If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Vulture)   Ask an Economist: which Bond villain plan would have worked (and which would have not)   (vulture.com) divider line 73
    More: Silly, Goldfinger, downtown Manhattan  
•       •       •

3643 clicks; posted to Business » on 24 Nov 2012 at 5:01 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



73 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-24 03:09:19 PM  
FTFA: "Casino Royale - This one's pretty nice and simple," says Dethier. In part because it's short term; successfully shorting a stock can produce a very quick return, making it irrelevant if the stocks eventually recover their value.

Looks like I can return those laser-headed sharks.... shorting stocks and terrorism it is!
 
2012-11-24 03:19:59 PM  

Arthur Jumbles: FTFA: "Casino Royale - This one's pretty nice and simple," says Dethier. In part because it's short term; successfully shorting a stock can produce a very quick return, making it irrelevant if the stocks eventually recover their value.

Looks like I can return those laser-headed sharks.... shorting stocks and terrorism it is!


Not so fast. What better way to make money than shorting a cruise liner company, and attacking their ships with laser-headed sharks?
 
2012-11-24 03:25:45 PM  
Goldeneye

Plot: Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean) wants to use an electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear weapon to bring London to its knees and destroy the Bank of England, but not before electronically stealing millions of pounds from the Bank's systems.

Plausibility: First of all, wouldn't destroying London and the Bank of England render the pounds you've stolen largely worthless? "Not exactly worthless, but close," says Dethier. Would you be able to convert it? "It's actually very hard to convert huge amounts of something, which is a problem the Chinese now know well with all their American dollar holdings," he says. So Trevelyan would have to spend all those pounds in the one country that'd take them: Britain. Whose economy he's just destroyed.



Well, nobody accused Boromir of being the sharpest sword in the armory.
 
2012-11-24 04:07:15 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Goldeneye

Plot: Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean) wants to use an electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear weapon to bring London to its knees and destroy the Bank of England, but not before electronically stealing millions of pounds from the Bank's systems.

Plausibility: First of all, wouldn't destroying London and the Bank of England render the pounds you've stolen largely worthless? "Not exactly worthless, but close," says Dethier. Would you be able to convert it? "It's actually very hard to convert huge amounts of something, which is a problem the Chinese now know well with all their American dollar holdings," he says. So Trevelyan would have to spend all those pounds in the one country that'd take them: Britain. Whose economy he's just destroyed.


Well, nobody accused Boromir of being the sharpest sword in the armory.


He wanted to use the EMP to cover-up a bank robbery, not to destroy London. So the money would be transferred to somehwere else and the EMP would destroy any trace of the transfer but the money would still be in the bank of whatever country they sent it to.
 
2012-11-24 04:13:26 PM  
They skipped Die Another Day. Admittedly it was pretty incomprehensible.
 
2012-11-24 04:27:11 PM  

Mugato: He wanted to use the EMP to cover-up a bank robbery, not to destroy London. So the money would be transferred to somehwere else and the EMP would destroy any trace of the transfer but the money would still be in the bank of whatever country they sent it to.


Right, aye.

Still, he should've converted everything to Bison Bucks.


Mugato: They skipped Die Another Day. Admittedly it was pretty incomprehensible.


I just... gah.

No.

I watched that and Quantum of Solace over these past two days.

My complaints with QoS is that it doesn't really have the *feel* or *flavor* of a Bond movie (almost everything about it is bland and lifeless, from the Bond girl to the primary/secondary villains to the plot) and that everything is Shakycam'd to death in big scenes. Other than that, it *is* watchable and has some flashes of brilliance here and there.

My complaints with DAD is that it's too silly and goofy to watch, even by Bond movie standards. It starts out well enough, but once Madonna and Gustav Graves show up, the movie spirals to hell and never really recovers from there.
 
2012-11-24 04:36:58 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: My complaints with DAD is that it's too silly and goofy to watch, even by Bond movie standards. It starts out well enough, but once Madonna and Gustav Graves show up, the movie spirals to hell and never really recovers from there.


Still better than Daniel Craig.
 
2012-11-24 04:49:49 PM  

GAT_00: Still better than Daniel Craig.


Oy... I dunno.

Daniel Craig was great in Casino Royale and Skyfall. Less so in QoS.

