Face it chaps. You will feel better.

[jimmyjazz]

I have been a big Bond fan since childhood. First film I ever went to see on my own was You Only Live Twice I think when I was ten...34 years ago. Got the soundtracks, had the spy kit and went to every new film on release. When I first saw Casino Royale I was shocked. I couldn't believe that they would do this to my hero, drag him kicking and screaming out of the suave good looks, witty one-liners and inflated baddies.

I told everyone how formulaic and violent Casino Royale was and how they should avoid it at all costs. Daniel Craig played a thug.

About a year ago someone left a DVD of Casino Royale at our house. After too much to drink one night and I put it on. Probably need the alcohol to sit through it I thought.

Well I’ve seen it many times since and before you say anything no, not after more booze. Instead as sober as a judge and I have realised what a narrow alleyway fear and prejudice can lead you down. I have all the previous bond films on DVD and when I have tried to watch them in recent months they are, without exception laughable compared to Casino Royale.

You must all understand how difficult it was for me to say that as a 34 year obsession is hard to challenge but I mean it. Connery was mannered. Lazenby…a bad sneeze. Moore…always an idiot and I think he knew it. Dalton started well then joined the club and Brosnan an absolute waste of time in every one!

I think the members of this forum need to face up to it. Your old god is dead and thank you Mr Craig for that. I can’t believe anyone could sit through an old Bond film without realising how bad they actually are. Casino Royale had a depth never before seen in a Bond film it’s as simple as that.

I admit that QoS went back a step and could have ended up a disaster but it still put the pre Craig Bond film to shame.

You should watch Casino Royale again and again. That’s the key to it. Every other Bond film lasts as long as it lasts and any re-visits are just nostalgia. Casino Royale really does change every time you see it. Multi layered and I say it again full of character depth.

And integral to that quality and success is the first believable Bond ever played by Daniel Craig.

[katied]

I can’t believe anyone could sit through an old Bond film without realising how bad they actually are

I don't necessarily agree with that.Some of them(especially the one that rhymes with "Pie another Day) are nigh on unwatchable. A matter of personal taste. But if I'm going to watch a Bond film, I'd rather watch something from the Connery era.

[Dr. No]

Great another "I don't like the old Bonds because Craig is so great."

I saw CR and was not impressed with it. It wasn't Bond and it wasn't that great or multi layered. For me it was a depressing movie in theme and tone.

The old Bond films have a lot in them. I've seen Bond be married, betrayed, grieve and be out matched. I've seen him bluff and I've seen him fight his way out when his back is against the wall.

I can't give your convictions much weight since you so easily shed them. And the last sentence is confusing "first believable Bond ever played by Daniel Craig."?
It can be taken several ways and I don't even have to argue with it. There is only one Bond approved buy his creator.

[The Sweeney]

I have been a big Bond fan since childhood. First film I ever went to see on my own was You Only Live Twice I think when I was ten...34 years ago. Got the soundtracks, had the spy kit and went to every new film on release. When I first saw Casino Royale I was shocked. I couldn't believe that they would do this to my hero, drag him kicking and screaming out of the suave good looks, witty one-liners and inflated baddies.

I told everyone how formulaic and violent Casino Royale was and how they should avoid it at all costs. Daniel Craig played a thug.

About a year ago someone left a DVD of Casino Royale at our house. After too much to drink one night and I put it on. Probably need the alcohol to sit through it I thought.

Well I’ve seen it many times since and before you say anything no, not after more booze. Instead as sober as a judge and I have realised what a narrow alleyway fear and prejudice can lead you down. I have all the previous bond films on DVD and when I have tried to watch them in recent months they are, without exception laughable compared to Casino Royale.

You must all understand how difficult it was for me to say that as a 34 year obsession is hard to challenge but I mean it. Connery was mannered. Lazenby…a bad sneeze. Moore…always an idiot and I think he knew it. Dalton started well then joined the club and Brosnan an absolute waste of time in every one!

I think the members of this forum need to face up to it. Your old god is dead and thank you Mr Craig for that. I can’t believe anyone could sit through an old Bond film without realising how bad they actually are. Casino Royale had a depth never before seen in a Bond film it’s as simple as that.

I admit that QoS went back a step and could have ended up a disaster but it still put the pre Craig Bond film to shame.

You should watch Casino Royale again and again. That’s the key to it. Every other Bond film lasts as long as it lasts and any re-visits are just nostalgia. Casino Royale really does change every time you see it. Multi layered and I say it again full of character depth.

And integral to that quality and success is the first believable Bond ever played by Daniel Craig.

Great post, and welcome to the forum.

I agreed with everything you wrote there. For me, CR is one on its own. It actually puts all the other Bond films to shame (including QoS). There is no coincidence that it received so many glowing reviews worldwide, and gained so many new fans of the franchise (my wife being one of them). I just hope its not EON's only crowning moment, and that they have one more decent film left in the bank to pull out. The worldwide BO opening of QoS told you everything you need to know about how audiences loved CR, forget what the critics think.

