Alessandra wrote:Uhm, Fleming did NOT describe a man with cold hard looks. Fleming had extremely specific physical details about him, too, and Craig has NONE of those. NONE. Tall (absolutely not) dark-haired (not a chance), handsome (HELL NO!), elegant (OMG don't even get me started), with curious eyes. This thing of the cold looks is a VERY understated assessment Fleming makes in CR WHILE DESCRIBING A SLEEPING BOND (I've yet to see anyone who doesn't look serious and cold while they're sleeping), that pro-Craig people have somehow turned into a fundamental feature of the description. It's not. AT ALL. In fact, when talking about awake Bond there's anything BUT cold non-expression to him. He's described as attentive and curious, and someone who has a VERY distinct taste for both food, beverages AND clothes. Absolutely NONE of these characteristics belong to Craig's Bond. And don't even get me started about that absolutely INSULTING line "do I look like I give a d**n" about the Martini, who destroys the entire Bond description Fleming makes in CR just with one line. I'm going to really laugh at those who even think about saying Craig's Bond is close to Fleming. If anything it is the FURTHER they've gotten from what Fleming described.
Alright, I get it. You don't buy Craig at all in any circumstances. At least that's what I get out of the tone of your post. I won't bother arguing about his validity.
So we'll agree to disagree on that.
One Bondian moment I'll point to is when he's escorted to a shitty looking hotel by Fields. He steps in for a couple of seconds and walks out never looking back "suit yourself, I rather be in a morgue". After checking in a five star hotel suite he bangs Fields. Swagger, snobbery and sex.
Uhm no. That's ignorant arrogance. Craig doesn't have either the looks, or the class, or the elegance in movements, or the taste and ABSOLUTELY NOT the sex appeal to do that. And that line sucks.
I disagree. Again it's clear you find nothing appealing about him personally. So I'll leave that be.
My favorite Bondian moment with Craig is probably after he wins the poker game and immediately has a late night dinner with Vesper. That's not Jason Bourne. Bourne would order at a diner with his hoodie up.
That IS Jason Bourne. Because Bond would know what he's ordering AND the Bond in the book does not order dinner the same way as that ignorant CHAV that we see on screen in CR does. Not to mention of course he has absolutely none of the physical attributes Fleming gives him in CR. The dinner scene in the book quickly gets uncomfortable AND Bond is giving extremely specific orders on what he wants and showing he's a very classy man in many areas, including his gourmet taste. Daniel Craig's Bond doesn't look classy even when wearing a tux. You can't buy class, you either have it or you don't, and Daniel Craig doesn't even know the meaning of the word. That of course means his entire portrayal of Bond makes Bond a generic killer instead of the ultra sophisticated, classy connaisseur of life and its pleasures that Fleming describes in his books.
To be fair we don't see him make any order at all the flick besides the highly detailed martini drink (the Vesper), so I don't see how you come to the conclusion that he didn't make specific orders for that dinner. Might as well say the same for the rest of the actors. Besides drinks, the films have rarely shown Bond's knowledge of food. Heck I don't think he ever ordered scrambled eggs. But again, it's clear you don't personally buy Craig under any circumstances. Fine then. We'll agree to disagree on that.
Oh right and that of course is worse than a plot that has no sense and no importance whatsoever and action scenes that make people want to throw up and where people absolutely don't understand what the hell is going on? The action scenes in TWINE are great, including the boat scene. I'm sorry but that's not opinion... any self-respecting second unit director would slam down the QoS ones and tell you the TWINE ones are WAY better from every single point of view.
Elaborate on how the plot in QOS is nonsense. As for second unit work, I find Vic Armstrong's work to be some of the dullest sequences in the series relying way too much on generic machine gun fire and too much depicting Bond as reckless and inconsiderate of his surroundings especially in crowded areas. Like when Bond is crashing through St. Petersburg like unstoppable force WITH A TANK, destroying everything in his path (rendering the whole sequence unexciting since there are literally no obstacles for a protagonist to overcome, he just crashes right through them), speeding the jet boat in the city of London crashing through restaurants and such. Craig's Bond is guilty of this in the beginning of CR but at least we see the consequences of his actions and M doesn't simply ignore it because it's "his job". I found that to be refreshing after Pierce Brosnan's Terminator Bond.
