Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

General Bond discussion from Sean Connery to Pierce Brosnan
Post Reply
User avatar
dirtybenny
0014
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:27 am
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia with Love and all the Connery films
Favorite Movies: Dirty Harry, Bullitt, The Sting, LA Confidential, The Maltese Falcon, and The Big Sleep
Location: Straight Outta Uranus

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by dirtybenny »

I agree with what's been said already, Dench was fine at first, a new and refreshing look at the character, however her sticking around during the Craig era was a huge mistake. First the continuity of Dench coming on as M with Brosnan and also recruiting Craig. How does that work? Second her character became a micromanaging pain in the rear who's incessant harping destroyed all the good will she had built up in the previous movies.
The Rouge Warrior, On Hermaphrodite's Secret Service Image
User avatar
Kristatos
OO Moderator
OO Moderator
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:26 pm
Location: St. Cyril's

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by Kristatos »

Plus, Dench staying gave ammunition to those "James Bond is a code name" cranks. I've no objection to people having their own personal headcanon, even if it doesn't really withstand much scrutiny, but those guys are the Jehovah's Witnesses of Bond fandom, constantly badgering everyone to see the light. And they all think they're the first person to come up with the code name theory.
"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
User avatar
Powder Puff
Lieutenant
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:28 am

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by Powder Puff »

Kristatos wrote:Plus, Dench staying gave ammunition to those "James Bond is a code name" cranks. I've no objection to people having their own personal headcanon, even if it doesn't really withstand much scrutiny, but those guys are the Jehovah's Witnesses of Bond fandom, constantly badgering everyone to see the light. And they all think they're the first person to come up with the code name theory.
Saying that Bond is a codename used by different people would explain big differences between Daniel Craig's Bond and the other actors.

Bit as we all know (apart from Kristatos' crank chums :) the latest Bond is an origin Bond.
Image
User avatar
John P. Drake
Agent
Posts: 1658
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:42 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies.
Location: Somewhere, strangling Barbara Broccoli.

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by John P. Drake »

Well described Kris!!
Image
User avatar
dirtybenny
0014
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:27 am
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia with Love and all the Connery films
Favorite Movies: Dirty Harry, Bullitt, The Sting, LA Confidential, The Maltese Falcon, and The Big Sleep
Location: Straight Outta Uranus

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by dirtybenny »

Hi all sorry for the hiatus, as I said in the original post sometimes life would catch up to me and delay my rants. Anyway I have some good ones lined up. Namely Reelism v. Realism, and thanks to Kristatos I plan on doing one on the "Code Name Conspiracy". Now on to the newest rant.



RANT #9

“Character Development” or how to con the art-house crowd without really trying.

Babs and Co. have shoved 3 consecutive art-house “origin stories” down our throats in the name of “character development”. However what they’ve been selling us is what’s referred to as all sizzle and no steak.

First let me say I want some character development in my films I’m not a fan of movies which consist of nothing more than ever increasing explosions until the credits roll. Now having said that what I don’t need especially in an Action/Adventure movie is a study in psychology. However it seems EON lately want us to play Freud and psychoanalyze Bond’s ID, Ego, and Super Ego and their not too good at it on top of it all.

