Yes. If only CR and QoS had the drama and realism of MR, OP and AVTAK!
Loeff, this quote was overlooked due to the more intense exchange between TheScashMan and SirMiles.
However, it is of due note to mention it.
First of all, not only are you thinking economically (half-price...ruddy brilliant btw) but also looking out for Sir Rog's legacy. Who wants to be represented by a two-bit robot when the real thing is the finest example of God's creation? Certainly not Rog. Since the real Moore was absolutely faultless (per TheScashMan's impenetrable opinion) why would we want Sir Moore's animatronic replica to be anything different. Of course, something will have to be done to get the exact tone of his liver spots, wouldn't want to miss those on the re-create. I think they could be described as "raw umber" or maybe even "chamoisee."
http://apbateman.com
Thanks, guys {[] I may not be a genius on the magnitude of our new friend (who is?!?), but thankfully I still have my moments...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I'm hoping you ment that in the nicest possible way .....8-)
Bond was supposed to be a Bad Ass(c).
He was in WWII.
He had a scar down his cheek.
He 'smiled grimly' when he found a pick up weapon.
Fleming used lots of good adjectives for Bond: dangerous, cruel, ruthless, cold etc.
Funny how silly, foppish and clownlike are not among them.
Daniel Craig looks dangerous.
Roger Moore looks...not so dangerous, even in his day.
To answer the title of the thread: I care about Bond 23 because I want more Bond movies.
Not Moore Bond movies.
So lets not get hung up on who the best Bond is - they all have their strengths and weaknesses. If anything we need to focus on the WRITERS of Bond films who are responsible for its successes and more recently, its total failures.
I like Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan and even Craig, though I draw the line at Lazenby.
I find it hard to list the writers I like and those I do, wrote the earlier films for the most part.
The original formula for Bond was very simple: ACTION + SENSUALITY. Recently the sensuality has gone out the window and instead we have ACTION + PSYCHOANALYSIS which is an awful combination and much better explored by the Bourne films IMO.
If you want the Bond we all know and love to come back tell the writers to bring back the SENSUALITY so that Bond can once more be an escapist fantasy instead of a tortuous psychodrama.
If I want grim reality I'll go outside or watch the evening News.
I agree, sensuality does not equal crude jokes and one night stands...just ask my wife. ;%
What do you describe as a "real" Bond fan- someone with floppy red shoes, a big squeaky nose and a room temperature
IQ?
Disagree, CR had little sensuality in it because the relationship between Bond and Vesper was poorly written and was the worst pat of the film. Bond and Vesper start out arguing and dismissing each other's importance, then they happen to select each other's evening wear, how cute. Then Vesper shows weakness and Bond cuddles and consoles her, then they are madly in love. Hogwash!
Where was the sensuality, sucking Vespers finger, cuddling in the shower? Don't think so, because not for a minute did I believe their love for each other.
I agree the sexual jokes that were prevalent in the 70's were not sexy or sensual or even funny for the most part. However, many Bond movies, FRWL, GF, TB, OHMSS, GE, TWINE had scenes that were very sensual. Not because Bond was madly in love with the woman character and was going to marry her, but because Bond loves women and he displays that love for females when alone with them. He wants to give them pleasure, because he enjoys the act. This is a man that takes pleasure where he can find it, in his food, his drink, his automobile and his women. This is a part of Bond that needs to rediscovered.
A now-classic fork in the road between fans and non-fans of CR...I for one did buy the Bond/Vesper relationship, sudden though the transition appears. I found their chemistry immediate on the train...and in the car afterward. For me, the shower scene is pivotal because Bond really steps outside his protective shell and provides comfort to Vesper. Now, Vesper's motivation for falling for Bond so suddenly after his injuries is ripe for examination and debate...personally, I think it might have been part 'rebound' from her treacherous French-Algerian "boyfriend" and guilt over the dawning awareness of her own culpability...so perhaps her love for Bond can be debated---Bond certainly seems to do so internally---but I think Bond completely falls for her, and is prepared (however rashly) to resign from MI6 for her.
In addition, I think the Reviled QoSTM provides the final necessary brick in the building of James Bond's character foundation...so #23 provides a tabula rasa for a fully-developed superagent. Pity we don't know when the film will actually get made
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Same for me Loeffelholz...I totally bought their relationship and I thought it was well scripted - and acted - too....
Otherwise yes, I too found their relationship and its gradual development believable. Just because it's not a HBO-type drama that plays out over 12+ hours and that can afford to pick over every little detail, it does not make CR's more broad-brush style and necessary cinematic shortcuts any less devoid of feeling or psychological realism or, yes, even subtlety. The challenge for the writers and actors was to make the love story believable in the context of Bond's unbelievable world, and a look back at the days of Electra King says they did that brilliantly.
Oh, and I'd hardly say that the Bond/Vesper relationship is the biggest fork in the road between fans and non-fans... what about the fact Bond's blond, uncouth, impulsive and repeatedly disobeys orders?
1. In TSWLM Bond and XXX driving off the pier in the white submarine car, destroying the helicopter that was chasing them with a torpedo and then going for a trip alone under water through the coral reefs accompanied by Marvin Hamlish's dreamy music.
2. In LTK, Bond failing to assassinate Sanchez, being attacked by his own people, spirited away, pursued by Sanchez's people, rescued by Sanchez and waking up in Sanchez's palace which is decorated with Jeff Koon's kitsch art.
3. The whole beginning of OHMSS where Tracy Di Vicenzo tries to drown herself and gets rescued by Bond.
4. In TB Bond meeting Domino underwater amid the ancient ruins, Bond removing a sea urchin spine from her foot with his teeth and then spear-gunning Vargus.
And there are loads more - what's yours?