That said, Die Another Day is probably my least favorite of the official Bond movies. When you saw the CGI bullet travel through the gun barrel at the beginning, you knew you were in trouble.
 
2012-11-24 04:52:46 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Daniel Craig was great in Casino Royale and Skyfall. Less so in QoS.


Casino Royale was a pile of shiat. That movie was godawful. I refuse to watch any of Craig's movies.
 
2012-11-24 05:06:19 PM  

Mugato: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Goldeneye

Plot: Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean) wants to use an electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear weapon to bring London to its knees and destroy the Bank of England, but not before electronically stealing millions of pounds from the Bank's systems.

Plausibility: First of all, wouldn't destroying London and the Bank of England render the pounds you've stolen largely worthless? "Not exactly worthless, but close," says Dethier. Would you be able to convert it? "It's actually very hard to convert huge amounts of something, which is a problem the Chinese now know well with all their American dollar holdings," he says. So Trevelyan would have to spend all those pounds in the one country that'd take them: Britain. Whose economy he's just destroyed.


Well, nobody accused Boromir of being the sharpest sword in the armory.

He wanted to use the EMP to cover-up a bank robbery, not to destroy London. So the money would be transferred to somehwere else and the EMP would destroy any trace of the transfer but the money would still be in the bank of whatever country they sent it to.


More importantly, Trevelyan's overall motive was revenge against the UK. Even if he doesn't get rich, he'd accomplish that by wrecking their economy.
 
2012-11-24 05:21:23 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: My complaints with DAD is that it's too silly and goofy to watch, even by Bond movie standards. It starts out well enough, but once Madonna and Gustav Graves show up, the movie spirals to hell and never really recovers from there.


I quite like the swordfight, but really, it's terrible. It's a toss-up between that and Moonraker for worst Bond movie.
 
2012-11-24 05:28:46 PM  

farkeruk: I quite like the swordfight, but really, it's terrible. It's a toss-up between that and Moonraker for worst Bond movie.


Moonraker had Jaws AND a Shirley Bassey theme song.

Game, set, match.


GAT_00: Casino Royale was a pile of shiat. That movie was godawful. I refuse to watch any of Craig's movies.


Fair enough. Agree to disagree and the like.
 
2012-11-24 05:46:19 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: farkeruk: I quite like the swordfight, but really, it's terrible. It's a toss-up between that and Moonraker for worst Bond movie.

Moonraker had Jaws AND a Shirley Bassey theme song.

Game, set, match.


GAT_00: Casino Royale was a pile of shiat. That movie was godawful. I refuse to watch any of Craig's movies.

Fair enough. Agree to disagree and the like.


I have a friend that's a huge Bond fan and he's of the same opinion: he disliked Casino Royale so much that he skipped QoS and I'm having to coax him into seeing Skyfall. I think the issue that a lot of Bond fans have with the Craig era is that he's not suave and sophisticated; which I agree. However, in the long view, we've gone from a very rough 'blunt instrument' in Casino Royale and have ended up with something closer to the Sean Connery-style of Bond by the end of Skyfall. I've always viewed Craig's Bond as a work in progress: we see his development from fresh initiate into the 00 ranks into the elite agent that we all want to see. And I've found it pretty fascinating, myself.
 
2012-11-24 05:49:06 PM  

GAT_00: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Daniel Craig was great in Casino Royale and Skyfall. Less so in QoS.

Casino Royale was a pile of shiat. That movie was godawful. I refuse to watch any of Craig's movies.


Because he plays Bond more like a ruthless thug? You know, kind of closer to the source material?
 
2012-11-24 05:54:11 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: I have a friend that's a huge Bond fan and he's of the same opinion: he disliked Casino Royale so much that he skipped QoS and I'm having to coax him into seeing Skyfall. I think the issue that a lot of Bond fans have with the Craig era is that he's not suave and sophisticated; which I agree. However, in the long view, we've gone from a very rough 'blunt instrument' in Casino Royale and have ended up with something closer to the Sean Connery-style of Bond by the end of Skyfall. I've always viewed Craig's Bond as a work in progress: we see his development from fresh initiate into the 00 ranks into the elite agent that we all want to see. And I've found it pretty fascinating, myself.


Exactly! THANK you!

