Would you rather watch Sir Sean in The Untouchables OR The Rock?

1969799101102

Comments

  • Posts: 804
    Oh, NSNA is quite Goldfinger-esque.

    It's like an alternate sequel to Goldfinger.



  • edited May 11 Posts: 3,086
    Brandauer’s performance is a weird one in NSNA. I’ve seen many people here praise it, but honestly, I think he’s one of the worst things about the film! It’s not a bad or even un-memorable performance as such (the latter being what Von Sydow’s Blofeld falls into) but I’ve always found something strange and uneven about the performance. Like, when he’s being affable he doesn’t quite have enough of that undercurrent of menace that the best Bond villains have, and when he’s being unhinged he doesn’t quite go big enough to be scary. I think the script doesn’t help and he’s not given enough truly threatening moments.

    Also @mtm I really like that alternative idea for TB/NSNA. Love the idea of SPECTRE playing Largo/bluffing with the bombs and setting one off anyway (although I do think Domino needs to be the one to kill Largo by the end, but otherwise it’s far more interesting than what we got).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 11 Posts: 15,140
    007HallY wrote: »
    Also @mtm I really like that alternative idea for TB/NSNA. Love the idea of SPECTRE playing Largo/bluffing with the bombs and setting one off anyway (although I do think Domino needs to be the one to kill Largo by the end, but otherwise it’s far more interesting than what we got).

    Thing is though, Volpe is actually more responsible for her brother's death than Largo- if there's anyone she should kill it's Fiona! :D
  • Posts: 3,086
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Also @mtm I really like that alternative idea for TB/NSNA. Love the idea of SPECTRE playing Largo/bluffing with the bombs and setting one off anyway (although I do think Domino needs to be the one to kill Largo by the end, but otherwise it’s far more interesting than what we got).

    Thing is though, Volpe is actually more responsible for her brother's death than Largo- if there's anyone she should kill it's Fiona! :D

    True! I suppose it all gets a bit lost in the ‘body double’ concept TB goes with for Domino’s brother (which is in itself a way to get Bond to realise Deval is already dead/leads him more organically to the Bahamas without M coming up with some contrived theory as per the book). I actually prefer what NSNA does with the character. Getting him addicted to heroin at least keeps him involved while still being sympathetic to the audience.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 11 Posts: 15,140
    Plus NSNA actually gives Bond a solid reason to go to the Bahamas - he sees the Flying Saucer's logo on Petachi's bag I think (it's a rather perfunctory clue but it adds up). In TB he knows something suspicious is going on with Derval, but the fact that he has a sister is all he goes on, which is mad when there's a ticking clock. It would be like him jetting off to find Elliot Carver's mum in Australia or something in TND - why?

    I know it's kind of a joke about Bond that he has a sixth sense for beautiful women or something, but the fate of the world is at stake here James!
  • Posts: 3,086
    mtm wrote: »
    Plus NSNA actually gives Bond a solid reason to go to the Bahamas - he sees the Flying Saucer's logo on Petachi's bag I think (it's a rather perfunctory clue but it adds up). In TB he knows something suspicious is going on with Derval, but the fact that he has a sister is all he goes on, which is mad when there's a ticking clock. It would be like him jetting off to find Elliot Carver's mum in Australia or something in TND - why?

    I know it's kind of a joke about Bond that he has a sixth sense for beautiful women or something, but the fate of the world is at stake here James!

    Oh yeah 😂 it doesn’t quite make sense. I can definitely see why they wrote it that way though. It gets Bond a bit more involved and streamlines everything a bit (and to be fair I think it’s one of these plot points in Bond which only seems strange after you’ve thought about it. I suppose there’s a logic in Bond at least trying to question the sister about Deval… I guess).

    I personally find it easier to go along with than Bouvar faking his own death and showing up to the funeral dressed as his own widow for some reason… and then Bond working this out due to the fact he opened a car door by himself (c’mon James, it’s the 60s).
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,025
    mtm wrote: »
    Plus NSNA actually gives Bond a solid reason to go to the Bahamas - he sees the Flying Saucer's logo on Petachi's bag I think (it's a rather perfunctory clue but it adds up). In TB he knows something suspicious is going on with Derval, but the fact that he has a sister is all he goes on, which is mad when there's a ticking clock. It would be like him jetting off to find Elliot Carver's mum in Australia or something in TND - why?

