The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[Veronica]

you won't believe what I read today. Some Craig fan wrote how "The Spy Who Loved Me" doesn't feel like a Bond movie...poor poor kids who saw Craig first... that's all I can say.

[Kristatos]

you won't believe what I read today. Some Craig fan wrote how "The Spy Who Loved Me" doesn't feel like a Bond movie...poor poor kids who saw Craig first... that's all I can say.

Yeah, there's going to be a generation that grows up thinking that Bond films are supposed to be middlebrow, character-based dramas. Very sad.

[The Saint 007]

you won't believe what I read today. Some Craig fan wrote how "The Spy Who Loved Me" doesn't feel like a Bond movie...poor poor kids who saw Craig first... that's all I can say.

A lot of the younger fans Craig is bringing in tend to dislike most if not all of the classic Bond films, and think Craig is the only true Bond. The Brosnan era brought in many new young fans to the series, especially with the video games like GoldenEye 64, but they appreciated the classic films and cinematic Bond elements for the most part.

[Veronica]

And the fact that someone even considered Idris Elba as Bond and that some people actually agree with the that is just an example of how truly they've lost themselves with this "reboot".I certainly have nothing against black people or any other nation or race for that matter but-Bond is white.He is British and that has always been one of the most important things about him.Bond movies always acknowledged that.Many times.In the very first Bond movie Julius No describes Bond as a man with "habits of the empire".
There were always things that were centered around that fact.In "From Russia With Love" for example Kromsteen says:"My reading of British mentality is that they always treat trap as a challenge."...in "The Spy Who Loved Me" Stromberg at one point comments:"British agent in love with Russian agent.Detente indeed". Two competitive forces now working together.In "For Eyes Only" Russians want something British have.Another game between them.GoldenEye represents world post Cold War and even represents Bond as a man out of time-an old relic.Valentin Zukowski at one point comments:"Still working for MI6 or have you decided to join the 21st century." This says something about a man who works for British Intelligence because he sees his country as maybe superior to other-as a world power they used to be.He after all is a naval commander.In Tomorrow Never Dies M states at one point:"I don't know if they will be angrier because they lost it or we found it." commenting on Americans.
In The World is Not Enough Elektra wants to get revenge on her father-an Englishman who ruled the "kingdom he stole from her mother" who came from Central Asia.After all,British Empire had colonies and they were rulers on foreign ground.They came and took.Even M comments how she always knew Sir Robert King would "concur the world".Even in DAD,colonel Moon points out:"You British still believe you have right to police the world." He comments how his main subject was "detesting democracy and despising the West."
Point is,the fact that Bond was British was always one of the biggest appeals of the series.You just could sense that,for me,wonderful British patriotism.Bond was British and he was self-aware because of it-I would say-just like Fleming.He's an Englishman.Of course,he as well is suave,and sophisticated and knows fine wines and brandies and thinks that poor choice of wine during dinner is an absolute proof that he's dealing with a double agent.Craig doesn't give the sense of any of that-and Elba couldn't do that either-there should be this self-awareness because of his roots.Elba couldn't do that.Because he simply isn't an Englishman.It has nothing to do with racism and quite honestly I get frustrated when people imply that.The president of USA is black-if that doesn't show that there generally isn't discrimination towards blacks then I don't what does.

[Veronica]

you won't believe what I read today. Some Craig fan wrote how "The Spy Who Loved Me" doesn't feel like a Bond movie...poor poor kids who saw Craig first... that's all I can say.

A lot of the younger fans Craig is bringing in tend to dislike most if not all of the classic Bond films, and think Craig is the only true Bond. The Brosnan era brought in many new young fans to the series, especially with the video games like GoldenEye 64, but they appreciated the classic films and cinematic Bond elements for the most part.

Totally right.I know quite a few people who grew up in the 90's and were introduced to Bond with Brosnan but all of them like and respect the older Bond movies.Espacially the classics like "From Russia With Love","Goldfinger","The Spy Who Loved Me." etc...now you can read comments like "Craig movies are the only good ones,the rest are campy and parodies" tragic.What made Bond so grand is his old-school charm he had.His charm,his sophistication his wine knowledge.And brandies.Bond movie were never meant to be (overly) serious...there were girls with ridiculous names,everybody seemed to know who Bond is-my absolute favourite moment from FRWL-"Because the man that they would almost certainly give this task would be their agent-James Bond." Because even though he is a secret agent he is just that well know.And he is the best at that.Also,in the pre-title sequence there is this SPECTRE practice and a man is wearing a James Bond mask.Bond at moments,seemed more like an international rock-star than asecret agent.But that was the appeal.Dr.No offers him martini-shaken,not stirred.Even his drink is well-known.Amazing.But the generation who first saw Craig maybe will never realise how much of a grand character Bond was before.

