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 » Thoughts on the teaser
Thoughts on the teaser [message #261959] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 16:24
Jeremy Kareken  
He has trouble with words like 'expectancy,' though in this writer's
humble opinion, that line is so clumsy I don't know what it's doing in
a trailer. "Though as I understand it, Double-Os don't live very
long." Who needs to ruin a cool shot with vestigial cleverness?

He has traces of his lower-middle-class accent, which I like very much.
Yes, Bond was to have gone to Eton, but never really quite fit in, did
he? His tastes are *very* middle class. Pinaud, that Prince of
Shampoos? Naming the brands of booze? Very non-posh, and telling of
Mr. Bond's class.

It strikes me that, in some ways, this seems like the story of the
making of Sean Connery. They take a truck driver/ body builder, teach
him to walk upright, give him a rolex and show him how to wear a
saville row suit. Terence Young is being played by Dame Judi while
Sean is being played by a body-hairless and blond Daniel Craig.

Personally, I love the anger behind Craig's eyes in the last shot.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261962 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 17:07
WQ  
Jeremy Kareken wrote:
> He has trouble with words like 'expectancy,' though in this writer's
> humble opinion, that line is so clumsy I don't know what it's doing in
> a trailer. "Though as I understand it, Double-Os don't live very
> long." Who needs to ruin a cool shot with vestigial cleverness?
>
> He has traces of his lower-middle-class accent, which I like very much.
> Yes, Bond was to have gone to Eton, but never really quite fit in, did
> he? His tastes are *very* middle class. Pinaud, that Prince of
> Shampoos? Naming the brands of booze? Very non-posh, and telling of
> Mr. Bond's class.
>
> It strikes me that, in some ways, this seems like the story of the
> making of Sean Connery. They take a truck driver/ body builder, teach
> him to walk upright, give him a rolex and show him how to wear a
> saville row suit. Terence Young is being played by Dame Judi while
> Sean is being played by a body-hairless and blond Daniel Craig.

--- Now that's a good analogy, I like that one. Unfortunately, we're
not getting Sean in the role for it.

> Personally, I love the anger behind Craig's eyes in the last shot.

--- The pursing of his lips kills him, and probably more than his hair
being blond. The anger in the eyes is too overt, more projecting than
being - and too piercingly blue, too.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261963 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 17:16
booby  
He also has trouble with the word 'half-hitman'. To some people, it
sounded like 'half-Hitler'.

LOL.

Bond as Hitler? That's taking gritty Bond too far! Chuckle.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261965 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 17:41
Paul Clarke  
WQ wrote:
> --- The pursing of his lips kills him, and probably more than his hair
> being blond. The anger in the eyes is too overt, more projecting than
> being - and too piercingly blue, too.

Oh, for fuck's sake! You're now reduced to criticizing the 'pursing of
his lips'? And the anger in his eyes being 'too overt'?

It's quite obvious that you are determined to manufacture reasons to
bring down CR and Craig. Enjoy your misery.


And why the hell doesn't my killfile stick?? I keep getting WQ messages
once in a while even though I've killfiled the miserable sod.


--
==007===
"My dear girl, there are some things that just aren't done, such as
drinking Dom Perignon '53 above a temperature of 38 degrees Fahrenheit.
That's as bad as being a sad bastard in public."
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261966 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 18:18
WQ  
Paul Clarke wrote:
> WQ wrote:
> > --- The pursing of his lips kills him, and probably more than his hair
> > being blond. The anger in the eyes is too overt, more projecting than
> > being - and too piercingly blue, too.
>
> Oh, for fuck's sake! You're now reduced to criticizing the 'pursing of
> his lips'? And the anger in his eyes being 'too overt'?

--- It's not just him, it's ANY actor who plays ANY part who tries to
come off looking cool, dashing, suave or whatever, but instead forces
that look rather than embraces it. It's what I call "poseuritis," a
particularly nasty affliction that some actors suffer from. Brosnan
had it with his smarminess, even Dalton, who I actually liked, had it
with his edgy overintensity at times. Actors need to strike the right
balance and be conscious of being natural in whatever it is they
project because the camera picks up on imperfections and phoniness very
easily - and anyone astute enough can see that too.

> It's quite obvious that you are determined to manufacture reasons to
> bring down CR and Craig. Enjoy your misery.

--- Obvious, it seems, to quite a few people around here. But unlike
those same people, I don't easily delude myself into believing that
Craig and CR will be great. I look at what I see and react in the way
it strikes me. If what most has struck me so far has been in the
negative, cautious or guarded vein, then I'm not going to ignore that
for false positives in some desperate hope to be entertained by a
terrific Bond film that might not even happen. And if there are things
that strike me right about the film and Craig, I acknowledge them. I
only wish there were more things I could say positively about both, but
maybe I might be able to see those positives more clearly once we get
past all these preliminary superficial teaser hypes which I never buy
into anyway for any film - I'm much too jaded for that. If ultimately
I'm proven wrong by the film and Craig, then I'll be delighted, and
probably more delighted than anyone else who's had high hopes all along
that end up being met. So there's no misery here for me. I simply
call them as I see them and I'm perfectly content with that. The
misery is on those who find that irritating, who desperately crave to
see a terrific Bond and don't want to have their bubbles bursted in the
meantime by someone who comes along and says, "Yeah, I can see the
scratches on the side of your brand new Porsche."

> And why the hell doesn't my killfile stick?? I keep getting WQ messages
> once in a while even though I've killfiled the miserable sod.

--- I'm the free runner of the newsgroup.

------------------

Of course, I could be wrong about all this.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261967 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 20:17
Paul  
"Moo Moo Sandwich" <booby [at] myself.com> wrote in
news:1146842182.575589.305970 [at] g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> He also has trouble with the word 'half-hitman'. To some people, it
> sounded like 'half-Hitler'.
>
> LOL.
>
> Bond as Hitler? That's taking gritty Bond too far! Chuckle.
>
>

I must admit i have not been a total fan of the way this movie is going
or with Craig as Bond, but i have left an open mind as much as possible,
however after seeing the trailer i am afraid my worries have not been
dispelled. All other teaser trailers always give me the urge to want
more, i am afraid this did not do it for me. I have looked at it a few
times to see if i can change my mind but really if it did not grab me at
the 1st go i doubt it will. I am not saying it wont be a good movie, i
am just thinking it may not be the type of bond movie i will wanna see.

