MI6...blah blah blah.....Brown....blah blah blah.....Crackhouse....blah blah blah......katied wrote:speaking of being boring and repeating yourself where Craig is concerned....: you get a gold star[/sarcasm]
Never even heard of that one - interesting that the title is very similar to Permission To Die, a Bond comic from the '80s by Mike Grell. The Lion In Winter is worth seeing, I'd say. It's based on a play, and is a little stagey as a result, but it has some nice art direction, Peter O'Toole at his finest, one of John Barry's own personal favourites of his scores, and the film debuts of both Tim and Sir Anthony Hopkins.stockslivevan wrote:I never saw The Lion in Winter, so I guess that makes it twice for Dalton since he also played a homosexual in the film Permission to Kill.
Coming off the success of MR, the new decade with a new style and a new Bond would have kept the series fresh unlike in 1987 when the popularity already declined by that point. Dalton would have stood well with his competitors like Harrison Ford and Arnold Schwarzenneger, unlike Moore's Grandpa Bond who's stunt stand ins were becoming rediculously blatant, with AVTAK helping no matters. Anyone find it astonishing how Moore looked like he aged a decade in two years from MR to FYEO? He still looked young for his age in MR but by FYEO he was already looking too old.James wrote:Timothy Dalton should really have begun his Bond career a lot sooner than 1987.
He was the 70s Bond anyway but I agree that it should have worked out like that. I know Moore was a safe bet for Broccoli and that he was the only successful Bond actor after Connery, but he should have took in the Bond image into consideration when bringing up other action heroes of the 80s, especially before making AVTAK. If Dalton was brought in 1981 the darker image would have been less shocking since Moore's lighthearted tenure was only 6 years as opposed to a whole 12 when everyone got so used to it.James wrote:I thought he looked ok in some of FYEO, if a bit heavy. He wasn't expecting to do that film so wasn't in his best shape. It would have been better if Rog had made his debut in 1971 and bowed out with Moonraker. Then he could have been the seventies Bond and left Dalton to be the eighties Bond.
So Connery is a 70s Bond too? It doesn't sound right, since he only had one film. That's like saying Brosnan was the Bond of the 2000s.James wrote:I always thought Rog being the only seventies Bond would have had a nice symmetry. It was the decade that seemed to suit his 007 persona with the big fantastical epics and, er, flared trousers.
News to me, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just more tabloid trash.What's this about Alicia Car Keys being unhappy about the new theme song? I found two links but both of them froze my crappy computer. If my computer was a person I'd have strangled it by now.
To the best of my knowledge 1971 was a part of the seventies.stockslivevan wrote:So Connery is a 70s Bond too?
I don't even want to imagine the drama if they decided to quit making Bond films007 wrote:Cavill looks like he's grown up quite a bit since 2005. We are assuming of course that Eon will make any more Bond films after Craig, who Barbara will hold onto for as long as possible.
I don't think the internet could handle it Better that they make crappy Bond films than give it up. I don't think simply having one film qualifies Connery the title of 70s Bond, especially when the next guy took over. To me, he'll always be 60s Bond much like Rog will be 70s Bond. The 80s is sort of a tug-of-war between Moore and Dalton, since Dalton is the new Bond of that decade yet Moore had the first half.James wrote:To the best of my knowledge 1971 was a part of the seventies.stockslivevan wrote:So Connery is a 70s Bond too?
Just saw the commercial...bjmdds wrote:I just TRIED to watch CR on the Showtime cable channel. I had to shut it off half way through the film. Craig is INTOLERABLE as Bond to me, and I find the entire film a bore with him in the lead. With Henry Cavill's new commercial, how much longer before he replaces Craig
I'm sorry BJ, but that kid isn't man enough to play a good convincing Bond. Maybe in a decade when he loses that babyface and stops being a metrosexual, MAYBE he'll be right for Bond. But no. No. No. No. No. No... NO. If Craig were to leave soon, I'd rather have Sam Worthington in the role, and I have yet to see a clip of that guy! And he looks much more like a man who can handle himself unlike Cavill who looks like he would cry the instant someone messes his hair out of place. It's no surprise that he does look 20 years younger than Craig, cuz, you know, he is 15 years younger. So given how young Cavill is, he's most likely to become the 8th actor rather than the 7th. WAY WAY WAY too young for Bond.how ridiculous will that be having the 7th Bond look 20 years younger than the 6th?
No, I didn't say it qualified him for any title but was just pointing out he made a film in the seventies. It was a pedantic musing on my part to imagine a decade for each actor - but OBVIOUSLY it didn't work out like that.stockslivevan wrote:I don't think simply having one film qualifies Connery the title of 70s Bond, especially when the next guy took over. To me, he'll always be 60s Bond much like Rog will be 70s Bond. The 80s is sort of a tug-of-war between Moore and Dalton, since Dalton is the new Bond of that decade yet Moore had the first half.James wrote:To the best of my knowledge 1971 was a part of the seventies.stockslivevan wrote:So Connery is a 70s Bond too?
