Wapsi Square Forum

jwhouk wrote:In case you haven't heard, then, Sean Connery isn't Bond anymore.

Sean Connery will always be James Bond to me.

Jabberwonky wrote:

jwhouk wrote:In case you haven't heard, then, Sean Connery isn't Bond anymore.

Sean Connery will always be James Bond to me.

Actually, i really preferred George Lazenby...

AnotherFairportfan wrote:

Jabberwonky wrote:

jwhouk wrote:In case you haven't heard, then, Sean Connery isn't Bond anymore.

Sean Connery will always be James Bond to me.

Actually, i really preferred George Lazenby...

With all due respect, you sir are weird...

lake_wrangler wrote: ...
Guess what I just watched today...

I could cheat and google it, but the truth is I cant place that one...

Warrl wrote:

DinkyInky wrote:Is it bad that I have not seen a single one of Daniel Craig's Bond?

If I have ever seen a James Bond film in its entirety in one sitting, I'm pretty sure it was before I was 10 years old.
And I have a great-grandson. So that was a while ago.
Trying to think of relatively-recent movies I've seen that I thought were really good... I get Tangled (the 2010 Disney one), Spitfire Grill (1996), and The Red Violin (1998).

But then I don't watch many movies or much TV.

The Red Violin is a great choice, but might I be presumptuous to recommend some films you might find the time well spent in viewing?

Some people just don't like movies, I get that, but I also get there are so many other things to be doing, going to the movies can seem like a frivolity. The spectrum and range of films is as deep and has such breadth as to match the human condition's complexity, except it's missing the film you yourself haven't made yet.

OK, I see myself getting soap-box-y as an advocate of what is both and art form and a distraction, sometimes at the same time. But I really think its worth some time to see some stuff, on the screen, you might not have had a chance to know about.

It will come down to personal preference, taste, and a small risk in exposing yourself to new things.
With respect- Great-grandchildren or no, it's not too much water under the bridge. I recommend the effort.

TazManiac wrote:

lake_wrangler wrote: ...
Guess what I just watched today...

I could cheat and google it, but the truth is I cant place that one...

Warrl wrote:

DinkyInky wrote:Is it bad that I have not seen a single one of Daniel Craig's Bond?

If I have ever seen a James Bond film in its entirety in one sitting, I'm pretty sure it was before I was 10 years old.
And I have a great-grandson. So that was a while ago.
Trying to think of relatively-recent movies I've seen that I thought were really good... I get Tangled (the 2010 Disney one), Spitfire Grill (1996), and The Red Violin (1998).

But then I don't watch many movies or much TV.

The Red Violin is a great choice...

*snip*

The Devil's Violinist, about Niccolo Pagagnini, which was played by very real, very good violinist, David Garrett, would probably be a good one for you.

Trivia: Noted violinist(world's finest in my very biased Hoosier opinion) Joshua Bell played his Taylor Stradivarius(having since been replaced by the Gibson ex Huberman) in the movie.

Jabberwonky wrote:

AnotherFairportfan wrote:Actually, i really preferred George Lazenby...

With all due respect, you sir are weird...

Might I express a strong preference for David Niven in the role?

Dave wrote:

Jabberwonky wrote:

AnotherFairportfan wrote:Actually, i really preferred George Lazenby...

With all due respect, you sir are weird...

Might I express a strong preference for David Niven in the role?

He did add an air of class to the roll. Sellers however, added enthusiasm and charm.

Allen....nah. Just nah.

TazManiac wrote:

lake_wrangler wrote: ...
Guess what I just watched today...

I could cheat and google it, but the truth is I cant place that one...

That was Disney's Atlantis: The Lost Empire

I also watched Anastasia and Prince of Egypt, yesterday. Today, was Iron Man (after coming back from choir practice.)

Hansontoons wrote:

Dave wrote:

Jabberwonky wrote: With all due respect, you sir are weird...

Might I express a strong preference for David Niven in the role?

He did add an air of class to the roll. Sellers however, added enthusiasm and charm.

Allen....nah. Just nah.

Sellers got fired in the middle of the film.

And he and Orson Welles refused to even be on the same set.

Jabberwonky wrote:

AnotherFairportfan wrote:

Jabberwonky wrote: Sean Connery will always be James Bond to me.

Actually, i really preferred George Lazenby...

With all due respect, you sir are weird...

Have you seen it?

A lot of people who say things like that haven't actually seen it and are going on the (mostly incorrect) word of mouth.

Also, did you check out my review i linked to?

