| Author |
Message |
|
TheFrenchun
Officially Mrs saspro
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:55 pm
Posts: 4955
Location: on the naughty step
|
When I was little I adored the roger Moore ones, but nowadays I find them too goofy. Daniel Craig and Pierce Brosnan are a lot closer to the original bond i think
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:34 pm |
 
|
|
|
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
Yes they were very tongue in cheek. They were entertaining which is what films are. _________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:42 pm |
|
|
|
l3v1ck
What's a life?
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
|
To be fair I'd have to say that Moonraker is the worst Bond movie by a country mile.
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:46 pm |
|
|
|
oceanicitl
Official forum cat lady
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
|
How can you say that? It's got Jaws in it??  _________________Still the official cheeky one 
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:47 pm |
|
|
|
l3v1ck
What's a life?
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
|
In the middle of a giant laser gun battle in space with a goofy girl. Not even remotely believable.
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:57 pm |
|
|
|
oceanicitl
Official forum cat lady
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
|
Bonds are supposed to be believable??? None of them are! lol _________________Still the official cheeky one
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:01 pm |
|
|
|
l3v1ck
What's a life?
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
|
some more so than others. Silly things like solar death rays or laser battles in space aren't. But the plot of Casino Royale is perfectly do-able in real life. No sci-fi nonsense, just guns, terrorists and money.
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:07 pm |
|
|
|
John_Vella
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 7:55 am
Posts: 7935
Location: Manchester.
|
Yeah? And? So did Jaws 3D, but that was utterly crap.  _________________John Vella BSc (Hons), PGCE - Still the official forum prankster and crude remarker  Sorry I'll behave now. Promise
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:48 pm |
|
|
|
okenobi
Spends far too much time on here
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:59 pm
Posts: 4932
Location: Sestriere, Piemonte, Italia
|
Agreed. On the subject of Moonraker, and everything generally, how many of you have actually read source material? The Moonraker novel is very, very good. And massively different and superior to the movie. In any case, when saying who did the best job and which films were the "best", I think it's important to clarify whether that's just as films in general, in comparison to source material, or in comparison with the rest of the cinematic canon.
|
| Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:06 pm |
|
|
