Re: New James Bond film: Spectre
Posted: Wed November 04, 2015 10:16 pm
That's kind of a stupid comparison though.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Bourne ---> BondBurtReynolds wrote:Bond is such a weird franchise to me. I don't get it.
That's kind of a stupid comparison though.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Bourne ---> BondBurtReynolds wrote:Bond is such a weird franchise to me. I don't get it.
LoathedVermin72 wrote:Jesus, Skyfall was a piece of shit. Worst Bond movie ever made. No one involved with the Craig era seems to have any idea what makes the franchise work. Ugh.
Nope. The people of RM have spoken.EJ wrote:That's kind of a stupid comparison though.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Bourne ---> BondBurtReynolds wrote:Bond is such a weird franchise to me. I don't get it.
Oh, okay. My bad.McParadigm wrote:Jesus, it was dumb. From the 500 foot fall into shallow water to the villain who controls the world because computers to 'wait he wanted to get caught' to farmer Bond. It didn't even manage to do any of this stuff in a way that was kind of fun.durdencommatyler wrote:Skyfall was fantastic. So, yeah, you're right. It wasn't mindless entertainment.
I did like the way they shot that fight with the sniper in the building tho (that was Skyfall, right?). And until he fell, the opening scene was pretty good.
All 12 of us, including second accounts?durdencommatyler wrote:Nope. The people of RM have spoken.EJ wrote:That's kind of a stupid comparison though.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Bourne ---> BondBurtReynolds wrote:Bond is such a weird franchise to me. I don't get it.
It really isEJ wrote:That's kind of a stupid comparison though.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Bourne ---> BondBurtReynolds wrote:Bond is such a weird franchise to me. I don't get it.
hahaE.H. Ruddock wrote:It really isEJ wrote:That's kind of a stupid comparison though.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Bourne ---> BondBurtReynolds wrote:Bond is such a weird franchise to me. I don't get it.
Guys, this was a really solid post.EJ wrote:All 12 of us, including second accounts?durdencommatyler wrote:Nope. The people of RM have spoken.EJ wrote:That's kind of a stupid comparison though.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Bourne ---> BondBurtReynolds wrote:Bond is such a weird franchise to me. I don't get it.
Well don't start with Skyfall. Apparently.Strat wrote:I dont think ive ever watched a bond movie all the way through.
is Han Solo in it?durdencommatyler wrote:Well don't start with Skyfall. Apparently.Strat wrote:I dont think ive ever watched a bond movie all the way through.
where does Ace Ventura fit in that?Strat wrote:the force awakens ----> star wars ----> taken -----> bourne ---> bond
despite my love of the Bond movies, there is a lot of truth in this statementBurtReynolds wrote:Seems like the idea of a Bond movie is always cooler than the actual movies.
Casino was incredibly strong. The second one wasn't as much, but continued to set up a mysterious force that was controlling the world. Then they dropped that to tell a story about a guy who was a mysterious force controlling the world. Good thing they ditched all that other stuff and didn't credit HIM with being behind all those events. It might have made the conflict compelling.Rangi Guy wrote:I never really enjoyed a Bond film until the Craig series
pfft, in bond world, there can be endless mysterious forces controlling the world all at the same time.McParadigm wrote:Casino was incredibly strong. The second one wasn't as much, but continued to set up a mysterious force that was controlling the world. Then they dropped that to tell a story about a guy who was a mysterious force controlling the world. Good thing they ditched all that other stuff and didn't credit HIM with being behind all those events. It might have made the conflict compelling.Rangi Guy wrote:I never really enjoyed a Bond film until the Craig series