Also also, Connery starred in two of the four worst Bond films.

"We have all the time in the world."

jwhouk wrote:"We have all the time in the world."

For Your Eyes Only was supposed to be the next film - even in the version that came out, the opening refers directly to OHMSS.

But because Lazenby listened to his idiot agent and priced himself out of the role, instead they whipped up the ... for want of a better word ... script for Diamonds Are Forever in a rush.

In my opinion, the only "official" Bond film that's worse than Diamonds Are Forever is A View to a Kill.

With Die Another Day and Never Say Never Again in close pursuit to the bottom.

And i ain't that happy with Moonraker - a huge part of which is an uncredited, nearly shot-for-shot remake of the Dino deLaurentis spy spoof Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die.

Which was a better film.

Funny, I liked DAF. Mostly for the locale of Las Vegas.

jwhouk wrote:Funny, I liked DAF. Mostly for the locale of Las Vegas.

Well, i guess the Vegas location might be interesting, but as a film it sucked dead wombat through a bendy straw

As long as you don't disparage my fave Bond - which you mentioned in passing.

AnotherFairportfan wrote:

jwhouk wrote:"We have all the time in the world."

For Your Eyes Only was supposed to be the next film - even in the version that came out, the opening refers directly to OHMSS.

But because Lazenby listened to his idiot agent and priced himself out of the role, instead they whipped up the ... for want of a better word ... script for Diamonds Are Forever in a rush.

In my opinion, the only "official" Bond film that's worse than Diamonds Are Forever is A View to a Kill.

With Die Another Day and Never Say Never Again in close pursuit to the bottom.

And i ain't that happy with Moonraker - a huge part of which is an uncredited, nearly shot-for-shot remake of the Dino deLaurentis spy spoof Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die.

Which was a better film.

*puts on Crazy Bond Fan hat*
Never Say Never Again doesn't count as a Bond film IMO because it's not a Broccoli film...it wasn't an official Bond...it was just a shitty remake of Thunderball. I refuse to accept that film as one of Connery's Bond portrayals on principle. The only reason I accept Niven/Sellers/Allen as Bond is because their Casino Royale (which I have seen multiple times and own, so can't say that I'm too snobby ) is a spoof. That said, I agree with you about Diamonds Are Forever. It was Connery's worst film. He was visibly older (which isn't necessarily a problem as has been explored in the more recent Craig films) and a bit more out of shape (which is more problematic) than you'd expect Bond to be. Additionally, it had one of the most annoying female leads (don't know how much of that was writing or the actress), and it felt like it lacked a certain kind of class that I typically associate with Bond films. It felt...I don't know...sleazier. That could have just been the era, or it could be all in my head. I did get a kick out of Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint though. They are pretty high up on my list of favorite henchmen. But the generally crappiness of this one film doesn't change the fact that Connery will always be James Bond...even if he's no longer my number one.

As for Lazenby...OHMSS is both underrated and deserving of the low opinion people have of it. I didn't really like the breaking of the 4th wall at the open of the movie (it rather forced viewers to compare him to "the other guy" instead of letting his performance do the talking), but that and everything else I disliked about the film could be attributed to poor writing. I felt like his romance with Tracy was rushed and practically side-lined at times. I shudder every time I even think of him being called "Hilly" when he was under cover. However, I am perfectly willing to accept that the story told by this film was absolutely essential to Bond's character, and Lazenby did the best he could with what he was given. I haven't read the books yet (Fleming's writing style isn't really my normal cup of tea, but I keep trying to read the books simply because I have loved this character and the many movies for so long), but if this movie more accurately followed the source material, then that's definitely another point in its favor. Could Lazenby have been better accepted as a Bond if he'd not turned down any follow up films? Perhaps. Just because of my general dislike for OHMSS he ranks as my least favorite Bond, but I will say that I like the way he played the character better than Roger Moore (the cheesiest of the Bonds by far).

And A View to a Kill is a repulsive Bond film that is only redeemed by Christopher Walken being such a wonderful creepy bad guy. However, I dislike Moonraker far more than I dislike A View to a Kill. That film was just... *shudders*
*removes Crazy Bond Fan hat*

Julie wrote:

AnotherFairportfan wrote:

jwhouk wrote:"We have all the time in the world."

For Your Eyes Only was supposed to be the next film - even in the version that came out, the opening refers directly to OHMSS.

But because Lazenby listened to his idiot agent and priced himself out of the role, instead they whipped up the ... for want of a better word ... script for Diamonds Are Forever in a rush.

