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 » OP Vs. NSNA
OP Vs. NSNA [message #240633] Mo, 20 März 2006 04:01
Will Traynor  
Since we are on the year 1983, which is the better Bond film of that year?
And why do you think so?
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240634 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 04:06
akaiser77  
I can't choose between them. I'd say their pretty much equal to me.
However, if forced at gunpoint, I'd have to say that I'd prefer to
watch . . . both of them.

AK
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240636 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 04:08
Will Traynor  
<akaiser77 [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142824014.371812.159960 [at] j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I can't choose between them. I'd say their pretty much equal to me.
> However, if forced at gunpoint, I'd have to say that I'd prefer to
> watch . . . both of them.
>
> AK
>

True, but if you were on an uncharted island and could pick only
one.......lol
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240638 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 05:19
JHause  
Will wrote:
> Since we are on the year 1983, which is the better Bond film of that year?
> And why do you think so?

Can I watch NSNA with OP's soundtrack? (Excluding "All Time High" and
the Tarzan yell.)
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240655 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 12:58
phil.gerrard1  
Will wrote:

> Since we are on the year 1983, which is the better Bond film of that year?
> And why do you think so?

OP, without a doubt. OP is a middling effort, whereas NSNA is a
complete dog's breakfast: while there's nothing in OP as good as
Brandauer, there's nothing as thoroughly bad as Rowan Atkinson, Pat
Roach, Derek Deadman, Legrand's score, the lacklustre production
values, etc, etc. NSNA also loses points for being a hugely wasted
opportunity. It could have been an attempt to show EON how a Bond film
*should* be done - in fact, I think that's what many of us were hoping
for at the time - but instead it slavishly and at times ineptly
imitated the then-current EON formula.

Best

Phil
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240666 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 15:07
Will Traynor  
"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1142855884.181039.303840 [at] j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Will wrote:
>
>> Since we are on the year 1983, which is the better Bond film of that
>> year?
>> And why do you think so?
>
> OP, without a doubt. OP is a middling effort, whereas NSNA is a
> complete dog's breakfast: while there's nothing in OP as good as
> Brandauer, there's nothing as thoroughly bad as Rowan Atkinson, Pat
> Roach, Derek Deadman, Legrand's score, the lacklustre production
> values, etc, etc. NSNA also loses points for being a hugely wasted
> opportunity. It could have been an attempt to show EON how a Bond film
> *should* be done - in fact, I think that's what many of us were hoping
> for at the time - but instead it slavishly and at times ineptly
> imitated the then-current EON formula.
>
> Best
>
> Phil
>

The production values disappointed me the most. I thought Connery gave a few
good performance, and some of his one-liners are classic. I liked the idea
of an aging Bond coming out of training for another case. But watching him
act with Rowan Atkinson and Edward Fox was painful. I don't know what Edward
Fox was thinking in this movie. He is a good actor. But I enjoy some of the
other performances (Carrerra, Brandauer, Casey).
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240670 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 16:12
phil.gerrard1  
Will wrote:

> The production values disappointed me the most. I thought Connery gave a few
> good performance, and some of his one-liners are classic. I liked the idea
> of an aging Bond coming out of training for another case. But watching him
> act with Rowan Atkinson and Edward Fox was painful. I don't know what Edward
> Fox was thinking in this movie. He is a good actor. But I enjoy some of the
> other performances (Carrerra, Brandauer, Casey).

Performance-wise, it's a mixed bag, to say the least. Ronald Pickup is
as quietly excellent as usual. Alec McCowen's good fun once you get
past the culture-shock of such a different Q and Q Branch. Gavin
O'Herlihy is at least a very good physical choice: there's enough of a
resemblance to convince the viewer that Jack and Domino Petachi are
siblings. On the other hand, Rowan Atkinson, Edward Fox, and Pat Roach
are all embarrassing to varying degrees. It all adds to the film's
disjointedness - and even if you didn't know any of what had gone on
behind the scenes, that disjointedness in itself might suggest that the
film had had a troubled production history.