I have been a strong Bond fan for nearly 40 years and i knew that when i
sat down in the cinema i was going to be entertained with some bloody
magnificent stunts, which i expect this movie will deliever on, but also
some tongue in cheeks humour, that was part of a Bond movie, it was a
known fact that one of the reasons why they where so sucessful and could
not be successfully imitated was they made fun out of themselves, after
looking at the trailer my PERSONAL views are that the movie will be too
serious for my taste, and to be honest unless i see something to the
contary in future views of the movie, i am seriuosly conserdiring not
seeing the movie on its release

I just hope that the gunbarrell sequence in the toilet is not an omen
that the movie is going to end up going down the pan, but i keep on
coming back to what Cubby once said to the current producers 'Dont let
them muck it up' and to be honest i think they have. perhaps time and
the movie will prove me wrong.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261968 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 21:03
Mac  
No, 'tis not expectancy he has trouble with, but "very." He cannot roll his
"Rs." Then again, Connery had a sibilant isshue (ah, the wit). Still, he has
a better voice than the estuary and rather flat estuary accent the (rather
puzzlingly) Coventry-born Owen has adopted.

The line itself seems truncated and taken out of context, it's actually;
"While I understand double-0s have a very short live expectancy...."

The final shot at the gaming table looks specifically shot for this teaser,
IMO.

--
--Mac
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261969 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 21:05
Mac  
Mac wrote:

> No, 'tis not expectancy he has trouble with, but "very." He cannot
> roll his "Rs." Then again, Connery had a sibilant isshue (ah, the
> wit). Still, he has a better voice than the estuary and rather flat
> estuary accent the (rather puzzlingly) Coventry-born Owen has adopted.
>
> The line itself seems truncated and taken out of context, it's
> actually; "While I understand double-0s have a very short live
> expectancy...."

Correction: life
--
--Mac
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261970 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 21:18
Mac  
WQ wrote:

>> It's quite obvious that you are determined to manufacture reasons to
>> bring down CR and Craig. Enjoy your misery.
>
> --- Obvious, it seems, to quite a few people around here. But unlike
> those same people, I don't easily delude myself into believing that
> Craig and CR will be great.

No, the difference between you and the people you refer to is *not* that
they believe Craig and CASINO ROYALE will be "great," they just remain
hopeful a good Bond film will come of it and can add balance to their
observations.

Your relentless negativity and pessimism, in the belief that you are
some sort of cinematic Cassandra, is a drag.
--
--Mac
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261971 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 21:46
JHause  
Paul wrote:
> "Moo Moo Sandwich" <booby [at] myself.com> wrote in
> news:1146842182.575589.305970 [at] g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> > He also has trouble with the word 'half-hitman'. To some people, it
> > sounded like 'half-Hitler'.
> >
> > LOL.
> >
> > Bond as Hitler? That's taking gritty Bond too far! Chuckle.
> >
> >
>
> I must admit i have not been a total fan of the way this movie is going
> or with Craig as Bond, but i have left an open mind as much as possible,
> however after seeing the trailer i am afraid my worries have not been
> dispelled. All other teaser trailers always give me the urge to want
> more, i am afraid this did not do it for me. I have looked at it a few
> times to see if i can change my mind but really if it did not grab me at
> the 1st go i doubt it will. I am not saying it wont be a good movie, i
> am just thinking it may not be the type of bond movie i will wanna see.
>
> I have been a strong Bond fan for nearly 40 years and i knew that when i
> sat down in the cinema i was going to be entertained with some bloody
> magnificent stunts, which i expect this movie will deliever on, but also
> some tongue in cheeks humour, that was part of a Bond movie, it was a
> known fact that one of the reasons why they where so sucessful and could
> not be successfully imitated was they made fun out of themselves, after
> looking at the trailer my PERSONAL views are that the movie will be too
> serious for my taste, and to be honest unless i see something to the
> contary in future views of the movie, i am seriuosly conserdiring not
> seeing the movie on its release
>
> I just hope that the gunbarrell sequence in the toilet is not an omen
> that the movie is going to end up going down the pan, but i keep on
> coming back to what Cubby once said to the current producers 'Dont let
> them muck it up' and to be honest i think they have. perhaps time and
> the movie will prove me wrong.

Yeah. They had been so on course with AVTAK.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261972 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 22:02
WQ  
Mac wrote:
> WQ wrote:
>
> >> It's quite obvious that you are determined to manufacture reasons to
> >> bring down CR and Craig. Enjoy your misery.
> >
> > --- Obvious, it seems, to quite a few people around here. But unlike
> > those same people, I don't easily delude myself into believing that
> > Craig and CR will be great.
>
> No, the difference between you and the people you refer to is *not* that
> they believe Craig and CASINO ROYALE will be "great," they just remain
> hopeful a good Bond film will come of it and can add balance to their
> observations.
>
> Your relentless negativity and pessimism, in the belief that you are
> some sort of cinematic Cassandra, is a drag.

--- Oh, relax, it's only a Bond movie, not the Virgin Mary. I can
dislike whatever is going on with it as much as anyone else can like
whatever is going on with it. I don't see you coming down on anyone
who's gushing too much over the film. If you're going to be "balanced"
yourself, you'd find them just as much of a drag too, but you don't.
Some "balance" on your part. But again, if you're going to make
self-serving comments like that, include my entire post to put what you
say into proper context. You do realize that I did go on beyond the
point where you ended quoting me. But of course adding whatever else I
said afterwards would've only robbed you of your cheap-thrills
hit-and-run two cents' worth of having its desired effect.

----------------------------

Of course, I coul dbe wrong about all this.


