›

The James Bond Debate Thread - 336 Craig looks positively younger in SP than he does in SF.

1…107108110112113…190

Comments

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    The point being made was the DB5 is much more of a '60's tribute than bringing a villain back at the end of the film, something more associated with the '70's.

    I understand you're no fan of the DB5 returning @thelivingroyale, I've read it before. :)
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    Agree
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    Disagree. Gilbert's films...MR is a rehash of TSWLM is a rehash of YOLT

  • 00130013
    Posts: 1,817
    Hamilton is formulaic but not more than Gilbert or even Glen. So disagree.

    By the way, @thelivingroyale, what do you think of the DB5 being left hand drive in CR?
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    0013 wrote:
    By the way, @thelivingroyale, what do you think of the DB5 being left hand drive in CR?

    Didn't really care. It made sense because it was in America. I was more bothered about them bringing it back in the first place.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited October 2012 Posts: 23,635
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 169</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Conti's action suites for FYEO would have worked better in the 70's.</b></font>
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    Is it me DD or does that read a little confusing?
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,635
    How so, sir? :)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,334
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 169</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Conti's action suites for FYEO would have worked better in the 70's.</b></font>
    I agree, Marvin's score was way too 70's but Conti's was more subtle and sounded better. IMO.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    Perhaps its because i am in the UK? Suites? Or did you mean suits?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited October 2012 Posts: 28,694
    RogueAgent wrote:
    Perhaps its because i am in the UK? Suites? Or did you mean suits?

    He means the music that accompanies the action. ;))
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,635
    I would have thought it to be a rather well-known word ;-).
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    Posts: 4,813
    'Is the cheesy 80's music really 70's music in disguise' ;)
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    I love Conti's soundtrack and it worked very well for FYEO.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    It may well have suited the '70's but it worked more than well enough for 1981's Bond film.
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    edited October 2012 Posts: 4,813
    That's true, I mean FYEO is barely an 80's movie, so I think I'll disagree with this one
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    edited October 2012 Posts: 5,745
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    That's true, I mean FYEO is barely an 80's movie, so I think I'll disagree with this one

    I love his score.. I think it fit's perfectly. It's unique, and it's my favorite Moore film.

    Disagree. I think it would have worked fine in the 70's, but it worked fine in '81 too.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    RogueAgent wrote:
    Perhaps its because i am in the UK? Suites? Or did you mean suits?

    He means the music that accompanies the action. ;))

    :)) Ah! You to me this read as in suite! Like as in a room! =)) Well? In that case? Disagree. To me the score does not sound very 70's. I think it suits an 80's vibe in FYEO.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,635
    RogueAgent wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    RogueAgent wrote:
    Perhaps its because i am in the UK? Suites? Or did you mean suits?

    He means the music that accompanies the action. ;))

    :)) Ah! You to me this read as in suite! Like as in a room! =)) Well? In that case? Disagree. To me the score does not sound very 70's. I think it suits an 80's vibe in FYEO.

    Really? Disco died in '78. ;-)
  • 0iker00iker0
    Posts: 501
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 169</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Conti's action suites for FYEO would have worked better in the 70's.</b></font>
    Disagree. It sounds just right. Not too old fashioned or too modern for the time. I really do love the soundtrack of that film, and I wouldn't change a thing.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Samuel001 wrote:
    The point being made was the DB5 is much more of a '60's tribute than bringing a villain back at the end of the film, something more associated with the '70's.

    I understand you're no fan of the DB5 returning @thelivingroyale, I've read it before. :)

    Ah, I see. But still, it would give sort of an old school Bond vibe if the henchman came back at the end.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited October 2012 Posts: 13,350
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    The point being made was the DB5 is much more of a '60's tribute than bringing a villain back at the end of the film, something more associated with the '70's.

    I understand you're no fan of the DB5 returning @thelivingroyale, I've read it before. :)

    Ah, I see. But still, it would give sort of an old school Bond vibe if the henchman came back at the end.

    It would and I'd never rule it out happening in the future, especially if we're made to believe the villain died earlier on.

    Craig and co. will look everywhere for inspiration you can be sure of that, so you never know what will turn up in future films. An exciting prospect.

    OK, sorry DD. Let's get back on topic.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,635
    Samuel001 wrote:
    OK, sorry DD. Let's get back on topic.

    No problem, sir! Here goes:

    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 170</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>OHMSS wasn't given a fair chance by critics, no matter what the quality of the film was.</b></font>

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,334
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    OK, sorry DD. Let's get back on topic.

    No problem, sir! Here goes:

    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 170</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>OHMSS wasn't given a fair chance by critics, no matter what the quality of the film was.</b></font>

    Agreed. I think at the time, people loved and were used to Connery, that this new Aussie had no business being Bond. Lazenby was good and OHMSS was great. but the world wasn't ready to accept him as Bond yet.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    Agree - although, their were some reviewers that bucked the trend, however
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited October 2012 Posts: 28,694
    Agree. A Bond film without Sean after that many years was going to experience a decrease in interest/enthusiasm for both critics and moviegoers alike.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    OK, sorry DD. Let's get back on topic.

    No problem, sir! Here goes:

    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 170</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>OHMSS wasn't given a fair chance by critics, no matter what the quality of the film was.</b></font>

    Agree. I think it was basically prejudged due to it not being Connery! Instead of the quality of the movie itself? Poor old GL also was given very bad advice on a professional level too!
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    Posts: 4,813
    THESIS 170
    Not a doubt in my mind-- agree
    As I've mentioned before-- this was a time when only Connery had played Bond-- it would be like if Indiana Jones was suddenly played by some young 'nobody'
  • SJK91SJK91
    edited October 2012 Posts: 1,310
    Agreed, although it is fair in saying that Lazenby wasn't completely up to par for the character. Don't get me wrong, there are really some scenes where Lazenby nails it (particularly the very last scene of the film), but there are times where he comes off as stiff and awkward.

    Regardless, OHMSS is a great film. I think if Lazenby had a little more acting experience, OHMSS would be my favorite Bond film. It's a true shame that poor Laz didn't get to do AT LEAST one more film to grow as an actor. I think he could have made a very good James Bond had he given himself the chance.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,049
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    OK, sorry DD. Let's get back on topic.

    No problem, sir! Here goes:

    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 170</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>OHMSS wasn't given a fair chance by critics, no matter what the quality of the film was.</b></font>

    Definitely agree. The problems with Lazenby's performance still resonate today but under infinitely less harsh reception, but the fact that it just wasn't Connery in the role meant that it would have met with a dodgy reception no matter how good the performance was, and that perception affected many people's views of the film. That's just the way it works sometimes.
Sign In or Register to comment.