Best

Phil
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240673 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 16:38
akaiser77  
I've always been baffled about why Edward Fox chose to play M that way.
I cringe every time he appears on screen, then fastforward. Totally
obnoxious and over the top.

AK
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240675 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 16:52
Mac  
akaiser77 [at] hotmail.com wrote:

> I've always been baffled about why Edward Fox chose to play M that
> way. I cringe every time he appears on screen, then fastforward.
> Totally obnoxious and over the top.

That's the point. He's supposed to be an idiot who doesn't recognise
007's importance to MI6. It's supposed to be a contrast with the Lee
'M.' I actually find him quite amusing. His "Oh do come along, Bond!"
dismissal of Bond's theory makes me laugh.

Rowan Atkinson, however, IS cringworthy.
--
--Mac
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240679 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 16:59
Mac  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:

> Performance-wise, it's a mixed bag, to say the least. Ronald Pickup
> is as quietly excellent as usual. Alec McCowen's good fun once you
> get past the culture-shock of such a different Q and Q Branch. Gavin
> O'Herlihy is at least a very good physical choice: there's enough of a
> resemblance to convince the viewer that Jack and Domino Petachi are
> siblings. On the other hand, Rowan Atkinson, Edward Fox, and Pat
> Roach are all embarrassing to varying degrees.

Don't have a problem with the late Pat Roach, per se, but I don't care
for the fight with Bond looking as though it were directed by Blake
Edwards. The crushed nose and the shtick with Derek Deadman is
*pure* Clouseau.
--
--Mac
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240686 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 20:09
akaiser77  
Mac,

I realize that he had a point to his performance. He didn't play an
annoying pompous ass on accident. However, for me it's totally
unnecessary and a bad idea.

AK
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240687 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 20:17
Will Traynor  
"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1142867569.343089.39980 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Will wrote:
>
>> The production values disappointed me the most. I thought Connery gave a
>> few
>> good performance, and some of his one-liners are classic. I liked the
>> idea
>> of an aging Bond coming out of training for another case. But watching
>> him
>> act with Rowan Atkinson and Edward Fox was painful. I don't know what
>> Edward
>> Fox was thinking in this movie. He is a good actor. But I enjoy some of
>> the
>> other performances (Carrerra, Brandauer, Casey).
>
> Performance-wise, it's a mixed bag, to say the least. Ronald Pickup is
> as quietly excellent as usual. Alec McCowen's good fun once you get
> past the culture-shock of such a different Q and Q Branch. Gavin
> O'Herlihy is at least a very good physical choice: there's enough of a
> resemblance to convince the viewer that Jack and Domino Petachi are
> siblings. On the other hand, Rowan Atkinson, Edward Fox, and Pat Roach
> are all embarrassing to varying degrees. It all adds to the film's
> disjointedness - and even if you didn't know any of what had gone on
> behind the scenes, that disjointedness in itself might suggest that the
> film had had a troubled production history.
>
> Best
>
> Phil
>

Yeah, I liked Alex McCowen a lot in that movie; it's a shame they didn't do
much with his character in the film.
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240688 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 20:21
Will Traynor  
"Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:4881sbFhpuuoU1 [at] individual.net...
> phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
>
>> Performance-wise, it's a mixed bag, to say the least. Ronald Pickup
>> is as quietly excellent as usual. Alec McCowen's good fun once you
>> get past the culture-shock of such a different Q and Q Branch. Gavin
>> O'Herlihy is at least a very good physical choice: there's enough of a
>> resemblance to convince the viewer that Jack and Domino Petachi are
>> siblings. On the other hand, Rowan Atkinson, Edward Fox, and Pat
>> Roach are all embarrassing to varying degrees.
>
> Don't have a problem with the late Pat Roach, per se, but I don't care
> for the fight with Bond looking as though it were directed by Blake
> Edwards. The crushed nose and the shtick with Derek Deadman is
> *pure* Clouseau.
> --
> --Mac
>
>
>
>