As for the sequences in QOS, yeah I'm not its biggest fan. The only sequences I do find thrilling are the car chase, the Opera, plane chase (sans awful skydiving) and the finale. I was able to follow those pretty well though, I didn't find them very nauseous plus I have a quick eye so it's all fine for me.
However, I do take issue with the rooftop chase scene. Feels like retread of the construction chase with the reliance on parkour. Plus there is nothing accomplished at the end. Bond chases a lead and kills him (in the silliest circumstances dangling upside down somehow knowing Mitchell is about to get to his gun). If anything at least the presence of Mitchell instigated an investigation that lead Bond to Haiti (I think that's when the film really gets better after a very weak first act). Cigar Girl's presence however doesn't affect the rest of the film. You could cut straight from the bomb exploding in MI6 to the funeral in Scotland and not lose a thing of real importance. Heck even Bond's magically disappearing shoulder injury could have been the result of him being so close to the blast.
]I'll admit that Greene was too underdeveloped but I wouldn't tag him as the weakest. Blofeld in YOLT, Stromberg, Carver, Renard, Elektra, Graves I consider far weaker.
You're kidding. Elektra would kick Greene's ass in two seconds. She was badass AND classy and gorgeous while being so. Perfect Bond product. Carver was the typical Bond crazy villain, and he had exactly that crazy evil going for him that works just fine. And seriously, Blofeld is a classic Bond villain that should never even be compared to Greene in QoS. Same goes for the other mentione ones. That was possibly the worst villain EVER in a Bond movie.
Elektra? Please. Physically she'd be beaten like a dog by any villain. But I wasn't really talking about that. Just the character. Greene is underused but I like a lot of what he did in his scenes. He's not the physically imposing but rather depicted as a sniveling little weasel. I like that when he gets an ax he's dangerous not because he's a capable fighter but because he is a flailing madman. Again, I wish his presence was a lot more stronger in the flick. Cut two scenes of him and he's almost no different than a talking head like Whitaker in TLD.
What?
Vesper SUCKED so badly that I can't even begin to explain. She was unattractive, with ridiculous baroque dresses, make up like Morticia Addams and COMPLETELY incompetent and incapable. Whatever she did, she did by pure coincidence. Eva Green made her the second-worst Bond girl I've ever seen in movies. And the worst gets the prize just because freaking girl (Denise Richards) wouldn't know acting if it bit her in the behind. Other than that, she was WAY worse than ALL the above mentioned. IN every single aspect. Eva Green can't act, totally inexpressive, and don't get me started on the fact her style SUCKED. Makeup, dresses, everything. She was as expressive as a dead fish. The only expressions she got were when they made her twenty kilos of eyeliner drool down from her eyes. Nice. NOT. Don't even get me started about the amount of bad taste she showed on the red carpet too. (Which YES is also a FUNDAMENTAL part of being a Bond girl, you represent the franchise just like Bond does.)
Fine, we'll have to disagree on the looks department. As a hot blooded male I find her very attractive in the variety of curvy women like Christina Hendricks. The scene where she arrives at the card game with that purple dress, STUNNING. Dead as a fish? I don't get that at all. I don't think the character is written as well as it could have been but I believe Eva Green does a very good job at what she has. I see so much going on in her performance than many other Bond girls.
Camille ONLY had the right looks. As far as the rest she was so underdeveloped people are NEVER going to remember her for Bond movies because she was completely insignificant. Comparing them to Pam Bouvier is insulting to both the character and the actress. Both so much better than the two aforementioned nobodies there's absolutely so comparison.
You really think people remember the character of Pam?