Let’s look at Skyfall where this is most apparent and where the series is headed according to John Logan who now seems to be the head writer. We are supposedly finding out “what motivates Bond” yet we learn nothing. The movie starts with Craig chasing a hard drive containing the names and locations of all undercover agents imbedded in terrorist organizations. The list gets away when Craig is blasted off a bridge. Craig plays dead for three months until he learns a bomb went off at MI6 and comes back to the service. Now why did Craig do this? We are never told. No explanation as to why Craig decided the explosion was more important than the agent list. In fact Craig is directly asked that very question by Mallory when he asks “why come back, why not stay dead?” to which Craig mumbles back “Hyr me or fyr me iz intyrly up 2 u” (spelling to illustrate Craig’s Method Mumbling™) If he is motivated by his duty as he says earlier, why didn’t he report for duty when he was needed to recover that list? In the final act when we are taken to Wayne Manor we are supposed to learn about Bond’s childhood and why he does what he does. However all we learn is how to set up an estate to ward off mercenaries home alone style. I don’t care what motivates Bond, I never have and never will. Because it’s quite obvious, he’s a patriot, he loves his country and wants to do all he can to stop the forces of evil. Of course that’s not a very popular position to take in this day and age so the producers concoct a bunch of cockamamie “origins” and “character developments” to explain it.
The Rouge Warrior, On Hermaphrodite's Secret Service Image
User avatar
The Saint 007
0013
Posts: 3716
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:16 am
Favorite Bond Movie: The Spy Who Loved Me, A View To A Kill, Goldfinger, GoldenEye, For Your Eyes Only, Moonraker, Octopussy, Thunderball

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by The Saint 007 »

This is why I refer to Craig's Bond films as espionage soap operas, because it's mostly about exploring Bond's character or other characters around him, while the adventure/mission is second fiddle. Having some character depth is okay, but the filmmakers are making it the primary focus, which is no good, especially when there's usually a three year gap between films. The whole character development thing is just becoming tedious. As I've said here before, Bond is only as interesting as the villains he faces and the adventures he goes on. I can't stand how at the end of all three of Craig's films so far they hint at him being ready for a mission/adventure and whatnot, only for the filmmakers to once again give you a depressed Bond going through mood swings and more character exploration.
Image
User avatar
John P. Drake
Agent
Posts: 1658
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:42 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies.
Location: Somewhere, strangling Barbara Broccoli.

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by John P. Drake »

Oh yes, and what you hear from the audience EON's products are aimed at is that they all look for "emotional/heart moving" (Balderdash!) storyline to "help" them cry with the act. Bloody hell. Just when... and I mean when an action/spy movie (Let Alone a BOND Movie!!) was about this so-called "character-development"? Speaking of action/crime movies. Take Dirty Harry. Five films, and all realistic. REAL Realistic. Have you ever seen the tough guy whining? No. He just moves on IF something goes awry and continues performing his duty. OR take the Death Wish series. ALL OF THEM. They are all incredibly played well, with no further "Character Development" thing to be dragged in. He's a vigilante, he hunts criminals and that's it. Why should I need to explore a character's "origins"? What on Earth kind of a trend is that? Is it a historical movie or something? Gimme a Break! Same thing about Bond. Why should I need to see what he was once? He's a secret agent, a patriot, a monarchist. He kills the villains, saves the world AND gets the girls! That's it. But, no, as today's (mostly ultra left-wing supporters) so-called brain-dead audience needs something to "stir their minds", such as Nolan's godawful Batman movies and the Jason Bourne series with Day-mone (yeah, they praise the combat part of the genre which is totally laughable and fictitious and UNREAL!) that influenced the "moviezz" of "Hollyweird" to rise over a decade, the rest of the motion pictures have become "Bourne Clones". (Hell, they don't even have the right to call that diseased trilogy "Bourne", a real dishonour to Robert Ludlum and his books) All we see nowadays, is a rogue agent trying to take out his country. Villains have become "heroz" and Heroes have become "da bud guyz". I'm truly fed up with everything I see on the screen, nowadays.
Image
User avatar
dirtybenny
0014
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:27 am
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia with Love and all the Connery films
Favorite Movies: Dirty Harry, Bullitt, The Sting, LA Confidential, The Maltese Falcon, and The Big Sleep
Location: Straight Outta Uranus

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by dirtybenny »

I suppose the producers are making up for lost time with these "origin stories". Every decade or so we've had to sit through a retelling of a super hero's "origin", we have to see superman come from Krypton, Batman's parents get murdered, etc. The producers don't realize the great thing about Bond is Fleming never gave Bond an origin, he just is. He's a constant like the empire it self, just always been there and always will. So now they have to cobble together some slapdash beginning so they can continue their recent trend of copying and ripping off other series, including their own. So the question is, now every time a new Bond is chosen will we have to sit through a "re-imagining" of Casino Royal or Skyfall?
The Rouge Warrior, On Hermaphrodite's Secret Service Image
User avatar
John P. Drake
Agent
Posts: 1658
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:42 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies.
Location: Somewhere, strangling Barbara Broccoli.