As for getting the members here to change their opinions on Craig - forget it. They will still be here saying the same old things when Craig has made another 2 Bond films. They will NEVER change their opinion on him, its as simple as that.

[bjmdds]

The first 20 films are part of the most historic movie franchise in the history of motion pictures. THEY made this saga noteworthy, NOT the past two mimics of another director's work. Watching CR over and over again is probably what they do to prisoners at Gitmo.

[The Sweeney]

The first 20 films are part of the most historic movie franchise in the history of motion pictures. THEY made this saga noteworthy, NOT the past two mimics of another director's work. Watching CR over and over again is probably what they do to prisoners at Gitmo.

Times change, styles change, movies evolve. The 60's Bond's were classics, the 70's Bond's were as enjoyable as Smoky and the Bandit, Cannonball Run and Every Which Way But Loose, the 80's Bond's were forgettable (even though I personally like TLD and LTK) and the 90's were a rehash of the Moore era, only more muddled in direction, and nowhere near as enjoyable, with DAD being the ultimate low point in the history of the franchise.

With CR we suddenly had a hard-hitting, no nonsense Fleming tale, bloody, nasty, ball whacking an' all.

Sadly, EON almost returned to their silly, misguided ways with QoS.....

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

I think the members of this forum need to face up to it. Your old god is dead and thank you Mr Craig for that. I can’t believe anyone could sit through an old Bond film without realising how bad they actually are. Casino Royale had a depth never before seen in a Bond film it’s as simple as that

.

I'll watch the first 20 bond movies and you can stick with Casino Royale.

I enjoy the series of movies made in the Cubby Broccoli style and will continue watching them. I have never heard anyone say that On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Goldfinger, From Russia With Love etc are "bad" movies. Even the loonies on CommanderBond.net do not go that far.

You are obviously not a James Bond fan, and therefore it is predictable that you love Casino Royale.

The Sweeney wrote:
With CR we suddenly had a hard-hitting, no nonsense Fleming tale, bloody, nasty, ball whacking an' all.

Or: with Casino Royale we had a ghastly Bourne/Batman Begins rip off that looks badly dated already.

[bjmdds]

Jimmy: Since you stated you have a 34 year 'obsession' with the Bond franchise, it is peculiar that you claim you saw YOLT 34 years ago. In 1975, NO Bond film was released , in fact, there was NO Bond film released from 1974-1977. If you were ten years old 34 years ago, you were born in 1965. YOLT was released in 1967 so unless you went yourself to a Bond film at age 2 , your timelines are way off, especially for someone who has had an 'obsession' with the franchise.

[Kristatos]

Jimmy: Since you stated you have a 34 year 'obsession' with the Bond franchise, it is peculiar that you claim you saw YOLT 34 years ago. In 1975, NO Bond film was released , in fact, there was NO Bond film released from 1974-1977. If you were ten years old 34 years ago, you were born in 1965. YOLT was released in 1967 so unless you went yourself to a Bond film at age 2 , your timelines are way off, especially for someone who has had an 'obsession' with the franchise.

Not necessarily. In the days before VCRs and cable movie channels, films were often re-released prior to their TV premieres (which, for a blockbuster film, could be anything up to 20 years after its original cinema release in those days). The first film I ever saw in the cinema was Mary Poppins, which was made in 1964 IIRC. I was born in 1967. I can't remember how old I was, but I think I was about 4 or 5 at the time.

[jimmyjazz]

Jimmy: Since you stated you have a 34 year 'obsession' with the Bond franchise, it is peculiar that you claim you saw YOLT 34 years ago. In 1975, NO Bond film was released , in fact, there was NO Bond film released from 1974-1977. If you were ten years old 34 years ago, you were born in 1965. YOLT was released in 1967 so unless you went yourself to a Bond film at age 2 , your timelines are way off, especially for someone who has had an 'obsession' with the franchise.

Well forgive me if this gets posted twice..as my intial response seems to have vanished. I saw YOLT together with I think all the other Connery Bonds back to back over one week at the Civic Hall Cinema, Clitheroe Lancashire. This was in the mid 70's and they were being screened 'for the last time' before they went to TV. Not sure it was really the last time but that's what my dad said. As a Bond obessive I wanted to see them all. My Mum took me to Dr No, Dad to FRWL, my brother to Golfinger and Mum again for Thunderball. By the time YOLT came on, (must have been a Thursday if you're keeping up) my family was sick of taking me so off I went on my own. I remember being a bit scared sat there on my own. So there you are. I do know my Bond stuff probably more than most. I still have a 10th anniversary double album with picture book listing all UK and US relase dates so DON'T try to catch me out!!!

