|
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
|
Miscellaneous / Verschiedenes » alt.fan.james-bond » Moore rebukes Craig's critics
| Moore rebukes Craig's critics [message #227541] |
Do, 23 Februar 2006 14:27 |
|
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/ThursdayTicket/2006/02/23/ 1457858-sun.html
Tony Borgosano
--
"I hope we're going to have some gratuitous sex and violence."
|
|
|
| Re: Moore rebukes Craig's critics [message #227544 ] |
Do, 23 Februar 2006 14:43 |
|
Tony wrote:
> http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/ThursdayTicket/2006/02/23/ 1457858-sun.html
I suppose it might be some small measure of consolation to whoever's
responsible for craignotbond that he or she is being discussed in such
illustrious circles. I mean, who wouldn't want to be able to boast
that Sir Roger Moore thinks they're a frickin' jerk?
Best
Phil
|
|
|
| Re: Moore rebukes Craig's critics [message #227571 ] |
Do, 23 Februar 2006 18:42 |
|
"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1140702186.500119.110530 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> Tony wrote:
>
>> http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/ThursdayTicket/2006/02/23/ 1457858-sun.html
>
> I suppose it might be some small measure of consolation to whoever's
> responsible for craignotbond that he or she is being discussed in such
> illustrious circles. I mean, who wouldn't want to be able to boast
> that Sir Roger Moore thinks they're a frickin' jerk?
>
> Best
>
> Phil
Good for Sir Roger. I was on yahoo yesterday and they had the Anti-Craig
story as one of its lead stories. Talk about a non-story. I thought the Dick
Cheney incident was the biggest non-story of the year until this.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Moore rebukes Craig's critics [message #227572 ] |
Do, 23 Februar 2006 18:59 |
|
Will wrote:
> "phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:1140702186.500119.110530 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> > Tony wrote:
> >
> >> http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/ThursdayTicket/2006/02/23/ 1457858-sun.html
> >
> > I suppose it might be some small measure of consolation to whoever's
> > responsible for craignotbond that he or she is being discussed in such
> > illustrious circles. I mean, who wouldn't want to be able to boast
> > that Sir Roger Moore thinks they're a frickin' jerk?
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Phil
>
> Good for Sir Roger. I was on yahoo yesterday and they had the Anti-Craig
> story as one of its lead stories. Talk about a non-story. I thought the Dick
> Cheney incident was the biggest non-story of the year until this.
>
> >
Roger is obviously a great guy, as evidenced by his charitable work,
obviously, but also by his long tenures in the Bond series, on TV
shows, etc., and how actors and directors kept wanting to work with him
again. That doesn't happen if you're a self-involved jerk, like a lot
of actors. He obviously had his salary disputes with Cubby, etc., but
that was business. Everybody obviously loved Roger.
|
|
|
| Re: Moore rebukes Craig's critics [message #227575 ] |
Do, 23 Februar 2006 19:16 |
|
"JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in message
news:1140717546.874231.154750 [at] o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> Will wrote:
>> "phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> news:1140702186.500119.110530 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>> > Tony wrote:
>> >
>> >> http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/ThursdayTicket/2006/02/23/ 1457858-sun.html
>> >
>> > I suppose it might be some small measure of consolation to whoever's
>> > responsible for craignotbond that he or she is being discussed in such
>> > illustrious circles. I mean, who wouldn't want to be able to boast
>> > that Sir Roger Moore thinks they're a frickin' jerk?
>> >
>> > Best
>> >
>> > Phil
>>
>> Good for Sir Roger. I was on yahoo yesterday and they had the Anti-Craig
>> story as one of its lead stories. Talk about a non-story. I thought the
>> Dick
>> Cheney incident was the biggest non-story of the year until this.
>>
>> >
>
> Roger is obviously a great guy, as evidenced by his charitable work,
> obviously, but also by his long tenures in the Bond series, on TV
> shows, etc., and how actors and directors kept wanting to work with him
> again. That doesn't happen if you're a self-involved jerk, like a lot
> of actors. He obviously had his salary disputes with Cubby, etc., but
> that was business. Everybody obviously loved Roger.
>
True, although I wish he took the Bond role more seriously.
|
|
|
| Re: Moore rebukes Craig's critics [message #227578 ] |
Do, 23 Februar 2006 19:24 |
|
Will wrote:
> "JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1140717546.874231.154750 [at] o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Will wrote:
> >> "phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1140702186.500119.110530 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> >> > Tony wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/ThursdayTicket/2006/02/23/ 1457858-sun.html
> >> >
> >> > I suppose it might be some small measure of consolation to whoever's
> >> > responsible for craignotbond that he or she is being discussed in such
> >> > illustrious circles. I mean, who wouldn't want to be able to boast
> >> > that Sir Roger Moore thinks they're a frickin' jerk?
> >> >
> >> > Best
> >> >
> >> > Phil
> >>
> >> Good for Sir Roger. I was on yahoo yesterday and they had the Anti-Craig
> >> story as one of its lead stories. Talk about a non-story. I thought the
> >> Dick
> >> Cheney incident was the biggest non-story of the year until this.
> >>
> >> >
> >
> > Roger is obviously a great guy, as evidenced by his charitable work,
> > obviously, but also by his long tenures in the Bond series, on TV
> > shows, etc., and how actors and directors kept wanting to work with him
> > again. That doesn't happen if you're a self-involved jerk, like a lot
> > of actors. He obviously had his salary disputes with Cubby, etc., but
> > that was business. Everybody obviously loved Roger.
> >
>
> True, although I wish he took the Bond role more seriously.
You know, I think he took it VERY seriously -- or I should say he took
his TAKE ON THE CHARACTER very seriously. He tends to downplay his own
acting, and is too self-depricating sometimes, which people take as
meaning he looked down on the films.
His TAKE wasn't Fleming's take, but it was a legitimate,
thought-through performance. It worked really well in TSWLM and with
some darker tweaking in FYEO (which is my favorite of his films).
The stuff I hated in some of his films wasn't Moore, but the lazy
plotting in the scripts, and the Tarzan yells and Beach Boys songs
added in post.
|
|
|
| Re: Moore rebukes Craig's critics [message #227594 ] |
Do, 23 Februar 2006 20:13 |
|
"JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in message
news:1140719050.686543.256710 [at] g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Will wrote:
>> "JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:1140717546.874231.154750 [at] o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Will wrote:
>> >> "phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in
>> >> message
>> >> news:1140702186.500119.110530 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > Tony wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/ThursdayTicket/2006/02/23/ 1457858-sun.html
>> >> >
>> >> > I suppose it might be some small measure of consolation to whoever's
>> >> > responsible for craignotbond that he or she is being discussed in
>> >> > such
>> >> > illustrious circles. I mean, who wouldn't want to be able to boast
>> >> > that Sir Roger Moore thinks they're a frickin' jerk?
>> >> >
>> >> > Best
>> >> >
>> >> > Phil
>> >>
>> >> Good for Sir Roger. I was on yahoo yesterday and they had the
>> >> Anti-Craig
>> >> story as one of its lead stories. Talk about a non-story. I thought
>> >> the
>> >> Dick
>> >> Cheney incident was the biggest non-story of the year until this.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >
>> > Roger is obviously a great guy, as evidenced by his charitable work,
>> > obviously, but also by his long tenures in the Bond series, on TV
>> > shows, etc., and how actors and directors kept wanting to work with him
>> > again. That doesn't happen if you're a self-involved jerk, like a lot
>> > of actors. He obviously had his salary disputes with Cubby, etc., but
>> > that was business. Everybody obviously loved Roger.
>> >
>>
>> True, although I wish he took the Bond role more seriously.
>
> You know, I think he took it VERY seriously -- or I should say he took
> his TAKE ON THE CHARACTER very seriously. He tends to downplay his own
> acting, and is too self-depricating sometimes, which people take as
> meaning he looked down on the films.
>
I don't think he looked down on the films, but I think he thought the James
Bond character was a bit of a parody, and he treated it as such. His serious
moments were far and few between. I have read where he did not like doing
the ruthless scenes in his films and tried to change the scripts because of
it. Clearly, he was more comfortable rattling off a few one-liners.
> His TAKE wasn't Fleming's take, but it was a legitimate,
> thought-through performance. It worked really well in TSWLM and with
> some darker tweaking in FYEO (which is my favorite of his films).
>
Mine are those too, also, for those reasons.
> The stuff I hated in some of his films wasn't Moore, but the lazy
> plotting in the scripts, and the Tarzan yells and Beach Boys songs
> added in post.
>
I totally agree with you on that. The JW Pepper stuff was absolutely
outrageous, too. Could you picture Connery doing those scenes? "I sho am,
boy." lol
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Fr Mai 25 10:13:13 CEST 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,02746 Sekunden |