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by John P. Drake »

Very quite, Benny. They are creating new universes "like comic books". One could have argued about the "non-sense" Philip José Farmer's Wold Newton Universe and Alan Moore and Kevin O'Neil's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen are altering the history into something that never makes sense, but compared to what EON does (such as the sudden appearance of BMT 216A Aston Martin DB5 from nowhere, even though the universe is a reboot), it does make sense for them. EON just dropped the balls when Barbara "The Evil Queen of Numbers" Broccoli stepped in.
Image
User avatar
dirtybenny
0014
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:27 am
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia with Love and all the Connery films
Favorite Movies: Dirty Harry, Bullitt, The Sting, LA Confidential, The Maltese Falcon, and The Big Sleep
Location: Straight Outta Uranus

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by dirtybenny »

Rant #10

Reelism v. Realism

Many lamentations have been made about how unrealistic the Bond films were previous to Craig’s tenure. However these three latest movies which are regaled as “real” and “gritty” are just as unrealistic if not more so.

One must suspend disbelief for movies that’s why they’re enjoyable, nobody wants to watch a realistic movie otherwise you could just stick your head out the window and watch people pass by.

Let’s start with Die Another Day, the go to example for the realism crowd illustrating how far of base the Bond series had become. Invisible car, para sailing tidal waves, etc. yes these are rather over the top, but they are so over the top you can’t take them seriously. Compare that to the “gritty” and “realistic” Casino Royale, where we see hopscotching between construction gantries a hundred feet in the air, scaling vertical I beams, and a sinking house… you know like in reality. Don’t even get me started on the critic’s darling Skyfall, getting shot off a 300 foot bridge, dropping subway trains through the ceiling, and holding off an army of mercenaries with “home alone” style antics. It’s akin to calling Batman more “realistic” to Superman because he’s not an alien who can fly. I say Craig’s movies are more unrealistic BECAUSE they are marketed as being realistic. What does that mean? The appearance of these over the top scenes in a “realistic” movie is so jarring they take you out of the “universe” the filmmakers are trying to create and causes them to stand out for how over the top they are, whereas in a movie which is already over the top these things are par for the course.

Another bone of contention for the realist crowd is the “comedy” found in earlier installments of the franchise. Now I’m not condoning double taking pigeons or Tarzan yells, but I think some light heartedness is very realistic. Life is not all comedy or drama, bad things happen during good times and funny things occur during tragedy. Some call out Bond’s quips made after dispatching a bad guy as “unfitting the character” however I contest this is very realistic it’s so realistic it has a name in the real world and it is called “gallows humor”. It’s a coping mechanism used by professionals who deal with tragedy on a daily basis such as cops, firemen, and paramedics. The new guard at EON and their minions would have us believe Bond deals with his demons by scowling into his martinis and mumbling nihilistic rhetoric to anyone who stands still long enough to hear it, but the professionals I deal with daily take a much lighter outlook on life, they have to or they’d jump off the Golden Gate Bridge.

While we’re on the topic of nihilism, the series was rebooted so as to show Bond at the beginning. Which means he started off as a cynical, nihilistic, mumbler and grew to become the suave sophisticated agent we all love? Now that’s none too realistic in my book!