> --
> --Mac
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261973 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 22:05
JHause  
WQ wrote:
>
> Of course, I coul dbe wrong about all this.
>
>

Of course you could. You can't even spell "could be" right.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261974 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 22:19
Mac  
WQ wrote:

> --- Oh, relax, it's only a Bond movie, not the Virgin Mary. I can
> dislike whatever is going on with it as much as anyone else can like
> whatever is going on with it. I don't see you coming down on anyone
> who's gushing too much over the film. If you're going to be
> "balanced" yourself, you'd find them just as much of a drag too, but
> you don't. Some "balance" on your part. But again, if you're going
> to make self-serving comments like that, include my entire post to
> put what you say into proper context. You do realize that I did go
> on beyond the point where you ended quoting me.

Trouble is, you go on-and-on. Go on and on saying the same bloody
thing. And that "cheap thrills" denfence mechanism bullshit you
produce like a "get out of jail free" card is a drag too.

Take your own advice: relax.
--
--Mac
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261975 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 22:29
WQ  
Mac wrote:
> WQ wrote:
>
> > --- Oh, relax, it's only a Bond movie, not the Virgin Mary. I can
> > dislike whatever is going on with it as much as anyone else can like
> > whatever is going on with it. I don't see you coming down on anyone
> > who's gushing too much over the film. If you're going to be
> > "balanced" yourself, you'd find them just as much of a drag too, but
> > you don't. Some "balance" on your part. But again, if you're going
> > to make self-serving comments like that, include my entire post to
> > put what you say into proper context. You do realize that I did go
> > on beyond the point where you ended quoting me.
>
> Trouble is, you go on-and-on. Go on and on saying the same bloody
> thing. And that "cheap thrills" denfence mechanism bullshit you
> produce like a "get out of jail free" card is a drag too.
>
> Take your own advice: relax.

--- I *am* relaxed. It's everybody else that can't handle any contrary
opinions. And if it seems like I go on and on saying the same bloody
things, it's probably because you've gotten to a point where you're
just reading too many of my posts. Take a bit of break and after a
while it'll all read fresh to you again. I'm better in small doses -
and even I admit that.

--------------------

Of course, I could b e wrong about all this.



> --
> --Mac
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #261976 ] Fr, 05 Mai 2006 22:42
booby  
WQ wrote:
> Mac wrote:
> > WQ wrote:
> >
> > > --- Oh, relax, it's only a Bond movie, not the Virgin Mary. I can
> > > dislike whatever is going on with it as much as anyone else can like
> > > whatever is going on with it. I don't see you coming down on anyone
> > > who's gushing too much over the film. If you're going to be
> > > "balanced" yourself, you'd find them just as much of a drag too, but
> > > you don't. Some "balance" on your part. But again, if you're going
> > > to make self-serving comments like that, include my entire post to
> > > put what you say into proper context. You do realize that I did go
> > > on beyond the point where you ended quoting me.
> >
> > Trouble is, you go on-and-on. Go on and on saying the same bloody
> > thing. And that "cheap thrills" denfence mechanism bullshit you
> > produce like a "get out of jail free" card is a drag too.
> >
> > Take your own advice: relax.
>
> --- I *am* relaxed. It's everybody else that can't handle any contrary
> opinions. And if it seems like I go on and on saying the same bloody
> things, it's probably because you've gotten to a point where you're
> just reading too many of my posts. Take a bit of break and after a
> while it'll all read fresh to you again. I'm better in small doses -
> and even I admit that.

Indeed,

LLC
>
> --------------------
>
> Of course, I could b e wrong about all this.
>
>
>
> > --
> > --Mac
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #262663 ] Sa, 06 Mai 2006 14:57
Paul  
"JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in
news:1146858406.130569.129600 [at] i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>
> Paul wrote:
>> "Moo Moo Sandwich" <booby [at] myself.com> wrote in
>> news:1146842182.575589.305970 [at] g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > He also has trouble with the word 'half-hitman'. To some people, it
>> > sounded like 'half-Hitler'.
>> >
>> > LOL.
>> >
>> > Bond as Hitler? That's taking gritty Bond too far! Chuckle.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I must admit i have not been a total fan of the way this movie is
>> going or with Craig as Bond, but i have left an open mind as much as
>> possible, however after seeing the trailer i am afraid my worries
>> have not been dispelled. All other teaser trailers always give me the
>> urge to want more, i am afraid this did not do it for me. I have
>> looked at it a few times to see if i can change my mind but really if
>> it did not grab me at the 1st go i doubt it will. I am not saying it
>> wont be a good movie, i am just thinking it may not be the type of
>> bond movie i will wanna see.
>>
>> I have been a strong Bond fan for nearly 40 years and i knew that
>> when i sat down in the cinema i was going to be entertained with some
>> bloody magnificent stunts, which i expect this movie will deliever
>> on, but also some tongue in cheeks humour, that was part of a Bond
>> movie, it was a known fact that one of the reasons why they where so
>> sucessful and could not be successfully imitated was they made fun
>> out of themselves, after looking at the trailer my PERSONAL views are
>> that the movie will be too serious for my taste, and to be honest
>> unless i see something to the contary in future views of the movie, i
>> am seriuosly conserdiring not seeing the movie on its release
>>
>> I just hope that the gunbarrell sequence in the toilet is not an omen
>> that the movie is going to end up going down the pan, but i keep on
>> coming back to what Cubby once said to the current producers 'Dont
>> let them muck it up' and to be honest i think they have. perhaps time
>> and the movie will prove me wrong.
>
> Yeah. They had been so on course with AVTAK.
>
>

What u mean on course?

They are only movies, some take them far 2 seriously, i merely state i
dont think i may not see this one because i think its going in a way i
wont like. The movies since avtak have ENTERTAINED me no big analisis
just entertainment, Thats y i like to go and watch a Bond movie to take
me away from the realitys of work and my business's, up until now i
could be reasonbly certain that when i put my bum on the seat i would be
entertained with the type of movie i like, i suspect,though i may be
wrong that this one will not entertain me in the same way if at all.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #262666 ] Sa, 06 Mai 2006 16:02
JHause  
Paul wrote:
>
> What u mean on course?
>
> They are only movies, some take them far 2 seriously, i merely state i
> dont think i may not see this one because i think its going in a way i
> wont like. The movies since avtak have ENTERTAINED me no big analisis
> just entertainment, Thats y i like to go and watch a Bond movie to take
> me away from the realitys of work and my business's, up until now i
> could be reasonbly certain that when i put my bum on the seat i would be
> entertained with the type of movie i like, i suspect,though i may be
> wrong that this one will not entertain me in the same way if at all.

