Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Miscellaneous / Verschiedenes » alt.fan.james-bond » IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre'
IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225138] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 05:12
booby  
The truth is finally revealed:

------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------
It's somewhere between Jason Bourne and John Le Carre.
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------

There we go. The truth is out. CR is not really Bond at all but "it's
somewhere between Jason Bourne and John Le Carre."

Seems a shame to change Bond and make him something he wasn't meant to
be. :(

You can read IGN's new script review:

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/689/689485p1.html

LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225140 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 06:15
WQ  
La La Cupcake (the unknown teletubby) wrote:
> The truth is finally revealed:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------
> It's somewhere between Jason Bourne and John Le Carre.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------
>
> There we go. The truth is out. CR is not really Bond at all but "it's
> somewhere between Jason Bourne and John Le Carre."
>
> Seems a shame to change Bond and make him something he wasn't meant to
> be. :(
>
> You can read IGN's new script review:
>
> http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/689/689485p1.html
>
> LLC

--- No real spoilers from me here.

Interesting read. Going strictly by the reviewer's perspective of the
script and trying to read between the lines of his description of what
goes on in it, it sounds like there are parts in the script that can
work. But what I've dreaded about the worst of what might happen looks
like it will risk happening.

First off, it sounds like Bond comes across as perhaps too arrogant a
character. On the one hand, that's not my take of Bond in the books,
never mind the movies. On the other hand, this can work to Craig's
advantage and the possibility for him to carve out Bond in his own
image separate and distinct from others. The real question is, though:
how much arrogance will I really be able to take from Bond before he
gets on my nerves?

Secondly, the script's description of Vesper sounds disappointing and
weak as I agree with the reviewer's assessment. But, since they had
not yet cast Vesper when this draft of the script was finalized on Dec.
13, 2005, her characterization may only be a working blueprint. Now
that Eva Green is on board, it certainly would be wise of EON to begin
tinkering with and fine-tuning Vesper in tailoring her to Green's
strengths [and weaknesses?] and, above all, improve on the relationship
between her and Bond. This is what I also feared and expressed
earlier, that unless I can buy the relationship, the whole point of
Bond becoming who he becomes gets lost, it all ends up becoming
unconvincing and hollow. The relationship as defined in the script
appears to be the script's real Achilles' heel. But it's still
salvageable if they get all the bugs out of it now that they have an
actual female lead to work with.

Thirdly, I'm not sure I agree with the reviewer about how he sees Mads
Mikkelsen as the right choice for Le Chiffre. Le Chiffre also sounds
like he's going to be more of an arrogant S.O.B. than he was in the
book. I don't know if I'll be able to handle arrogance vs. arrogance
without sneering at the screen at all the arrogance overkill. I still
want to see a fat man sweating like a pig for Le Chiffre! There's
color in that, something Mikkelsen will be lacking if all he's going to
end up doing is acting like a good-looking arrogant creep. We've
already had Gustav Graves for that.

Fourthly, I also agree with the reviewer that turning Bond's talk with
Mathis about the whole spy and killing biz shouldn't be morphed into
some sort of suspense scene. This is a terrible idea, and judging by
the reviewer's comments, it doesn't work effectively. That's a scene
that should be retained as it was written in the book: two agents
kicking back and discussing the spy and killing life. Though it's not
described, how do they really do it in the script? A la Pulp Fiction
in the course of hunting someone down? I don't know, that's turning
something meaty into something shallow. The reviewer gets negative
vibes from it, I get negative vibes from it too.

For now, those are the things that hit me the most in the reading of
it. Overall, I'd say that maybe there is a story there that could be
interesting to tell, besides the actual one, and it seems like the
first half of the script may be stronger than the second half. And not
because of the action stuff, but because the writers probably were
clued out as to exactly how to nail down Vesper and the relationship in
the second half. But like I said, now that they have someone to focus
on, maybe she and the relationship will finally come together in a way
that clicks. If they put more work into Vesper and the relationship
and pull that off, then whatever other shortcomings and drawbacks there
are in the film, i.e. Craig, Mikkelsen, arrogance, the whole chronolgy
and M thing, can probably be overlooked more easily. If they stick to
the script as it is now, it's all doomed.
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225141 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 08:03
JHause  
WQ wrote:
>
> Interesting read. Going strictly by the reviewer's perspective of the
> script and trying to read between the lines of his description of what
> goes on in it,

Contradiction in terms, nitwit.

