Timothy Dalton or Daniel Craig?

1313234363748

Comments

  • This sounds more personal preference than factual basis.

    Not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that Bond is realistic? What do you mean by "factual"??

  • Not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that Bond is realistic? What do you mean by "factual"??
    Means you're stating your opinion as though it were fact without really offering up anything to support it (e.g. factual material that's independently verifiable).

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    acoppola wrote:
    Your assessment of Connery as not being as funny says it all. Bond is not supposed to be pantomine. He is a killer and not someone you would want to invite for tea and biscuits.

    Bond is a genre of its own . It has nothing to do with reality. If you want to see a realistic spy movie, then Bond is not a good choice. It is the humour that is the genius with Bond and that is why JW Pepper and Jaws are the best supporting characters, not to forget the dialogues between Q (Desmond Llewelyn) and Bond (Qs sarchastic remarks about Bond as being reckless and immature. (IF 007 can be trusted to look after it...).

    Nothing to do with reality? Why do you think SF is the biggest Bond film since the 60's heyday? It is exactly because of the more realistic stamp. I felt I finally got a film that is not just a Bond movie but a serious piece of modern film making. It did not need mindless action to conceal it's inadequacies like some Bond films of the 90's did.

    The campy Bond cannot exist in today's world. Humour is important but not when you can set your watch to it and predict when it is going to come. And DAD was the final nail in the coffin as showing that abused humour can be the destruction of the franchise not what makes it.

    I enjoy campy Bond but truly feel it worked best in the 70's. In 2012 Austin Powers should they do another film can do it better now.

  • Skyfall the best since the 60s? You gotta be kidding. It is the worst since Licence to kill! And of course I state my own opinion, as we all do. There is nothing factual about opinions. To say that one opinion is more factual than another is utter nonsense. And Skyfall realistic? Come on! It is totally impossible to survive such a fall like Bond had from that bridge! Still, the main problem with Skyfall was the lack of a plot. It could have been a good movie with a less childish villain. I thought Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were brilliant films. The plot was well developed and particularly in QoS it was easy to follow. The villains were also much more interesting than in Skyfall. Goldeneye had a theme that was similar to Skyfall, but with a far better plot and a much more interesting villain.
  • Skyfall the best since the 60s? You gotta be kidding. It is the worst since Licence to kill! And of course I state my own opinion, as we all do. There is nothing factual about opinions. To say that one opinion is more factual than another is utter nonsense. And Skyfall realistic? Come on! It is totally impossible to survive such a fall like Bond had from that bridge! Still, the main problem with Skyfall was the lack of a plot. It could have been a good movie with a less childish villain. I thought Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were brilliant films. The plot was well developed and particularly in QoS it was easy to follow. The villains were also much more interesting than in Skyfall. Goldeneye had a theme that was similar to Skyfall, but with a far better plot and a much more interesting villain.

    From the sounds of things, it's less about things like "lack of plot" than it is concerning some people closed minds.

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    Skyfall the best since the 60s? You gotta be kidding. It is the worst since Licence to kill! And of course I state my own opinion, as we all do. There is nothing factual about opinions. To say that one opinion is more factual than another is utter nonsense. And Skyfall realistic? Come on! It is totally impossible to survive such a fall like Bond had from that bridge! Still, the main problem with Skyfall was the lack of a plot. It could have been a good movie with a less childish villain. I thought Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were brilliant films. The plot was well developed and particularly in QoS it was easy to follow. The villains were also much more interesting than in Skyfall. Goldeneye had a theme that was similar to Skyfall, but with a far better plot and a much more interesting villain.

    Sincerely thanks @jasonbourne You just underlined something here for me. When I watched SF, I knew some traditional fans of the campy Bond are going to hate it. If Moonraker is a favourite then SF is going to cause outrage.

    I loved SF because it was as much a controversy in terms of style as was LTK at the time. Though it has done financially way, way better than LTK. But promotion was super!

    Also the Bond producers know that traditionalist fans are in some cases going to pan the film, so they broadened the films appeal to a non-Bond fan audience. My cinema was packed four weeks into release.

    I watched CR yesterday and actually think SF is far more gritty and dirty. It is a dark film with far less sheen than CR had. I was actually surprised in the positive sense of how they exceeded my expectation for Bond.

    SF is my favourite Bond since LTK. And I do enjoy CR too. I loved SF because it took me out of Bond comfort zone a lot. The style was like no other Bond film before. Cinematically, Mendes speaks a different language to Campbell.



  • Posts: 11,189
    I'm 95% certain that Dalton would consider SF far superior to LTK.
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    I'm 95% certain that Dalton would consider SF far superior to LTK.

    Just for production values alone, one would imagine.

  • Posts: 173
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I'm 95% certain that Dalton would consider SF far superior to LTK.
    So now you're Dalton's spokesperson?
  • Posts: 11,189
    No, I just...have a feeling. In fairness maybe Dalton's opinion on LTK is tainted by his well documented verbal punch up with John Glenn
  • Regan wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I'm 95% certain that Dalton would consider SF far superior to LTK.
    So now you're Dalton's spokesperson?
    Probably be why Regan used the word "would" as opposed to something more declarative.

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I'm 95% certain that Dalton would consider SF far superior to LTK.

    I am sure he would in terms of film making and production values. SF is an excellent movie. I could easily say SF is far superior in terms of film making than Goldfinger too.

    I mean it is incredibly intelligent and free from any bad luggage.

    But as Bond actors. I think both Craig and Dalton are so different and excellent representations of their respective eras. They both have added impressive shadings to the character and are so rewatchable as what you see on the surface goes way deeper over repeat viewings. Both actors understand character motivation and are brilliant Bonds.