You won't see it because... Oh, you're posing. Sorry, I just lost
interest.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #262680 ] So, 07 Mai 2006 00:10
Paul  
"JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in news:1146924120.401054.308280
[at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:

>
> Paul wrote:
>>
>> What u mean on course?
>>
>> They are only movies, some take them far 2 seriously, i merely state i
>> dont think i may not see this one because i think its going in a way i
>> wont like. The movies since avtak have ENTERTAINED me no big analisis
>> just entertainment, Thats y i like to go and watch a Bond movie to take
>> me away from the realitys of work and my business's, up until now i
>> could be reasonbly certain that when i put my bum on the seat i would be
>> entertained with the type of movie i like, i suspect,though i may be
>> wrong that this one will not entertain me in the same way if at all.
>
> You won't see it because... Oh, you're posing. Sorry, I just lost
> interest.
>
>

posing?
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266646 ] Di, 09 Mai 2006 20:51
Jabei  
Paul - I think that if you were entertained by TND,TWINE & DAD (other than
the pre credit sequences), you will have a bad experience with CR.On the
other hand, those films bored me senseless so this trailer brings me great
excitement - the only problem I can see is that all these films are written
by the same people....tile will tell.



"Paul" <pcb007 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97BB8DF3C96C0pcb007gmailcom [at] 194.117.143.53...
> "JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in
> news:1146858406.130569.129600 [at] i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
>>
>> Paul wrote:
>>> "Moo Moo Sandwich" <booby [at] myself.com> wrote in
>>> news:1146842182.575589.305970 [at] g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>> > He also has trouble with the word 'half-hitman'. To some people, it
>>> > sounded like 'half-Hitler'.
>>> >
>>> > LOL.
>>> >
>>> > Bond as Hitler? That's taking gritty Bond too far! Chuckle.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> I must admit i have not been a total fan of the way this movie is
>>> going or with Craig as Bond, but i have left an open mind as much as
>>> possible, however after seeing the trailer i am afraid my worries
>>> have not been dispelled. All other teaser trailers always give me the
>>> urge to want more, i am afraid this did not do it for me. I have
>>> looked at it a few times to see if i can change my mind but really if
>>> it did not grab me at the 1st go i doubt it will. I am not saying it
>>> wont be a good movie, i am just thinking it may not be the type of
>>> bond movie i will wanna see.
>>>
>>> I have been a strong Bond fan for nearly 40 years and i knew that
>>> when i sat down in the cinema i was going to be entertained with some
>>> bloody magnificent stunts, which i expect this movie will deliever
>>> on, but also some tongue in cheeks humour, that was part of a Bond
>>> movie, it was a known fact that one of the reasons why they where so
>>> sucessful and could not be successfully imitated was they made fun
>>> out of themselves, after looking at the trailer my PERSONAL views are
>>> that the movie will be too serious for my taste, and to be honest
>>> unless i see something to the contary in future views of the movie, i
>>> am seriuosly conserdiring not seeing the movie on its release
>>>
>>> I just hope that the gunbarrell sequence in the toilet is not an omen
>>> that the movie is going to end up going down the pan, but i keep on
>>> coming back to what Cubby once said to the current producers 'Dont
>>> let them muck it up' and to be honest i think they have. perhaps time
>>> and the movie will prove me wrong.
>>
>> Yeah. They had been so on course with AVTAK.
>>
>>
>
> What u mean on course?
>
> They are only movies, some take them far 2 seriously, i merely state i
> dont think i may not see this one because i think its going in a way i
> wont like. The movies since avtak have ENTERTAINED me no big analisis
> just entertainment, Thats y i like to go and watch a Bond movie to take
> me away from the realitys of work and my business's, up until now i
> could be reasonbly certain that when i put my bum on the seat i would be
> entertained with the type of movie i like, i suspect,though i may be
> wrong that this one will not entertain me in the same way if at all.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266647 ] Di, 09 Mai 2006 21:41
edrhodes  
Jeremy Kareken wrote:
> He has trouble with words like 'expectancy,' though in this writer's
> humble opinion, that line is so clumsy I don't know what it's doing in
> a trailer. "Though as I understand it, Double-Os don't live very
> long." Who needs to ruin a cool shot with vestigial cleverness?

My daughter's thought was; "Dear God, who thought to put that man in a
Speedo?"
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266656 ] Mi, 10 Mai 2006 23:46
Paul  
"Jabei" <jabei [at] btinternet.com> wrote in
news:bPydnWBQdOU6ef3ZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d [at] bt.com:

