Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm looking forward to seeing it at the movie house & also interested in who the new 007 will be. I don't care what color or gender, just give us a good storey.
James Bond is a white macho male.
Now if they want to spin off his Black Daughter Jamie Bond, maybe someone somewhere might watch it.
I don't know how long 007 series will continue since Eason Hunt is the American 007 and MI series is quickly catching up--eight ones now.
Assuming that there isn't another court fight over who owns the rights it will never end. It might morph into what is now direct to video lower budget and expectations stuff but the owners will keep picking at the carcass and eventually sell it off to someone else trying to get a share.
May be. Bond was born out of the Cold War and seems more and more of a relic every year.
And it's kinda hard to relate to a guy fighting nefarious global conspiracies when real-world governments and corporations are evil enough on their own these days. Not sure how a guy like James Bond fits into today's world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
And Roger Moore is still my favorite Bond.
Everyone is entitled to one incorrect opinion.
"Look, it's the four pillars of the male heterosexual psyche. We like: naked women, stockings, lesbians, and Sean Connery best as James Bond. Because that is what being a boy is. And if you don't like it, darling, join a film collective." (Steve Taylor on Coupling)
May be. Bond was born out of the Cold War and seems more and more of a relic every year.
1) The Craig Bond franchise has updated the concept as far as it can go. It wiped away the residue of the underwhelming Brosnan years (no offense, but I think he got there a little late).
2) The cup runneth full. The thirst hath been slaked.
3) M:I is still going, and very successful (no, I don't hit the theaters for those).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
Everyone is entitled to one incorrect opinion.
I'm sure yours is Connery, which is fine. He has the most fans. It's a generational thing.
Btw, you can't have an "incorrect" favorite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
"Look, it's the four pillars of the male heterosexual psyche. We like: naked women, stockings, lesbians, and Sean Connery best as James Bond. Because that is what being a boy is. And if you don't like it, darling, join a film collective." (Steve Taylor on Coupling)
Roger was also a dashing gent, had a great voice, and didn't have to wear a rug.
"Bond...James Bond." He said it the best. Deal with it.
1) The Craig Bond franchise has updated the concept as far as it can go. It wiped away the residue of the underwhelming Brosnan years (no offense, but I think he got there a little late).
Agreed. I enjoyed the first few Brosnan flicks. The problems with those movies was not Brosnan but the scripts. The last couple were REALLY goofy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
3) M:I is still going, and very successful (no, I don't hit the theaters for those).
I think I have only seen the first two. Meh. I don't dislike them. But they don't particularly excite me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Roger was also a dashing gent
Yeah, and I think that's why he didn't work for me. Bond shouldn't be a "gent." Even amidst all the Armani suits and cognac, Bond needs an air of danger about him. Moore never did. And it didn't help that out of all the Moore films, I think I really only liked two of them. I still love FOR YOUR EYES ONLY and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. All the rest of the Moore flicks range from the mediocre to the bad.
Agreed. I enjoyed the first few Brosnan flicks. The problems with those movies was not Brosnan but the scripts. The last couple were REALLY goofy.
All of them are goofy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
Yeah, and I think that's why he didn't work for me. Bond shouldn't be a "gent." Even amidst all the Armani suits and cognac, Bond needs an air of danger about him. Moore never did. And it didn't help that out of all the Moore films, I think I really only liked two of them. I still love FOR YOUR EYES ONLY and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. All the rest of the Moore flicks range from the mediocre to the bad.
What was that again about being entitled to one incorrect opinion?
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,584 posts, read 15,686,495 times
Reputation: 14050
The director of this film stated that Bond was a rapist. That tells me all I need to know -- I will not be seeing this one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
