Welcome thread

[Kristatos]

Welcome to the forum, Gd-Maitre.

[Dalton exMI6]

Greetings,

Thank God for this site, because I have had enough of Craig. He has destroyed the franchise and is as much Bond as Vladimir Putin is Barack Obama.

I left MI6 Home Of James Bond or should I say the Craig knitting circle. The place where intelligent commentary and speaking the truth results in an coordinated attack from several members.

I love Bond and am disgusted how Craig gets all the credit. They now say he is the closest to Connery and equal in personality /style.

Craig being and acting like Connery, well, they may as well say a cactus up the arse is a smooth experience. I hope I can have a place where fair discussions are not ignored or where posts are detailed by talking about the width of the toilet in Casino Unroyale.

And Craig makes me ashamed to be British.

[Kristatos]

Welcome to the forum, Dalton

[dirtybenny]

Welcome Dalton Ex!

I know how you feel so many "Bond fans" have discarded their critical thinking caps and have turned Bond fandom in to the Daniel Craig fan club, so much time is spent researching the jockstrap Craig wears in the "Madagascar scene" of CR or what brand of flight bag he was seen carrying at Heathrow. Meanwhile those who do not lap up whatever tripe EON regurgitates and pins a "Bond" label to are considered "not real Bond fans"! Worry no longer friend you've found a home with kindred spirits here!

[The Saint 007]

Welcome to the forum Dalton exMI6.

I think I may have recently read your posts on the MI6 forum's controversial opinions thread, where there was some constructive criticisms regarding the Craig era from a Dalton fan. These criticisms were very much like what most people here have been saying for years, and I figured it wouldn't be long before the Craig defence force would get triggered by them.

I recall a while back there was a Roger Moore hater on the MI6 forum who was just relentless. This person expressed their dislike of the Moore era on a daily basis, even in a Moore appreciation thread, and derailed threads constantly regarding the subject. After umpteen warnings for months, the mods finally decided to issue a ban. Now if that sort of thing was done to Craig, I'm pretty sure the ban would have happened much faster.

It's good that you found this forum, though, and I hope you enjoy it here.

[Veronica]

Welcome Dalton! It's good you have come here since the MI6 forum hasn't been a sensible place for a while now. I couldn't believe some stuff I read there. Anyhow, I hope you will enjoy your time here!

[Dalton exMI6]

Welcome Dalton Ex!

I know how you feel so many "Bond fans" have discarded their critical thinking caps and have turned Bond fandom in to the Daniel Craig fan club, so much time is spent researching the jockstrap Craig wears in the "Madagascar scene" of CR or what brand of flight bag he was seen carrying at Heathrow. Meanwhile those who do not lap up whatever tripe EON regurgitates and pins a "Bond" label to are considered "not real Bond fans"! Worry no longer friend you've found a home with kindred spirits here!

Thank you dirtybenny. Much appreciated!!!

If I stayed on that site, I would have lost my enthusiasm for Bond, just by association. Talking of Craggers, my biggest regret of 2015 was paying £9.80 to see Spectre. Of course I hated it, and to this day have not told my wife I have seen it. I would be more comfortable saying I cheated on her.

Regarding EON, you are right. They have done the opposite of the wishes of Cubby Broccoli. Babs did say her father would be proud of the success, but that is a lie. Cubby never compromised on the image of Bond, and would even turn down a huge movie star, if the physical requirements were not there. Burt Reynolds for one.

I mentioned this too on MI6, that if Cubby vetoed Sam Neill for The Living Daylights, then how can they come to the conclusion he would have approved Craig.

[Dalton exMI6]

Welcome to the forum Dalton exMI6.

I think I may have recently read your posts on the MI6 forum's controversial opinions thread, where there was some constructive criticisms regarding the Craig era from a Dalton fan. These criticisms were very much like what most people here have been saying for years, and I figured it wouldn't be long before the Craig defence force would get triggered by them.

I recall a while back there was a Roger Moore hater on the MI6 forum who was just relentless. This person expressed their dislike of the Moore era on a daily basis, even in a Moore appreciation thread, and derailed threads constantly regarding the subject. After umpteen warnings for months, the mods finally decided to issue a ban. Now if that sort of thing was done to Craig, I'm pretty sure the ban would have happened much faster.