> Paul - I think that if you were entertained by TND,TWINE & DAD (other
> than the pre credit sequences), you will have a bad experience with
> CR.On the other hand, those films bored me senseless so this trailer
> brings me great excitement - the only problem I can see is that all
> these films are written by the same people....tile will tell.
>
>
>
> "Paul" <pcb007 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns97BB8DF3C96C0pcb007gmailcom [at] 194.117.143.53...
>> "JHause" <JHause [at] aol.com> wrote in
>> news:1146858406.130569.129600 [at] i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>
>>> Paul wrote:
>>>> "Moo Moo Sandwich" <booby [at] myself.com> wrote in
>>>> news:1146842182.575589.305970 [at] g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>> > He also has trouble with the word 'half-hitman'. To some people,
>>>> > it sounded like 'half-Hitler'.
>>>> >
>>>> > LOL.
>>>> >
>>>> > Bond as Hitler? That's taking gritty Bond too far! Chuckle.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I must admit i have not been a total fan of the way this movie is
>>>> going or with Craig as Bond, but i have left an open mind as much
>>>> as possible, however after seeing the trailer i am afraid my
>>>> worries have not been dispelled. All other teaser trailers always
>>>> give me the urge to want more, i am afraid this did not do it for
>>>> me. I have looked at it a few times to see if i can change my mind
>>>> but really if it did not grab me at the 1st go i doubt it will. I
>>>> am not saying it wont be a good movie, i am just thinking it may
>>>> not be the type of bond movie i will wanna see.
>>>>
>>>> I have been a strong Bond fan for nearly 40 years and i knew that
>>>> when i sat down in the cinema i was going to be entertained with
>>>> some bloody magnificent stunts, which i expect this movie will
>>>> deliever on, but also some tongue in cheeks humour, that was part
>>>> of a Bond movie, it was a known fact that one of the reasons why
>>>> they where so sucessful and could not be successfully imitated was
>>>> they made fun out of themselves, after looking at the trailer my
>>>> PERSONAL views are that the movie will be too serious for my taste,
>>>> and to be honest unless i see something to the contary in future
>>>> views of the movie, i am seriuosly conserdiring not seeing the
>>>> movie on its release
>>>>
>>>> I just hope that the gunbarrell sequence in the toilet is not an
>>>> omen that the movie is going to end up going down the pan, but i
>>>> keep on coming back to what Cubby once said to the current
>>>> producers 'Dont let them muck it up' and to be honest i think they
>>>> have. perhaps time and the movie will prove me wrong.
>>>
>>> Yeah. They had been so on course with AVTAK.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> What u mean on course?
>>
>> They are only movies, some take them far 2 seriously, i merely state
>> i dont think i may not see this one because i think its going in a
>> way i wont like. The movies since avtak have ENTERTAINED me no big
>> analisis just entertainment, Thats y i like to go and watch a Bond
>> movie to take me away from the realitys of work and my business's, up
>> until now i could be reasonbly certain that when i put my bum on the
>> seat i would be entertained with the type of movie i like, i
>> suspect,though i may be wrong that this one will not entertain me in
>> the same way if at all.
>
>
>

At last a sensible reply. Yes they did entertain me as have all the
other Bond movies some more then others. Thats what they r there for,
they cannot stand scuntiny, i have read some posts on here where guys
have tried to analise them, why did Bond do this, why did bond do that,
baiscally because the script did it that way. I know a hell of a lot
about Bond movies, read all the books, but cant remember them in detail,
but despite all this the reason i like them is they entertained me in a
a way i like, no more no less. I suspect Casino Royale will have some
bloody brilliant stunts in, it has to have to sell it to the public but
the lack of humour(apparently) and the fact that i still cannot take to
Craig as Bond just makes me more convinced its not gonna be a bond movie
of the style i like, thats not to say i like every piece of every movie,
far from it, i still cant watch the paraglide sequence without cringing
from DAD, but over all they are a damn good entertainment.On another
point i think it would be a good idea to bring John Barry back to score
this movie, i am not saying arnold has not done a good job but i just
think John Barry could really help it on the way. What do any of u guys
think?
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266657 ] Do, 11 Mai 2006 00:00
Paul Clarke  
Paul wrote:

> At last a sensible reply. Yes they did entertain me as have all the
> other Bond movies some more then others. Thats what they r there for,
> they cannot stand scuntiny, i have read some posts on here where guys
> have tried to analise them, why did Bond do this, why did bond do that,
> baiscally because the script did it that way. I know a hell of a lot
> about Bond movies, read all the books, but cant remember them in detail,
> but despite all this the reason i like them is they entertained me in a
> a way i like, no more no less. I suspect Casino Royale will have some
> bloody brilliant stunts in, it has to have to sell it to the public but
> the lack of humour(apparently) and the fact that i still cannot take to
> Craig as Bond just makes me more convinced its not gonna be a bond movie
> of the style i like, thats not to say i like every piece of every movie,
> far from it, i still cant watch the paraglide sequence without cringing
> from DAD, but over all they are a damn good entertainment.On another
> point i think it would be a good idea to bring John Barry back to score
> this movie, i am not saying arnold has not done a good job but i just
> think John Barry could really help it on the way. What do any of u guys
> think?

I think you need better punctuation, grammar, and capitalization. (Hey,
I'm a writer/editor; I'm a stickler for such things.)

But snippiness aside, I take your point that Bond films are, first and
foremost, sheer entertainment and that, perhaps more importantly for the
continuation of the series, they have to attract ticket buyers. I love
what I've seen and read of the direction CR is taking, and eagerly
anticipate Craig in the role, but I think you are correct that a
grittier, more serious approach will be a bit of a hard sell to "Joe
Popcorn," though I think it's exactly where EON needed to go
artistically. The 007 series needs an occasional grounding to keep
things from flying too much into the realms of fantasy comedy. But does
the average moviegoer care about more drama and characterization in a
Bond film? I would argue the relative box office take for each film
indicates they do not.

--
==007===
"My dear girl, there are some things that just aren't done, such as
drinking Dom Perignon '53 above a temperature of 38 degrees Fahrenheit.
That's as bad as snarkily commenting on online writing."
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266658 ] Do, 11 Mai 2006 00:14
JHause  
Yup. All I know is I didn't make a dime off DAD. I just saw a bad
movie. What do I care what the box office was?
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266668 ] Do, 11 Mai 2006 06:59
Lee Edward McIlmoyle  
"WQ" <wq [at] email.com> wrote in news:1146860987.979367.61480
[at] u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com:

>> Take your own advice: relax.
>
> --- I *am* relaxed. It's everybody else that can't handle any contrary
> opinions. And if it seems like I go on and on saying the same bloody
> things, it's probably because you've gotten to a point where you're
> just reading too many of my posts. Take a bit of break and after a
> while it'll all read fresh to you again. I'm better in small doses -
> and even I admit that.

LOL! I used to tell people that about myself all the time.

> Of course, I could b e wrong about all this.