    I know it's kind of a joke about Bond that he has a sixth sense for beautiful women or something, but the fate of the world is at stake here James!

    I would add that I like that we have a reason why Bond goes to Shrublands. In TB we are guessing he's there due to the strike the back by Number 6. Which is a pretty weak reason. In NSNA we get something more in line with the book. M orders his to go to the health spa to get back in physical shape. Another reason I enjoy NSNA it doesn't pretend Bond is a young man.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 11 Posts: 15,140
    thedove wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Plus NSNA actually gives Bond a solid reason to go to the Bahamas - he sees the Flying Saucer's logo on Petachi's bag I think (it's a rather perfunctory clue but it adds up). In TB he knows something suspicious is going on with Derval, but the fact that he has a sister is all he goes on, which is mad when there's a ticking clock. It would be like him jetting off to find Elliot Carver's mum in Australia or something in TND - why?

    I know it's kind of a joke about Bond that he has a sixth sense for beautiful women or something, but the fate of the world is at stake here James!

    I would add that I like that we have a reason why Bond goes to Shrublands. In TB we are guessing he's there due to the strike the back by Number 6. Which is a pretty weak reason. In NSNA we get something more in line with the book. M orders his to go to the health spa to get back in physical shape. Another reason I enjoy NSNA it doesn't pretend Bond is a young man.

    Yes I like that - Shrublands actually fits with the film more. Plus there's a bit more of an impression that it's Bond's mission as he locates the Flying Saucer.

    Folks often say that Connery's character in The Rock was an ersatz Bond, but I like to imagine that they could have actually done another McClory at that time, with Bond, rather like Connery's character in The Rock, having been incarcerated in top security HMP Shrublands for a couple of decades - with his fellow inmate Count Lippe :D
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,946
    il_570xN.5382743479_95uz.jpg
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,527
    I'm a purist, but NSNA for me for two reasons: one, I don't think I've ever actually seen it front to back, and two, I always go into Thunderball with an open mind and heart, but I can't help but find it boring every time. I know it has it's passionate fans, and objectively I know it's good (and I love the book), but for whatever reason it just doesn't click for me.
  • Posts: 14,865
    007HallY wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Also @mtm I really like that alternative idea for TB/NSNA. Love the idea of SPECTRE playing Largo/bluffing with the bombs and setting one off anyway (although I do think Domino needs to be the one to kill Largo by the end, but otherwise it’s far more interesting than what we got).

    Thing is though, Volpe is actually more responsible for her brother's death than Largo- if there's anyone she should kill it's Fiona! :D

    True! I suppose it all gets a bit lost in the ‘body double’ concept TB goes with for Domino’s brother (which is in itself a way to get Bond to realise Deval is already dead/leads him more organically to the Bahamas without M coming up with some contrived theory as per the book). I actually prefer what NSNA does with the character. Getting him addicted to heroin at least keeps him involved while still being sympathetic to the audience.

    As contrived as it was in the novel, I loved how M made a Mycroft Holmes of himself and figured out where the bombs most likely would be hidden. I loved that he didn't just briefed Bond, he explained his theory and how he came to that conclusion. I know it wouldn't have worked in a film. But I loved it in the novel all the same.
  • Posts: 6,880
    Venutius wrote: »
    il_570xN.5382743479_95uz.jpg

    Kevin McClory mustn't have read the bottom corner of that photo!
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,019
    😂
  • Posts: 1,723
    the real contest, as in real life, would be Thunderball, NSNA or The Return of The Man from U.N.C.L.E.
  • Posts: 3,086
    Ludovico wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Also @mtm I really like that alternative idea for TB/NSNA. Love the idea of SPECTRE playing Largo/bluffing with the bombs and setting one off anyway (although I do think Domino needs to be the one to kill Largo by the end, but otherwise it’s far more interesting than what we got).