It's good that you found this forum, though, and I hope you enjoy it here.

Thank you so much sir!!!

You read it! My breaking point with those cabbages over there, was when one of them mentioned the charisma and screen presence of Craig being "A giant". And the obedience on MI6 to that asinine assertion was beyond belief.


Craig has no presence. Forget looks. His stint with the Queen for The Olympics also proves that. The camera doesn't lie and the appalling step-down of the most famous fictional character is shameful.

Also the introduction of Q in Skyfall in the museum was the franchise with it's pants down for the world to see.







The video below tells any sane person that the limits of credibility are being stretched.


[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZB8-VRpglnc[/video]

[Dalton exMI6]

Welcome Dalton! It's good you have come here since the MI6 forum hasn't been a sensible place for a while now. I couldn't believe some stuff I read there. Anyhow, I hope you will enjoy your time here!

Thank you very much Veronica.

I appreciate the courage this site has and that is attractive. James Bond represents courage and not conformity!!! A glass of p*ss is not Bolinger Champagne, despite hearing to the contrary.

The picture of the five previous Bonds for the forum, proves that the quality control of the Broccoli/Saltzman era was exemplary. And Brosnan was the last Cubby Broccoli approved Bond. I will say this regarding Dalton or Brosnan. Whether you prefer one over the other in terms of style, in terms of image they both scream JAMES BOND!!!

I could care less what EON will do. I have zero faith. They will probably cast Rupert Grint-Ron Weasley- next and tell us we are unreasonable.



Naturally, we all have our favourite Bond/Bonds and that is fine.

[bjmdds]

I did battle there for a time in 2006, then left it when they LOCKED my anti-Cr-egg thread there. You, are our kind of people

[Dalton exMI6]

I did battle there for a time in 2006, then left it when they LOCKED my anti-Cr-egg thread there. You, are our kind of people

Thanks for your reply. I made the stupid mistake of trying to reason over there. I admit for a while I tried to be nice about Craggers, but it was a capital error.

I now realise that it is foolish to even call that miscast Bond in the same sentence as Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan.

The first five Bonds are horses. Craig is a donkey trying to be a horse. Man were we spoilt with the previous Bonds!

Poor Ian Fleming.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

Welcome Dalton.

When it was rumoured that Craig was to be cast, fans were appalled. But when he was cast they fell into line and now say bizarre things to support him. The joke is these Craig fans were probably saying he looks like a potato in April 2005.

[bjmdds]

Cr-egg's action figure!

[The Saint 007]

You read it! My breaking point with those cabbages over there, was when one of them mentioned the charisma and screen presence of Craig being "A giant". And the obedience on MI6 to that asinine assertion was beyond belief.

There was no reason for those people to get so defensive. You made some decent arguments to back up your criticisms regarding the Craig era in an appropriate thread, and didn't come off as being a troll like that Moore hater I mentioned above.


I especially agree with your point about Barbara's obsession with Craig. It seems that she puts him above the Bond character, which wasn't done with the older filmmakers. It looks as though they can't be bothered to find suitable candidates, and are fine with keeping their Mr. Roper lookalike in this Days Of Our Bond soap opera for several more years.

[Dalton exMI6]

Welcome Dalton.

When it was rumoured that Craig was to be cast, fans were appalled. But when he was cast they fell into line and now say bizarre things to support him. The joke is these Craig fans were probably saying he looks like a potato in April 2005.

Thank you for the welcome. I salute you for having the courage to see the disaster from day one.

Many people I know are not enthusiastic with what has transpired. Craig is so easy to take apart as the antithesis of Bond.

And what comes out of his mouth is as ugly as his face. He is a low class individual and someone that Cubby Broccoli would have severely disliked.

Connery was pure class and a man who chose his words wisely. Connery is the Beatlemania of the franchise. What has become evident is that EON want to use the Craig era to set him as the new benchmark to measure past Bonds against.

Craig is becoming the Frankenstein monster that will destroy the goodwill of true Bond fans. Skyfall for me is a film for those who hate the classic era. It is an insult not a homage to the past.

Brosnan said in Tomorrow Never Dies : "They'll print anything these days!". And regarding Bond : "They'll cast anyone these days!".

