|
Post by Greg Haugen on Aug 7, 2007 8:27:48 GMT -5
Yes that's right, Roger Moore was awful wasn't he. He was just about to make the blockbusting Moonraker and Spy Who Loved Me and then followed that up with For Your Eyes Only. Wasn't Roger awful. Yes, it's interesting that he doesn't realize the film he describes would have been equally over-the-top. Can you imagine if Roger Moore had battled mechanical sharks?! I'm sure these people carry a small handbook which tells them what the trendy line on everything is. Roger Moore was crap, most James Bond films are crap, Sean Connery films were serious thrillers blah, blah. I'd have more respect for someone who put forward a mildly original or unconventional view. At least you'd know they were able to think for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Aug 7, 2007 8:21:59 GMT -5
Even though the rival series is no more, wouldn't be interesting to see Pierce do an unofficial Bond? I think that door has been closed now. Perhaps they might try and make the Thomas Crown sequel more Bondish.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Dec 3, 2007 13:58:49 GMT -5
The Ultimate Editions were in Woolworths today for £7 each.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Oct 18, 2007 13:17:39 GMT -5
I think that's true. Timothy Dalton actually lightened up considerably in interviews after he left the role. If you watch the Licence To Kill DVD Extras he's very, very serious and glum.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Sept 25, 2007 8:17:50 GMT -5
I think Cubby would have made five or six Brosnan films and then hired a Gerard Butler or someone like that. He might have liked Jackman too. He gave the rookie Bond thing short shrift in the eighties and cast Timothy Dalton (after losing Brosnan) so we know what his general rules were when it came to casting a new Bond. In the Cubby era I think Daniel Craig would have been either mistaken for a window-cleaner or removed from Eon's offices by security. I do think though that the Brosnan films would have been bigger with Cubby. I think he would have given Brosnan a modern version of The Spy Who Loved Me or something a bit like Octopussy even. Big lavish adventures that played to Brosnan's strengths. I certainly agree that Cubby Broccoli might have been a bit more enthusiastic and productive during the Brosnan era. Eon:The Next Generation signed Brosnan as Bond in 1994 and just made four (average) films with him. 'Eon: The Next Generation'. Welcome to the forum.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Dec 21, 2007 14:36:03 GMT -5
That sounds very interesting. I've seen the credit sequence of this revamped NSNA on the net and it does seem a bit more Bondish with the music. I'm a bigger fan of NSNA than some (it tends to rank low on lists) and I think the fact it is a renegade Bond film adds to the charm a bit, although it could have been better with an Eon sized budget!
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Aug 27, 2007 10:26:09 GMT -5
I thought the Embassy sequence was fairly bizarre. Craig leaps in and starts beating up soldiers twice his size and then avoids numerous bullets. Very Steven Seagal.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Aug 16, 2007 8:50:09 GMT -5
What happened to the reboot and the twenty-eight year-old Bond? I think the official explanation was that the younger actors they tested just looked too young. What a stroke of luck that they had 48 year-old Daniel Craig waiting in the wings to play the young Bond on his first mission.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Aug 11, 2007 16:31:24 GMT -5
Very interesting review kadov.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Jul 28, 2007 13:59:51 GMT -5
To some Casino Royale is very Fleming and to others it seems like they've made 007 more of a modern generic action character. I suppose it would be a dull world if we all agreed.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Jul 20, 2007 11:14:43 GMT -5
1. Sean Connery 2. Roger Moore 3. Pierce Brosnan 4. Timothy Dalton* 5. George Lazenby 6. David Niven 7. Barry Nelson *I would've placed Dalton higher, but I don't feel he had enough time to comfortably grow into the role the way the others did. I really wished he had gotten to make a couple more films. Who was number eight? Woody Allen? Oh, and welcome to the forum jackburton.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Jul 19, 2007 12:08:00 GMT -5
Thanks for the welcome, guys. DAD presents another problem for the anti-Brosnan campaign. His detractors like to point out that while DAD may have been a financial success, it was creatively bankrupt. But then, if it truly was the worst Bond script ever, it speaks volumes about Brosnan that he was able to sell it so effectively. Just imagine if he had been working from a great script. You'd think sometimes that Brosnan wrote, directed, produced and did all the special-effects for his films. He seems to get the blame for everything.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Jul 17, 2007 15:13:28 GMT -5
I also find it surprising, especially since Die Another Day was such a huge hit. If the current line is to be believed, then DAD should've been the biggest flop of the series. Yet critics and audiences alike rewarded it- despite the Rotten Tomatoes that have since been thrown online. I think it stems from the fact that Fleming's novels appear so down-to-earth by today's standards. Kids read them and think, "Wow, Bond is actually supposed to be really serious!"- completely oblivious to the element of fantasy the stories presented at the time. People make a big deal about the Bourne films being closer in tone, yet there have always been "anti-Bonds" in response to Bond. This is true whether you're talking about a John Le Carre novel or a film such as Saltzman's own Ipcress File. The mere fact that serious spies have traditionally been dubbed "anti-Bonds" should provide a hint as to Bond's true role in pop culture. I think if Daniel Craig had turned up in a spy film playing secret agent Kenny Onions (or whatever) he would have been labelled a counter-point to Bond or even an anti-Bond.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Jul 10, 2007 10:21:33 GMT -5
I'd have loved another Dalton film. Lazenby could have gone on but the fact he was in possibly the best film for his debut would have made it difficult for him to be accepted in what would have been weaker films. He wasn't really accepted in OHMSS either.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Haugen on Aug 21, 2007 13:23:38 GMT -5
He's a really good Bond. But his one liners were pretty bad. I realize that part of Bond is the sarcasm and those lines, but Moore's script didn't do him any justice. Paraphrasing something from Moonraker "I discovered it had a crush on me" That's something sixth graders have stopped laughing at. He's not completely wooden, but he doesn't move very smoothly, especially when it comes to fighting, most of the blows don't look like they even make contact. I grew up with Sir Rog but I understand why he isn't quite everybody's cup of tea. He did have a deadly karate chop though.
|
|