You're going to give JHause another brain aneurysm i-f you keep that up.
;)

For the record though, I can see how a lot of your reactions to other
people's enthusiasm must be aggravating for them. I personally can see
the mirth and even the point in what you're saying. That's why I keep
reading. I get it. But a lot of these guys are in need of some good old
fashioned hope. They can handle a dose or two or cautious criticism here
and there, but you tend to strip the whole thing down bare every time you
speak. I suspect it's a little heartbreaking (or perhaps more fairly just
grating, like shellfire every morning) for a few of these guys, who are
very smart and don't like to be made to feel like their enthusiasm is
evidence of their stupidity. It does get offensive after a while, even
though I know you don't intend it that way. You're just speaking your
mind, and that's fair. I even caught you smiling and going light in a few
posts I've read here tonight. So I can see what they might be
overlooking.

Still, man, you're bumming them out. They've got an intense (if rather
undebonair-looking) actor to play in one of the all-time most brutal Bond
stories, and they're more worried that it will turn out to be a drag than
that it won't be serious or convincing enough. For my money, I think he
looks totally wrong for the role, and yet I really think he's going to
nail it. I don't even need reassurances of it. I can see it in the body
of work he's already done, and the fact that he's not playing it for
laughs. Some fans may never be comfortable with it, but I think this one
really will turn some heads and make people take the franchise seriously
again.

Okay, climbing off my high horse again. Thanks for tolerating me.

Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
blathering mostly
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266669 ] Do, 11 Mai 2006 07:05
Lee Edward McIlmoyle  
"Mac" <see.mac [at] SPAMLESSvirgin.net> wrote in
news:4c1lt6F13mpjmU1 [at] individual.net:

> The final shot at the gaming table looks specifically shot for this
> teaser, IMO.

Most telling for me is that he didn't utter the Bond, James Bond line once.
He just glared at you, like he knows you already know the line, and he's
not going to say it for you. It's a direct challenge.

They're pretty deliberately distancing this from the rest of the franchise.
I know that sounds a little worrying, but I think they're trying to get
themselves the breathing space they need to do something different. By
refusing to play to the expectations too closely, even for the teaser,
they're clearly trying to challenge the audience to put away their
preconceptions.

At least, that's my reading of the whole thing. I could be WAY off base
here.

Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
maybe thinks too much about the wrong things
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266670 ] Do, 11 Mai 2006 07:43
Lee Edward McIlmoyle  
Paul <pcb007 [at] gmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns97BAC4502AC96pcb007gmailcom [at] 194.117.143.37:

> I must admit i have not been a total fan of the way this movie is
> going or with Craig as Bond, but i have left an open mind as much as
> possible, however after seeing the trailer i am afraid my worries have
> not been dispelled. All other teaser trailers always give me the urge
> to want more, i am afraid this did not do it for me. I have looked at
> it a few times to see if i can change my mind but really if it did not
> grab me at the 1st go i doubt it will. I am not saying it wont be a
> good movie, i am just thinking it may not be the type of bond movie i
> will wanna see.
>
> I have been a strong Bond fan for nearly 40 years and i knew that when
> i sat down in the cinema i was going to be entertained with some
> bloody magnificent stunts, which i expect this movie will deliever on,
> but also some tongue in cheeks humour, that was part of a Bond movie,
> it was a known fact that one of the reasons why they where so
> sucessful and could not be successfully imitated was they made fun out
> of themselves, after looking at the trailer my PERSONAL views are that
> the movie will be too serious for my taste, and to be honest unless i
> see something to the contary in future views of the movie, i am
> seriuosly conserdiring not seeing the movie on its release
>
> I just hope that the gunbarrell sequence in the toilet is not an omen
> that the movie is going to end up going down the pan, but i keep on
> coming back to what Cubby once said to the current producers 'Dont let
> them muck it up' and to be honest i think they have. perhaps time and
> the movie will prove me wrong.

I don't think it's an issue of what's missing from this film that is the
problem. I think the problem is, and has been for a while, that the
series has lost all relevance to anyone except Bond fans, and we're a
dying breed.

Let's face it; haldf of us like hard-boiled espionage films. We
reconcile ourselves with Bond as being the Pop Star of our espionage
collection. We adore his adventures and forgive him his sins because
he's our sweet tooth. The rest of us love the lighter side of the series
and are looking on in mounting dread at what we're seeing as an invasion
of our warmest, most pleasurable habits, the absorption of a new Bond
Thriller. We love the jokes. We love the ludicrousness. We love the high
fantasy elements. We love the entertainment value. Fair enough.

Problem is, Bond has ceased to make a dent with anyone outside of the
genre, except perhaps some children and spouses who catch the bug from
our own enthusiasm. Doesn't work all the time, but it works
occasionally.

Most American film-goers would rather see a famous American movie star
like a Ben Affleck or a Tom Cruise beating up villains they understand
and can really dislike, and perhaps cracking a few jokes that play
better to American crowds, than to see a Brit blithely walk through most
of the action sequences, brandish a handgun slightly larger than a
handgun a woman might carry (in the States), and chase after some loon
with a jaw wired shut to keep from vomitting pop rocks or some such
thing.

I kow it's a gross exaggeration, but that's the point. Most people think
Bond is hokey, and when he's not, he's boring. He doesn't blow up enough
stuff, he doesn't kill enough bad guys, he doesn't have powerful
romantic scenarios with his female leads (he has romantic liaisons, but
they're obviously temporary), the jokes he cracks are dry and lame
(particularly by American standards, but even Anglos find them weak and
pointless), and he rarely looks like the situation is beyond his
control.

Basically, all of the things we love about Bond don't impress most
people these days. They think Bond is bullshit.

And you know what? They're right.

The thing is, we fans keep holding on because we enjoy Bond, or some
part of Bond, or some part of Bond's canon, and even if... heck,
especially if we like the newer films, we're still holding out for
something more. Bond still sells, that's for certain, but Bond still
gets absolutely no acclaim, and no one references Bond films as great
cinema, except real Bond afficianados who have studied and explroed the
depths of On Her Majesty's Secret Service or From Russia With Love or
even, dare I say it, Moonraker.