> it sounds like there are parts in the script that can
> work. But what I've dreaded about the worst of what might happen looks
> like it will risk happening.
>

What? They're using your "script?"

> First off, it sounds like Bond comes across as perhaps too arrogant a
> character. On the one hand, that's not my take of Bond in the books,
> never mind the movies. On the other hand, this can work to Craig's
> advantage and the possibility for him to carve out Bond in his own
> image separate and distinct from others. The real question is, though:
> how much arrogance will I really be able to take from Bond before he
> gets on my nerves?
>

You should be an expert there.
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225150 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 09:06
JHause  
"Casino Royale successfully reintroduces James Bond as a serious and
seriously cool secret agent for modern audiences. Respect is shown to
the past films, and enough of Fleming's slim novel remains intact that
I didn't feel it was bastardized. That said, I'm confused as to why
Bond and Vesper's emotional connection was rushed through. After all,
that is the heart of this story, what makes it different from almost
all other Bond movies and what this new screen version will live or let
die by."

Considering that this is an earlier script without Leiter, and Haggis
was brought in specifically to work on the Bond/Vesper relationship,
this all looks good!
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225156 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 14:15
booby  
"First off, it sounds like Bond comes across as perhaps too arrogant a
character"

But Bond is arrogant. Arrogant in a charming way. Surely that's part of
the character's appeal?

LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225167 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 17:56
WQ  
La La Cupcake (the unknown teletubby) wrote:
> "First off, it sounds like Bond comes across as perhaps too arrogant a
> character"
>
> But Bond is arrogant. Arrogant in a charming way. Surely that's part of
> the character's appeal?

--- Depends on the the intensity of the arrogance. Craig looks like he
might run the risk of being arrogant without the charm.

>
> LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225168 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 18:02
phil.gerrard1  
WQ wrote:

> --- Depends on the the intensity of the arrogance. Craig looks like he
> might run the risk of being arrogant without the charm.

Since when did a person's capacity for charm have anything to do with
the way they look?

Best

Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225170 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 18:27
WQ  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> WQ wrote:
>
> > --- Depends on the the intensity of the arrogance. Craig looks like he
> > might run the risk of being arrogant without the charm.
>
> Since when did a person's capacity for charm have anything to do with
> the way they look?

--- Some people have it, some people don't, no matter how hard they
try. Craig could have it, but with the limited exposure I've had of
him, charm doesn't seem to come easily to him. He doesn't exude
natural charm on screen like a Connery or Cary Grant or even Steve
McQueen, to whom he's been sometimes compared. In fact, if anyone can
be compared to Steve McQueen it's Wentworth Miller, the star of the
Prison Break series. If Craig ends up playing Bond in more or less the
same way he played XXX, or was it XXXX?, in Layer Cake, then the charm
will be lacking. But we'll see, won't we? My take on his charm skips
the point B process that you're going through right now to get to where
I am already.

>
> Best
>
> Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225172 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 18:30
phil.gerrard1  
WQ wrote:

> If Craig ends up playing Bond in more or less the
> same way he played XXX, or was it XXXX?, in Layer Cake, then the charm
> will be lacking.

What a daft point. The character in 'Layer Cake' wasn't meant to be
charming, so why go to that film expecting to see charm, or for that
matter to see Bond? He's an actor. He plays different roles in
different ways. That's what actors do.

Best

Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225175 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 18:44
phil.gerrard1  
And please skip this point B stuff. It's pseudo-scientific,
near-paranormal guff, and essentially a clever-sounding way of making
claims to clairvoyance. Anyway, I note that *you're* the one who's
decided that you're one of this supposed 2.5% of the population who
possess this extraordinary skill. There's been no corroboration, no
tests, nothing - just your say-so. I might as well claim the ability
to read minds for all it's worth in an argument.

We're both working from the same information. Claiming that you have
what amount to superpowers which allow you to see the outcome of what's
happening better than 97.5% of the population doesn't make your
arguments look any more plausible - in fact it makes them, and you,
less likely to be taken seriously.

Best

Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225178 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 18:55
WQ  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> WQ wrote:
>
> > If Craig ends up playing Bond in more or less the
> > same way he played XXX, or was it XXXX?, in Layer Cake, then the charm
> > will be lacking.
>
> What a daft point. The character in 'Layer Cake' wasn't meant to be
> charming, so why go to that film expecting to see charm, or for that
> matter to see Bond? He's an actor. He plays different roles in
> different ways. That's what actors do.

