James Bond 007: Quantum of Solace

[gearyt]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Gadgets, Q, pointless double enterdres, and for god's sake the theme music when something cool happens, they all need to be back.

and the bond type openings !!!

how can you not like "***** Galore" ?

[CAB]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Most people familiar with Fleming feel that Moore's Bond was the closest to Fleming's Bond.

Indeed - but remember he also wrote Chitty Chitty Bang Bang which oddly was also produced by Broccoli and had Desmond Llewelyn in a supporting role. In spite of his vision, I prefer the more brutal performances found in Dr. No and the latest Casino Royale.

People dying badly makes for good film.

Edit: I weep every time I watch Casino Royale. That poor, poor Aston Martin. *sob*
Edit 2: I dig the name. It makes me have to think and isn't a cheesy cliche'.

[SpikesBluBlooded]

Originally Posted by JadedRaverLA

Indeed.

I don't want to bash on anyone, but it does seem that the discussions on this board have sadly fallen in quality recently.

From derogatory and juvenile comments, to people making inappropriate comments about recently deceased actors (and showing more concern for the fate of the next Batman movie than for that young actor's family), its become an increasingly less civil place to discuss movies and Blu-ray than it used to be.

I'm all for more people joining the board and engaging in discussions, but this isn't a videogame system "smackdown" board, where berating people who disagree with you or using derogatory or insulting language is accepted.

Anyway, just my $.02


Anyway, I'm giving Craig and the filmmakers this next film to convince me that this new direction for Bond is really a good thing. I think the old-style Bond had gone on for so long, that its okay to try to reinvent the series (putting aside reservations many have about moving away from Fleming's direction). But, Casino Royale, while having some great scenes (especially the opening chase) didn't convince me they had it right. We'll see if the next one does.

Well put, and to add to it: Remember, this is our forum, the mods can only do so much, and with more and more new posters, it's going to be harder for them to keep up on behavior that is less-than-desirable in a timely manner. The solution? Report them. Use the little caution button to the bottom left of the posters window and tell the mods what the poster is doing that is either FUD or hostile.

Think of it as a little "harassment" button. Someone trying to get a rise out of everyone by being nasty, derogatory, or trying to spread FUD? Use the button and let the mods handle them! Why engage in a conversation that you know in the end you will lose (as they're getting just what they want) and fill the thread with a bunch of crap? Report them and ignore them, and the mods will handle it from there...

[miokti]

Originally Posted by JadedRaverLA

Indeed.

I don't want to bash on anyone, but it does seem that the discussions on this board have sadly fallen in quality recently.

From derogatory and juvenile comments, to people making inappropriate comments about recently deceased actors (and showing more concern for the fate of the next Batman movie than for that young actor's family), its become an increasingly less civil place to discuss movies and Blu-ray than it used to be.

I'm all for more people joining the board and engaging in discussions, but this isn't a videogame system "smackdown" board, where berating people who disagree with you or using derogatory or insulting language is accepted.

Anyway, just my $.02


Anyway, I'm giving Craig and the filmmakers this next film to convince me that this new direction for Bond is really a good thing. I think the old-style Bond had gone on for so long, that its okay to try to reinvent the series (putting aside reservations many have about moving away from Fleming's direction). But, Casino Royale, while having some great scenes (especially the opening chase) didn't convince me they had it right. We'll see if the next one does.

+1 Thank You.

[depooter]

Originally Posted by JadedRaverLA

Indeed.
Anyway, I'm giving Craig and the filmmakers this next film to convince me that this new direction for Bond is really a good thing. I think the old-style Bond had gone on for so long, that its okay to try to reinvent the series (putting aside reservations many have about moving away from Fleming's direction). But, Casino Royale, while having some great scenes (especially the opening chase) didn't convince me they had it right. We'll see if the next one does.

I can't disagree more with this and other comments about Craig, Casino Royale and the direction of the franchise. Casino Royale was the best bond movie ever. no question. I had given up on the franchise and fell in love with this film. People love Connery and the older bond films, but that's wishful thinking and nostaglia. They just don't hold up anymore....

Can't wait for the new film. It will be the first bond film I see at the theater in 15 years...

[GORT]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Let me show you where I stand

Worst Bond- Roger Moore, followed by Connery (Lazenby doesn't count)

Best Bond, Dalton, followed by Brosnan(who took Connery's good parts, and mixed in a bunch of Dalton's)

Note we're not talking quality of scripts, we're talking quality of the performance as the character of Bond.

Bond is supposed to be ludicrous, fantasy material. To make anything else is betraying the concept. If I wanted to watch Bourne, I'd go watch Bourne.