It was a 2-minute fight expanded to a 5-minute, extended scene with little
or no suspense. The Derek Deadman stuff was totally Blake Edwards !! That's
so right !! lol....I'm laughing me head off over here, the crushed nose
thing was bad. And the point where he pauses before attacking Bond to watch
what the people at Shrublands are seeing on TV. Bad stuff.
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240689 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 20:23
Will Traynor  
"JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in message
news:1142828347.561399.118070 [at] j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Will wrote:
>> Since we are on the year 1983, which is the better Bond film of that
>> year?
>> And why do you think so?
>
> Can I watch NSNA with OP's soundtrack? (Excluding "All Time High" and
> the Tarzan yell.)
>

You always bring up the Tarzan yell, lol.....My personal irritation is the
Beach Boys during AVTAK teaser...ugh.
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240690 ] Mo, 20 März 2006 20:34
akaiser77  
Will,

I could not agree more. I would take a dozen "delicatessin in
stainless steel" lines over the Beach Boys in AVTAK. It was John
Glen's idea--and one of the worst in the history of the series, IMO.
It's totally inappropriate, stupid, and not even remotely funny.

Whew. Glad I got that off my chest.

AK
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240712 ] Di, 21 März 2006 01:56
Mac  
akaiser77 [at] hotmail.com wrote:

> Mac,
>
> I realize that he had a point to his performance. He didn't play an
> annoying pompous ass on accident. However, for me it's totally
> unnecessary and a bad idea.

I know it's he performance you have an issue with, but I don't agree
it's a bad idea to have Bond in conflict with his new boss; EON
certainly didn't when they appropriated it. For me, it just adds an
extra layer of conflict and given the position Bond is in at the start
of NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN makes perfect sense, IMHO.
--
--Mac
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240715 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:05
Will Traynor  
"Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:4891atFivgteU1 [at] individual.net...
> akaiser77 [at] hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> Mac,
>>
>> I realize that he had a point to his performance. He didn't play an
>> annoying pompous ass on accident. However, for me it's totally
>> unnecessary and a bad idea.
>
> I know it's he performance you have an issue with, but I don't agree
> it's a bad idea to have Bond in conflict with his new boss; EON
> certainly didn't when they appropriated it. For me, it just adds an
> extra layer of conflict and given the position Bond is in at the start
> of NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN makes perfect sense, IMHO.
> --
> --Mac
>
>

The problem I had with his performance was not the fact he was in conflict,
but the way he over-reacted to almost everything Bond said. The guy was
ready to pop a vessel everytime Connery opened his mouth. I think M should
have a bit more class and low-key authority to him. I prefer M to be a
low-key, yet authoritative figure, as opposed to an overexcitable wingnut
frothing at the mouth.


>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240716 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:13
phil.gerrard1  
Mac wrote:

> I know it's he performance you have an issue with, but I don't agree
> it's a bad idea to have Bond in conflict with his new boss; EON
> certainly didn't when they appropriated it. For me, it just adds an
> extra layer of conflict and given the position Bond is in at the start
> of NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN makes perfect sense, IMHO.

Just in passing, I think the way the conflict between Bond and M is
introduced in GE is a very nice touch, in that a third party (Kitchen
as Tanner, note-perfect) sets up the confrontation and delineates the
differences betwen the two characters, all in the space of a single
sentence.

Best

Phil
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240717 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:23
Mac  
Will wrote:

> The problem I had with his performance was not the fact he was in
> conflict, but the way he over-reacted to almost everything Bond said.
> The guy was ready to pop a vessel everytime Connery opened his mouth.
> I think M should have a bit more class and low-key authority to him.
> I prefer M to be a low-key, yet authoritative figure, as opposed to
> an overexcitable wingnut frothing at the mouth.

I know! But Fox's delivery of "..do come along, Bond!" makes me
laugh every time! I can't help it!
--
--Mac
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240718 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:29
Mac  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:

> Just in passing, I think the way the conflict between Bond and M is
> introduced in GE is a very nice touch, in that a third party (Kitchen
> as Tanner, note-perfect) sets up the confrontation and delineates the
> differences betwen the two characters, all in the space of a single
> sentence.

I'm kind of sorry they abandoned it in favour of the
eye-rolling-mildly-disapproving-big-sister-tag-team of
Moneypenny and M in later films.