In my opinion, the only "official" Bond film that's worse than Diamonds Are Forever is A View to a Kill.

With Die Another Day and Never Say Never Again in close pursuit to the bottom.

And i ain't that happy with Moonraker - a huge part of which is an uncredited, nearly shot-for-shot remake of the Dino deLaurentis spy spoof Kiss the Girls and Make Them Die.

Which was a better film.

*puts on Crazy Bond Fan hat*
Never Say Never Again doesn't count as a Bond film IMO because it's not a Broccoli film...it wasn't an official Bond...it was just a shitty remake of Thunderball. I refuse to accept that film as one of Connery's Bond portrayals on principle. The only reason I accept Niven/Sellers/Allen as Bond is because their Casino Royale (which I have seen multiple times and own, so can't say that I'm too snobby ) is a spoof. That said, I agree with you about Diamonds Are Forever. It was Connery's worst film. He was visibly older (which isn't necessarily a problem as has been explored in the more recent Craig films) and a bit more out of shape (which is more problematic) than you'd expect Bond to be. Additionally, it had one of the most annoying female leads (don't know how much of that was writing or the actress), and it felt like it lacked a certain kind of class that I typically associate with Bond films. It felt...I don't know...sleazier. That could have just been the era, or it could be all in my head. I did get a kick out of Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint though. They are pretty high up on my list of favorite henchmen. But the generally crappiness of this one film doesn't change the fact that Connery will always be James Bond...even if he's no longer my number one.

As for Lazenby...OHMSS is both underrated and deserving of the low opinion people have of it. I didn't really like the breaking of the 4th wall at the open of the movie (it rather forced viewers to compare him to "the other guy" instead of letting his performance do the talking), but that and everything else I disliked about the film could be attributed to poor writing. I felt like his romance with Tracy was rushed and practically side-lined at times. I shudder every time I even think of him being called "Hilly" when he was under cover. However, I am perfectly willing to accept that the story told by this film was absolutely essential to Bond's character, and Lazenby did the best he could with what he was given. I haven't read the books yet (Fleming's writing style isn't really my normal cup of tea, but I keep trying to read the books simply because I have loved this character and the many movies for so long), but if this movie more accurately followed the source material, then that's definitely another point in its favor. Could Lazenby have been better accepted as a Bond if he'd not turned down any follow up films? Perhaps. Just because of my general dislike for OHMSS he ranks as my least favorite Bond, but I will say that I like the way he played the character better than Roger Moore (the cheesiest of the Bonds by far).

And A View to a Kill is a repulsive Bond film that is only redeemed by Christopher Walken being such a wonderful creepy bad guy. However, I dislike Moonraker far more than I dislike A View to a Kill. That film was just... *shudders*
*removes Crazy Bond Fan hat*

Read them. Oh, and on a cute Bond trivia note, Sean Connery's son Jason played Fleming in a lovely little number called Spymaker.

Oh, and a series about Fleming(now on Netflix).

OHMSS is probably the most accurate transcription of the original novel (except for, perhaps, "Dr No"). There are entire scenes that are basically pretty much shot-for-shot from the book. And Lazenby's character and appearance are closer to Fleming's Bond.

Possibly the oddest bit of Bond trivia is an Italian spoof called "Operation Kid Brother", starring Neil Connery and featuring Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell as rather familiar characters.

AnotherFairportfan wrote:OHMSS is probably the most accurate transcription of the original novel (except for, perhaps, "Dr No"). There are entire scenes that are basically pretty much shot-for-shot from the book. And Lazenby's character and appearance are closer to Fleming's Bond.

Possibly the oddest bit of Bond trivia is an Italian spoof called "Operation Kid Brother", starring Neil Connery and featuring Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell as rather familiar characters.

Parodied by Mystery Science 3000 under the name Operation Double 007. You can watch it on YouTube...

Jabberwonky wrote:

AnotherFairportfan wrote:OHMSS is probably the most accurate transcription of the original novel (except for, perhaps, "Dr No"). There are entire scenes that are basically pretty much shot-for-shot from the book. And Lazenby's character and appearance are closer to Fleming's Bond.

Possibly the oddest bit of Bond trivia is an Italian spoof called "Operation Kid Brother", starring Neil Connery and featuring Bernard Lee and Lois Maxwell as rather familiar characters.

Parodied by Mystery Science 3000 under the name Operation Double 007. You can watch it on YouTube...

Which may have been its original title in Italian. Jes' a sec...

Nope - the original Italian title was even more batant: OK Connery.

But that title was apparently used too.