So in short are any of the Bonds realistic? No, of course not. So why is anyone trying to say this one is?
The Rouge Warrior, On Hermaphrodite's Secret Service Image
User avatar
commander0077again
Commander
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:56 am
Favorite Bond Movie: OHMSS YOLT GOLDFINGER LALD FYEO GOLDENEYE
Favorite Movies: OUR MAN FLINT THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD/ERROL FLYNN CASABLANCA ZORRO FILMS / TV SHOW
Location: Hong Kong by the Sea

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by commander0077again »

Quite sew (he said in Mandarin), DB. And don't forget the incredibly realistic scene where 'Bond' rips off a door handle with one hand. :up:
Just saw White House Down. I also saw the similar Olympus Has Fallen. Seems like most viewers give WHD a big negative, while giving a better rating to OHF. These are both action films with a Diehard-type hero.
WHD is the more entertaining of the two. It's strictly unrealistic, of course, and it's surprising what the haters say about it -- that's it's a political statement, the implausibility of a RPG taking out a tank, when 'everyone knows the tank in the film could take seven hits and still keep on fighting' ... and so on. I was ready to suspend belief, while at the same time didn't want the hero to go crashing thru stone walls. He doesn't. Like Bond there's a rain of bullets, there's plenty of close combat, even the President of the U.S. gets into the act, but the hero doesn't scowl into his soup. Even though he's just lost a chance to be a Secret Service agent. As entertainment, I think it's a great set up: guy who loses his chance, so takes his daughter on the tour of the White House. She thinks he landed the job. Of course the baddies attack, and they're separated. Of course, when he has a chance to escape he turns back because he's not leaving his daughter. And at the climax, fighter jets are about to decimate the White House with all the hostages, because nuclear war is about to break out in the Mid East. And then the wing commander is informed of a little girl waving the presidential flag on the lawn. And he does the incredible, he disobeys a direct order and they abort. And the critics say, "That's unrealistic!" "They'd spend the next 20 years in prison."
But is that realistic or semi-realistic? Have there been cases when people have listened to their gut and overridden authority?
I was reading an account where President Kennedy called up the Captain on site during the Cuban Missile Crises. The ship was closing in to intercept, and I think ready to fire. Was it carrying missiles or not? The wrong decision could lead to war. Going against his military advisors, Kennedy called up the Captain: "This is the President ..." And then he asked as a former navy man to a navy man: What does your gut tell you? And the Captain said he didn't think the ship was carrying missiles. Unlike the new 'M' we can see that that president didn't micro-manage the situation.
That's a long-winded real life example. Who knows, maybe in a time of the most critical decision, a guy will gamble that he's right. That of course goes against the odds and training. But to get back to the rant. As a movie moment I liked it. Did I want the little girl and other hostages blown to bits vs. the possibility of nuclear war? Millions of people vs. a dozen? Why, no brainer! But we see this no-brainer in other films. Ok, Mr President. Give me the launch codes. You don't mind if I kill you? Well, here, I'll point my gun at this little girl. (Or at your daughter). And at that moment, we, the viewer is caught in the moment. What would we do? We have only seconds! I wasn't looking at the politics. I was looking it as an ideal of what a president (or other leader) as a moral man should really be, instead of a politician or flunky. It's just a film, but still it was saying something. We see the same thing with Bond. Just a film. Just an imagined main character. But yet this character stands with the classic characters in fiction. We first meet him (or some of us) in books; or sometimes we see the films and then read the first Fleming book... this fiction stays with us because the character and the writer's style is unique. The author has his own unique 'voice' ... when I read Fleming I can really appreciate him as a writer, it's too bad he had a relatively short career. Like Chandler, I have to classify as a genius in his field. He created a character James Bond that had some of the things of the classic hero, and some not so classic. But when weighing Bond's character, he always was a lot heavier in the plus department.

But in the latest 'incarnation' Bond is overweighed with negative traits, he has hardly any. Does he show a trace of humor? Do we think he can laugh at himself? Most of all, does he enjoy himself? Bond, even at the end of Fleming's run, looked at the world with the 'big eyes' of a simple artist. Unlike his creator he was straightforward in his enjoyments, and he didn't dwell much in self-pity. He had a spell of that in the beginnings of YOLT and TMWTGG (books), but he snapped out of it. In fact, YOLT begins with the witty Bond, matching wits with Tiger; Fleming brings us into the past and then back to the present newly furbished Bond. When Bond discovers it's Blofeld aka Dr Shatterhand, his friend Tiger is surprised at the change from the affable 'Bond san' to a cold avenger. But then, Bond meets Kissy and he has 'one golden day' ... and it ends with Bond having some peace in his life. Even if he's lost his memory, he still has his sense of fun. Fleming, like the best Bond films, ends with Bond with a beautiful girl, there's a shadow of 'Bond sentiment' and then Bond mentally 'shrugs his shoulders' and he's wondering what's next in store.

