It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
QoS does not rival anything with Connery in it but it is a lot better than some people make out. My favourite from the DC era. A flawed but decent effort.
Times are so different from the 1960s, bigger budgets, more license to go for bigger things, greater stunts, action sequences etc. Connery didn't really have that during his tenure, but he still gave us a very good portrayal of the Fleming character, and his two appearances from 1962-63, may never be broken when it comes to how close you can be to Flemings original creation, Craig is too thuggish sometimes, and simply lacks the smoothness or debonair that Connery had, while still being dangerous and at times, ruthless
There was a part of me that couldn't quite comprehend anyone saying why they didn't like Connery or thought he didn't do a good job as 007, but it's all about opinions. Certainly after 1965, I would go along with that, but some of those earliest appearances, it was almost immaculate
I have been arguing this since its release. A tight little thriller.
Agree with every word.
Those who compare DC to Connery are doing both actors a disservice. Frankly no one is ever going to match the perfection of those early films. It is partly to do with being the first, but as @Baltimore_oo7 says, those early performances are immaculate. It's cinematic alchemy taking place before your eyes. No one, not Rog, not Tim or DC can match it.
Four out of six isn't bad though...
Well you're wrong.
I'll second that. It's not even close.
It's not. Really not.
But it's way better than everyone makes it out to be. Greene is one of my favorite villains. HATE ME! HATE ME FOR THAT!
I'll take tight little thriller over bloated big reboot, thank you very much. b-(
Well, if you prefer than, then I guess QoS is superior. I do get the appeal in it, don't get me wrong. Lots of scenes in QoS is fantastic. It's just the editing which kinda bothers me.
To ME... anyway.
:))
They'll print anything these days. 8-|
You know... there's no news, like bad news.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwNej77PVLI
Definitely true. A simple, straightforward Bond movie with no nonsense (apart from the shaky cam and dodgy editing...). It's been unfairly maligned.
I see parallels with TND in a way. TND is IMO the best Brozza outing, partly because it is also the least pretentious of his films. It has a simple story and the first half is mainly decent. I think it's the most visually stylish of the Brosnan films as well. The only one that captures the look and feel of the 90s.
No need to worry any way. DC is not even within touching distance of Sean.
I appreciate Craig is giving the character a greater depth in terms of background etc but I just don't enjoy his performances as much as Sean, Rog or Tim. Dalts did a 'darker' Bond and did it better IMO. Sean was charm and danger personified and Rog was just pure quilty pleasure. As much I welcomed DC's arrival after Brosnan I find myself increasingly bored by his navel-gazing characterisation. I want Bond to get over himself and live a little.