    Thing is though, Volpe is actually more responsible for her brother's death than Largo- if there's anyone she should kill it's Fiona! :D

    True! I suppose it all gets a bit lost in the ‘body double’ concept TB goes with for Domino’s brother (which is in itself a way to get Bond to realise Deval is already dead/leads him more organically to the Bahamas without M coming up with some contrived theory as per the book). I actually prefer what NSNA does with the character. Getting him addicted to heroin at least keeps him involved while still being sympathetic to the audience.

    As contrived as it was in the novel, I loved how M made a Mycroft Holmes of himself and figured out where the bombs most likely would be hidden. I loved that he didn't just briefed Bond, he explained his theory and how he came to that conclusion. I know it wouldn't have worked in a film. But I loved it in the novel all the same.

    It's definitely something that works more in the novel, and it's fine as a way to progress things. But agreed, it doesn't quite hit the same when shown in a film. It has the impression of coming out of nowhere.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,025
    Very interesting discussion about this would you rather. I must admit I am taken aback a bit by the love for NSNA as it often gets flogged on here. I am warmed to see some love shown for the film. I wish EON would pick up on the Bond aging for a future film. Not like Skyfall where it was hinted at and then abandoned, but really lean into it more.

    Okay on to another would you rather:

    Would you rather have a stainless steel rimmed bowler hat OR stainless steel teeth?

    Have fun with this one and think which one would you rather have? OddJob's hat is deadly yet stylish. Jaws teeth would allow for you to chew just about anything. Which one would you rather have?
  • Posts: 14,865
    thedove wrote: »
    Very interesting discussion about this would you rather. I must admit I am taken aback a bit by the love for NSNA as it often gets flogged on here. I am warmed to see some love shown for the film. I wish EON would pick up on the Bond aging for a future film. Not like Skyfall where it was hinted at and then abandoned, but really lean into it more.

    Okay on to another would you rather:

    Would you rather have a stainless steel rimmed bowler hat OR stainless steel teeth?

    Have fun with this one and think which one would you rather have? OddJob's hat is deadly yet stylish. Jaws teeth would allow for you to chew just about anything. Which one would you rather have?

    The bowler hat, easily. It's stylish and deadly. Perfect weapon to conceal. The teeth would make me look like a monster.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,683
    Ludovico wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    Very interesting discussion about this would you rather. I must admit I am taken aback a bit by the love for NSNA as it often gets flogged on here. I am warmed to see some love shown for the film. I wish EON would pick up on the Bond aging for a future film. Not like Skyfall where it was hinted at and then abandoned, but really lean into it more.

    Okay on to another would you rather:

    Would you rather have a stainless steel rimmed bowler hat OR stainless steel teeth?

    Have fun with this one and think which one would you rather have? OddJob's hat is deadly yet stylish. Jaws teeth would allow for you to chew just about anything. Which one would you rather have?

    The bowler hat, easily. It's stylish and deadly. Perfect weapon to conceal. The teeth would make me look like a monster.

    I’m with @Ludovico ! The hat is cool.

    The teeth are freakish.

    The hat’s deadliness is concealed.

    Those teeth are on constant display.

    Steel rimmed hat, please!
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    edited May 13 Posts: 2,029
    Bowler hat, without question.
    Still the coolest villain weapon in movies, responsible for the single most impressive kill in the series.
    Oddjob manages to strike down a black-clad Tilly while she’s running, obscured by darkness and trees.
    Truly a master of his ‘craft’, combining the elegance, dexterity and deadly precision of Federer, Nicklaus and O’Sullivan, all together.
  • Posts: 15,870
    Bowler.
  • edited May 12 Posts: 3,086
    My weapon of choice would be a gun cane personally. But in this case I'll go with the bowler hat. Have never had to wear braces but I guess the steel teeth would be a much more cumbersome version of those, which doesn't appeal to me.
  • Posts: 2,101
    I’m going for the bowler hat as well. They make for a nice “pimp” look.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,025
    I guess that was a bit too easy to choose. Who would want steel teeth.

    Okay lets talk about a future film adventure.

    Would you rather see a young Bond OR an older Bond?

    We usually see Bond as a 30-something agent out in the field. There might be a new angle of playing with the age of the character. We haven't seen a young Bond on the screen, though I suppose Daniel's characterization came close. We also haven't seen a film that openly embraces an older Bond. It has been hinted at within SF. In AVTAK with a 57 year old actor it was ignored and became an elephant in the room.