--- I was using that film as the main point of reference since I've
seen him in little else [3 films in all], and also judging him on the
basis of his screen persona, which transcends whatever character he may
be playing at the time. It's like there are some actors out there who
really aren't great actors but they're just pleasant or fun to watch.
Robert Wagner is an example. He exudes a natural charm that goes
beyond whatever characters he plays, but he's no Oscar-worthy thespian,
that's for sure. And then there are actors who can put forth good,
solid, earnest, depthful, well-rounded performances on screen, but
they're only as good as the script or parts given, and you'd only be
able to take them in only those roles and no other. Al Pacino and
Robert DeNiro come easily to mind. They've each done great parts and
films and they've each had their stinkers. Could I watch them for the
stinkers? No way. They just don't have the natural charm that
transcends whatever stinker role or film for me to watch them in it.
Could I watch a Robert Wagner in a stinker? Sure, because his natural
screen charm makes it easy for me to overlook the stinker aspect of the
film. Seems to me Craig is the kind that falls into the heavyweight
Pacino/DeNiro class rather than the lightweight Wagner one. And when
it comes to Bond, have we really had heavyweight Pacino/DeNiro class
actors playing him? The closest perhaps was Timothy Dalton, but his
film background and character roles are so sparse that he's not even in
the same league as Pacino/DeNiro. Even Connery couldn't be classified
as a heavyhitter when he was first chosen to play Bond based on his
previous film experience. So this is another big factor that goes
against Craig. Again - and I keep stressing again, which you keep
overlooking - I'm not saying that it's not possible for him to nail
Bond, all I'm saying is that he's got a lot working against him going
into this, including, ironically enough, whatever strengths he has as
an actor, which may not be the right strengths to play Bond. If EON
could miscast Dr. Christmas Jones, they can miscast Bond. That's the
impression I have. But we'll see, won't we?

>
> Best
>
> Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225179 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 18:57
WQ  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> And please skip this point B stuff. It's pseudo-scientific,
> near-paranormal guff, and essentially a clever-sounding way of making
> claims to clairvoyance. Anyway, I note that *you're* the one who's
> decided that you're one of this supposed 2.5% of the population who
> possess this extraordinary skill. There's been no corroboration, no
> tests, nothing - just your say-so. I might as well claim the ability
> to read minds for all it's worth in an argument.
>
> We're both working from the same information. Claiming that you have
> what amount to superpowers which allow you to see the outcome of what's
> happening better than 97.5% of the population doesn't make your
> arguments look any more plausible - in fact it makes them, and you,
> less likely to be taken seriously.

--- Yeah, but won't you be red-faced if I'm proven right about CR. But
I'd rather be proven wrong in this case.

>
> Best
>
> Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225180 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 19:02
phil.gerrard1  
WQ wrote:

> --- Yeah, but won't you be red-faced if I'm proven right about CR. But
> I'd rather be proven wrong in this case.

'Proven'? There's no way to 'prove' whether a film is good or bad, and
whether it's faithful enough to the novel or too much like previous EON
films are likewise matters of opinion, not matters of fact. If I end
up liking CR and you don't, or (far more unlikely) vice versa, that
'proves' nothing.

Best

Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225182 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 19:17
WQ  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> WQ wrote:
>
> > --- Yeah, but won't you be red-faced if I'm proven right about CR. But
> > I'd rather be proven wrong in this case.
>
> 'Proven'? There's no way to 'prove' whether a film is good or bad, and
> whether it's faithful enough to the novel or too much like previous EON
> films are likewise matters of opinion, not matters of fact. If I end
> up liking CR and you don't, or (far more unlikely) vice versa, that
> 'proves' nothing.

--- Geez, you really are so literal, aren't you? Can't you discuss in
figurative terms? Sure, by your definition, no film can be proven good
or bad, but then that's like saying there's no God or Satan, or that
there's just as much bad in God as there is good in Satan, depending on
one's perspective. From a greater perspective of things, that's true.
But we're not being cosmic here, we're being down to earth. Saddam
Hussein is bad, very bad. The Pope is good, very good. DAD is bad,
very bad. FRWL is good, very good. It's generally acknowledged as
such. You'll have some sore thumbs who'll think to the contrary, but
they just enjoy being sore thumbs. And when the time comes, it'll be
generally acknowledged, in earthly terms, that CR will be either good,
bad or somewhere in between. That's why there's a grading system to
everything on this planet. Your own personal grading system may be
different than mine, which is to be expected, but once the general
consensus view of a film [which extends far beyond just what critics
have to say about it] is factored in, that's what will ultimately
define the real quality level of that film.