I'm hoping that CASINO ROYALE establishes and maintains
the tension between Bond and M rather than having it
dissolve into Bond and his "Auntie M."

Yes, that is an intentional nod to the WIZARD OF OZ...
--
--Mac
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240720 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:29
Will Traynor  
"Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:4892rvFi99mfU1 [at] individual.net...
> Will wrote:
>
>> The problem I had with his performance was not the fact he was in
>> conflict, but the way he over-reacted to almost everything Bond said.
>> The guy was ready to pop a vessel everytime Connery opened his mouth.
>> I think M should have a bit more class and low-key authority to him.
>> I prefer M to be a low-key, yet authoritative figure, as opposed to
>> an overexcitable wingnut frothing at the mouth.
>
> I know! But Fox's delivery of "..do come along, Bond!" makes me
> laugh every time! I can't help it!
> --
> --Mac
>
>
>
>
>

I like Connery's line about free radicals, too. A great Connery line, funny
but not ridiculous. I still think Connery delivered the best lines in Bond
history, even though Moore had more of them. Connery delivered a funny line
with a very slight smirk or straight-faced and without winking at the
audience. Brosnan and Moore always came off as saying to the audience,
"Here's the punchline now" while smiling or winking at the audience, IMHO.
DAF contains one of my favorite Connery moments with the introduction of
Plenty O'Toole. Connery was just so non-chalant with his lines without
acknowledging he had a movie camera filming him. There are too many of those
moments to list, but that's one example of why Connery was so good as Bond.
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240721 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:31
Will Traynor  
"Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:48938aFiodq3U1 [at] individual.net...
> phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
>
>> Just in passing, I think the way the conflict between Bond and M is
>> introduced in GE is a very nice touch, in that a third party (Kitchen
>> as Tanner, note-perfect) sets up the confrontation and delineates the
>> differences betwen the two characters, all in the space of a single
>> sentence.
>
> I'm kind of sorry they abandoned it in favour of the
> eye-rolling-mildly-disapproving-big-sister-tag-team of
> Moneypenny and M in later films.
>
> I'm hoping that CASINO ROYALE establishes and maintains
> the tension between Bond and M rather than having it
> dissolve into Bond and his "Auntie M."
>
> Yes, that is an intentional nod to the WIZARD OF OZ...
> --
> --Mac
>
>
>
>
>

Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?" That
was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How absurd.
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240722 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:36
phil.gerrard1  
Will wrote:

> Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?" That
> was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How absurd.

How Fierstein...

Best

Phil
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240724 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:42
Mac  
Will wrote:

> I like Connery's line about free radicals, too. A great Connery line,
> funny but not ridiculous. I still think Connery delivered the best
> lines in Bond history, even though Moore had more of them. Connery
> delivered a funny line with a very slight smirk or straight-faced and
> without winking at the audience. Brosnan and Moore always came off as
> saying to the audience, "Here's the punchline now" while smiling or
> winking at the audience, IMHO. DAF contains one of my favorite
> Connery moments with the introduction of Plenty O'Toole. Connery was
> just so non-chalant with his lines without acknowledging he had a
> movie camera filming him. There are too many of those moments to
> list, but that's one example of why Connery was so good as Bond.

The sarcastic retorts about cutting out the white bread, etc. is
undoubtedly the work of Clement & La Frenais. Those of us that
have seen their classic sit-com, PORRIDGE, could well imagine
Norman Stanley Fletcher exchanging those comments with
Mr. Mackay. The gag about urinating in the beaker from accross
the room is actually lifted wholesale from the series.

Clement & La Frenais have also written a number of spy films,
including OTLEY and TO CATCH A SPY. They also adapted the
screenplay for the Daniel Craig thriller ARCHANGEL.

All comes back to Bond.