[Dalton exMI6]

You read it! My breaking point with those cabbages over there, was when one of them mentioned the charisma and screen presence of Craig being "A giant". And the obedience on MI6 to that asinine assertion was beyond belief.

There was no reason for those people to get so defensive. You made some decent arguments to back up your criticisms regarding the Craig era in an appropriate thread, and didn't come off as being a troll like that Moore hater I mentioned above.


I especially agree with your point about Barbara's obsession with Craig. It seems that she puts him above the Bond character, which wasn't done with the older filmmakers. It looks as though they can't be bothered to find suitable candidates, and are fine with keeping their Mr. Roper lookalike in this Days Of Our Bond soap opera for several more years.

Thank you for noticing that I attempt to back up my argument. I was called a nutter for saying Barbara wants to use Craig to dethrone Connery. She is unhealthily obsessed with Craig. It was sickening to hear her sound like a little girl when she said he is the best Bond.



As for Mi6 and trying to reason. They insult past Bonds, yet showing Craig with the Queen which was a disaster, still got them defensive about his total lack of charisma. It is like a religious cult over on that site and they are to be pitied.

There is no room for intelligent debate over there. A tractor is sexier than a Ferrari according to them.

As for Babs, she gave Craggers the keys to the franchise and Spectre is the result. It underperformed despite cinema ticket prices rising by a significant amount in anticipation of Star Wars The Force Awakens.

And how much did the advertising cost?
Because Spectre was supposed to hit closer to $1.4 billion and they threw everything they had.

Even License To Kill took back five times its budget with the worst promotion in the studio's history. John Glen and Cubby Broccoli point this out in their biographies.

[The Saint 007]

As for Babs, she gave Craggers the keys to the franchise and Spectre is the result. It underperformed despite cinema ticket prices rising by a significant amount in anticipation of Star Wars The Force Awakens.

And how much did the advertising cost?
Because Spectre was supposed to hit closer to $1.4 billion and they threw everything they had.

Even License To Kill took back five times its budget with the worst promotion in the studio's history. John Glen and Cubby Broccoli point this out in their biographies.

I thankfully was able to watch Spectre for free on YouTube before it was removed. For a film with a ridiculous budget that took three years to make, four writers and an arty farty director like Sam Mendes, Spectre is a disaster that managed to top Quantum Of Solace as my least favourite Bond film. While I did read the Sony leaks, the film trailer alone made it pretty clear where they were going with the big plot twist. Craig and the filmmakers have stated that the Austin Powers films were partly responsible for the choice of rebooting the series, and yet they turn around and make the foster brother connection between Bond and Blofeld, a similar plot twist from the film Goldmember.

Many Bond fans seem to get uptight over these Austin Powers films, but the thing is that every popular film/TV series usually gets parodied. If people take the effort to cash in off your success and popularity, it most likely means you are doing something right. Austin Powers wasn't the first Bond parody and it isn't the last, so the filmmakers and certain fans need to get over it.

Regardless of the criticisms John Glen gets, he is my favourite Bond director. His five Bond films all felt unique, and unlike Sam Mendes, he doesn't put himself above Bond.

[Dalton exMI6]

As for Babs, she gave Craggers the keys to the franchise and Spectre is the result. It underperformed despite cinema ticket prices rising by a significant amount in anticipation of Star Wars The Force Awakens.

And how much did the advertising cost?
Because Spectre was supposed to hit closer to $1.4 billion and they threw everything they had.

Even License To Kill took back five times its budget with the worst promotion in the studio's history. John Glen and Cubby Broccoli point this out in their biographies.

I thankfully was able to watch Spectre for free on YouTube before it was removed. For a film with a ridiculous budget that took three years to make, four writers and an arty farty director like Sam Mendes, Spectre is a disaster that managed to top Quantum Of Solace as my least favourite Bond film. While I did read the Sony leaks, the film trailer alone made it pretty clear where they were going with the big plot twist. Craig and the filmmakers have stated that the Austin Powers films were partly responsible for the choice of rebooting the series, and yet they turn around and make the foster brother connection between Bond and Blofeld, a similar plot twist from the film Goldmember.

Many Bond fans seem to get uptight over these Austin Powers films, but the thing is that every popular film/TV series usually gets parodied. If people take the effort to cash in off your success and popularity, it most likely means you are doing something right. Austin Powers wasn't the first Bond parody and it isn't the last, so the filmmakers and certain fans need to get over it.

