Anybody see Quantum of Solace yet? (NO SPOILERS)

[maverick218]

I disagree. I think Brosnan was the perfect compromise. He had a bit of the Bond "flair", but he kicked just enough ass to keep the action moving. I think Dalton was a bit bland as Bond, btw-
Craig is certainly the guy for the "new generation" though. And apparently my prediction that he was the next George Lazenby didn't turn out!

Aside from Dalton, Lazenby was the closest to Fleming's creation ever put on the screen.
Just saw QOS, the ending feels tacked on, as if they needed something to blow up real good.
Other than that, a solid if undistinguished entry.
Enough Bondian moments to make it worth the admission.

Oh yeah, I LIKED Lazenby (I just meant a "one and done" Bond)- OHMSS was a great Bond flick...and how can you go wrong with a somking hot Diana Rigg in tow?

OHMSS may be my favorite Bond movie-- love the soundtrack

[maverick218]

I didn't think the series was in nearly as bad shape as fans made it out to be (invisible cars and ice palaces, included).

The first half of Die Another Day was fantastic. But they screwed up with some of the stupid crap in the second half of the film. But you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Stupidest thing they could have done was to replace Pierce Brosnan, which is exactly what they did.

Pierce was my second favorite Bond behind Connery.

[maverick218]

I think what many people don't realize is how far apart from the original James Bond character of the Ian Flemming books the movies had become, and Casino Royale was a decided return back to that style. They had to dispense with many of the things that movie-only fans had grown to expect in order to accomplish this. Me, I loved it and thought it was incredibly well done. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan mainly of the movies, but fans of the books will appreciate that film for what it did much more that people who only knew the Bond of the films.

I own the books. I've read the books.
I think Fleming would take extreme issue with Bond's worldview being molded by a woman (including being given his first tux).

You've got that right.

[WykkedSensation]

In my eyes James Bond Died the day they cast Daniel Craig as Bond, and the other f-ed up changes they made to the style and tone of the films since he started as Bond.

I have been a die-hard Bond fan since 1983 when Octopussy came out. I own all 20 of the official Bond films on DVD that were made before Craig became "Bond," plus the unofficial "Never Say Never Again."

I've watched all of those films at least 20 times each.

But I watched Casino Royale once, and it sucked so bad that I've never watched it a second time, and doubt I'll ever watch again. And I have no plans to see Quantum Of Solace at all.

Every review of QOS that I've read so far as been very negative about the film. Pretty much only Daniel Craig fanboys are gonna like it from what I've heard.

Excellent post and totally agree with everything you say here.
Casino was utter shit. I watched it once and will NEVER watch it again either.
I still can not believe they even considered Craig for the role. The biggest fuck up since they cast Dalton way back.
Brosnan, no matter what anyone says, was the perfect Bond, and the best ever, maybe. Certainly my fave.

I can't believe that they ever considered Craig either. IMO, he's by far the worst Bond ever.
I consider Dalton to have been a good Bond, but that it was a mistake to cast him for the simple reason of him not being able to appeal to a wide range of fans.

Brosnan was still the perfect guy for the role at this time.

It's basically a 3-way-tie for me as to who my favorite James Bond was, and those 3 are Sean Connery, Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan.

For your eyes only is the only one he did that I actually enjoyed. Octopussy and MoonRaker are more in line with the Flint films with James Coburn.

I enjoyed Moore as Bond. He made some cracking movies.
'Live and let die' and 'The man with the golden gun' would both feature in my top 10 Bond movies.
I also thought Lazenby was ok in the role. Never could understand why he got so much flack, and OHMSS was a pretty good effort.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Christopher Lee, who is one of Ian Fleming's cousins, and who also co-stared with Roger Moore in "The Man With The Golden Gun," has said that he thinks that Ian would have considered Pierce Brosnan to have been the closest to what he envisioned as being the ideal "James Bond."

Familiar with the quote.
Don't really care what Lee has to say.
Maybe Brosnan as he appeared in 'The Tailor of Panama' would be up to Fleming's liking, but as he played Bond, I think the guy is something of a lightweight.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Thing is that this current "James Bond" isn't really James Bond at all, he's just a Jason Bourne wannabe.

You can take issue with his looks all you want, but Craig is very much playing James Bond.
As for the Bourne comparisons, well, Bond has always ripped off other film series.
Big deal.

[Rip Rokken]

I think what many people don't realize is how far apart from the original James Bond character of the Ian Flemming books the movies had become, and Casino Royale was a decided return back to that style. They had to dispense with many of the things that movie-only fans had grown to expect in order to accomplish this. Me, I loved it and thought it was incredibly well done. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan mainly of the movies, but fans of the books will appreciate that film for what it did much more that people who only knew the Bond of the films.

I own the books. I've read the books.
I think Fleming would take extreme issue with Bond's worldview being molded by a woman (including being given his first tux).

I haven't read any of them all the way thru, though I've owned a few. I grew up reading another character who was completely different in the books than in the movies, so I can understand the dilemma of trying to please all the fans.

[Rip Rokken]

The more important review would be of the new Star Trek trailer!

Stu, it's up on ain'titcool, via youtube. Here's a link:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39118

THe jury is still out for me. I think it looks ok, but MAN- just read the ain't it cool posters- they are split RIGHT down the middle on this thing. It is a bit "90210" ish in the casting department (Simon Pegg notwithstanding) but I have faith that JJ can pull it off.I'm still pissed that they pulled it from the Xmas releases- Star Trek NEEDS to be a Holiday film! Must EVERYTHING change????

What say you Ripper???[/quote

WOW! What a nice surprise today, and I didn't realize it those had been released yet. I haven't had time to keep track and am out of the loop. This really excites me, and especially that they've paid such homage to the original series. Still wishing Shatner could have made his cameo and have been hoping they are slyly hiding a surprise, but who knows... sounds like it really didn't happen. At least we still have Nimoy, and Quinto really does look like him! Also sad they pushed this back to next May, but hopefully it will give them time to make it right... sounds like QOS was rushed and is suffering for it.