[Omega]

Avengers falls sort of predictions . It was a big weekend for sports

Never got to go myself. Next weekend for sure


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Saint 007]

But the generation who first saw Craig maybe will never realise how much of a grand character Bond was before.

I also see quite a few of Craig's newcomers who don't watch certain Bond films based on IMDb/Rotten Tomatoes scores. I'm so tired of people treating those sites as the gospel, simply reading the criticisms and repeating them like a parrot on the forums without even giving the films an honest chance. They should take a closer look into the series to understand and appreciate the Bond legacy.

[Veronica]

But the generation who first saw Craig maybe will never realise how much of a grand character Bond was before.

I also see quite a few of Craig's newcomers who don't watch certain Bond films based on IMDb/Rotten Tomatoes scores. I'm so tired of people treating those sites as the gospel, simply reading the criticisms and repeating them like a parrot on the forums without even giving the films an honest chance. They should take a closer look into the series to understand and appreciate the Bond legacy.

Craig fans repeat things as a parrot even when things are about Craig. He is more serious,more realistic more something bla bla bla.... who cares? More realistic? In what terms? If realistic means "he can't be charming or crack a joke for the life of him" is realistic then yeah-sure. They constantly repeat things without even explaning them.

[The Saint 007]

But the generation who first saw Craig maybe will never realise how much of a grand character Bond was before.

I also see quite a few of Craig's newcomers who don't watch certain Bond films based on IMDb/Rotten Tomatoes scores. I'm so tired of people treating those sites as the gospel, simply reading the criticisms and repeating them like a parrot on the forums without even giving the films an honest chance. They should take a closer look into the series to understand and appreciate the Bond legacy.

Craig fans repeat things as a parrot even when things are about Craig. He is more serious,more realistic more something bla bla bla.... who cares? More realistic? In what terms? If realistic means "he can't be charming or crack a joke for the life of him" is realistic then yeah-sure. They constantly repeat things without even explaning them.

I suppose in all fairness most of us tend to repeat ourselves when it comes to defending our favourite Bond, or criticizing what we don't like about another. As long as someone has good arguments and can have constructive discussions, I'm okay with it. Don't just say some of the films suck without giving them a chance.

The one thing I always question is the whole "Craig is just like the Bond of the books" argument. Have most of the people saying this actually read the Fleming books, or are they just simply repeating what I feel is a marketing term to justify Craig as Bond? Embarrassingly enough, I remember my father trying to tell me that Craig was more like the Bond of the books, and he has never read a single one.

[Veronica]

I don't take sites like imdb or RT seriously. The only movies that will get very high grade are like Schindler's list or The Godfather. or any Nolan movie. Or some historical spectacl like "Braveheart".. for example if a comedy is super funny why should't it get 9 rating or something? If comedy reached its goal-to entertain why shouldn't it get higher grade. At best comedies get 7 something rating.

[Veronica]

But the generation who first saw Craig maybe will never realise how much of a grand character Bond was before.

I also see quite a few of Craig's newcomers who don't watch certain Bond films based on IMDb/Rotten Tomatoes scores. I'm so tired of people treating those sites as the gospel, simply reading the criticisms and repeating them like a parrot on the forums without even giving the films an honest chance. They should take a closer look into the series to understand and appreciate the Bond legacy.

Craig fans repeat things as a parrot even when things are about Craig. He is more serious,more realistic more something bla bla bla.... who cares? More realistic? In what terms? If realistic means "he can't be charming or crack a joke for the life of him" is realistic then yeah-sure. They constantly repeat things without even explaning them.

I suppose in all fairness most of us tend to repeat ourselves when it comes to defending our favourite Bond, or criticizing what we don't like about another. As long as someone has good arguments and can have constructive discussions, I'm okay with it. Don't just say some of the films suck without giving them a chance.