>
> Best
>
> Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225183 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 19:24
Will Traynor  
"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1140285755.975640.101320 [at] o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> WQ wrote:
>
>> --- Yeah, but won't you be red-faced if I'm proven right about CR. But
>> I'd rather be proven wrong in this case.
>
> 'Proven'? There's no way to 'prove' whether a film is good or bad, and
> whether it's faithful enough to the novel or too much like previous EON
> films are likewise matters of opinion, not matters of fact. If I end
> up liking CR and you don't, or (far more unlikely) vice versa, that
> 'proves' nothing.
>
> Best
>
> Phil
>

I see you wasting an awful lot of energy, Phil. Like shoveling S%&t against
the tide......
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225184 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 19:30
phil.gerrard1  
Will wrote:

> I see you wasting an awful lot of energy, Phil. Like shoveling S%&t against
> the tide......

Yeah, I think that was the proverbial one post too many I promised I'd
stop sending. Sorry about that, folks.

Best

Pjil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225185 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 19:31
phil.gerrard1  
Will wrote:

> I see you wasting an awful lot of energy, Phil. Like shoveling S%&t against
> the tide......

I think that was the proverbial one post too many I promised I'd stop
sending. Sorry about that, folks.

Best

Phil
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225186 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 20:35
booby  
"--- I was using that film as the main point of reference since I've
seen him in little else [3 films in all], and also judging him on the
basis of his screen persona, which transcends whatever character he may

be playing at the time. It's like there are some actors out there who
really aren't great actors but they're just pleasant or fun to watch.
Robert Wagner is an example. He exudes a natural charm that goes
beyond whatever characters he plays, but he's no Oscar-worthy thespian,

that's for sure. And then there are actors who can put forth good,
solid, earnest, depthful, well-rounded performances on screen, but
they're only as good as the script or parts given, and you'd only be
able to take them in only those roles and no other. Al Pacino and
Robert DeNiro come easily to mind. They've each done great parts and
films and they've each had their stinkers. Could I watch them for the
stinkers? No way. They just don't have the natural charm that
transcends whatever stinker role or film for me to watch them in it.
Could I watch a Robert Wagner in a stinker? Sure, because his natural
screen charm makes it easy for me to overlook the stinker aspect of the

film. Seems to me Craig is the kind that falls into the heavyweight
Pacino/DeNiro class rather than the lightweight Wagner one. And when
it comes to Bond, have we really had heavyweight Pacino/DeNiro class
actors playing him? The closest perhaps was Timothy Dalton, but his
film background and character roles are so sparse that he's not even in

the same league as Pacino/DeNiro. Even Connery couldn't be classified
as a heavyhitter when he was first chosen to play Bond based on his
previous film experience. So this is another big factor that goes
against Craig. Again - and I keep stressing again, which you keep
overlooking - I'm not saying that it's not possible for him to nail
Bond, all I'm saying is that he's got a lot working against him going
into this, including, ironically enough, whatever strengths he has as
an actor, which may not be the right strengths to play Bond. If EON
could miscast Dr. Christmas Jones, they can miscast Bond. That's the
impression I have. But we'll see, won't we? "


You don't even need to be an experienced actor or an actor full stop to
be a good Bond. George Lazeby was good and he'd never acted before in
his life. There is no way Craig will be better than Lazenby. Bond is
all about being an alpha male chap; acting chops come a distinct
second.

:)

LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225188 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 21:13
booby  
You lot just don't get it. You just don't get Bond. Bond is ALPHA MALE.
Repeat that a few times and then you'll get why Craig is badly miscast.
His face is too small to be Bond, he has zero Bond masculinity and
charm. Even if he can do charm, he can't act a larger face. This is why
sad old me looks more like a modern Bond Begins Bond and Craig doesn't:

http://img344.imageshack.us/img344/7171/craigvsme16la.jpg

Sorry, I am an alpha male in appearance - I have a much larger face and
jawline - which is the main physical trait of an alpha male. I also
have the higher in height nose. Craig has a smaller face, smaller jaw
and smaller in height nose. Also from a genetic point of view, he's
aging quite badly which makes his less of a dominant man. Life isn't
fair but it doesn't change the fact Craig looks wimpy compared to me
(and that isn't even me trying to look tough).

Sorry but time for all Bond fans to live in the real world. If you want
the real James Bond, Eon has to find someone with a more dominant face
- and more handsome and heroic helps too!