We fans are absolutely certain that there is a Bond film out there
waiting to be made that will finally wake people up and make them
realize that this isn't just some sad little fanclub like... hell, like
any marginal or even successul fanclub that has a few too many of those
obsessive hardcore types who make everyone else around them feel a
little pathetic. We know we're a little geeky about Bond, but we also
know that here is a lot of cool stuff here that is not inaccessible to
anyone who hasn't learned to speak Klingon in seven dialects.

And we know that Bond should be the star of one of these thrillers that
everyone talks about for years to come, like a Spielberg film or a
Scorsese film or even a Tarantino film, love him or hate him. We know
Bond could be on everyone's lips, and not with a sneer.

But some things have got to change.

I'd hate for Bond to become so unentertaining for you that you felt you
had to turn your back on the movie completely. I for one have trouble
with some of Moore's early films in particular, when the humour was a
little too clownish and the plot and suspense tended to be overshoadowed
by the playful atmosphere. That opinion is not unique, but it's also not
the consensus. Lots of opeople love those movies, many precisely for the
light-hearted nature, and more inspite of it.

But no one in their right minds ever wonders (soberly at least) why most
folks don't take The Man With The Golden Gun seriously. Why they didn't
give Moore an Oscar nom at least for his performance in For Your Eyes
Only. Even Brosnan, whom many of us have derided for his latter
comments, disparaged ever being taken seriously for moments like the
killing of Elektra, the apartment scene before Paris walks in, even the
entire first half of Die Anotehr Day. The answer is simple: the second
half of Die Another Day. Immensely entertaining, truly magnificently
over the top, truly a Bondian highpoint, and yet, utter nonsense that no
one with any discerning taste in film had anything good to say about.
Even the Moore-era fans thought it was a little too far-fetched.

You're probably not even reading this anymore, so I'll end here. There
may be humour, and there may even be laughs and smiles in Casino Royale.
But you're not going to be able to enjoy it if you go in expecting it to
be like the good old days. It's not. It can't be anymore. They have
nowhere left to go but down. Unless they start over, and try to heighten
the reality of the fantastic, rather than graft realism onto the
heightened fantasy.

Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
shutting the hell up and leaving your childhood be
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266678 ] Do, 11 Mai 2006 19:26
James Hunter  
"Leaving [my] childhood be?!"

To hell with that - we all have to grow up sometime. Lee, I have to
applaud, long and hard, your observations about the series. And about how
the series is considered by one and all (fan and general movie-goer alike).
We all know that the first 4 are the Classics, and that OHMSS is a gem, and
that since then others have been loved or hated by fans, and that's part of
the problem for those on the "inside." Does anyone here seriously think
that the general public considers OHMSS a "gem," let alone knows it exists?
Don't we fans recognize that the Connery Bonds are considered classics by
the general public because of Connery's cache and the nostalgic tenderness
granted to 60's Pop Art?

Contemporary action films are not ignored if they are marketed/distributed
right; Bond is ignored (except as a pop culture curiosity) because he no
longer matters. And what Lee was saying is that in order for James Bond to
matter to the general public again, he/it *must* be restarted, refreshed,
driven just far enough away from our comfort zones so as to mean something.
One of the reasons why I am so excited by CR is because it seems so clear
that with their dear parents now both gone, and with the monkey of MGM off
their backs, Wilson and Broccoli have gathered up the guts to take some
risks and try to redefine what "heightened reality" means when it comes to
the Bond films. Cubby almost had it right when he (and others) turned away
from the light-hearted approach in '87, but I'm afraid that ultimately he
didn't get it. I'm not blaming him, though - I am, in contrast, praising
his children. Everything they have said publicly has been borne out in
action; everything they've shown us has at least been *interesting* even if
we may not like it; everything points to a fall movie season that brings
Bond back in a way that he will matter again, and not simply to studio
accountants. What a distinct, thorough, entertaining, and involving
pleasure.

Let's follow Lee's approach and leave childhood be and start enjoying being
adults with all this, shall we?

