By the Power of Gaia!!!
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2005
- Messages
- 14,581
Dude, you're spending WAY too much time thinking up stuff like this. 
Daniel Craig Unveiled As New James Bond
- Thread starter Ragna "D" BloodEdge
- Start date
BEST IN THE WORLD!!!
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2005
- Messages
- 3,243
Hell yes! I loved that movie. I'm glad he got the role, but I would not have minded seeing Clive Owen...Keith "JC" Hayward said:
I was gonna be mad at this no-name, but no... he was in that movie L4YER CAKE I talked about a while ago and he was fantastic.
This guy's one killer actor and I'm glad it's not somebody whose name would overshadow the name James Bond.
He might just do alright.
Find L4YER CAKE to see what he's capable of.
WIIIIIIIIIIII!
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 5,066
It goes like this, IMO:
Connery
Brosnan
Moore
Tie between Lazenby and Dalton for worst.
This guy sounds like he might do a good job...but a Bond prequel? Why? We don't need to know his past history.
Connery
Brosnan
Moore
Tie between Lazenby and Dalton for worst.
This guy sounds like he might do a good job...but a Bond prequel? Why? We don't need to know his past history.
Mazin...Go!
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 657
Sigh
Why I liked George Lazenby as James Bond better than Pierce Brosnan.
1) I loved the movie "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" in general. Less emphasis on gadgets, GREAT fights and choreography.
2) On that line of thought, George more than held his own in aforementioned fight scenes. When he hits people, it's believable. Kinda like Sean. With Pierce, I never could believe that such a scrawny guy like him could really beat up all them thugs.
3) Nice low voice. Roger Moore got away with not having a low, intimidating, powerful yet suave voice. Not Pierce.
4) UA was all set to offer George more Bond movie roles. It was George Lazenby who was a dumbass at the time and thought he'd be better off doing other movies. He wasted his chance.
Why I liked George Lazenby as James Bond better than Pierce Brosnan.
1) I loved the movie "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" in general. Less emphasis on gadgets, GREAT fights and choreography.
2) On that line of thought, George more than held his own in aforementioned fight scenes. When he hits people, it's believable. Kinda like Sean. With Pierce, I never could believe that such a scrawny guy like him could really beat up all them thugs.
3) Nice low voice. Roger Moore got away with not having a low, intimidating, powerful yet suave voice. Not Pierce.
4) UA was all set to offer George more Bond movie roles. It was George Lazenby who was a dumbass at the time and thought he'd be better off doing other movies. He wasted his chance.
Mazin...Go!
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 657
Sigh
Why I liked George Lazenby as James Bond better than Pierce Brosnan.
1) I loved the movie "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" in general. Less emphasis on gadgets, GREAT fights and choreography.
2) On that line of thought, George more than held his own in aforementioned fight scenes. When he hits people, it's believable. Kinda like Sean. With Pierce, I never could believe that such a scrawny guy like him could really beat up all them thugs.
3) Nice low voice. Roger Moore got away with not having a low, intimidating, powerful yet suave voice. Not Pierce.
4) UA was all set to offer George more Bond movie roles. It was George Lazenby who was a dumbass at the time and thought he'd be better off doing other movies. He wasted his chance.
Of course, that's just my two cents. I can understand that those who like Pierce love the fact that he IS arguably the most "sophisticated" and "suave" James Bond. But for ME, James Bond is not about MERE sophistication and suave. I remember that Bond is also a ruthless killer, fighter and, as Dr. No called him, a "policeman". It is THAT aspect of Bond that I couldn't reconcile with Pierce's portrayal of him.
Of course, you know who best fits the Bond of Ian Fleming's novels? TIMOTHY DALTON.
Why I liked George Lazenby as James Bond better than Pierce Brosnan.
1) I loved the movie "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" in general. Less emphasis on gadgets, GREAT fights and choreography.
2) On that line of thought, George more than held his own in aforementioned fight scenes. When he hits people, it's believable. Kinda like Sean. With Pierce, I never could believe that such a scrawny guy like him could really beat up all them thugs.
3) Nice low voice. Roger Moore got away with not having a low, intimidating, powerful yet suave voice. Not Pierce.
4) UA was all set to offer George more Bond movie roles. It was George Lazenby who was a dumbass at the time and thought he'd be better off doing other movies. He wasted his chance.
Of course, that's just my two cents. I can understand that those who like Pierce love the fact that he IS arguably the most "sophisticated" and "suave" James Bond. But for ME, James Bond is not about MERE sophistication and suave. I remember that Bond is also a ruthless killer, fighter and, as Dr. No called him, a "policeman". It is THAT aspect of Bond that I couldn't reconcile with Pierce's portrayal of him.
Of course, you know who best fits the Bond of Ian Fleming's novels? TIMOTHY DALTON.
Similar threads