This is all very entertaining. Bond arrives. He sees. He conquers. That's the basic formula. Not Bond arrives. Bond pouts. Bond pity parties. Bond hates his life. Bond hates life in general.

This rant is for you
So pay the price
Make one rant come true .....
You move very well for a dead man, Mister Bond

Kill him!
Kill Bond! Now!!!
User avatar
carl stromberg
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Defence
Posts: 4446
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:15 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: The Spy Who Loved Me
Favorite Movies: Amicus compendium horror films
It's a Gift
A Night At The Opera
The Return of the Pink Panther
Sons of the Desert
Location: The Duck Inn

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by carl stromberg »

The Craig fans praise his Bonds for being more realistic unlike the "cartoonish" old Bond films. But when the silly aspects of the Craig era are pointex out they say "it's a Bond film - it's fantasy".
Bring back Bond!
User avatar
John P. Drake
Agent
Posts: 1658
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:42 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies.
Location: Somewhere, strangling Barbara Broccoli.

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by John P. Drake »

carl stromberg wrote:The Craig fans praise his Bonds for being more realistic unlike the "cartoonish" old Bond films. But when the silly aspects of the Craig era are pointex out they say "it's a Bond film - it's fantasy".
Yet they accept no arguments. If that is not ignorance, then I don't know what that is.
Image
User avatar
mcbride007
Commander
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:06 am
Favorite Bond Movie: The Living Daylights
Goldfinger
For Your Eyes Only
Location: England

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by mcbride007 »

They scrapped the James Bond series, invented a new spy series with Daniel Craig, but pretend that the new series it is a continuation of the decades old James Bond series.

That annoys me. Why not just launch a new series with Daniel Craig's spy character and continue making James Bond films?
User avatar
Daltonite Toothpaste
Single O
Posts: 883
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 2:35 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: The Living Daylights, Licence To Kill, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, From Russia With Love, Tomorrow Never Dies & For Your Eyes Only.
Favorite Movies: American Mary, Deadlier Than The Male, Dracula, Saved, The Big Sleep, The French Connection, Under The Sand

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by Daltonite Toothpaste »

John P. Drake wrote:
carl stromberg wrote:The Craig fans praise his Bonds for being more realistic unlike the "cartoonish" old Bond films. But when the silly aspects of the Craig era are pointex out they say "it's a Bond film - it's fantasy".
Yet they accept no arguments. If that is not ignorance, then I don't know what that is.
They're Cragzies.
Image
User avatar
John P. Drake
Agent
Posts: 1658
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:42 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies.
Location: Somewhere, strangling Barbara Broccoli.

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by John P. Drake »

Daltonite Toothpaste wrote:
John P. Drake wrote:
carl stromberg wrote:The Craig fans praise his Bonds for being more realistic unlike the "cartoonish" old Bond films. But when the silly aspects of the Craig era are pointex out they say "it's a Bond film - it's fantasy".
Yet they accept no arguments. If that is not ignorance, then I don't know what that is.
They're Cragzies.
Well said!
Image
User avatar
Daltonite Toothpaste
Single O
Posts: 883
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 2:35 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: The Living Daylights, Licence To Kill, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, From Russia With Love, Tomorrow Never Dies & For Your Eyes Only.
Favorite Movies: American Mary, Deadlier Than The Male, Dracula, Saved, The Big Sleep, The French Connection, Under The Sand

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by Daltonite Toothpaste »