Regardless of the criticisms John Glen gets, he is my favourite Bond director. His five Bond films all felt unique, and unlike Sam Mendes, he doesn't put himself above Bond.

What Craig and the producers stated, and what they tried to do is evident. Originally they marketed Craggers as having nothing to do with the old Bond. They knew he would not be accepted as the classic Bond. Like you say a reboot (With the old M and Connery's car???).

But after the success of Skyfall, they moved the goalpost and tried to make Craggers into the very thing that he cannot do, which is the Connery/Moore hybrid. Him blatantly ripping off Connery was laughable. And the white tuxedo looked sh*te on him!

The more I look at the Skyfall poster and the more I think of him as a mature Tintin with that grotesque hairstyle. Or a Nazi agent. How can they F up a Bond poster?

That is another problem with Craig, you watch him in those Bond films and you have to superimpose the other actors over his face to make it less painful.

John Glen knew how to do a beginning, middle and end. You knew it was a Bond film and it felt naturally Bond. And he could tie up the story to begin the new film afresh. Each film he did built on what he learned from the last. Even License To Kill keeps a link to the past films, despite moving off in another direction.

And by License To Kill, John Glen had to do that film with a smaller budget than the previous film and the same budget as Moonraker from 1979. And despite the lack of money, it still had fresh ideas and was a film that grew in popularity over the years. It did not need to borrow from the past like the Craggers are doing.

By the way, The pre-title sequence of For Your Eyes Only was genius. Glen's first Bond. How the helicopter was used was beyond cool and the way Glen escalates tension is brilliant. By contrast, the helicopter scene in Spectre was duller than words can describe. And Moore looked great in that helicopter. His suit and style was superb.


Old Bond invented with each new film. New Bourne photocopies.

I told John Glen at his book signing back in October 2015 in London, that he did a great job. And that he deserves more credit. And John Glen is a huge fan of the classic Bond films. That's what is great about him. He did Bond for the right reasons!



And Glen knew Bond having served Cubby and Harry since 1969.

[The Saint 007]

What Craig and the producers stated, and what they tried to do is evident. Originally they marketed Craggers as having nothing to do with the old Bond. They knew he would not be accepted as the classic Bond. Like you say a reboot (With the old M and Connery's car???).

But after the success of Skyfall, they moved the goalpost and tried to make Craggers into the very thing that he cannot do, which is the Connery/Moore hybrid. Him blatantly ripping off Connery was laughable. And the white tuxedo looked sh*te on him!

The more I look at the Skyfall poster and the more I think of him as a mature Tintin with that grotesque hairstyle. Or a Nazi agent. How can they F up a Bond poster?

That is another problem with Craig, you watch him in those Bond films and you have to superimpose the other actors over his face to make it less painful.

John Glen knew how to do a beginning, middle and end. You knew it was a Bond film and it felt naturally Bond. And he could tie up the story to begin the new film afresh. Each film he did built on what he learned from the last. Even License To Kill keeps a link to the past films, despite moving off in another direction.

And by License To Kill, John Glen had to do that film with a smaller budget than the previous film and the same budget as Moonraker from 1979. And despite the lack of money, it still had fresh ideas and was a film that grew in popularity over the years. It did not need to borrow from the past like the Craggers are doing.

By the way, The pre-title sequence of For Your Eyes Only was genius. Glen's first Bond. How the helicopter was used was beyond cool and the way Glen escalates tension is brilliant. By contrast, the helicopter scene in Spectre was duller than words can describe. And Moore looked great in that helicopter. His suit and style was superb.


Old Bond invented with each new film. New Bourne photocopies.

I told John Glen at his book signing back in October 2015 in London, that he did a great job. And that he deserves more credit. And John Glen is a huge fan of the classic Bond films. That's what is great about him. He did Bond for the right reasons!



And Glen knew Bond having served Cubby and Harry since 1969.

The Aston Martin DB5 has now become a nostalgia card the producers like to use in order to win over fans of the classic Bond films, but I don't fall for it. It's going to take more than these cheap homages to get me interested in the Bond films again.