    So what would you rather see brought to the screen? A young Bond or an older Bond?
  • Posts: 12,294
    Young, absolutely. My ideal direction for the next era is something akin to Matt Reeves's The Batman, as far as having the protagonist early in his career but not origin level.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,010
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    Where NSNA takes the win is Brandauer, and his top-notch performance as Largo. He was tightly coiled, a barely in control psychotic that certainly scared me as a kid when I watched this film, and still does now.

    I know I always say it, but I almost think Connery could have sued Cubby for making the villain in his next film a young psychotic guy with blond hair called Max :D

    Mind you, he didn't really have a leg to stand on with Blofeld's white cat and a character called Q :))

    😂, very true.

    How did they get away with Blofeld's white cat and Q (these were EoN's inventions, not Fleming, nor the novel of Thunderball)?

    Beats me! I guess maybe they banked on Eon not thinking it was worth the trouble. I suppose Casino Royale had done a version of Q too so the waters had been tested.
    peter wrote: »
    Paluzzi was always in control, and that not only made her sexy, but more dangerous

    My issue is that the film isn't big enough: it doesn't feel like a sequel to Goldfinger like YOLT does- it feels like what it is: a script written before the Bond films got successful. So they should have made it crazier, and I think NSNA should have done that too.

    I think they should have done something like landed the Vulcan on a runway which rises out of the sea or something- stored it in a base under Palmerya. And make the plan less dull: maybe say they're ransoming the UK but in fact they're going to let the bomb off right where they are and create a tidal wave which destroys Florida and Cuba (then make loads of money by swooping in and rebuilding them) - and frame 007 for the explosion as revenge for Dr No and Red Grant (and Bouvar I guess)!
    Largo doesn't know this though- he thinks it's in Washington, but Blofeld kept him in the dark: when Fiona reveals this to him she kills him! Then, she tries to make her getaway in the Vulcan, but Bond (or Domino) stops it taking off and destroys it and the base. Maybe with his jetpack :D

    I dunno, maybe that's all very silly, but I wish it were sillier. Having the bombs thousands of miles away just makes it duller and reduces the personal stakes, and the ransom plot is no way as interesting or clever as Goldfinger's plan- and I want more Fiona!

    This is so astute, and a new way (for me) to look at TB. I've always found it a slog. It makes sense that it would be from a lower-key script that they more or less dusted off, so that they could continue to make a new Bond film every year.

    In a way, it's much more tonally in line with DN, simpler.

    DN to FRWL to GF to YOLT is a definite progression in terms of outlandishness. TB is the outlier.
  • edited May 14 Posts: 3,086
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Young, absolutely. My ideal direction for the next era is something akin to Matt Reeves's The Batman, as far as having the protagonist early in his career but not origin level.

    Agreed. An early 30s Bond after his first couple of years as a 00 would be cool and feels like a good place to start a new actor’s tenure. It’s not far away in spirit to when we see Bond in DN. We’ve kind of had an older Bond anyway with NTTD (well, a retired Bond in his 50s anyway, which I think is fine. I don’t know what ‘old man Bond’ would add apart from being a novelty).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 14 Posts: 15,140
    Yeah, young absolutely. We've even done old Bond a few times: really that's what NTTD was.
    I don't think a Bond in his 70s would be significantly more interesting than that, and really NTTD was right: he shouldn't live to be that old anyway.
    I'd quite like actual Young Bond as per the books: I think that would be fun, but there's also a line of thinking that the next 007 should be younger than usual anyway. In a world where Ryan Gosling is maybe too old to open an action film, and everything that Timothée Chamalet makes earns a shedload, maybe we need a new Bond who's in his 20s or early 30s.
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    Where NSNA takes the win is Brandauer, and his top-notch performance as Largo. He was tightly coiled, a barely in control psychotic that certainly scared me as a kid when I watched this film, and still does now.

    I know I always say it, but I almost think Connery could have sued Cubby for making the villain in his next film a young psychotic guy with blond hair called Max :D

    Mind you, he didn't really have a leg to stand on with Blofeld's white cat and a character called Q :))

    😂, very true.