If this is the reboot for the series, I wouldn't *want* him to be smacking of the Connery Bond by the second film.

Work-in-progress is a good way to describe the journey of Craig's interpretation.
 
2012-11-24 05:58:17 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: I think the issue that a lot of Bond fans have with the Craig era is that he's not suave and sophisticated; which I agree.


Exactly, that's what Bond is. Not a knockoff of Bourne. The movies and books may differ, but the movie Bond is a firmly established character. Craig obliterates that with no redeeming features.

People are saying this one is good, but that was said for the previous two Bond movies as well. I despised what they did to Bond with Casino Royale.
 
2012-11-24 05:58:37 PM  
Thunderball always seemed somewhat plausible: blackmail the UK/US by threatening to nuke a then-unknown major city (Miami) if they don't get £100 million in diamonds. They had the aircraft, they had the bombs, and it was all rather plausible and (for a Bond film) believable.

Skyfall, on the other hand, wasn't so good (the acting was great but the plot, not so much): the bad guy's evil plot (revenge against M) was nothing world-shattering, overly-elaborate, and just way too unrealistic. I found it difficult to suspend my disbelief with this one, much like Quantum of Solace (the bad guy's evil plan is controlling the water prices in Bolivia? ZOMG!). Fun movie, but a bit over the top.
 
2012-11-24 06:03:09 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: My complaints with DAD is that it's too silly and goofy to watch, even by Bond movie standards. It starts out well enough, but once Madonna and Gustav Graves show up, the movie spirals to hell and never really recovers from there.


It started with Bond getting captured, tortured for a few months and disavowed by MI6. Great start. The villain's plan was to create a space laser to destroy the land mines between North and South Korea. Okay, fine, it's a Bond movie, not a bad plan. But then a Korean had to undergo some procedure to turn into a white guy and there's an invisible car...there is a line. I know that non Bond movie-fans might not get it but there is a line.
 
2012-11-24 06:08:18 PM  

GAT_00: RoyFokker'sGhost: I think the issue that a lot of Bond fans have with the Craig era is that he's not suave and sophisticated; which I agree.

Exactly, that's what Bond is. Not a knockoff of Bourne. The movies and books may differ, but the movie Bond is a firmly established character. Craig obliterates that with no redeeming features.

People are saying this one is good, but that was said for the previous two Bond movies as well. I despised what they did to Bond with Casino Royale.


Bond is supposed to have fun killing people, chugging vodka, using ridiculous gadgets that can only be used once and dogging girls. He's not supposed to be a Jason Bourne-emo biatch.
 
2012-11-24 06:14:08 PM  

Mugato: It started with Bond getting captured, tortured for a few months and disavowed by MI6. Great start. The villain's plan was to create a space laser to destroy the land mines between North and South Korea. Okay, fine, it's a Bond movie, not a bad plan. But then a Korean had to undergo some procedure to turn into a white guy and there's an invisible car...there is a line. I know that non Bond movie-fans might not get it but there is a line.


Precisely.

The Moonraker line, as you've deemed it.

The Mario Paint special effects don't help, either.

Never have a real surfer and a CGI surfer in your film. People *will* notice.
 
2012-11-24 06:17:47 PM  

Mugato: GAT_00: RoyFokker'sGhost: I think the issue that a lot of Bond fans have with the Craig era is that he's not suave and sophisticated; which I agree.

Exactly, that's what Bond is. Not a knockoff of Bourne. The movies and books may differ, but the movie Bond is a firmly established character. Craig obliterates that with no redeeming features.

People are saying this one is good, but that was said for the previous two Bond movies as well. I despised what they did to Bond with Casino Royale.

Bond is supposed to have fun killing people, chugging vodka, using ridiculous gadgets that can only be used once and dogging girls. He's not supposed to be a Jason Bourne-emo biatch.


What I think of when I think of Bond is Brosnan in his windowless boat/sub, calmly fixing his tie while he's ducking the bridge.
 
2012-11-24 06:25:08 PM  

GAT_00: What I think of when I think of Bond is Brosnan in his windowless boat/sub, calmly fixing his tie while he's ducking the bridge.


Brosnan was the best Bond, IMO, even if he didn't have all the best scripts.
 
2012-11-24 06:27:07 PM  

Mugato: Brosnan was the best Bond, IMO, even if he didn't have all the best scripts.