I'm not saying Camile will be remembered. Not at all. That's why I said the last true classic Bond girl was Diana Rigg. After that I think only people remember Barbara Bach in general, but I can't stand her. After her who else is memorable? Perhaps Octopussy but that's down to her name being both the title and provocative.
And, Vesper wasn't a modern Bond girl at ALL. She was a useless, incompetent, incapable Bond girl whose only casual achievement was to save Bond at a certain moment, something that happened coincidentally, not because of her skills or preparation. She had absolutely no skill for anything. Not even for lying since when she started the biggest lie, Bond immediately understood.
When I say Modern Bond girl I really mean a certain era which started with FYEO. No Bond girl has been that iconic since the 70s. As for Vesper, the only importance she serves in the film is that she captivates Bond, turns out to be a double and then commits suicide which devastates Bond. She has never really been useful beyond that, including the novel.
(By the way they also made Bond a PATHETIC Barbara Cartland romance novel guy in the second part of CR, something I will NEVER forgive them for. And no, it's not the way it is in the CR novel AT ALL). And this about Vesper, despite in theory being the most important (and maybe the most devious, given the situation) one of the entire franchise. We can thank the useless Eva Green for that, alongside with the script.
I'll agree to an extent concerning the post-Casino job scenes with Bond and Vesper's romantic leave. It's not really the content that troubles me but how they really skim it. More should have been done IMO to really make the betrayal powerful. Despite that, the actors seem to do their best with the material and I almost forgive the fourth quarter of the film for their dedication to making it work.
Considering you dare saying that the incompetent, incapable and absolutely style-lacking Vesper not to mention the totally insignificant (albeit gorgeous) Camille compare to KICKASS Pam Bouvier who sets a standard for Bond girls (while those two destroy what the Bond girl is all about) I'm not surprised. Elektra instead is the one who is exactly in the same range as Pam and, more than Pam, Lupe, since she is the evil Bond girl and not the good one. A badass, evil, gorgeous girl who knows exactly what she wants, goes after it, and doesn't hesitate to kill people in the process. Doing so while always displaying beauty and style.
And while being utterly annoying. I like the actress but they really had her ham it out a little too much for my tastes hence why I refer to her as a spoiled rich brat. They should have had Elektra more subdued. Moments like her delivering "HA! (yeah, she utters that) THEY WILL BELIEVE! THEY WILL ALL BELIEVE! Can't you see? Nobody can resist me!"
And when she's running around trying to taunt Bond as if she were a five year old girl taunting a little boy "nyah nyah nyah nyah! you can't catch me!" Like when she starts saying "You can't kill me, not in cold blood!" Uh, bitch considering how you treated Bond and how he was affected by this experience I very much doubt he'll shoot you in cold blood. In fact throughout the whole scene it's very much apparent he's going to kill her in hot blood, just look at the rage.
The concept of Elektra I think is great and provides a very interesting premise for a Bond film. This woman that captivates Bond and turns out to be the villain and Bond has to take her down. Great stuff! Except instead of being this very well written calculated bitch she's more of an annoying psychopath with daddy issues. And the relationship between her and Bond is ruined thanks to a lack of a pivotal scene. During the first half of the film Bond tries keeping his composure, turning down Elektra's invitations "Elektra, this is not a game I can afford to play". There should have been a moment where we saw Bond finally give into the temptations. The last time we saw them before he gave in was in the Casino where he's very much not happy to see her risking her life like an idiot. The very next scene we see them in is the two already in bed. No build up. They're already in bed and Bond is smitten. What a waste of a good concept.
I'm sorry I didn't mean to oblige you to show a photo! I actually still think of you as Sark (that's a compliment, he's the evil guy, but he's a good-looking, competent and stylish one at that
). nice photo
Nah, I made it long ago and realized I never really showed it to this forum for amusement so I saw an opportunity to shamelessly exploit my FACEINHOLE photo. It's a great site.
Anyway, just wanna say I'm enjoying this whole discussion. Haven't had a good argument with an anti-Craiger in this site for years!
I assume you just mixed up acronyms. I once referred to GF as Goldenfinger.