Dalton??????? you could have had a tree and it would have been better than him and Connery defined James Bond if it wasnt for him Bond would have flooped you need to watch goldfinger

[jubaiweaponx]

I too was a fan of dalton and thought he should have done more movies ,dunno if I agree on moore ,and also thought brosnan should have done more bond movies way before they got him to do them ,bond in general is good

[krendevil]

Originally Posted by SpikesBluBlooded

Well put, and to add to it: Remember, this is our forum, the mods can only do so much, and with more and more new posters, it's going to be harder for them to keep up on behavior that is less-than-desirable in a timely manner. The solution? Report them. Use the little caution button to the bottom left of the posters window and tell the mods what the poster is doing that is either FUD or hostile.

Think of it as a little "harassment" button. Someone trying to get a rise out of everyone by being nasty, derogatory, or trying to spread FUD? Use the button and let the mods handle them! Why engage in a conversation that you know in the end you will lose (as they're getting just what they want) and fill the thread with a bunch of crap? Report them and ignore them, and the mods will handle it from there...

Cheers to that notion! I hate to be a "hall monitor" of sorts, but folks need to grow up a little bit or we're going to have to run them out of town. Count me in for the "Blu-ray Posse"

[Minimejer05]

Im sure its going to look good in Blu.

[Luis_A51]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Exactly the opposite for me

I didn't want to BE Bond at the end. He's supposed to be a male fantasy

Gadgets, Q, pointless double enterdres, and for god's sake the theme music when something cool happens, they all need to be back.

All the pierce brosnan bond movies were crap. Hes such an F-ing pansy, relied entirely on cheesy lines and gadgets.

Casino Royale was a breath of fresh air and the only bond Ive ever actually liked (granted Ive never seen the pre-brosnan movies, mainly because I was completely turned off of the series by his movies)

[Blu-Beard]

Even though some of the films could've been better I still love 'em all as a whole. And I really enjoyed Daniel Craig as Bond, he is a great actor and Casino Royale was damn good. But I heard a rumor way back before they decided on Craig that they were gonna go with Clive Owen, I was really hoping that would happen, I bet he would've brought a lot to the role. Even though they didn't go with Owen I'm not down playing Craig's performance at all, like I said before he is a great actor and did a fine job in Cas Roy. I just think Owen would've brought back some of the Connery like qualities back to the role and IMHO I think Connery embodied Bond better than anyone ever could or will.

[Blu-Beard]

Originally Posted by Luis_A51

All the pierce brosnan bond movies were crap. Hes such an F-ing pansy, relied entirely on cheesy lines and gadgets.

Casino Royale was a breath of fresh air and the only bond Ive ever actually liked (granted Ive never seen the pre-brosnan movies, mainly because I was completely turned off of the series by his movies)

I agree with you about the Brosnan movies not being the best but I don't think you can blame him 'cause he is a good actor. I just think that whoever was in control of the movies then didn't have that good of a vision 'cause it seemed as if they wanted Remington Steele and not James Bond. That's actually when they wanted Brosnan was after seeing him in Rem Stee

[CAB]

I have a hard time blaming Dalton (dug him in Flash Gordon) and Brosnan for anything I didn't like in those movies. The stories sucked and the direction wasn't better. I'm a big fan of Judi Dench's M role.

[Luis_A51]

Originally Posted by Blu-Beard

I agree with you about the Brosnan movies not being the best but I don't think you can blame him 'cause he is a good actor. I just think that whoever was in control of the movies then didn't have that good of a vision 'cause it seemed as if they wanted Remington Steele and not James Bond. That's actually when they wanted Brosnan was after seeing him in Rem Stee

You're probably right. It was the script that was to blame. Thanks

I know some others claim that his movies were more in line with the Flemming novels but lets get real here, those arent gonna cut it any more. People dont want some pretty boy with a bunch of gadgets prancing around. They want someone that actually seems like a secret agent.

Just like batman had to evolve from the adam west days, so does Bond.

[Seretur]

To think I'm giddy as a schoolboy about Bond again...

Some ten years ago, I published a review of Tomorrow Never Dies entitled Bond Is Dead. At the time, it really felt like that -- it was only Brosnan's second Bond picture, after a long hiatus following Dalton's so-so turn, and over a decade of Moore's increasingly ridiculous shenanigans. Every new actor would start out making a more serious, more grown-up Bond, but within a film or two it would all degenerate into the same camp that maybe worked in the sixties, but was hopelessly outdated in the late nineties.

I deeply felt that if the franchise was to continue, it had to be rebooted mercilessly, as if none of the preceding films had ever happened. And I secretly hoped that this time around, the films would have an actual timeline and continuity and emotional core that goes beyond foiling the bad guy and bedding the belle du jour. We'd had decades of that, and it's always easier to go back to the original movies that worked in their time than to try and recapture lightning in a bottle using the same old, same old formula.