I can't help but wonder how Casino Royale would've turned out with Brosnan playing Bond.

Quite a few lines and moments in that film seem to be tailor-made for the guy.
 
2012-11-24 06:30:44 PM  

GAT_00: RoyFokker'sGhost: I think the issue that a lot of Bond fans have with the Craig era is that he's not suave and sophisticated; which I agree.

Exactly, that's what Bond is. Not a knockoff of Bourne. The movies and books may differ, but the movie Bond is a firmly established character. Craig obliterates that with no redeeming features.

People are saying this one is good, but that was said for the previous two Bond movies as well. I despised what they did to Bond with Casino Royale.


Trust me, by the end of Skyfall, you'll have a Bond that you'll enjoy in Daniel Craig. Maybe not your favorite, but certainly worthy of the character.

The quips are there. The confidence is there. Bond having fun on the mission is there. All the supporting characters Ian Flemming had in his books are there. It's a beautiful swan song for Judi Dench to say farewell, a great Bond villain, and a clean slate to start with for the next 50 years of Bond. Connery had the advantage in that Bond was already an experienced agent in Dr. No. Like I said before, the Craig movies show us a Bond starting to get established.
 
2012-11-24 06:36:19 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Mugato: Brosnan was the best Bond, IMO, even if he didn't have all the best scripts.

I can't help but wonder how Casino Royale would've turned out with Brosnan playing Bond.

Quite a few lines and moments in that film seem to be tailor-made for the guy.


Brosnan had a better rapport with Judi Dench, that's for sure.
 
2012-11-24 06:37:24 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: The quips are there. The confidence is there. Bond having fun on the mission is there.


THIS.

It contained what Quantum sorely lacked, and it does a lot in the name of restoring the feel, flavor, and fun of the classic Bond movies.
 
2012-11-24 06:38:21 PM  

Mugato: Brosnan had a better rapport with Judi Dench, that's for sure.


I imagine that his answer for "M" in a word association test would be a *tad* more positive, aye.
 
2012-11-24 06:44:58 PM  
I still want Michael Wilson (producer and idea man behind Quantum of Solace) to suffer hard for that incredibly lame pay off. Our master scheme is .... charging poor people in a small country more for water! Bwwwahahahahaha! Why not have a James Bond film where Quantum installs a CEO of Hewlett Packard who runs the company into the ground! Or perhaps he could get involved in the tense negotiations for tenuring a professor of history at the sorbonne. Maybe there is a scheme to make a fake ATM that steals card info he could bust up.

I mean, jesus.
 
2012-11-24 06:47:09 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: RoyFokker'sGhost: The quips are there. The confidence is there. Bond having fun on the mission is there.

THIS.

It contained what Quantum sorely lacked, and it does a lot in the name of restoring the feel, flavor, and fun of the classic Bond movies.


I'd argue it tried for that, but only really captured it at the very, very end outside of M's office.

But, generally, I've disliked all the Craig films. None felt like "movie Bond", which is the whole point for me.
 
2012-11-24 06:49:30 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: I'd argue it tried for that, but only really captured it at the very, very end outside of M's office.


I loved, loved, loved the ending.


TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: But, generally, I've disliked all the Craig films. None felt like "movie Bond", which is the whole point for me.


Fair enough, aye.

Even for those who didn't like Craig, I'd suggest that this movie was a big step forward. Perhaps the next one will be even more so?
 
2012-11-24 06:51:38 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: I'd argue it tried for that, but only really captured it at the very, very end outside of M's office.

I loved, loved, loved the ending.


TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: But, generally, I've disliked all the Craig films. None felt like "movie Bond", which is the whole point for me.

Fair enough, aye.

Even for those who didn't like Craig, I'd suggest that this movie was a big step forward. Perhaps the next one will be even more so?


It was definitely more watchable than the previous two.
 
2012-11-24 06:51:50 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: GAT_00: RoyFokker'sGhost: I think the issue that a lot of Bond fans have with the Craig era is that he's not suave and sophisticated; which I agree.

Exactly, that's what Bond is. Not a knockoff of Bourne. The movies and books may differ, but the movie Bond is a firmly established character. Craig obliterates that with no redeeming features.

People are saying this one is good, but that was said for the previous two Bond movies as well. I despised what they did to Bond with Casino Royale.

Trust me, by the end of Skyfall, you'll have a Bond that you'll enjoy in Daniel Craig. Maybe not your favorite, but certainly worthy of the character.

The quips are there. The confidence is there. Bond having fun on the mission is there. All the supporting characters Ian Flemming had in his books are there. It's a beautiful swan song for Judi Dench to say farewell, a great Bond villain, and a clean slate to start with for the next 50 years of Bond. Connery had the advantage in that Bond was already an experienced agent in Dr. No. Like I said before, the Craig movies show us a Bond starting to get established.


After watching Skyfall:

Casino/Quantum/Skyfall: Basically all three movies take bond to ground 0. At the end of Skyfall we can start doing gold finger and everything else again. The fundementals are all reset and you have a REASON to buy into Moneypenny/Q/and the New (old) M again. The relationships are all crafted in blood in skyfall. And I think that was the point of these three movies. To Reset bond and re-establish the fundementals. Thats a seriously ballsy gambit if I am right
 
2012-11-24 06:54:11 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Mugato: Brosnan had a better rapport with Judi Dench, that's for sure.

I imagine that his answer for "M" in a word association test would be a *tad* more positive, aye.


And the old "Q" commanded more respect from Bond in the Brosnan films. He was the only person Bond actually respected.
 
2012-11-24 06:56:15 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: It was definitely more watchable than the previous two.


The best of the three, easily.


karasoth: Thats a seriously ballsy gambit if I am right


Although Quantum is shakier than the other two in my book, I'd say that it was a gambit that paid off.


Mugato: And the old "Q" commanded more respect from Bond in the Brosnan films. He was the only person Bond actually respected.


That's definitely the vibe that I got in Q's last scene in The World is Not Enough.
 
2012-11-24 07:01:10 PM  
The economist is wrong about the gold in Goldfinger. It doesn't matter that you can't touch it, as long as you can transfer ownership of the gold, and everyone agrees who owns the gold. Ie. just how it works today. Gold could even rise in value, because of the added security that it couldn't be stolen due to being radioactive. Think of all the resources you'd save guarding it.

As a real good example, let's look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones

Huge stone money, that can't really be moved around. But they function perfectly as currency, because the ownership is transfered. Best example of that is one of the Rai Stones that was lost in a river. No one can see it, or touch it. But it still has value, as the people on those islands has come to the consensus that the stone must be on the bottom, thus still exist.
 
2012-11-24 07:02:21 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: RoyFokker'sGhost: The quips are there. The confidence is there. Bond having fun on the mission is there.

THIS.

It contained what Quantum sorely lacked, and it does a lot in the name of restoring the feel, flavor, and fun of the classic Bond movies.


You know that with QOS they had an unfinished script because of the writer's strike, and it shows. "What happens now?" "I dunno, how about a 20-minute chase scene, or some explosions and fire?"
 
2012-11-24 07:03:02 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: It was definitely more watchable than the previous two.

The best of the three, easily.


karasoth: Thats a seriously ballsy gambit if I am right

Although Quantum is shakier than the other two in my book, I'd say that it was a gambit that paid off.


Mugato: And the old "Q" commanded more respect from Bond in the Brosnan films. He was the only person Bond actually respected.

That's definitely the vibe that I got in Q's last scene in The World is Not Enough.


Basically after Skyfall: I would believe Craig's bond in any of the Connery Bond movies. Now in prior bond movies bond fans were told "Timothy Dalton is now bond now" and you had to just take it. What the Craig movies did was they said "Here lets see Bond because a Giant Damn Hero" Its something I didn't think he needed for the movies but frankly: It pays off.
 
2012-11-24 07:05:18 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Mugato: And the old "Q" commanded more respect from Bond in the Brosnan films. He was the only person Bond actually respected.

That's definitely the vibe that I got in Q's last scene in The World is Not Enough.


Yeah, he was genuinely concerned that Q was going to retire. Great line, "I've always tried to teach you two things, 007. Never let them see you bleed and always have an escape plan."....the very words I live by.

Coincidentally, Desmond Llewellyn was killed in a hit and run accident, he wasn't driving, soon after.
 
2012-11-24 07:08:29 PM  

revrendjim: You know that with QOS they had an unfinished script because of the writer's strike, and it shows. "What happens now?" "I dunno, how about a 20-minute chase scene, or some explosions and fire?"


Yeah, I remember hearing about that.

And that's unfortunate, because the film *does* have flashes of brilliance. The opera scene, for instance, was great.

"Well, Tosca's not for everyone..."


karasoth: Basically after Skyfall: I would believe Craig's bond in any of the Connery Bond movies. Now in prior bond movies bond fans were told "Timothy Dalton is now bond now" and you had to just take it. What the Craig movies did was they said "Here lets see Bond because a Giant Damn Hero" Its something I didn't think he needed for the movies but frankly: It pays off.


Solid assessment.

They made him more dryly and slyly humorous, which goes a long way towards gravitating back to the feel of the Connery-era films.

I mean, yeah, Skyfall has a host of dark stuff happening, but neither the film nor Craig's Bond become completely consumed by that darkness. That's important on a tonal level.
 
2012-11-24 07:11:53 PM  

Mugato: Yeah, he was genuinely concerned that Q was going to retire. Great line, "I've always tried to teach you two things, 007. Never let them see you bleed and always have an escape plan."....the very words I live by.


Brosnan worked the HELL out of that scene with only the use of subtlety.

With the simplest of beats between "You're not going to retire anytime soon" and "Are you?", Brosnan's Bond works to illustrate that respect that the two men have.

And it was a great final line, but I only wish that real-life events didn't give it more gravity.


Mugato: Coincidentally, Desmond Llewellyn was killed in a hit and run accident, he wasn't driving, soon after.


It sucked, aye.

As I understood it, he would've come back for Die Another Day, had he not been in that accident.
 
2012-11-24 07:14:36 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Yeah, I remember hearing about that.

And that's unfortunate, because the film *does* have flashes of brilliance. The opera scene, for instance, was great.

"Well, Tosca's not for everyone..."


karasoth: Basically after Skyfall: I would believe Craig's bond in any of the Connery Bond movies. Now in prior bond movies bond fans were told "Timothy Dalton is now bond now" and you had to just take it. What the Craig movies did was they said "Here lets see Bond because a Giant Damn Hero" Its something I didn't think he needed for the movies but frankly: It pays off.

Solid assessment.

They made him more dryly and slyly humorous, which goes a long way towards gravitating back to the feel of the Connery-era films.

I mean, yeah, Skyfall has a host of dark stuff happening, but neither the film nor Craig's Bond become completely consumed by that darkness. That's important on a tonal level.


But you have a rebirth (which they hint in the movie)

He goes from being Bond the man, to Bond the legend.

The allusions to it were very good throughout the movie.

And he has a boogie man (unlike his Casino or Quantum Villians) more typical for your normal bond movies. And the Villian helps him become the legend by killing him
 
2012-11-24 07:27:38 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, the Craig movies show us a Bond starting to get established.


It actually elevates CR and QoS in retrospect, as it makes them part of a trilogy showing how Bond went from a Jason Bourne type ex-military type to being the martini-swilling tuxedo-wearing femme fatale-seducing superspy we all know and lust after.
 
2012-11-24 07:29:38 PM  

karasoth: But you have a rebirth (which they hint in the movie)

He goes from being Bond the man, to Bond the legend.

The allusions to it were very good throughout the movie.

And he has a boogie man (unlike his Casino or Quantum Villians) more typical for your normal bond movies. And the Villian helps him become the legend by killing him


Too bad it all had to be at the expense of his Aston Martin.

I'm STILL mourning that.
 
2012-11-24 07:35:27 PM  

Mugato: GAT_00: What I think of when I think of Bond is Brosnan in his windowless boat/sub, calmly fixing his tie while he's ducking the bridge.

Brosnan was the best Bond, IMO, even if he didn't have all the best scripts.


I don't know if I'm willing to elevate him over Connery, but Brosnan is easily the second best. Even with godawful scripts, those are good movies.
 
2012-11-24 07:38:21 PM  

Gunther: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, the Craig movies show us a Bond starting to get established.

It actually elevates CR and QoS in retrospect, as it makes them part of a trilogy showing how Bond went from a Jason Bourne type ex-military type to being the martini-swilling tuxedo-wearing femme fatale-seducing superspy we all know and lust after.


It does elevate CR and QoS: I was also thinking truth be told its a VERY long time since the average bond movie viewer has read a bond book. So the Craig Trilogy of bond movies re-established everything the pantheon of books had established for an earlier generation.

Also:

Skyfall set up the stage where when you think of some of the Iconic bond antagonists:
Goldfinger, Dr. No, Spectre, etc

Skyfall set up the Universe that while those things aren't any more plausible then they were before: they just make more sense in-universe

I would put Skyfall DEFINITELY in the top ten bond movies, probably in the top 5. Better then everything by Moore and Dalton, at least up there with Lazenby and the bulk of Brosnan's work and it stands up to the best of connery (though Connery's bonds were movies of their time)
 
2012-11-24 07:50:51 PM  
I remember as a short bit in "How to Succeed in Evil" the dwarf lawyer sidekick suggested they nuke Fort Knox in order to ruin the value of the American dollar.

The evil consultant pointed out that the result would be a 98% devaluation of the dollar, right? Well, it looks like someone beat him to it.
 
2012-11-24 07:53:48 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Moonraker had Jaws AND a Shirley Bassey theme song.

Game, set, match.


Shirley Bassey, yes. Jaws, no. They had him meeting the girl with pigtails and wrecked his character.

And the story is just way over the top. Basically, the mass extinction of human life via a tiny orchid. It went beyond Bond and into Our Man Flint (which was somewhat a parody of Bond).Stromberg's plan might have been nuts, but it was at least, just about plausible.

The problems of Moonraker are also this: What happened to the flight control mooks? Were they told - hey, we're just going off to space, see you soon, or were they told that they and their families were going to die horrible deaths via an orchid? And what of all the perfect people who are going to recolonise the earth? Are you going to easily get hold of a few hundred people who are that good looking and don't care about their friends dying, and aren't going to mention that maybe you want to go checking out the skies for a massive space station (that somehow, doesn't appear on telescopes even though it's far bigger than the ISS). And are all those people going to be happy going back to earth and not just doing a lot of boning, but also being well, peasant farmers while you recreate enough people on earth to run all the stuff that you depended on before?
 
2012-11-24 08:13:28 PM  
My James Bond essential list:

Dr. No, Gold Finger, and From Russia with love:
These are the best Connery Bond movies bar none
I will also add in Never Say Never Again in large part because of the effort they made in showing mortality in Connery as Bond
Lazenby's On Her Majesty's Secret Service is also in my essential list because Lazenby is one of those things that if you like Bond (and not just the bond movies) you like this movie.
Essential Moore Bond films are:
The Spy Who Loved Me, Octopussy (because she is one of the most Iconic of the Bond women)
Essential Brosnan Bond:
Golden Eye, Tommorrow Never dies
Essential Craig Bond:
Skyfall

Thats my top ten bond movies

I would but them in this order
Goldfinger,
From Russia with Love,
Never say Never again,
Skyfall,
Goldeneye,
Dr No,
Tommorrow Never dies,
On Her Majesty's Secret Service,
The Spy who loved me,
and Octopussy

I would actually put the one Dalton movie I liked (Licence to Kill) in at #11. Not essential but almost top 10 worthy

and my bottom three bond movies:
You Only Live Twice (Dat Racism ), Live and Let Die (Dat Racism), Die Another Day (Dat Racism, Dat Lazy movie script, Dat Lazy madonna cameo)
 
2012-11-24 08:21:47 PM  

GAT_00: What I think of when I think of Bond is Brosnan in his windowless boat/sub, calmly fixing his tie while he's ducking the bridge.


[SPOILER ALERT]

Craig actually does something similar in Skyfall after leaping onto a semi-destroyed train, but even more Bond-like; at around the halfway mark, he's attacked by several henchmen at a casino and has a quip ready after he feeds one to a komodo dragon (yes; there's a random pit filled with komodo dragons in the casino). That's classic Sean Connery era bond stuff.
 
2012-11-24 08:38:56 PM  

karasoth:
I will also add in Never Say Never Again in large part because of the effort they made in showing mortality in Connery as Bond


Never Say Never Again is in no way essential. It is the very definition of non-essential to the Bond franchise. Why not list 'Thunderball' instead since it's the exact same movie with the exact same actor playing Bond. And superior in every way.
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report