You're not dealing with Vince now, you know...
--
--Mac
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240725 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:43
Will Traynor  
"Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:4893vjFiope4U1 [at] individual.net...
> Will wrote:
>
>> I like Connery's line about free radicals, too. A great Connery line,
>> funny but not ridiculous. I still think Connery delivered the best
>> lines in Bond history, even though Moore had more of them. Connery
>> delivered a funny line with a very slight smirk or straight-faced and
>> without winking at the audience. Brosnan and Moore always came off as
>> saying to the audience, "Here's the punchline now" while smiling or
>> winking at the audience, IMHO. DAF contains one of my favorite
>> Connery moments with the introduction of Plenty O'Toole. Connery was
>> just so non-chalant with his lines without acknowledging he had a
>> movie camera filming him. There are too many of those moments to
>> list, but that's one example of why Connery was so good as Bond.
>
> The sarcastic retorts about cutting out the white bread, etc. is
> undoubtedly the work of Clement & La Frenais. Those of us that
> have seen their classic sit-com, PORRIDGE, could well imagine
> Norman Stanley Fletcher exchanging those comments with
> Mr. Mackay.

>The gag about urinating in the beaker from accross
> the room is actually lifted wholesale from the series.
>

That is another one of my favorite lines from NSNA.

> Clement & La Frenais have also written a number of spy films,
> including OTLEY and TO CATCH A SPY. They also adapted the
> screenplay for the Daniel Craig thriller ARCHANGEL.
>
> All comes back to Bond.
>
> You're not dealing with Vince now, you know...
> --
> --Mac
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240726 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:43
Will Traynor  
"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1142904979.842075.306890 [at] z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Will wrote:
>
>> Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?" That
>> was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How absurd.
>
> How Fierstein...
>
> Best
>
> Phil
>

Is he working on CR?
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240727 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:47
Mac  
Will wrote:

> Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?"
> That was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How
> absurd.

Indeed.

The writing in that entire scene is dreadful. Brosnan is visibly having
difficulty delivering those lines. The "...if only it could be said of you
and I, Moneypenny." or whatever that line is: absolutely *appalling*.
--
--Mac
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240728 ] Di, 21 März 2006 02:52
Will Traynor  
"Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:4894a6Fiacc4U1 [at] individual.net...
> Will wrote:
>
>> Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?"
>> That was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How
>> absurd.
>
> Indeed.
>
> The writing in that entire scene is dreadful. Brosnan is visibly having
> difficulty delivering those lines. The "...if only it could be said of you
> and I, Moneypenny." or whatever that line is: absolutely *appalling*.
> --
> --Mac
>
>
>
>
>

I'm so irritated with what they've done with Judi Dench, because she is such
a good actress. I hope they get back on track with her relationship with
Bond. I'm still trying to figure out why she sold him out so quickly in DAD
with virtually no proof that he talked.
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240730 ] Di, 21 März 2006 03:14
GSHATTERHAND  
OP is the better film but NSNA has the better Bond.
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240733 ] Di, 21 März 2006 03:48
Absorb  
Mac wrote:
> Will wrote:
>
>
>>Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?"
>>That was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How
>>absurd.
>
>
> Indeed.
>
> The writing in that entire scene is dreadful. Brosnan is visibly having
> difficulty delivering those lines. The "...if only it could be said of you
> and I, Moneypenny." or whatever that line is: absolutely *appalling*.

Bond looks as if he's in physical pain when he says that, which I took
to mean that he's not too happy about M and Moneypenny's
"eye-rolling-mildly-disapproving-big-sister-tag-team."

Absorb
------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
"From now on, it's only heavy metal bands that's gonna boss me around."
-Meatwad
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240734 ] Di, 21 März 2006 03:48
Absorb  
Will wrote:
> "Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
> news:4894a6Fiacc4U1 [at] individual.net...
>
>>Will wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?"
>>>That was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How
>>>absurd.
>>
>>Indeed.
>>
>>The writing in that entire scene is dreadful. Brosnan is visibly having
>>difficulty delivering those lines. The "...if only it could be said of you
>>and I, Moneypenny." or whatever that line is: absolutely *appalling*.
>>--
>>--Mac
>>
>
>
> I'm so irritated with what they've done with Judi Dench, because she is such
> a good actress. I hope they get back on track with her relationship with
> Bond. I'm still trying to figure out why she sold him out so quickly in DAD
> with virtually no proof that he talked.