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069895/?ref_=nv_sr_2

That's where I got the name from, seeing how some of them have acted when faced with *gasp* a negative opinion of Craig.
Image
User avatar
dirtybenny
0014
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:27 am
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia with Love and all the Connery films
Favorite Movies: Dirty Harry, Bullitt, The Sting, LA Confidential, The Maltese Falcon, and The Big Sleep
Location: Straight Outta Uranus

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by dirtybenny »

commander0077again wrote: But in the latest 'incarnation' Bond is overweighed with negative traits, he has hardly any. Does he show a trace of humor? Do we think he can laugh at himself? Most of all, does he enjoy himself? Bond, even at the end of Fleming's run, looked at the world with the 'big eyes' of a simple artist. Unlike his creator he was straightforward in his enjoyments, and he didn't dwell much in self-pity. He had a spell of that in the beginnings of YOLT and TMWTGG (books), but he snapped out of it. In fact, YOLT begins with the witty Bond, matching wits with Tiger; Fleming brings us into the past and then back to the present newly furbished Bond. When Bond discovers it's Blofeld aka Dr Shatterhand, his friend Tiger is surprised at the change from the affable 'Bond san' to a cold avenger. But then, Bond meets Kissy and he has 'one golden day' ... and it ends with Bond having some peace in his life. Even if he's lost his memory, he still has his sense of fun. Fleming, like the best Bond films, ends with Bond with a beautiful girl, there's a shadow of 'Bond sentiment' and then Bond mentally 'shrugs his shoulders' and he's wondering what's next in store.

This is all very entertaining. Bond arrives. He sees. He conquers. That's the basic formula. Not Bond arrives. Bond pouts. Bond pity parties. Bond hates his life. Bond hates life in general.

This rant is for you
So pay the price
Make one rant come true .....
Well said Commander, Fleming was always saying how Bond would have a moment of reflection or emotion and then "shake it off to get back to the task at hand" while it seems Craig just gets overcome and never gets to the shaking off.

mcbride007 wrote:They scrapped the James Bond series, invented a new spy series with Daniel Craig, but pretend that the new series it is a continuation of the decades old James Bond series.

That annoys me. Why not just launch a new series with Daniel Craig's spy character and continue making James Bond films?
I agree totally, I wouldn't mind the movies so much if they were about an Agent named John Brown and was some upstart series like Bourne, however they decide to destroy their established series in favor of copying what everyone else is doing.
The Rouge Warrior, On Hermaphrodite's Secret Service Image
User avatar
Omega
0010
Posts: 7304
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:01 pm
Favorite Bond Movie: TLD LTK GE TND TWINE DAD OHMSS
Favorite Movies: Gladiator
John Wick
Pacific Rim
LOTR trilogy
RED
Kingsman
X-Men First Class
X-Men Days of Futures Past
MI Rogue Nation
Location: the lost city
Contact:

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by Omega »

I've been thinking about it a lot in one way if Craig were not "Bond" there would be no problems with his Portrayal. IMO. But the movies as they are wouldn't make it as the adventures of Daniel Craig. Its James Bond that people want to see, and in the end the mediocre movies which would fail as a series on their own are as given praise because they are so different from real bond movies. the critics love them since it's a bond movie that's ubBondian. If it were not for the history nobody would care about Craig or EONs Bourne again Bond.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
............ :007:
User avatar
dirtybenny
0014
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:27 am
Favorite Bond Movie: From Russia with Love and all the Connery films
Favorite Movies: Dirty Harry, Bullitt, The Sting, LA Confidential, The Maltese Falcon, and The Big Sleep
Location: Straight Outta Uranus

Re: Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

Post by dirtybenny »

Here's a mini rant, I heard there was a Bond inspired cologne for sale at Kohl's department store. Out of morbid curiosity I went to their website and typed James Bond in the search box. This is what greeted me:

http://www.kohls.com/product/prd-140235 ... -print.jsp

Need I say anymore?
The Rouge Warrior, On Hermaphrodite's Secret Service Image
Post Reply