The best Bond ever.

Just the right mixture of action, suspense, romance, style and gadgetry (very little). And, BTW: hello, Mr. Craig! (And I am even not into blonds). Money and time well spent. How often can you say this?

This entry was posted on November 19, 2006 at 10:27 pm and is filed under Culture!. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

12 Responses to “The best Bond ever.”

  1. krm Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 12:32 am

    I was worried about this casting move, like every other Bond change (not too worried mind you, they’re just fluff movies after all, but well done and fairly reliably enjoyable fluff movies). It is good to hear positive reactions from some people with trustworthy judgement that this one worked. I would have hated to see another semi-sissified Bond (like Moore or Brosnan).

  2. Alisa Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 1:24 am

    Fluff is a good point: this one is considerably less fluffy than most others in that franchise. And nothing sissified about this guy, I assure you :-)

  3. Andrew Ian Dodge Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 3:42 am

    Oh you noticed its the gayest bond movie yet. Hello sailor.

  4. llew Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 7:26 am

    I thought Brosnan was pretty good. particularly in his later ones - but glad to hear this one’s good, thought the trailer was excellent.

    BTW - does the chick in the sinking elevator live?

  5. Alisa Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 8:25 am

    The answer to this question is one of the nice things about the movie - but I am not giving no spoilers.

    Andrew: huh???

  6. Murray Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 10:48 am

    Can you say “projecting”.

  7. Alisa Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 11:25 am

    BTW, Brosnan was quite good (although only with his shirt on), but the movies mostly sucked.

  8. krm Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 12:12 pm

    Brosnan made the character work in his own fashion, but I never liked the sort of prissy/dandy vibe from him. Connery had the right gestalt.

  9. Andrew Ian Dodge Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 9:53 pm

    I like Connery & Brosnan.

  10. Alisa Says:
    November 20, 2006 at 11:48 pm

    Brosnan was just a brunet Moore, which is not a terrible pair of shoes to step in. I kind of liked Timothy Dalton as well. The major problem with the several last Bond movies was not the actors, but the movies themselves: they became more and more cartoonish. This one is a first in a long time that went back to basics.

  11. RickG Says:
    November 21, 2006 at 11:38 am

    Glad to know it.
    Read the book(let) and it will be interesting to see how they can build that into a full-blown movie.

  12. llew Says:
    November 22, 2006 at 3:23 pm

    I thought Brosnan was much better with the action than Moore - moore was not convincing in this regard. I was never too put off by the curse of Remington Steele with Brosnan because I’d seen him play a soulless IRA assassin in The Long Good Friday.

    Dalton WAS good - but his movies sucked chunks. Lazy scripts & direction - although the big jump off the Rock of Gibralta in one of them was great.

    BTW - there’s a great review of the first Goldeneye frm Berardinelli:

    “Also, there’s more action in Goldeneye than in previous 007 entries — enough to keep a ninety-minute film moving at a frantic pace. Unfortunately, this movie isn’t ninety-minutes long — it’s one-hundred thirty,”

    http://www.reelviews.net/movies/g/goldeneye.html

Leave a Reply