    But I loved SF the most out of the last 7 films since LTK. It is one I shall return to a lot when it comes out and have not been as excited in years.

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    No, I just...have a feeling. In fairness maybe Dalton's opinion on LTK is tainted by his well documented verbal punch up with John Glenn

    I think he prefers TLD overall for balance. But as a fan, I personally like his full boil Bond in LTK. It shows that under the veneer of a nice tuxedo is a brutal and dirty man who enjoys watching his enemies die in front of him. And a Bond who despite a woman's beauty is willing to put a knife to her throat. Not that it is a nice thing but the Bond of the books is slightly twisted and no poster boy of PC.

    One day another actor will take over from Craig, and I will defend Craig as much as Dalton even if the fickle world says to hate him. I stick to my guns through thick and thin.

  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited November 2012 Posts: 13,978
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I'm 95% certain that Dalton would consider SF far superior to LTK.

    Dalton being diplomatic, probably would say that.
  • acoppola wrote:
    But I loved SF the most out of the last 7 films since LTK. It is one I shall return to a lot when it comes out and have not been as excited in years.
    I feel very much the same way. I haven't been this pleased with a movie for a long, long time.

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    acoppola wrote:
    But I loved SF the most out of the last 7 films since LTK. It is one I shall return to a lot when it comes out and have not been as excited in years.
    I feel very much the same way. I haven't been this pleased with a movie for a long, long time.

    I have to say that both the trailers for LTK and SF are poor representations. But in the cinema I could not fault SF on one thing which is exactly how I felt about LTK.

    Of course I preferred some scenes than others in both films, but they gave me something totally new and unexpected. I am not looking forward to the next Bond actor as EON are known for sometimes changing direction for the worse.

    I think my tolerance of a Bond actor with perfect hair at all times has evaporated after SF especially. Craig has none of the vanity but all the strengths of the true Bond.

    And one of my friends who is old enough to remember Goldfinger in 1964 told me that SF is his favourite since LTK. With bond, I love nothing more than bold approach and true pioneering without looking back to the past so obviously.

  • Not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that Bond is realistic? What do you mean by "factual"??
    Means you're stating your opinion as though it were fact without really offering up anything to support it (e.g. factual material that's independently verifiable).

    How can you verify an opinion?
  • acoppola wrote:
    Nothing to do with reality? Why do you think SF is the biggest Bond film since the 60's heyday? It is exactly because of the more realistic stamp. I felt I finally got a film that is not just a Bond movie but a serious piece of modern film making. It did not need mindless action to conceal it's inadequacies like some Bond films of the 90's did.

    Did I hear something about stating an opinion as though it was a fact? Is not that what we all do when we say that one film is better than another? There is nothing realistic about Skyfall. Skyfall is mindless action with a very weak plot. Yes, there are some great action scenes, but the plot is very weak. Most of the Bond movies are better than this. Possibly Skyfall is better than Die another day, but just possibly. Neither of the two films are excellent in the way that Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace and Goldeneye are. Those three films are the best since For your eyes only.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 82
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I'm 95% certain that Dalton would consider SF far superior to LTK.

    Skyfall IS better than Licence to kill, but that does not say a lot, as LTK was just an orgie of violence. tI lacked the charm of Connery and Moores Bond.

  • How can you verify an opinion?

    Might help not to state an opinion as though it were fact.

  • How can you verify an opinion?

    Might help not to state an opinion as though it were fact.
    Isnt that what everyone is doing here?? Like when some say that Skyfall is the best since the 60s?
  • Isn't that what everyone is doing here?? Like when some say that Skyfall is the best since the 60s?

    Some, like yourself, certainly are; others are simply saying it's the film they enjoy the most, which is a little different than saying is is definitely "the best".

  • Actually, it was not I who said that, I was referring to another person here as an example. I definitely do NOT think it the best since the 1960. It is the best since Quantum of Solace (which I truly loved).
  • No, you make declarative statements like this:
    Skyfall IS better than Licence to kill, but that does not say a lot, as LTK was just an orgie of violence that lacked the charm of Connery and Moores Bond.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2012 Posts: 17,789
    LTK was just an orgie of violence. tI lacked the charm of Connery and Moores Bond.
    Having just seen it last night, no, and, no. IMO.
    Every time I watch one of Dalton's movies, I like it better than the last time. Lots of great moments supplied mainly by the man himself. And the violence in LTK, while intense at times, is by no means an 'orgy'. That would imply a non-stop or supremely gratuitous nature to it, and such was not the case, again, IMO.

  • Of course I make declarative statement, as every one here. That is why I was referring to the statement by another user who claimed that Skyfall is the best since the 60s.
  • Of course I make declarative statement, as every one here. That is why I was referring to the statement by another user who claimed that Skyfall is the best since the 60s.
    Think you might be lumping some folks in here who really aren't putting everything forward as though it were a universal truth.

  • An example of someone stating their opinion as though they were facts:
    acoppola wrote:
    Nothing to do with reality? Why do you think SF is the biggest Bond film since the 60's heyday?
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 803
    An example of someone stating their opinion as though they were facts:
    acoppola wrote:
    Nothing to do with reality? Why do you think SF is the biggest Bond film since the 60's heyday?

    Yes -- as I wrote earlier, some certainly do take this tack -- but I don't think everyone here does.

  • Then it is strange that you should pick one of the statements that were stated least emphatically as an example. I think you would find several more empahtic statements, both myself and others in this discussion.
Sign In or Register to comment.