The one thing I always question is the whole "Craig is just like the Bond of the books" argument. Have most of the people saying this actually read the Fleming books, or are they just simply repeating what I feel is a marketing term to justify Craig as Bond? Embarrassingly enough, I remember my father trying to tell me that Craig was more like the Bond of the books, and he has never read a single one.

Well,we all tend to repeat ourselves. Connery fans will say how he is the first,the original,the one who set the standard. Moore fans might say that he was very charming and very humorous and that they liked that. Dalton fans will say how Dalton was more serious and more like book Bond-they pretty much have similar arguments like Craig fans but their arguments stand better I think. Brosnan fans will say how he has natural Bond vibe,how he combinde everything well. But Craig fans have seriously some truly lame arguments. "He look like a killer" is my pick for wrost one ever. the way they write and express themselves seriously got me thinking they don't even know what book looks like.

[FormerBondFan]

I don't take sites like imdb or RT seriously. The only movies that will get very high grade are like Schindler's list or The Godfather. or any Nolan movie. Or some historical spectacl like "Braveheart".. for example if a comedy is super funny why should't it get 9 rating or something? If comedy reached its goal-to entertain why shouldn't it get higher grade. At best comedies get 7 something rating.

Speaking of IMDB, there was one Pierce hater 10 years ago who said that Pierce himself is the worst actor ever, even worse than Steven Seagal (who would make a better Bond).

[Veronica]

I don't take sites like imdb or RT seriously. The only movies that will get very high grade are like Schindler's list or The Godfather. or any Nolan movie. Or some historical spectacl like "Braveheart".. for example if a comedy is super funny why should't it get 9 rating or something? If comedy reached its goal-to entertain why shouldn't it get higher grade. At best comedies get 7 something rating.

Speaking of IMDB, there was one Pierce hater 10 years ago who said that Pierce himself is the worst actor ever, even worse than Steven Seagal (who would make a better Bond).

I don't know what movie did he watch to proclaim that... The Tailor of Panama,The Matador-terrific performances. He can work with both lighter and more serious elements. And he simply seems natural as "the coolest guy"-James Bond and Thomas Crown...the selling point that he has likeability... that something that just caputres your attention...and comlaring an action star to an actor who does diversity...well.no.

[The Saint 007]

I don't take sites like imdb or RT seriously. The only movies that will get very high grade are like Schindler's list or The Godfather. or any Nolan movie. Or some historical spectacl like "Braveheart".. for example if a comedy is super funny why should't it get 9 rating or something? If comedy reached its goal-to entertain why shouldn't it get higher grade. At best comedies get 7 something rating.

Speaking of IMDB, there was one Pierce hater 10 years ago who said that Pierce himself is the worst actor ever, even worse than Steven Seagal (who would make a better Bond).

That person really needs to watch Tommy Wiseau in a film called The Room.

[Veronica]

I don't take sites like imdb or RT seriously. The only movies that will get very high grade are like Schindler's list or The Godfather. or any Nolan movie. Or some historical spectacl like "Braveheart".. for example if a comedy is super funny why should't it get 9 rating or something? If comedy reached its goal-to entertain why shouldn't it get higher grade. At best comedies get 7 something rating.

Speaking of IMDB, there was one Pierce hater 10 years ago who said that Pierce himself is the worst actor ever, even worse than Steven Seagal (who would make a better Bond).

That person really needs to watch Tommy Wiseau in a film called The Room.

Tommy Wiseau? Who is that??

[The Saint 007]

Tommy Wiseau? Who is that??

It's this guy:



He's a director, screenwriter, producer, and actor, but he's best known for The Room. Here's a clip from the film:

[video][/video]

[Count_Lippe]

[Veronica]

Tommy Wiseau? Who is that??

It's this guy:



He's a director, screenwriter, producer, and actor, but he's best known for The Room. Here's a clip from the film:

[video][/video]

Is this some kind of a joke??? LOL.

[The Saint 007]

Is this some kind of a joke??? LOL.

Although The Room has been deemed as one of the worst films ever made, it has gained some cult status over the years. Just look up other clips on YouTube, the film is so bad that it's good.

[Veronica]

Is this some kind of a joke??? LOL.

Although The Room has been deemed as one of the worst films ever made, it has gained some cult status over the years. Just look up other clips on YouTube, the film is so bad that it's good.

I never saw anything like this. compared to this Denise Richards almost seems like an Oscar winner. well maybe that's a far stretch-Megan Fox looks like Meryl Streep-this terms has been used before by a critic anyway.