In regards to your comment about the Skyfall poster, the posters for the Craig era in general have been rather uninspired, to put it mildly. I've seen far better fan posters both hand drawn and digital that put the official Craig Bond posters to shame. In both the Skyfall and Spectre posters, Craig is doing his trademark wide stance, which someone else here has said he sort of looks like he crapped himself. With the Spectre teaser poster, there were a lot of people comparing Craig wearing the black outfit to that of Moore's in Live And Let Die, but Moore looks much cooler in it than Craig, in my opinion.



Completely agree with everything you said about John Glen. He made Bond films that weren't ashamed of being what they are, and did great work even with a limited budget. His Bond films have some of the best action scenes and stunts in the series.

[Dalton exMI6]

What Craig and the producers stated, and what they tried to do is evident. Originally they marketed Craggers as having nothing to do with the old Bond. They knew he would not be accepted as the classic Bond. Like you say a reboot (With the old M and Connery's car???).

But after the success of Skyfall, they moved the goalpost and tried to make Craggers into the very thing that he cannot do, which is the Connery/Moore hybrid. Him blatantly ripping off Connery was laughable. And the white tuxedo looked sh*te on him!

The more I look at the Skyfall poster and the more I think of him as a mature Tintin with that grotesque hairstyle. Or a Nazi agent. How can they F up a Bond poster?

That is another problem with Craig, you watch him in those Bond films and you have to superimpose the other actors over his face to make it less painful.

John Glen knew how to do a beginning, middle and end. You knew it was a Bond film and it felt naturally Bond. And he could tie up the story to begin the new film afresh. Each film he did built on what he learned from the last. Even License To Kill keeps a link to the past films, despite moving off in another direction.

And by License To Kill, John Glen had to do that film with a smaller budget than the previous film and the same budget as Moonraker from 1979. And despite the lack of money, it still had fresh ideas and was a film that grew in popularity over the years. It did not need to borrow from the past like the Craggers are doing.

By the way, The pre-title sequence of For Your Eyes Only was genius. Glen's first Bond. How the helicopter was used was beyond cool and the way Glen escalates tension is brilliant. By contrast, the helicopter scene in Spectre was duller than words can describe. And Moore looked great in that helicopter. His suit and style was superb.


Old Bond invented with each new film. New Bourne photocopies.

I told John Glen at his book signing back in October 2015 in London, that he did a great job. And that he deserves more credit. And John Glen is a huge fan of the classic Bond films. That's what is great about him. He did Bond for the right reasons!



And Glen knew Bond having served Cubby and Harry since 1969.

The Aston Martin DB5 has now become a nostalgia card the producers like to use in order to win over fans of the classic Bond films, but I don't fall for it. It's going to take more than these cheap homages to get me interested in the Bond films again.

In regards to your comment about the Skyfall poster, the posters for the Craig era have been rather uninspired in general, to put it mildly. I've seen far better fan posters both hand drawn and digital that put the official Craig Bond posters to shame. In both the Skyfall and Spectre posters, Craig is doing his trademark wide stance, which someone else here has said he sort of looks like he crapped himself. With the Spectre teaser poster, there were a lot of people comparing Craig wearing the black outfit to that of Moore's in Live And Let Die, but Moore looks much cooler in it than Craig, in my opinion.



Completely agree with everything you said about John Glen. He made Bond films that weren't ashamed at being what they are, and did great work even with a limited budget. His Bond films have some of the best action scenes and stunts in the series.

Thanks! Absolutely right that Moore looks way cooler than Craig. Craig and that skull mask he wears in Spectre are great bedfellows. That skull mask is like his personality. He is the death of Bond!

What makes Roger Moore so fantastic is that he does not believe his own hype. He is very humble and a great ambassador for the UK worldwide. He is a legend and he was my first exposure to James Bond as a child on television. And he is a brilliant, brilliant comedian. He actually is funny. Stand up comics have nothing on Roger.

Craig on the other hand thinks he is the dogs bollocks and it comes across in his interviews. When I see his mug on the television, I change channel. He is pretentious and looks like a goblin from Harry Potter.

I can watch Connery, Moore, Lazenby, Dalton and Brosnan with enthusiasm. All different, but all classy in their own way. They represent the image elegantly. Their value is now greater than before due to a certain miscreant in the role!