As Vader would say, I find her lack of faith disturbing. And unlike GE
where she understood Bond even though she didn't agree with him or his
methods, that reaction shows that she doesn't get Bond at all in DAD. I
would have preferred some cliche "I didn't do it!" "I know that, but
the brass doesn't!" argument over what actually happened.

IMHO, the Bond, M, and Moneypenny dynamic worked well in GE, but much
less so in TND, TWINE, and DAD.

Absorb
------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
"From now on, it's only heavy metal bands that's gonna boss me around."
-Meatwad
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240736 ] Di, 21 März 2006 04:39
Will Traynor  
"Absorb" <rubylustre [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:oOWdnZCkDozy9ILZnZ2dnUVZ_uidnZ2d [at] comcast.com...
> Will wrote:
>> "Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in message
>> news:4894a6Fiacc4U1 [at] individual.net...
>>
>>>Will wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Was it TND where Judi Dench asks Bond to "pump her for information?"
>>>>That was the lowpoint of the modern Bond/M relationship for me. How
>>>>absurd.
>>>
>>>Indeed.
>>>
>>>The writing in that entire scene is dreadful. Brosnan is visibly having
>>>difficulty delivering those lines. The "...if only it could be said of
>>>you
>>>and I, Moneypenny." or whatever that line is: absolutely *appalling*.
>>>--
>>>--Mac
>>>
>>
>>
>> I'm so irritated with what they've done with Judi Dench, because she is
>> such a good actress. I hope they get back on track with her relationship
>> with Bond. I'm still trying to figure out why she sold him out so quickly
>> in DAD with virtually no proof that he talked.
>
> As Vader would say, I find her lack of faith disturbing. And unlike GE
> where she understood Bond even though she didn't agree with him or his
> methods, that reaction shows that she doesn't get Bond at all in DAD. I
> would have preferred some cliche "I didn't do it!" "I know that, but
> the brass doesn't!" argument over what actually happened.
>
> IMHO, the Bond, M, and Moneypenny dynamic worked well in GE, but much
> less so in TND, TWINE, and DAD.
>

After she hangs him out to dry in DAD, she expects him to turn around and
start working under cover for her. If I were Bond, I would have told her to
screw or at the very least gave her a piece of my mind. But no mention of it
in the film. Bond let her off the hook much too easily. That was a big plot
hole, IMHO.

> Absorb
> ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
> "From now on, it's only heavy metal bands that's gonna boss me around."
> -Meatwad
>
>
>
>
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240737 ] Di, 21 März 2006 05:41
Absorb  
Will wrote:

> After she hangs him out to dry in DAD, she expects him to turn around and
> start working under cover for her. If I were Bond, I would have told her to
> screw or at the very least gave her a piece of my mind. But no mention of it
> in the film. Bond let her off the hook much too easily. That was a big plot
> hole, IMHO.

Well, Trevelyan wasn't entirely wrong when he said Bond was "her
majesty's loyal terrier." Of course, he wasn't exactly right either,
and I agree that it should have been addressed.

In any case, I understand Bond's devotion to the mission a lot more than
M's silly "Gee, info got leaked, and there are some rumors about from
where, so I bet it was my best agent even though I have no concrete
proof." Setting up the hospital scene that way just makes M look like a
moron; if we had been given better motivation for M's actions (no, the
"given the drugs, you wouldn't have known what you were saying" doesn't
do it for me), we might even agree with her instead of just waiting for
her to leave so Bond can escape.

Although I like the film, DAD glosses over this whole section.