Thanks!
James

"Lee Edward McIlmoyle" <leeinlimbo [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97C0117F1A59Eleeinlimbogmailcom [at] 207.35.177.134...
> Paul <pcb007 [at] gmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns97BAC4502AC96pcb007gmailcom [at] 194.117.143.37:
>
> > I must admit i have not been a total fan of the way this movie is
> > going or with Craig as Bond, but i have left an open mind as much as
> > possible, however after seeing the trailer i am afraid my worries have
> > not been dispelled. All other teaser trailers always give me the urge
> > to want more, i am afraid this did not do it for me. I have looked at
> > it a few times to see if i can change my mind but really if it did not
> > grab me at the 1st go i doubt it will. I am not saying it wont be a
> > good movie, i am just thinking it may not be the type of bond movie i
> > will wanna see.
> >
> > I have been a strong Bond fan for nearly 40 years and i knew that when
> > i sat down in the cinema i was going to be entertained with some
> > bloody magnificent stunts, which i expect this movie will deliever on,
> > but also some tongue in cheeks humour, that was part of a Bond movie,
> > it was a known fact that one of the reasons why they where so
> > sucessful and could not be successfully imitated was they made fun out
> > of themselves, after looking at the trailer my PERSONAL views are that
> > the movie will be too serious for my taste, and to be honest unless i
> > see something to the contary in future views of the movie, i am
> > seriuosly conserdiring not seeing the movie on its release
> >
> > I just hope that the gunbarrell sequence in the toilet is not an omen
> > that the movie is going to end up going down the pan, but i keep on
> > coming back to what Cubby once said to the current producers 'Dont let
> > them muck it up' and to be honest i think they have. perhaps time and
> > the movie will prove me wrong.
>
> I don't think it's an issue of what's missing from this film that is the
> problem. I think the problem is, and has been for a while, that the
> series has lost all relevance to anyone except Bond fans, and we're a
> dying breed.
>
> Let's face it; haldf of us like hard-boiled espionage films. We
> reconcile ourselves with Bond as being the Pop Star of our espionage
> collection. We adore his adventures and forgive him his sins because
> he's our sweet tooth. The rest of us love the lighter side of the series
> and are looking on in mounting dread at what we're seeing as an invasion
> of our warmest, most pleasurable habits, the absorption of a new Bond
> Thriller. We love the jokes. We love the ludicrousness. We love the high
> fantasy elements. We love the entertainment value. Fair enough.
>
> Problem is, Bond has ceased to make a dent with anyone outside of the
> genre, except perhaps some children and spouses who catch the bug from
> our own enthusiasm. Doesn't work all the time, but it works
> occasionally.
>
> Most American film-goers would rather see a famous American movie star
> like a Ben Affleck or a Tom Cruise beating up villains they understand
> and can really dislike, and perhaps cracking a few jokes that play
> better to American crowds, than to see a Brit blithely walk through most
> of the action sequences, brandish a handgun slightly larger than a
> handgun a woman might carry (in the States), and chase after some loon
> with a jaw wired shut to keep from vomitting pop rocks or some such
> thing.
>
> I kow it's a gross exaggeration, but that's the point. Most people think
> Bond is hokey, and when he's not, he's boring. He doesn't blow up enough
> stuff, he doesn't kill enough bad guys, he doesn't have powerful
> romantic scenarios with his female leads (he has romantic liaisons, but
> they're obviously temporary), the jokes he cracks are dry and lame
> (particularly by American standards, but even Anglos find them weak and
> pointless), and he rarely looks like the situation is beyond his
> control.
>
> Basically, all of the things we love about Bond don't impress most
> people these days. They think Bond is bullshit.
>
> And you know what? They're right.
>
> The thing is, we fans keep holding on because we enjoy Bond, or some
> part of Bond, or some part of Bond's canon, and even if... heck,
> especially if we like the newer films, we're still holding out for
> something more. Bond still sells, that's for certain, but Bond still
> gets absolutely no acclaim, and no one references Bond films as great
> cinema, except real Bond afficianados who have studied and explroed the
> depths of On Her Majesty's Secret Service or From Russia With Love or
> even, dare I say it, Moonraker.
>
> We fans are absolutely certain that there is a Bond film out there
> waiting to be made that will finally wake people up and make them
> realize that this isn't just some sad little fanclub like... hell, like
> any marginal or even successul fanclub that has a few too many of those
> obsessive hardcore types who make everyone else around them feel a
> little pathetic. We know we're a little geeky about Bond, but we also
> know that here is a lot of cool stuff here that is not inaccessible to
> anyone who hasn't learned to speak Klingon in seven dialects.
>
> And we know that Bond should be the star of one of these thrillers that
> everyone talks about for years to come, like a Spielberg film or a
> Scorsese film or even a Tarantino film, love him or hate him. We know
> Bond could be on everyone's lips, and not with a sneer.
>
> But some things have got to change.
>
> I'd hate for Bond to become so unentertaining for you that you felt you
> had to turn your back on the movie completely. I for one have trouble
> with some of Moore's early films in particular, when the humour was a
> little too clownish and the plot and suspense tended to be overshoadowed
> by the playful atmosphere. That opinion is not unique, but it's also not
> the consensus. Lots of opeople love those movies, many precisely for the
> light-hearted nature, and more inspite of it.
>
> But no one in their right minds ever wonders (soberly at least) why most
> folks don't take The Man With The Golden Gun seriously. Why they didn't
> give Moore an Oscar nom at least for his performance in For Your Eyes
> Only. Even Brosnan, whom many of us have derided for his latter
> comments, disparaged ever being taken seriously for moments like the
> killing of Elektra, the apartment scene before Paris walks in, even the
> entire first half of Die Anotehr Day. The answer is simple: the second
> half of Die Another Day. Immensely entertaining, truly magnificently
> over the top, truly a Bondian highpoint, and yet, utter nonsense that no
> one with any discerning taste in film had anything good to say about.
> Even the Moore-era fans thought it was a little too far-fetched.
>
> You're probably not even reading this anymore, so I'll end here. There
> may be humour, and there may even be laughs and smiles in Casino Royale.
> But you're not going to be able to enjoy it if you go in expecting it to
> be like the good old days. It's not. It can't be anymore. They have
> nowhere left to go but down. Unless they start over, and try to heighten
> the reality of the fantastic, rather than graft realism onto the
> heightened fantasy.
>
> Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
> shutting the hell up and leaving your childhood be
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266679 ] Do, 11 Mai 2006 19:50
Paul Clarke  
> "Lee Edward McIlmoyle" <leeinlimbo [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns97C0117F1A59Eleeinlimbogmailcom [at] 207.35.177.134...
>
>>There may be humour, and there may even be laughs and smiles in Casino Royale.
>>But you're not going to be able to enjoy it if you go in expecting it to
>>be like the good old days. It's not. It can't be anymore. They have
>>nowhere left to go but down. Unless they start over, and try to heighten
>>the reality of the fantastic, rather than graft realism onto the
>>heightened fantasy.
>>

A well-reasoned, well-argued, well-written post! With this last
paragraph, I really think you hit the nail on the head. It's time that
the Bond films were a serious contender in world cinema again.

--
==007===
"My dear girl, there are some things that just aren't done, such as
drinking Dom Perignon '53 above a temperature of 38 degrees Fahrenheit.
That's as bad as dancing with a lampshade on your head when everyone
else is too drunk to care or has left the apartment."
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266724 ] So, 14 Mai 2006 01:13
iedsri  
They've done something ridiculous with his hair, apparently: teased it
up into a little puffy mountain, perhaps in an attempt to minimize its
thinness. Pathetic.
Re: Thoughts on the teaser [message #266731 ] So, 14 Mai 2006 11:56
Lee Edward McIlmoyle  
iedsri [at] aol.com wrote in news:1147562012.546661.138150
[at] i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> They've done something ridiculous with his hair, apparently: teased it
> up into a little puffy mountain, perhaps in an attempt to minimize its
> thinness. Pathetic.

Jo Jo, is that you?

Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
didn't have him pegged for a Bond fan
Vorheriges Thema:Daniel Craig denies the claim: 'the stress of Bond is getting to me'
Nächstes Thema:HAPPY BIRTHDAY, KERIM BEY
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 26 05:26:57 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,11174 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered