Model Boat Mayhem
Mess Deck: General Section => Chit-Chat => Topic started by: richald on November 25, 2011, 04:57:36 pm
-
Just announced, the part of 'Q' in the new film is to be played by some 'kid'.... see
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15889689 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15889689)
I was planning to write a longer diatribe about how entertainment and life in general
seems to be tilted more and more towards the 'yoof' element when this pops up
to prove it !
BTW I don't watch James Bond any more - since Daniel Craig took the part -
it seems to have too much malevolent violence in it these days.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am prepared to put money on the the next Doctor Who being a schoolboy!
- it is a long way from William Hartnell !
In fact if you look at the sequence of the actors who've taken the part ....
William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker, Peter Davison,
Colin Baker, Sylvester McCoy, Paul McGann, Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant,
and Matt Smith
It's noticeable that they get younger with each re-incarnation...
When I was younger (I'm 62 now) I used to look up to, and respect older people
for their experience and knowledge - I looked forward to the day when I might
(hopefully) be respected for those traits, but somehow in the intervening years it's
all changed, and I never really noticed!
If you watch the news these days more often than not we get fed some 'Political Expert'
not long out of college, but somehow knows all about the political scene way back to the
1990s and beyond, but was probably still at primary school when it all actually took place.
Anybody care to comment?
Richard
-
I believe that the way Daniel Craig plays the part is actually more how James Bond was intended to be.. A Cold Hearted Rutheless KIller.. :-))
-
As a died in the wool Bond fan I hate the Daniel Craig versions. The Craig versions could have been any thriller movie. The wry humour & lighthearted nature of the fims is what made them great & drew me in.
-
Too true.
What has happened is, they (007) are now trying to cater to a younger larger audience.
Whereas "The Doctor" was aimed at children. Perhaps we should ask the kids if a younger, not much older than them, Doctor, is believable me thinks not. <:( <:( <:( <:(
-
What has happened is, they (007) are now trying to cater to a younger larger audience.
Don't forget that when the first Bond films were made, we were much younger, too O0, and we were the targeted audience :-)
Peter.
-
Don't forget that when the first Bond films were made, we were much younger, too O0, and we were the targeted audience :-)
Peter.
I have to say Daniel craig has killed bond films for me, the last 2 films were truly awful! Though I don't like all the old bond films, a view to a kill springs to mind, for me Brosnan was the best bond, just the right balance of violence, and dry whit. John Cleese was never right as 'Q' anyway. I think bond has run it's course and they should just stop, like most new films they try wowing with endless explosions and special effects rather than actual content. I remember spending weeks saving my pocket money and buying each bond film on video, had the whole collection up to 'the world is not enough' then even when i saw the newer 1's in the bargain bin just didn't bother, didn't even bother going to the cinema to see the last 1 or 2.
-
Peter , Bikerdude666
Yes - I suppose we all prefer the Bonds that were made for the us when we were
the 'target' audience - I preferred the Sean Connery and Roger Moore ones.
I did enjoy most of the Pierce Brosnan ones although I found the start of
Die Another Day (where he was captured and imprisoned in Korea) a bit too dark.
I think that the original Doctor Who was aimed at children but obviously in those days
we were more prepared to accept a much older character as a hero (anybody remember
Richard Hearne as Mr. Pastry?)
Richard
-
I agree, Richard, my preference is for Sean Connery, although I have enjoyed most of the Bond films. It's strange that the book, Casino Royale was the first Bond novel published in 1953, yet was not made into a "serious" Bond film until 2006 with Daniel Craig. In my opinion, the best Bond films are from the books written by Ian Fleming himself, and not those by writers who carried on the Bond story after Fleming's death.
Peter.
-
I did enjoy most of the Pierce Brosnan ones although I found the start of
Die Another Day (where he was captured and imprisoned in Korea) a bit too dark.
I think that the original Doctor Who was aimed at children but obviously in those days
we were more prepared to accept a much older character as a hero (anybody remember
Richard Hearne as Mr. Pastry?)
Richard
I completely agree about 'Die another day' to me it just wasn't bond, being captured, and not having some gadget to get himself out....
I like Dr. No, but really prefer the 1's with the gadgets, but, I like to try and watch things and appreciate the time at which they were made, (dambusters, for instance, truly awful effects, but they were doing what they could at the time)
Nowadays they've gone too far the other way, rely on a huge to effects budget to wow you and take your mind off the complete lack of content in the film,.
-
Do you remember David Niven Sir James Bond ? ....... in the Original 1967 Casino Royale with Peter Sellers & Ursula Andress
Mmmmmmmmmmm Xenia Sergeevna Onatopp in GoldenEye, played by actress Famke Janssen
Dave
-
Peter is correct.
Yes, we were the target audience back then and a 70 yr old 007 doesn't quite cut it now.
However pictures were entertainment back then, which you watched with a grain of salt and they did not have to be a blockbuster.
These days it is all changed as the audience has also changed.
-
One thing I do like about the Craig films is they proceed at a cracking pace.
-
I did enjoy the last 2 Bond films, they were different and played 'for keeps' rather than laughs.
The worst was an American very early Bond film where he was called Jimmy Bond. I have only seen extracts.
regards Roy
-
not seen any of the danial craig films yet , more by accident than choice, i will have to see one one day to decided as for me i was always a timothy man my self
-
Though we're told that Craig's Bond is nearer to Ian Fleming's character, I have to agree that the two movies were just spy thrillers for me. They lost what makes a Bond movie a Bond movie. The wit, the one-liners, the gadgets (with the exception of the ridiculous invisble car!), the megolomanica villains, the crazy world-domination plots, and, of course, the Bond Girls.
I preferred the original Casino Royale, daft thought it was, to the newer Craig version.
As for the #1 Bond, it was always Connery for me, until Pierce Brosnan came along.