    How did they get away with Blofeld's white cat and Q (these were EoN's inventions, not Fleming, nor the novel of Thunderball)?

    Beats me! I guess maybe they banked on Eon not thinking it was worth the trouble. I suppose Casino Royale had done a version of Q too so the waters had been tested.
    peter wrote: »
    Paluzzi was always in control, and that not only made her sexy, but more dangerous

    My issue is that the film isn't big enough: it doesn't feel like a sequel to Goldfinger like YOLT does- it feels like what it is: a script written before the Bond films got successful. So they should have made it crazier, and I think NSNA should have done that too.

    I think they should have done something like landed the Vulcan on a runway which rises out of the sea or something- stored it in a base under Palmerya. And make the plan less dull: maybe say they're ransoming the UK but in fact they're going to let the bomb off right where they are and create a tidal wave which destroys Florida and Cuba (then make loads of money by swooping in and rebuilding them) - and frame 007 for the explosion as revenge for Dr No and Red Grant (and Bouvar I guess)!
    Largo doesn't know this though- he thinks it's in Washington, but Blofeld kept him in the dark: when Fiona reveals this to him she kills him! Then, she tries to make her getaway in the Vulcan, but Bond (or Domino) stops it taking off and destroys it and the base. Maybe with his jetpack :D

    I dunno, maybe that's all very silly, but I wish it were sillier. Having the bombs thousands of miles away just makes it duller and reduces the personal stakes, and the ransom plot is no way as interesting or clever as Goldfinger's plan- and I want more Fiona!

    This is so astute, and a new way (for me) to look at TB. I've always found it a slog. It makes sense that it would be from a lower-key script that they more or less dusted off, so that they could continue to make a new Bond film every year.

    In a way, it's much more tonally in line with DN, simpler.

    DN to FRWL to GF to YOLT is a definite progression in terms of outlandishness. TB is the outlier.

    Thanks, yeah: in a way I think the problem is they made the films too quickly if anything, they didn't really take time to learn from their successes with GF and spot what made it a hit. You go from Oddjob, who was obviously a massive hit with his striking look, crushing golfballs, saying "Ah!" and steel-rimmed bowler, to Vargas who..er.. "doesn't do anything". That's literally his quirk: that he's boring. I mean, what were they thinking?

    TB was supposed to be the first film originally I think, and although they bolted jetpacks and things into it I think you can tell: it's in line with Dr No, as you say and feels more 50s than 60s.

    Random thought but thedove made a really good point about NSNA giving a reason for Bond to be sent to Shrublands: the PTS is such a great place to do that it's kind of mad it doesn't happen. Imagine if he'd been exposed to some deadly toxin Bouvar was smuggling or something so gets sent to Shrublands as a precaution (this is 60s Bond so he can't get badly injured or anything :D ).
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,156
    Young-ish Bond for now. If EON wants to do an origin story, they should use parts of Richard Maibaum and MGW’s Bond 15 treatments. There is promising material in there. Kincade could comeback. Meeting certain people for the first time. I’m sorry for repeating myself, again. If EON wants a true origin story for Bond and his allies, use Forever and a Day and Carte Blanche respectively, as influences. The personal stories of the characters were my favorite of the books.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited May 14 Posts: 4,462
    1979 born actor wil never happen, but i expect on his latest is not born later then 1986. If he is 42 and looks/mental is younger no problem.

    But if not better choose mabey i wil make exception for Callum Turner born in 1990 but 3-6 years to young. But has some Roger Moore and Lazenby in him, like him in interviews. Can see him with Felicity Jones as Q. Joel Edgerton as ally, villian or new Tanner. Mia Goth mabey for his final 3th Bond movie with she have Ursula Andres look, but should age a bit more. Shailene Woodley wil great as (lesbian) Bondgirl too. And Dua Lipa can do Bond 27 title song.

    Production/Art design of No Time To Die and QOS be big improvement and return to older days, that should be done more and also with Bondgirls. Remain things be done for real, even sets bulding like hotel in QOS or whole country as in Goldeneye. At Bond in train, bus or boat with traveling in country with 1-3 locations (England minimal). I wish that we have seen a little bit how Bond end in Norway .

    Iam curious how the new actor look like in the new Mi6 if that already be possible.
  • edited May 14 Posts: 804
    mtm wrote: »
    Yeah, young absolutely. We've even done old Bond a few times: really that's what NTTD was.
    I don't think a Bond in his 70s would be significantly more interesting than that, and really NTTD was right: he shouldn't live to be that old anyway.
    I'd quite like actual Young Bond as per the books: I think that would be fun, but there's also a line of thinking that the next 007 should be younger than usual anyway. In a world where Ryan Gosling is maybe too old to open an action film, and everything that Timothée Chamalet makes earns a shedload, maybe we need a new Bond who's in his 20s or early 30s.
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    Where NSNA takes the win is Brandauer, and his top-notch performance as Largo. He was tightly coiled, a barely in control psychotic that certainly scared me as a kid when I watched this film, and still does now.

    I know I always say it, but I almost think Connery could have sued Cubby for making the villain in his next film a young psychotic guy with blond hair called Max :D

    Mind you, he didn't really have a leg to stand on with Blofeld's white cat and a character called Q :))

    😂, very true.

    How did they get away with Blofeld's white cat and Q (these were EoN's inventions, not Fleming, nor the novel of Thunderball)?

    Beats me! I guess maybe they banked on Eon not thinking it was worth the trouble. I suppose Casino Royale had done a version of Q too so the waters had been tested.
    peter wrote: »
    Paluzzi was always in control, and that not only made her sexy, but more dangerous

    My issue is that the film isn't big enough: it doesn't feel like a sequel to Goldfinger like YOLT does- it feels like what it is: a script written before the Bond films got successful. So they should have made it crazier, and I think NSNA should have done that too.

    I think they should have done something like landed the Vulcan on a runway which rises out of the sea or something- stored it in a base under Palmerya. And make the plan less dull: maybe say they're ransoming the UK but in fact they're going to let the bomb off right where they are and create a tidal wave which destroys Florida and Cuba (then make loads of money by swooping in and rebuilding them) - and frame 007 for the explosion as revenge for Dr No and Red Grant (and Bouvar I guess)!
    Largo doesn't know this though- he thinks it's in Washington, but Blofeld kept him in the dark: when Fiona reveals this to him she kills him! Then, she tries to make her getaway in the Vulcan, but Bond (or Domino) stops it taking off and destroys it and the base. Maybe with his jetpack :D

    I dunno, maybe that's all very silly, but I wish it were sillier. Having the bombs thousands of miles away just makes it duller and reduces the personal stakes, and the ransom plot is no way as interesting or clever as Goldfinger's plan- and I want more Fiona!

    This is so astute, and a new way (for me) to look at TB. I've always found it a slog. It makes sense that it would be from a lower-key script that they more or less dusted off, so that they could continue to make a new Bond film every year.

    In a way, it's much more tonally in line with DN, simpler.

    DN to FRWL to GF to YOLT is a definite progression in terms of outlandishness. TB is the outlier.

    Thanks, yeah: in a way I think the problem is they made the films too quickly if anything, they didn't really take time to learn from their successes with GF and spot what made it a hit. You go from Oddjob, who was obviously a massive hit with his striking look, crushing golfballs, saying "Ah!" and steel-rimmed bowler, to Vargas who..er.. "doesn't do anything". That's literally his quirk: that he's boring. I mean, what were they thinking?

    TB was supposed to be the first film originally I think, and although they bolted jetpacks and things into it I think you can tell: it's in line with Dr No, as you say and feels more 50s than 60s.

    Random thought but thedove made a really good point about NSNA giving a reason for Bond to be sent to Shrublands: the PTS is such a great place to do that it's kind of mad it doesn't happen. Imagine if he'd been exposed to some deadly toxin Bouvar was smuggling or something so gets sent to Shrublands as a precaution (this is 60s Bond so he can't get badly injured or anything :D ).

    Well, to be fair, they couldn't have made YOLT without TB.

    I mean, YOLT was Dr No meets TB.

    Anyway, TB made a lot of money.
Sign In or Register to comment.