Agreed, the plot of QoS left a lot to be desired, but it was still a lot of fun to watch.. I loved Casino Royale though.
Bond's been shot/captured/tortured in a lot of movies.Adams_BJ wrote:
Yeah but now he gets shot too. He just isn't awesome any more.Flecco wrote:
Go watch some of the early stuff kthnx.Adams_BJ wrote:
I don't like the new ones. Bond was always about the gadgets. I mean half of every movie was GADGETS!!!!!! Why would they get rid of them?
There are some gadgets but mostly it's about Sean Bond doing his crazy shit.
@ Reaper... Who doesn't like parkour/freerunning?
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
It was alright, it's just not Bond to get so worked up over a bitch like he did in Casino Royale/Quantum, and Quantum was a good action film, but not a good Bond film
Very true.Mekstizzle wrote:
It was alright, it's just not Bond to get so worked up over a bitch like he did in Casino Royale/Quantum, and Quantum was a good action film, but not a good Bond film
But also explainable. These are supposed to be the first Bond films. This is where he gets his hardened attitude towards women from. Makes sense when you think about it like that.
I know he does, but in the two new ones, he just seems more... pussy.Flecco wrote:
Bond's been shot/captured/tortured in a lot of movies.Adams_BJ wrote:
Yeah but now he gets shot too. He just isn't awesome any more.Flecco wrote:
Go watch some of the early stuff kthnx.
There are some gadgets but mostly it's about Sean Bond doing his crazy shit.
@ Reaper... Who doesn't like parkour/freerunning?
In the others he would get captured, tortured, and then bust out and kick everyone's ass and walk away. All while getting the girl.
I mean in Casino Royale, the only gadget he got was a defrib. He almost gets killed by poison and then struggle to use the defrib. If he was really James Bond, Q would have given him a pair of specs that could break down the chemical composition of the drink so he would know it would be poison and then have something hidden in his watch to render the toxin useless. And even if he did get poisoned, he wouldn't have had such a hard time zapping himself.
And besides, being poisoned is such a low way for Bond to go, it should be unthinkable to even put it in the script.
Take it up with Ian Fleming.Adams_BJ wrote:
I know he does, but in the two new ones, he just seems more... pussy.Flecco wrote:
Bond's been shot/captured/tortured in a lot of movies.Adams_BJ wrote:
Yeah but now he gets shot too. He just isn't awesome any more.
@ Reaper... Who doesn't like parkour/freerunning?
In the others he would get captured, tortured, and then bust out and kick everyone's ass and walk away. All while getting the girl.
I mean in Casino Royale, the only gadget he got was a defrib. He almost gets killed by poison and then struggle to use the defrib. If he was really James Bond, Q would have given him a pair of specs that could break down the chemical composition of the drink so he would know it would be poison and then have something hidden in his watch to render the toxin useless. And even if he did get poisoned, he wouldn't have had such a hard time zapping himself.
And besides, being poisoned is such a low way for Bond to go, it should be unthinkable to even put it in the script.
So these films are supposed to be films about Bond at the early stage of his career, so it's like prequels? Except they're set in modern times, so it's like.....hang on a second......alright, but it's still kinda lameBertster7 wrote:
Very true.Mekstizzle wrote:
It was alright, it's just not Bond to get so worked up over a bitch like he did in Casino Royale/Quantum, and Quantum was a good action film, but not a good Bond film
But also explainable. These are supposed to be the first Bond films. This is where he gets his hardened attitude towards women from. Makes sense when you think about it like that.
Wasn't a terrible film, I actually enjoyed it too
Mek, I don't supposed you've watched Star Wars?Mekstizzle wrote:
So these films are supposed to be films about Bond at the early stage of his career, so it's like prequels? Except they're set in modern times, so it's like.....hang on a second......alright, but it's still kinda lame
Casino Royale is the 1st Bond book. It is also the 1st Bond film - starring David Niven. It was remade starring Daniel Craig with an updated screenplay to make it more contemporary.Mekstizzle wrote:
So these films are supposed to be films about Bond at the early stage of his career, so it's like prequels? Except they're set in modern times, so it's like.....hang on a second......alright, but it's still kinda lameBertster7 wrote:
Very true.Mekstizzle wrote:
It was alright, it's just not Bond to get so worked up over a bitch like he did in Casino Royale/Quantum, and Quantum was a good action film, but not a good Bond film
But also explainable. These are supposed to be the first Bond films. This is where he gets his hardened attitude towards women from. Makes sense when you think about it like that.
lulz. Already abusing his powers.ATG wrote:
Watch it bub. http://i16.tinypic.com/2ur2jk7.gifghettoperson wrote:
But the Quantum of Solace is actually an awesomely entertaining movie.
kidding
Bless him, he tries so hard to thinkBertster7 wrote:
Casino Royale is the 1st Bond book. It is also the 1st Bond film - starring David Niven. It was remade starring Daniel Craig with an updated screenplay to make it more contemporary.Mekstizzle wrote:
So these films are supposed to be films about Bond at the early stage of his career, so it's like prequels? Except they're set in modern times, so it's like.....hang on a second......alright, but it's still kinda lameBertster7 wrote:
Very true.
But also explainable. These are supposed to be the first Bond films. This is where he gets his hardened attitude towards women from. Makes sense when you think about it like that.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
'... now the whole world will know you died scratching my balls for me' - Bond, Casino Royale, torture scene...Adams_BJ wrote:
I know he does, but in the two new ones, he just seems more... pussy.Flecco wrote:
Bond's been shot/captured/tortured in a lot of movies.Adams_BJ wrote:
Yeah but now he gets shot too. He just isn't awesome any more.
@ Reaper... Who doesn't like parkour/freerunning?
In the others he would get captured, tortured, and then bust out and kick everyone's ass and walk away. All while getting the girl.
I mean in Casino Royale, the only gadget he got was a defrib. He almost gets killed by poison and then struggle to use the defrib. If he was really James Bond, Q would have given him a pair of specs that could break down the chemical composition of the drink so he would know it would be poison and then have something hidden in his watch to render the toxin useless. And even if he did get poisoned, he wouldn't have had such a hard time zapping himself.
And besides, being poisoned is such a low way for Bond to go, it should be unthinkable to even put it in the script.
How the fuck is that not badass? Next, poisons that target the nervous system make it very hard/impossible to control your muscles, though the one depicted in the film seems to be all about cardiac arrest. When you're having a heart attack it's probably pretty hard to move properly. They are giving Bond a solid grounding in reality. I like it. Makes him more badass than ever. Less of a super-hero style superman guy who is invincible to everything and everyone.
Anyway, the argument is stupid. Fact is, the new Bond movies are selling, just like the previous ones. It's a new direction, away from the Brosnan style superman with a nuke hidden in his coat pocket to something a lot more tangible.
@ Mok, Casino Royale and QoS are part of a series reset. Apparently they will be the only two chain movies ever in a Bond. Some long forgotten article I read mentioned the third Craig film is going to be closer to the previous formula now that the reasons for Bond being such a cold bastard have been explained.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
i wonder if MI6 is anything like the new bond stuff.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Quiet you, I was aware that the film names were taken from the books but I thought that it pretty much ended there. I didn't know these were supposed to be real adaptations of the books which were among the first in the series of Bond Books so therefore would be portraying Bond in his early Bond daysFatherTed wrote:
Bless him, he tries so hard to thinkBertster7 wrote:
Casino Royale is the 1st Bond book. It is also the 1st Bond film - starring David Niven. It was remade starring Daniel Craig with an updated screenplay to make it more contemporary.Mekstizzle wrote:
So these films are supposed to be films about Bond at the early stage of his career, so it's like prequels? Except they're set in modern times, so it's like.....hang on a second......alright, but it's still kinda lame
well you're a fucking mug then innitMekstizzle wrote:
Quiet you, I was aware that the film names were taken from the books but I thought that it pretty much ended there. I didn't know these were supposed to be real adaptations of the books which were among the first in the series of Bond Books so therefore would be portraying Bond in his early Bond daysFatherTed wrote:
Bless him, he tries so hard to thinkBertster7 wrote:
Casino Royale is the 1st Bond book. It is also the 1st Bond film - starring David Niven. It was remade starring Daniel Craig with an updated screenplay to make it more contemporary.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Didn't the content of the films make it pretty fucking obvious? You know, like the black and white bit at the beginning of Casino Royale where he gets his license to kill? Remember that?Mekstizzle wrote:
Quiet you, I was aware that the film names were taken from the books but I thought that it pretty much ended there. I didn't know these were supposed to be real adaptations of the books which were among the first in the series of Bond Books so therefore would be portraying Bond in his early Bond daysFatherTed wrote:
Bless him, he tries so hard to thinkBertster7 wrote:
Casino Royale is the 1st Bond book. It is also the 1st Bond film - starring David Niven. It was remade starring Daniel Craig with an updated screenplay to make it more contemporary.
I suppose that's baddass.Flecco wrote:
'... now the whole world will know you died scratching my balls for me' - Bond, Casino Royale, torture scene...Adams_BJ wrote:
I know he does, but in the two new ones, he just seems more... pussy.Flecco wrote:
Bond's been shot/captured/tortured in a lot of movies.
@ Reaper... Who doesn't like parkour/freerunning?
In the others he would get captured, tortured, and then bust out and kick everyone's ass and walk away. All while getting the girl.
I mean in Casino Royale, the only gadget he got was a defrib. He almost gets killed by poison and then struggle to use the defrib. If he was really James Bond, Q would have given him a pair of specs that could break down the chemical composition of the drink so he would know it would be poison and then have something hidden in his watch to render the toxin useless. And even if he did get poisoned, he wouldn't have had such a hard time zapping himself.
And besides, being poisoned is such a low way for Bond to go, it should be unthinkable to even put it in the script.
How the fuck is that not badass? Next, poisons that target the nervous system make it very hard/impossible to control your muscles, though the one depicted in the film seems to be all about cardiac arrest. When you're having a heart attack it's probably pretty hard to move properly. They are giving Bond a solid grounding in reality. I like it. Makes him more badass than ever. Less of a super-hero style superman guy who is invincible to everything and everyone.
Anyway, the argument is stupid. Fact is, the new Bond movies are selling, just like the previous ones. It's a new direction, away from the Brosnan style superman with a nuke hidden in his coat pocket to something a lot more tangible.
But can't you give him a Austin with missiles and a gadget watch? Please? I respect the angle that they are going for, but they are taking away all the things that made a Bond film, well a Bond film. They may as well call it call it Die Hard - The MI6 Chronicles now, I mean John McLane and James Bond are pretty much the same now. I hope they find a nice balance for both markets.
fuck books and daniel criag
Dr No. is the first Bond and Die Another Day is the last
Dr No. is the first Bond and Die Another Day is the last
But Die Another Day was shittacular. I enjoyed both Tomorrow Never Dies and Golden Eye, but The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day were horrible.Sidsnot wrote:
fuck books and daniel criag
Dr No. is the first Bond and Die Another Day is the last
Die another Day seemed a bit like the 2nd Star Wars film to me... (2nd of the prequel ones... shit only decent things in the prequel ones were Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon Jinn, Jango Fett and Darth Maul... Rest was shit... emodarthvader.)ghettoperson wrote:
But Die Another Day was shittacular. I enjoyed both Tomorrow Never Dies and Golden Eye, but The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day were horrible.Sidsnot wrote:
fuck books and daniel criag
Dr No. is the first Bond and Die Another Day is the last
I.e 'Throw enough special effects at them and they will be convinced it's entertaining!'
Last edited by Flecco (2009-03-07 06:10:54)
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
The special effects were so so bad though. Seriously. Go rewatch the scene where he's surfing away from some falling ice or something. Worst CGI I have seen in a movie since the early 90's. It's atrocious.
they are more "Bond" than any of the first 20 filmsAussieReaper wrote:
It was shit.
Casino was okay, but they aren't "Bond" films.
Who here has read a Bond book written by Ian Flemming?
I've read about ten of them I think.Bertster7 wrote:
Who here has read a Bond book written by Ian Flemming?