Absorb
------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
"From now on, it's only heavy metal bands that's gonna boss me around."
-Meatwad
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240738 ] Di, 21 März 2006 05:48
Will Traynor  
"Absorb" <rubylustre [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:prGdnRCBr7CUGYLZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d [at] comcast.com...
> Will wrote:
>
>> After she hangs him out to dry in DAD, she expects him to turn around and
>> start working under cover for her. If I were Bond, I would have told her
>> to screw or at the very least gave her a piece of my mind. But no mention
>> of it in the film. Bond let her off the hook much too easily. That was a
>> big plot hole, IMHO.
>
> Well, Trevelyan wasn't entirely wrong when he said Bond was "her
> majesty's loyal terrier." Of course, he wasn't exactly right either,
> and I agree that it should have been addressed.
>
> In any case, I understand Bond's devotion to the mission a lot more than
> M's silly "Gee, info got leaked, and there are some rumors about from
> where, so I bet it was my best agent even though I have no concrete
> proof." Setting up the hospital scene that way just makes M look like a
> moron; if we had been given better motivation for M's actions (no, the
> "given the drugs, you wouldn't have known what you were saying" doesn't
> do it for me), we might even agree with her instead of just waiting for
> her to leave so Bond can escape.
>
> Although I like the film, DAD glosses over this whole section.
>

I liked bits and pieces of the film, but overall it was a clunker for me,
especially the second half.

> Absorb
> ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
> "From now on, it's only heavy metal bands that's gonna boss me around."
> -Meatwad
>
>
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240740 ] Di, 21 März 2006 10:54
phil.gerrard1  
Mac wrote:

> The sarcastic retorts about cutting out the white bread, etc. is
> undoubtedly the work of Clement & La Frenais.

Agreed. Isn't this also a spin on a line in Fleming's novel? IIRC, M,
as in the movie, reels off a long list of processed foods, detailing
the impurities in each, to which Bond, slightly taken aback, replies 'I
don't eat all that much white bread, sir'.

Best

Phil
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240741 ] Di, 21 März 2006 10:59
phil.gerrard1  
Will wrote re Fierstein:

> Is he working on CR?

I hope not, and I would suspect that he isn't - even uncredited -
because EON's stated intentions for the movie are completely at odds
with his writing style.

Best

Phil
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240742 ] Di, 21 März 2006 11:24
phil.gerrard1  
Will, then Absorb:

> > After she hangs him out to dry in DAD, she expects him to turn around and
> > start working under cover for her. If I were Bond, I would have told her to
> > screw or at the very least gave her a piece of my mind. But no mention of it
> > in the film. Bond let her off the hook much too easily. That was a big plot
> > hole, IMHO.
>
> In any case, I understand Bond's devotion to the mission a lot more than
> M's silly "Gee, info got leaked, and there are some rumors about from
> where, so I bet it was my best agent even though I have no concrete
> proof." Setting up the hospital scene that way just makes M look like a
> moron; if we had been given better motivation for M's actions (no, the
> "given the drugs, you wouldn't have known what you were saying" doesn't
> do it for me), we might even agree with her instead of just waiting for
> her to leave so Bond can escape.
>
> Although I like the film, DAD glosses over this whole section.

I don't know. Isn't there also a time factor involved here? Certainly
M would be foolish to leap to conclusions if Bond had been held for
only a few days, as had happened on previous missions, but when he's
missing presumed dead for a year and a half and then he reappears, with
information that only he'd known having been leaked, the very least one
would expect is that he would be kept in quarantine. Certainly I don't
think M would have suspected Bond of cracking if he hadn't been gone
for so long, but after that length of time being tortured in a North
Korean prison, I don't think one could be sure that even the strongest
and best agents wouldn't have given in.

For me, this sequence has echoes of Fleming's TMWTGG - and I suspect
the glass screen between Bond and M is a deliberate allusion to the
novel. In Fleming's universe, a year is enough time to turn one of
MI6's top agents into a brainwashed assassin, so in that context I
don't think it's altogether unreasonable or unlikely for M's attitude
in DAD to be as harsh as it is.

As for Bond's letting her off the hook, well, one can only surmise that
while he's angry that he was under suspicion, deep down he kind of
understands why this was so.

(As an aside, if we're talking about Bond films and books glossing over
subjects, is there any more glaring example than Bond's remarkable
return to his old self in Fleming's TMWTGG?)

Best

Phil
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240744 ] Di, 21 März 2006 13:03
Mac  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:

> Mac wrote:
>
>> The sarcastic retorts about cutting out the white bread, etc. is
>> undoubtedly the work of Clement & La Frenais.
>
> Agreed. Isn't this also a spin on a line in Fleming's novel? IIRC,
> M, as in the movie, reels off a long list of processed foods,
> detailing the impurities in each, to which Bond, slightly taken
> aback, replies 'I don't eat all that much white bread, sir'.

Superb call. Yes, M lectures about the additives in bread and
Bond says he doesn't eat it. Then M talks about the benefit
of eating yoghurt and fresh fruit and Bond replies laughing, I
don't eat them either!

Then he lights up a fag and tells the old duffer to piss off.

Or something like that....
--
--Mac

I might have made up the last part
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240745 ] Di, 21 März 2006 13:14
Tom Zielinski  
"phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com" <phil.gerrard1 [at] ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1142936658.224287.267600 [at] t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Will, then Absorb:
>
>> > After she hangs him out to dry in DAD, she expects him to turn around
>> > and
>> > start working under cover for her. If I were Bond, I would have told
>> > her to
>> > screw or at the very least gave her a piece of my mind. But no mention
>> > of it
>> > in the film. Bond let her off the hook much too easily. That was a big
>> > plot
>> > hole, IMHO.
>>
>> In any case, I understand Bond's devotion to the mission a lot more than
>> M's silly "Gee, info got leaked, and there are some rumors about from
>> where, so I bet it was my best agent even though I have no concrete
>> proof." Setting up the hospital scene that way just makes M look like a
>> moron; if we had been given better motivation for M's actions (no, the
>> "given the drugs, you wouldn't have known what you were saying" doesn't
>> do it for me), we might even agree with her instead of just waiting for
>> her to leave so Bond can escape.
>>
>> Although I like the film, DAD glosses over this whole section.
>
> I don't know. Isn't there also a time factor involved here? Certainly
> M would be foolish to leap to conclusions if Bond had been held for
> only a few days, as had happened on previous missions, but when he's
> missing presumed dead for a year and a half and then he reappears, with
> information that only he'd known having been leaked, the very least one
> would expect is that he would be kept in quarantine. Certainly I don't
> think M would have suspected Bond of cracking if he hadn't been gone
> for so long, but after that length of time being tortured in a North
> Korean prison, I don't think one could be sure that even the strongest
> and best agents wouldn't have given in.
>
> For me, this sequence has echoes of Fleming's TMWTGG - and I suspect
> the glass screen between Bond and M is a deliberate allusion to the
> novel.


I had not before considered that. Excellent call.

And is not this leak/loyalty issue addressed to some extent in the later
Underground scene between the two?


> In Fleming's universe, a year is enough time to turn one of
> MI6's top agents into a brainwashed assassin, so in that context I
> don't think it's altogether unreasonable or unlikely for M's attitude
> in DAD to be as harsh as it is.
>
> As for Bond's letting her off the hook, well, one can only surmise that
> while he's angry that he was under suspicion, deep down he kind of
> understands why this was so.
>
> (As an aside, if we're talking about Bond films and books glossing over
> subjects, is there any more glaring example than Bond's remarkable
> return to his old self in Fleming's TMWTGG?)



Tom Zielinski
"...Bond's eyes narrowed. He knew, at some point, he would have to slay this
particular dragon. He settled back in his chair, removing a Morlands' three
ring special from the gunmetal cigarette case. As he waited for the
delicious Balkan/Turkish blend to take effect on his lungs, he reflected
that M was right; knowing who to trust is everything in this business..."
Re: OP Vs. NSNA [message #240752 ] Di, 21 März 2006 14:10
phil.gerrard1  
Mac wrote:

> Then he lights up a fag and tells the old duffer to piss off.
>
> Or something like that....

LOL!

One other bit in TB which I find amusing in the light of Fleming's
'Playboy' interview is the following chapter (I think) in which Bond
turns a bit dufferish himself and bemoans the idleness and lack of work
ethic among modern British youth. I wonder what he'd have had to say
about the 'Fleming two-day week'?

Best

Phil
Vorheriges Thema:Bond MVP
Nächstes Thema:OT for Mike Feeney's eyes only...
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Fr Mai 25 21:01:58 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,03878 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered