What Movies are you looking forward to this month?

[Artemis]

its mission impossible...i love tom cruise

Btw it appears with Ghost Protocol MI has entered the Roger Moore phase of it's life cycle.I was so hoping that they would at least aspire to Timothy Dalton.

I was sort of wondering if this movie would wander off toward the look of A View To A Kill, in Knight and Day Tom Cruise was already beginning to look haggered and less the action hero. I sort of have the image of all the collagen and elastin and other anti aging therapies suddenly letting go, leaving him looking like a Shar Pei after a hard day in the sun.

[mjmacky]

Btw it appears with Ghost Protocol MI has entered the Roger Moore phase of it's life cycle.I was so hoping that they would at least aspire to Timothy Dalton.

I actually liked Roger Moore as a Bond, and I think I prefer him over Connery. Actually, it doesn't seem reasonable to compare them in the first place.
As far as the newer ones go, I really don't like the Jewish Assassin as the new Bond. They should have gone with Clive Owen even though he wasn't in the running. Brosnan set a style that I wanted them to continue. Obviously this is a bit of a personal preference, to each his own when they define swagger.

[IdolEyes787]

Btw it appears with Ghost Protocol MI has entered the Roger Moore phase of it's life cycle.I was so hoping that they would at least aspire to Timothy Dalton.

I actually liked Roger Moore as a Bond, and I think I prefer him over Connery. Actually, it doesn't seem reasonable to compare them in the first place.
As far as the newer ones go, I really don't like the Jewish Assassin as the new Bond. They should have gone with Clive Owen even though he wasn't in the running. Brosnan set a style that I wanted them to continue. Obviously this is a bit of a personal preference, to each his own when they define swagger.

I can only assume that you were having some sort of psychotic episode when you wrote that.
Individual preference may be individual preference but even bad taste has it's limits.Btw Justin Beiber has a "swagger coach" so maybe you can see where I'm going here.

"Swaggering" like cockiness is totally the domain of lesser men. Bond does not "swagger" he merely radiates supreme confidence in his ability to get the job done*.A person that is tasked with the things that he has to do needs that sort of self invoked layer of invulnerablity to waltz into seemingly unwinnable situations on a daily basis.Good actors understand that, bad actors, well that results in Moonraker and Octopussy and a Southern sheriff doing barrel-rolls over a Japanese river.

*Except in the case of Roger Moore in which he radiates the likelihood that he is going to crack a bad pun or break a hip.Also Brosnan though undeniably suave is also prissy ,bordering on effete.

[mjmacky]

I can only assume that you were having some sort of psychotic episode when you wrote that.
Individual preference may be individual preference but even bad taste has it's limits.Btw Justin Beiber has a "swagger coach" so maybe you can see where I'm going here.

"Swaggering" like cockiness is totally the domain of lesser men. Bond does not "swagger" he merely radiates supreme confidence in his ability to get the job done*.A person that is tasked with the things that he has to do needs that sort of self invoked layer of invulnerablity to waltz into seemingly unwinnable situations on a daily basis.Good actors understand that, bad actors, well that results in Moonraker and Octopussy and a Southern sheriff doing barrel-rolls over a Japanese river.

*Except in the case of Roger Moore in which he radiates the likelihood that he is going to crack a bad pun or break a hip.Also Brosnan though undeniably suave is also prissy ,bordering on effete.

James Bond aims for swagger in most attempts. Lesser men is what I would come to expect from a character on screen, being that I find myself rooted in reality.

You being a Canadian, I am holding you partially responsible for Justin Bieber. I don't typically blame residents of the country like this, but since Canada mostly does no harm, it really stings when they spew something terrible upon the Earth.

Are you really surprised that Brosnan makes my favorite Bond? I'm a bit prissy myself.

[IdolEyes787]

I'm currently not surprised by anything however if somewhere along the line aliens do end up invading the Earth I may have to amend that statement though.

Btw the character of James Bond have been described as being a "blunt weapon" but to further confound you with pointless analogies I think a dog with a very long leash and but one command "Win"would also be appropriate.
If you prefer your pitbulls to wear tuxes and sip shaken martinis this too doesn't surprise me.

I was sort of wondering if this movie would wander off toward the look of A View To A Kill

That at least had Christopher Walken and arguably the second best title song.What I was obliquely referring to was that in MI 4 they have decided to emphasize the comedy almost as much as the action.

[mjmacky]

If you prefer your pitbulls to wear tuxes

Only if it's their funeral.

[Artemis]

Out of the 60's spies I actually always preferred Michael Caine's Harry Palmer, with the exception of the fantasy of the Billion Dollar Brain, he was a far more believable secret agent and much more of an amoral bastard into the bargain as well.

If you have read any of the original Ian Fleming books though (which I have) then you would realise the original character was even more rough and had more of a violent edge than even Sean Connery's take on Bond. Yet Connery's is the closest portrayal of the early characters, and I am a firm proponent of Goldfinger being the quintessential Bond movie.

George Lazenby was simply too effete to play Bond and Roger Moore simply changed the name of his character and went from playing The Saint on TV to Bond on the big screen, the 'acting' did not change one jot. There were also the campy one liners and increasingly bizarre henchmen (and women) during the Moore years. This was the main reason to return to a more visceral and violent characterisation which was Timothy Dalton. The franchise seemed to have overcompensated though and ended up with a single minded assassin which no-one warmed to where as Pierce Brosnan's characterisations while still having a level of violence and ruthlessness had them under check in a velvet lined glove, which once again is far more in line with the original character Ian Fleming created.

To a certain extent I see Daniel Craig's characterisation as a return to the Timothy Dalton style, and once again we seem to have a single minded amoral killer, he just happens to bat for the good guys, which didn't work for the franchise back then and doesn't really seem to be working this time around either.

[mjmacky]

Out of the 60's spies I actually always preferred Michael Caine's Harry Palmer, with the exception of the fantasy of the Billion Dollar Brain, he was a far more believable secret agent and much more of an amoral bastard into the bargain as well.

If you have read any of the original Ian Fleming books though (which I have) then you would realise the original character was even more rough and had more of a violent edge than even Sean Connery's take on Bond. Yet Connery's is the closest portrayal of the early characters, and I am a firm proponent of Goldfinger being the quintessential Bond movie.

George Lazenby was simply too effete to play Bond and Roger Moore simply changed the name of his character and went from playing The Saint on TV to Bond on the big screen, the 'acting' did not change one jot. There were also the campy one liners and increasingly bizarre henchmen (and women) during the Moore years. This was the main reason to return to a more visceral and violent characterisation which was Timothy Dalton. The franchise seemed to have overcompensated though and ended up with a single minded assassin which no-one warmed to where as Pierce Brosnan's characterisations while still having a level of violence and ruthlessness had them under check in a velvet lined glove, which once again is far more in line with the original character Ian Fleming created.

To a certain extent I see Daniel Craig's characterisation as a return to the Timothy Dalton style, and once again we seem to have a single minded amoral killer, he just happens to bat for the good guys, which didn't work for the franchise back then and doesn't really seem to be working this time around either.

+ 0.976

[IdolEyes787]

Out of the 60's spies I actually always preferred Michael Caine's Harry Palmer, with the exception of the fantasy of the Billion Dollar Brain, he was a far more believable secret agent and much more of an amoral bastard into the bargain as well.

If you have read any of the original Ian Fleming books though (which I have) then you would realise the original character was even more rough and had more of a violent edge than even Sean Connery's take on Bond. Yet Connery's is the closest portrayal of the early characters, and I am a firm proponent of Goldfinger being the quintessential Bond movie.

George Lazenby was simply too effete to play Bond and Roger Moore simply changed the name of his character and went from playing The Saint on TV to Bond on the big screen, the 'acting' did not change one jot. There were also the campy one liners and increasingly bizarre henchmen (and women) during the Moore years. This was the main reason to return to a more visceral and violent characterisation which was Timothy Dalton. The franchise seemed to have overcompensated though and ended up with a single minded assassin which no-one warmed to where as Pierce Brosnan's characterisations while still having a level of violence and ruthlessness had them under check in a velvet lined glove, which once again is far more in line with the original character Ian Fleming created.

To a certain extent I see Daniel Craig's characterisation as a return to the Timothy Dalton style, and once again we seem to have a single minded amoral killer, he just happens to bat for the good guys, which didn't work for the franchise back then and doesn't really seem to be working this time around either.

Movies tend to reflect their times.That can certainly be seen in Connery's casual sexism or Moore's frivolity.It is also evident in Craig's version of Bond where the World is clearly a very scary place and hard, difficult to stomach actions sometimes seem the only option.
Anyway I think you are selling Craig's interpretation far short as his Bond is easily the most conflicted and some things he does he obviously does at some personal cost.
Also Lazenby is ,at least in certain circles , believed to have been unfairly given a bad rap.He was saddled with the nye on impossible role of replacing Connery and although he does lack real charisma he does convey Bond's "maleness" pretty well. Anyway he couldn't have been that awful as On Her Majesty's Secret Service still manages to be one of the better entries in the series as btw does The Living Daylights where Dalton's chief flaw is not his violent characterization but unlike Mr. Craig his total inability to be sympathetic at the same time.

Yes I know that I'm not changing anyone's opinion here but honestly look me in the eye and tell me that the mess that was Die Another Day was more appealing on any level than Casino Royale.

[mjmacky]

Bond movies on Netflix, I'm going to go watch some Bond.