Casino Royale did the reboot, exactly as I prayed. And now, apparently, Quantum of Solace will do the rest -- create a firm continuity while adding to the emotional core of the actor. And Craig is the man to pull it off: he started out as a trained pitbull of an agent, completely emotionless -- and the only Bond ever that truly felt like a professional killer; so, to see him fall in love in CR, and then lose this huge love, was truly moving. And I never knew a Bond movie could be moving.

All this while still being the toughest and coolest bastard around.

Forster is a great director, and this is going to be a total winner, I feel it in my guts. For all those nostalgic of older Bonds (hey, myself included) I'm sure the Ultimate Edition masters will start popping up on Blu-ray in conjunction with the film's release. And for the new generation who just can't see beyond the camp in the old titles, the Craig series will be a new benchmark.

BTW, the rights to Bond are reverting to MGM from Sony with Bond 23; and Craig has signed up for a total of five films now. It's going to be a vintage run.

[Luis_A51]

Originally Posted by Seretur

To think I'm giddy as a schoolboy about Bond again...

Some ten years ago, I published a review of Tomorrow Never Dies entitled Bond Is Dead. At the time, it really felt like that -- it was only Brosnan's second Bond picture, after a long hiatus following Dalton's so-so turn, and over a decade of Moore's increasingly ridiculous shenanigans. Every new actor would start out making a more serious, more grown-up Bond, but within a film or two it would all degenerate into the same camp that maybe worked in the sixties, but was hopelessly outdated in the late nineties.

I deeply felt that if the franchise was to continue, it had to be rebooted mercilessly, as if none of the preceding films had ever happened. And I secretly hoped that this time around, the films would have an actual timeline and continuity and emotional core that goes beyond foiling the bad guy and bedding the belle du jour. We'd had decades of that, and it's always easier to go back to the original movies that worked in their time than to try and recapture lightning in a bottle using the same old, same old formula.

Casino Royale did the reboot, exactly as I prayed. And now, apparently, Quantum of Solace will do the rest -- create a firm continuity while adding to the emotional core of the actor. And Craig is the man to pull it off: he started out as a trained pitbull of an agent, completely emotionless -- and the only Bond ever that truly felt like a professional killer; so, to see him fall in love in CR, and then lose this huge love, was truly moving. And I never knew a Bond movie could be moving.

All this while still being the toughest and coolest bastard around.

Forster is a great director, and this is going to be a total winner, I feel it in my guts. For all those nostalgic of older Bonds (hey, myself included) I'm sure the Ultimate Edition masters will start popping up on Blu-ray in conjunction with the film's release. And for the new generation who just can't see beyond the camp in the old titles, the Craig series will be a new benchmark.

BTW, the rights to Bond are reverting to MGM from Sony with Bond 23; and Craig has signed up for a total of five films now. It's going to be a vintage run.

Couldnt agree with you more.

[kapitalisten]

Originally Posted by Bond007

I agree with your list 100%. However, I think Craig will move up to #2 if he can repeat the performance of Casino Royale.


Connery will always be Bond. No one will ever be able to hold a candle to him in the role. Craig is a great new Bond and can only get better. Brosnan was a cool and smooth Bond. Moore was in some of the coolest Bond flicks. But, Connery was and still is the man!!!

Could not agree more - I also think that Craig has the possibility of overtaking Brosnan for the second spot, but I would like to see some more of his Bond-acting, just to make sure that he delivers consistent performances

And even if Brosnan was the second-best (my opinion), I still feel he was held back by somewhat far-out plot-ideas from the Moonraker-days (brrh )

[kapitalisten]

Originally Posted by CAB

...
Edit: I weep every time I watch Casino Royale. That poor, poor Aston Martin. *sob*
...

Likewise here, although I have settled with it as a "contribution to a good course"

[Blu-Beard]

Originally Posted by Luis_A51

You're probably right. It was the script that was to blame. Thanks

I know some others claim that his movies were more in line with the Flemming novels but lets get real here, those arent gonna cut it any more. People dont want some pretty boy with a bunch of gadgets prancing around. They want someone that actually seems like a secret agent.

Just like batman had to evolve from the adam west days, so does Bond.

I agree

[Rustmonsteru]

Originally Posted by JadedRaverLA

Indeed.

I don't want to bash on anyone, but it does seem that the discussions on this board have sadly fallen in quality recently.

From derogatory and juvenile comments, to people making inappropriate comments about recently deceased actors (and showing more concern for the fate of the next Batman movie than for that young actor's family), its become an increasingly less civil place to discuss movies and Blu-ray than it used to be.

I'm all for more people joining the board and engaging in discussions, but this isn't a videogame system "smackdown" board, where berating people who disagree with you or using derogatory or insulting language is accepted.

Anyway, just my $.02

Sadly, as Blu-ray becomes more popular so too shall this place be flooded with the vacant legions of the unidimensional, inhuman & megalomaniacal. It is the greatest truth of the internet: Anonymity makes douchebags of people.