While Eon casts beta males like Craig as Bond the franchise is going
nowhere but backwards. Until Eon finds a proper man to play James Bond,
all this pontificating about Craig's attributes as Bond, about his
acting ability are irrelevant. Bond is an alpha male and not even the
best actors like Robert De Niro can act that 'quality'. You have to be
born with it.

Sorry, just being honest. But I'm sure Craig is a good actor but it's
not enough when it comes to Bond.

LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225189 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 21:17
booby  
Obviously a sad pretty boy like me wouldn't be the ideal look - but you
get my point!

LOL

It's all in the face size, folks. Smaller face as Bond - bad, larger
face as Bond - good.

:)

LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225190 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 21:23
booby  
Even with my pretty man face and girly eyes, I'd be far more masculine
than Craig. Why? Not because I am arrogant or even tougher, but my face
- the skull and jawline are far more dominant. I'd look better as Bond
than him (even with girly eyes). Me in a Bond fight versus Craig in a
Bond fight - I'd look more credible and believe me, I have soft
feminine eyes. But I'd still look tougher.

Eon's just cast the wrong guy - it's so obvious. And before people say
Bond isn't meant to be a pretty man, HE IS. Just one with a more' world
weary' look and crueler eyes or mouth. But the essence of Bond's look
is 'pretty man'. It's just to what degree. But Craig isn't right and
acting can't make him look tougher or give him an alpha male size face.

LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225191 ] Sa, 18 Februar 2006 21:30
booby  
And Craig's eyes are seriously spooky. I dunno about Bond having cruel
eyes, but Daniel's are plain spooky! EEK.

:)

LLC
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225193 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 00:53
JHause  
WQ wrote:
> --- Some people have it, some people don't, no matter how hard they
> try. Craig could have it, but with the limited exposure I've had of
> him, charm doesn't seem to come easily to him. He doesn't exude
> natural charm on screen like a Connery or Cary Grant or even Steve
> McQueen, to whom he's been sometimes compared. In fact, if anyone can
> be compared to Steve McQueen it's Wentworth Miller, the star of the
> Prison Break series. If Craig ends up playing Bond in more or less the
> same way he played XXX, or was it XXXX?, in Layer Cake, then the charm
> will be lacking.

THEY'RE DIFFERENT CHARACTERS, RUPERT! IT'S NOT REAL!

> But we'll see, won't we? My take on his charm skips
> the point B process that you're going through right now to get to where
> I am already.

To get where you are? You mean living in your mom's basement, Rupert?
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225195 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 01:06
WQ  
JHause wrote:
> WQ wrote:
> > --- Some people have it, some people don't, no matter how hard they
> > try. Craig could have it, but with the limited exposure I've had of
> > him, charm doesn't seem to come easily to him. He doesn't exude
> > natural charm on screen like a Connery or Cary Grant or even Steve
> > McQueen, to whom he's been sometimes compared. In fact, if anyone can
> > be compared to Steve McQueen it's Wentworth Miller, the star of the
> > Prison Break series. If Craig ends up playing Bond in more or less the
> > same way he played XXX, or was it XXXX?, in Layer Cake, then the charm
> > will be lacking.
>
> THEY'RE DIFFERENT CHARACTERS, RUPERT! IT'S NOT REAL!
>
> > But we'll see, won't we? My take on his charm skips
> > the point B process that you're going through right now to get to where
> > I am already.
>
> To get where you are? You mean living in your mom's basement, Rupert?

--- You know what, I'll make a deal with you. You keep my mom out of
it, rest her soul, and I'll keep that fucking faggot of a
penile-implanted creepazoid you call your ever-lovin' incestuous
pedophiliac dad out of this too. Now I know how you got brain-damaged.
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225196 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 01:15
JHause  
WQ wrote:
> --- You know what, I'll make a deal with you. You keep my mom out of
> it, rest her soul, and I'll keep that fucking faggot of a
> penile-implanted creepazoid you call your ever-lovin' incestuous
> pedophiliac dad out of this too. Now I know how you got brain-damaged.