Oh and by the way. Rupert Penry Jones and all those other Brosnan type suave, (some might say creepy) candidates for Bond that people keep going on about. The old Bond had a look that was too defined. The look of the old Bond has gone beyond the screen and into wider culture. There is a 'James Bond type'. You could hear and I have heard someone being described as a 'James Bond type'.

That is why your old Bond is dead. If someone who had the look of Rupert Penry Jones was intervied for MI5 in reality, he would be refused the job for looking too much like James Bond and the baddies would see him coming

Another Brosnan type would be like casting a Marilyn Monroe look-a-like in the part of a Bond girl. Or even an Honour Blackman type. She would stick out like a sore thumb as beuatiful as they both were.

[bjmdds]

What will you say if the 7th 007 looks more like a traditional Connery type than a Craig type? I guess he will be reborn then.

[katied]

What will you say if the 7th 007 looks more like a traditional Connery type than a Craig type? I guess he will be reborn then.

Or if they continue on the current path, reBourne!

[jimmyjazz]

What will you say if the 7th 007 looks more like a traditional Connery type than a Craig type? I guess he will be reborn then.

Well that's a strange point and one that has no relation to my cultural comments on the nature of the old Bond look. I would like to hear more if you have any substance to add. However I would like to hear your response to my reply to your comments that I could not have seen YOLT in the mid 70's at the cinema. Bond did exist before the invention of video and certainly before digital tech. Surely you must know that? Research also existed before the internet you know. An apology would be right I think. (After all it's what the anti Craig lobby will need to get used to when they wake up). So respond to that point first and we will take it from there.

I'm guessing.....under 25???

BOND EXPERT. (I don't think many have visited this forum).

[John Drake]

Oh and by the way. Rupert Penry Jones and all those other Brosnan type suave, (some might say creepy) candidates for Bond.

I don't know about creepy. I think the word you are looking for is handsome. Fleming described Bond as film star handsome, tall, dark, etc, but then what the f**k did he know about anything.

Another Brosnan type would be like casting a Marilyn Monroe look-a-like in the part of a Bond girl. Or even an Honour Blackman type. She would stick out like a sore thumb as beuatiful (sic) as they both were.

Oh, absolutely. Pussy Galore would be a crap Bond girl in these refined times. Luckily for us Eon will cast another former Soviet Republic bimbo with the acting range of a pair of socks.

[katied]

Luckily for us Eon will cast another former Soviet Republic bimbo with the acting range of a pair of socks.

Someone like Olga would be preferrable to Gemma Arteron.

[bjmdds]

What will you say if the 7th 007 looks more like a traditional Connery type than a Craig type? I guess he will be reborn then.

Well that's a strange point and one that has no relation to my cultural comments on the nature of the old Bond look. I would like to hear more if you have any substance to add. However I would like to hear your response to my reply to your comments that I could not have seen YOLT in the mid 70's at the cinema. Bond did exist before the invention of video and certainly before digital tech. Surely you must know that? Research also existed before the internet you know. An apology would be right I think. (After all it's what the anti Craig lobby will need to get used to when they wake up). So respond to that point first and we will take it from there.

I'm guessing.....under 25???

BOND EXPERT. (I don't think many have visited this forum).

So you were watching YOLT in the 1970s in the cinema when Roger Moore was starring in the role. I'm guessing, we have seen you here before.

[The Sweeney]

What will you say if the 7th 007 looks more like a traditional Connery type than a Craig type? I guess he will be reborn then.

Well that's a strange point and one that has no relation to my cultural comments on the nature of the old Bond look. I would like to hear more if you have any substance to add. However I would like to hear your response to my reply to your comments that I could not have seen YOLT in the mid 70's at the cinema. Bond did exist before the invention of video and certainly before digital tech. Surely you must know that? Research also existed before the internet you know. An apology would be right I think. (After all it's what the anti Craig lobby will need to get used to when they wake up). So respond to that point first and we will take it from there.

I'm guessing.....under 25???

BOND EXPERT. (I don't think many have visited this forum).

So you were watching YOLT in the 1970s in the cinema when Roger Moore was starring in the role. I'm guessing, we have seen you here before.

Eh?? Did you not read his earlier explanation........

[katied]

According to IMDB YOLT has never been rereleased.

[The Sweeney]

Oh and by the way. Rupert Penry Jones and all those other Brosnan type suave, (some might say creepy) candidates for Bond.

I don't know about creepy. I think the word you are looking for is handsome. Fleming described Bond as film star handsome, tall, dark, etc, but then what the f**k did he know about anything.

He also described Bond as a nasty looking customer. When Viv Michel first meets him in TSWLM, her initial impression was that Bond was a villain.

But like you said, what the f**k did he know about anything......

[The Sweeney]

According to IMDB YOLT has never been rereleased.

I doubt IMDB is that accurate. I remember back-to-back screenings of the Bonds being shown in my local cinema in the late 70's too. If a local cinema had bought the film reels to do this, I doubt it is noted down in the history books as a `re-release' officially.