She's dead? I'll bet that's just her excuse to get away from you.
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225198 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 01:59
Will Traynor  
"JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in message
news:1140308105.157378.268720 [at] z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> WQ wrote:
>> --- You know what, I'll make a deal with you. You keep my mom out of
>> it, rest her soul, and I'll keep that fucking faggot of a
>> penile-implanted creepazoid you call your ever-lovin' incestuous
>> pedophiliac dad out of this too. Now I know how you got brain-damaged.
>
> She's dead? I'll bet that's just her excuse to get away from you.
>

Someone plonk someone and end this !!! Please !!!! For the sake of Bond fans
all over the world !!!
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225202 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 02:46
WQ  
Will wrote:
> "JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1140308105.157378.268720 [at] z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > WQ wrote:
> >> --- You know what, I'll make a deal with you. You keep my mom out of
> >> it, rest her soul, and I'll keep that fucking faggot of a
> >> penile-implanted creepazoid you call your ever-lovin' incestuous
> >> pedophiliac dad out of this too. Now I know how you got brain-damaged.
> >
> > She's dead? I'll bet that's just her excuse to get away from you.
> >
>
> Someone plonk someone and end this !!! Please !!!! For the sake of Bond fans
> all over the world !!!

--- You know, you're right. I give a wide latitude to allowing what
people want to say in this group, but I guess there will always be
those who will only prove to be little more than deliberate irritants.
He got the best of me one time too many and though I don't believe in
plonking, he's officially plonked by me. He's going to have to get his
cheap thrills elsewhere because there's no feeding this JHause vermin
of a troll from me anymore.
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #225206 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 03:00
JHause  
WQ wrote:
>
> --- You know, you're right. I give a wide latitude to allowing what
> people want to say in this group, but I guess there will always be
> those who will only prove to be little more than deliberate irritants.
> He got the best of me one time too many and though I don't believe in
> plonking, he's officially plonked by me. He's going to have to get his
> cheap thrills elsewhere because there's no feeding this JHause vermin
> of a troll from me anymore.

Is your Dad supposed to be dead, too? Check the local pub. They're
probably in there celebrating their escape from you.
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #227242 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 16:49
Tom Zielinski  
"WQ" <wq [at] email.com> wrote in message
news:1140307584.560629.182350 [at] f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> JHause wrote:


> --- You know what, I'll make a deal with you.


<Snip the rest of what may be the most vile posting *ever* to this forum>



At the risk of being branded the NG police, could you both PLEASE refrain
from this pissing war? Or take it to e.mail. I don't think I'm the only
one here who is losing a lot of respect for two obviously intelligent
posters.

Agree to disagree, or ignore each other.

Please.

Thank you.



Tom Zielinski
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #227244 ] So, 19 Februar 2006 17:03
JHause  
Tom Zielinski wrote:
>
> At the risk of being branded the NG police, could you both PLEASE refrain
> from this pissing war? Or take it to e.mail. I don't think I'm the only
> one here who is losing a lot of respect for two obviously intelligent
> posters.
>
> Agree to disagree, or ignore each other.
>
> Please.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Tom Zielinski

Okay, but I don't know how my "fucking faggot of a penile-implanted
creepazoid you call your ever-lovin' incestuous pedophiliac dad" will
handle it.
Re: IGN site says CR is 'Bourne meets John Le Carre' [message #227326 ] Mo, 20 Februar 2006 20:49
Draugnar  
Just ask Tolkien fans like myself about movies being "faithful" to their
original source. You think we have arguments here. Some of us think the
movies were faithful and true to his vision, even if some details were
changed and scenes moved around. Others have fits over the simple fact that
Shelob was placed in Return of the King instead of where Tolkien had her, in
The Two Towers, even though is was just a matter of where Peter Jackson
chose to break the two (choosing to end it TT with Frodo still alive and
"kill" him early in RoTK.) My only problem with the series was that Sam
never wore the ring. In the books, he too was tempted and had to wear it to
save Frodo from the tower, but I digress...

There will always be arguments whenever a beloved novel or series of books
is translated to the big screen as to the faithfulness of the adaptation,
but the mediums are different and the way to tell the tale requires a
different set of tools to keep the audience enthralled.

-Draugnar

"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1140285755.975640.101320 [at] o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> WQ wrote:
>
>> --- Yeah, but won't you be red-faced if I'm proven right about CR. But
>> I'd rather be proven wrong in this case.
>
> 'Proven'? There's no way to 'prove' whether a film is good or bad, and
> whether it's faithful enough to the novel or too much like previous EON
> films are likewise matters of opinion, not matters of fact. If I end
> up liking CR and you don't, or (far more unlikely) vice versa, that
> 'proves' nothing.
>
> Best
>
> Phil
>
Vorheriges Thema:SPOILERS: More CR Script Notes
Nächstes Thema:According to comingsoon.net...
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Fr Mai 25 08:31:21 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,04147 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered