The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

James Bond 007: Quantum of Solace

2456715

Posts

  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Craig is an excellent Bond so far. It's mainly in how he plays the character. For anyone who's read any of the books, he quite possibly matches Flemming's character better than any of the other actors. It's a dark, gritty character with a sense of humor.
    (Also, if anyone's read Moonraker, the book would make a fucking awesome movie, unlike the completely unrelated film we got).
    Connery was good in the role, just getting a little too silly at the end.
    I actually liked Lazenby. I think if he'd stuck with it, he would've been really good.
    Moore was just plain terrible in my opinion. It was like most of his films were actually parodies. At the end it had gotten to the point that you'd just have to replace him with Austin Powers and you'd be ready to go.
    Dalton was fantastic. He could've been a bit more suave, but the dark, grittiness was great.
    Brosnan was good in Goldeneye, but then it all went downhill from there.

    Also, though this is the last Flemming title, none of the Brosnan films used Flemming titles. Just sayin'.

    I can't wait to see Quantum of Solace. I've gone out of my way to avoid trailers and previews so it's all fresh when I see it.

    TubularLuggage on
  • Flippy_DFlippy_D Digital Conquistador LondonRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Tubular I am better than you.

    Flippy_D on
    p8fnsZD.png
  • Casual EddyCasual Eddy The Astral PlaneRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    "Quantum of Solace" is "a little bit of solace", only cooler sounding. I like the title.
    No it isn't. "Quantum" just means "a quantity." It doesn't denote any gradient or value. So, it's "An Unspecified Quantity of Solace." This is still fine conceptually, but I think that the title is aesthetically clunky and seems off-kilter compared to other Bond titles (though it's from the pen of Ian Fleming, so YMMV).

    in physics talk it means the smallest amount or size possible.

    anyway I love the restart. It's cut the ridiculous bloat from the last few movies. I mean, did you see those pieces of shit? They were absurd. It reminds me of Nolan's take on the Batman franchise, like "what would happen if this shit actually happened?"

    Casual Eddy on
  • OrganichuOrganichu poops peesRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Quantum of Solace is released on my 21st birthday. If any of you can think of a valid counter to my plan to see it smashed (legally, for the first time)... speak now or forever hold your peace.

    Organichu on
  • Flippy_DFlippy_D Digital Conquistador LondonRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    You won't remember it.

    Flippy_D on
    p8fnsZD.png
  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Organichu wrote: »
    Quantum of Solace is released on my 21st birthday. If any of you can think of a valid counter to my plan to see it smashed (legally, for the first time)... speak now or forever hold your peace.

    You're supposed to see a film smashed or high the second time, not the first (unless it's a film that can only be enjoyed that way, which doesn't apply here).

    TubularLuggage on
  • OrganichuOrganichu poops peesRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Well QED I guess.

    I'll see it the next night.

    Organichu on
  • VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Casino Royale is easily my favorite Bond and I'm greatly anticipating this.

    the first thing I read on it was them shooting a car crash with digital cameras and the article detailed the INSANE amount of data being recorded per second by all of these state of the art cameras. I don't remember it exactly so no point in guessing but it sounded shit hot. can't wait.

    edit - I pretty much agree with flippy. I like Moore, Connery, and Brosnan pretty much equally to be honest, but Brosnan's movies sucked after Goldeneye (not his fault) and I don't honestly know the full breadth of either Connery's or Moore's Bond catalog.

    Variable on
    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    "Quantum of Solace" is "a little bit of solace", only cooler sounding. I like the title.
    No it isn't. "Quantum" just means "a quantity." It doesn't denote any gradient or value. So, it's "An Unspecified Quantity of Solace." This is still fine conceptually, but I think that the title is aesthetically clunky and seems off-kilter compared to other Bond titles (though it's from the pen of Ian Fleming, so YMMV).

    in physics talk it means the smallest amount or size possible
    Was that even a use of the word when Ian Fleming created the title, though? :X

    But yeah, that's also a usage of the word. :)

    Oboro on
    words
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Flippy_D wrote: »
    As a film critic and a pretty big Bond fan I was so so gratified by Casino Royale. I mean, YES.

    A Bond film that's not only a good 'Bond Film' (I would argue, the best), but a great film on its own merits? Intelligent, arch, action-packed without being gratuitous (looking at you, Mr. Bay)?

    Fuck yes please. Brilliant. Exactly what the series needed. And it definitely felt like Bond.

    As for the Bonds. Pierce should have been the best Bond ever, with Connery coming a close second and Dalton taking third. But Pierce's acting talent and persona were utterly squandered after Goldeneye - the director of which, entirely un-coincidentally, went on to do Casino Royale.

    Craig very much suits the new Bond - almost perfectly - and one can make a compelling argument for his being the most authentic. He is also a very capable actor. Whether he can *be* Bond for more than one film is as yet unknown, but he absolutely nailed in it on his first outing.

    This is exactly why I love this movie. Not only is it "believable" in the same way the Bourne movies can be, but I can recommend Casino Royale without reservation to anybody who loves a good, smart action flick. "You don't like Bond movies, you say, but have you given Casino Royale a shot?"

    DoctorArch on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • Raybies666Raybies666 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Due to living conditions, the first Bond I saw in the cinema was Goldeneye (having seen pretty much all of them on tv/vhs already) and it was great. I really don't like the way Brosnan was given progressively worse films to be be in (Die another day was awful, i think we can all agree), and then a lot of people just started talking as if Brosnan was shit (the series producers were a factor in this if I remember).

    I found Casino Royale to be kind of boring, quite a lot of the second part dragged for me and it felt too long because of this. The new trailer was before The Dark Knight and I'm just not interested, which is a shame. It's the first Bond movie that I haven't been gagging to see and that makes me a sad panda.

    Y'know whats great? The fucking James Bond theme. Seriously, it's a fantastic piece of movie music that can easily be fiddled around with for varoius uses.

    Y'know what else is great, Bond action scenes. I can't really put my finger on it, but when I got to 00:36 below, I nearly cheered in the cinema

    To me, this is Bond. And awesome.

    Raybies666 on
    Beat me on Wii U: Raybies
    Beat me on 360: Raybies666

    I remember when I had time to be good at games.
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    edited September 2008
    I think looking forward to a Bond film is almost as good as actually seeing it. Also, in that clip, he expresses extreme tension by adjusting his tie. So much love for that man.

    Also, this is so very fine

    Bogart on
  • EinEin CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Raybies666 wrote: »
    Due to living conditions, the first Bond I saw in the cinema was Goldeneye (having seen pretty much all of them on tv/vhs already) and it was great. I really don't like the way Brosnan was given progressively worse films to be be in (Die another day was awful, i think we can all agree), and then a lot of people just started talking as if Brosnan was shit (the series producers were a factor in this if I remember).

    I found Casino Royale to be kind of boring, quite a lot of the second part dragged for me and it felt too long because of this. The new trailer was before The Dark Knight and I'm just not interested, which is a shame. It's the first Bond movie that I haven't been gagging to see and that makes me a sad panda.

    Y'know whats great? The fucking James Bond theme. Seriously, it's a fantastic piece of movie music that can easily be fiddled around with for varoius uses.

    Y'know what else is great, Bond action scenes. I can't really put my finger on it, but when I got to 00:36 below, I nearly cheered in the cinema

    To me, this is Bond. And awesome.

    Haha I remember how much I loved that now

    Power sliding a tank.

    Ein on
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Aegis wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Aegis wrote: »
    I think this is the point at which the naming of Bond films finally jumps the shark.

    As opposed to Goldfinger? Moonraker? The Living Daylights? Octopussy?

    The first three are alright, and the last one just sounds awesome. This new one just sounds like they wanted it for the simple fact of 'hey, obscure english words'.

    No, no. It's actually used correctly. This marks the first time "Quantum" has been used correctly in the history of Cinema.

    "Quantum of Solace" is "a little bit of solace", only cooler sounding. I like the title.

    Also, the bond girl is fine, but she doesn't really make my heart leap out of my chest or anything.

    I also like it because I understand it, but none of my friends or family would know what a quantum is, indeed virtually nobody would. If they've heard the word it would be from Star Trek or something.

    Its a neat name, but really only for people with a bit of physics background, otherwise I'm sure it just sounds like fancy nonsense.

    [Tycho?] on
    mvaYcgc.jpg
  • chasmchasm Ill-tempered Texan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    The guy who plays the agent from the CIA(?) is an awesome actor(he played Peoples in Shaft). I might see it just because he's in it.

    Yeah, Jeffrey Wright is damned good. Check out Ride With The Devil if you haven't yet.

    chasm on
    steam_sig.png
    XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Moderator mod
    edited September 2008
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    It's not too much of a stretch to describe Ian Fleming's Bond as a sociopathic serial rapist. Dude had some serious issues with women.

    Jacobkosh on
  • osietraosietra __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2008
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    It's not too much of a stretch to describe Ian Fleming's Bond as a sociopathic serial rapist. Dude had some serious issues with women.

    Are there many rape scenes in Bond films?

    I can't recall any.

    osietra on
  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    osietra wrote: »
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    It's not too much of a stretch to describe Ian Fleming's Bond as a sociopathic serial rapist. Dude had some serious issues with women.

    Are there many rape scenes in Bond films?

    I can't recall any.

    There were a few scenes in various Roger Moore films that came close. That dude just wouldn't take no for an answer.

    TubularLuggage on
  • Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    It's not too much of a stretch to describe Ian Fleming's Bond as a sociopathic serial rapist. Dude had some serious issues with women.

    Oh yeah, definitely- though a lot of that was just the 1950s in general. This is the same character who cured Pussy Galore's lesbianism with his cock, after all. (I think they even kept that in Goldfinger, though it might be more implied...)

    The movies tend to have little to no relation to the books pretty quick, though. A lot of them are chopped-up and remixed.

    Professor Phobos on
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Bogart wrote: »
    I think looking forward to a Bond film is almost as good as actually seeing it. Also, in that clip, he expresses extreme tension by adjusting his tie. So much love for that man.

    Also, this is so very fine

    What the fuck is that?

    Is that David Bowie making fun of Quantum of Solace?

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • IreneDAdlerIreneDAdler Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    There were a few scenes in various Roger Moore films that came close. That dude just wouldn't take no for an answer.

    Those girls were just trying to hide how much they wanted it.

    But yeah, I really think the obvious issues he had with women are more an artifact of the times. People in 50 years might look back on Casino Royale and be like "Wow, that guy is a douche."

    Also, if any of you guys haven't seen the original Casino Royale with Peter Sellers and David Niven, I'd highly highly recommend it. If you have Netflix, it's available on the Instant Viewing thing.

    IreneDAdler on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I think I have it on DVD, Irene. Yeah, it's funny. Hell, even Woody Allen was in it.

    Also, "Quantum of Solace" sounds like it should be the new Castlevania, not a Bond film.

    That said, I'm looking forward to seeing this very much.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    I don't think I liked that, though. I always liked the slightly campy bond-fantasy-super-spy thing. They seemed a bit more lighthearted and you could smile every now and then while watching the damn movie.

    You know we should really be calling it "Solace" for short. The only reason to use Quantum is if you don't know what that means.

    Which is probably fair, I guess.

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Adrien wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    I don't think I liked that, though. I always liked the slightly campy bond-fantasy-super-spy thing. They seemed a bit more lighthearted and you could smile every now and then while watching the damn movie.

    You know we should really be calling it "Solace" for short. The only reason to use Quantum is if you don't know what that means.

    Which is probably fair, I guess.

    It's two pints to one quantum.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • NuzakNuzak Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Ein wrote: »
    Aside from the hair color thing, Craig just looks too 'hard' for the part.
    This - this exactly summarizes my problem!

    Craig is fucking built, but he comes across as too much of a brawler. They need to do something to soften his screen presence when he's not killing people.

    yeah but it's because he's not "bond" yet

    hence the vodka martinis, hence the YOUR PUNY BUILDING SITE DRYWALL CANNOT STOP MEE, etc.

    Nuzak on
  • Flippy_DFlippy_D Digital Conquistador LondonRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I wouldn't venture he's going to get particularly more 'soft'. It would go against the ideas the 'reboot' introduced - the ones that have worked so well.

    If they're smart, they'll make him less impetuous but still prone to mistakes and still vulnerable to being outmaneuvered. So like, he'll do most things right and then still find he's been realistically compromised.

    Flippy_D on
    p8fnsZD.png
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Nuzak wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    Aside from the hair color thing, Craig just looks too 'hard' for the part.
    This - this exactly summarizes my problem!

    Craig is fucking built, but he comes across as too much of a brawler. They need to do something to soften his screen presence when he's not killing people.

    yeah but it's because he's not "bond" yet

    hence the vodka martinis, hence the YOUR PUNY BUILDING SITE DRYWALL CANNOT STOP MEE, etc.

    Hehe, I loved that martini bit.

    "Vodka martini."
    "Shaken or stirred, sir?"
    "I don't GIVE A FUCK!"

    KalTorak on
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    KalTorak wrote: »
    Nuzak wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    Aside from the hair color thing, Craig just looks too 'hard' for the part.
    This - this exactly summarizes my problem!

    Craig is fucking built, but he comes across as too much of a brawler. They need to do something to soften his screen presence when he's not killing people.

    yeah but it's because he's not "bond" yet

    hence the vodka martinis, hence the YOUR PUNY BUILDING SITE DRYWALL CANNOT STOP MEE, etc.

    Hehe, I loved that martini bit.

    "Vodka martini."
    "Shaken or stirred, sir?"
    "I don't GIVE A FUCK!"

    It was "do I look like I give a damn?"

    But yes, that was gold.

    (Sorry, I just watched this again two or three days ago.)

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Drez wrote: »
    KalTorak wrote: »
    Nuzak wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    Aside from the hair color thing, Craig just looks too 'hard' for the part.
    This - this exactly summarizes my problem!

    Craig is fucking built, but he comes across as too much of a brawler. They need to do something to soften his screen presence when he's not killing people.

    yeah but it's because he's not "bond" yet

    hence the vodka martinis, hence the YOUR PUNY BUILDING SITE DRYWALL CANNOT STOP MEE, etc.

    Hehe, I loved that martini bit.

    "Vodka martini."
    "Shaken or stirred, sir?"
    "I don't GIVE A FUCK!"

    It was "do I look like I give a damn?"

    But yes, that was gold.

    (Sorry, I just watched this again two or three days ago.)

    I know; they don't say fuck in Bond movies.

    KalTorak on
  • chasmchasm Ill-tempered Texan Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Yeah, me, too. I'm still disappointed that the new BluRay doubledip coming out soon won't be the international cut.

    chasm on
    steam_sig.png
    XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
  • APZonerunnerAPZonerunner Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    It's not too much of a stretch to describe Ian Fleming's Bond as a sociopathic serial rapist. Dude had some serious issues with women.

    Oh yeah, definitely- though a lot of that was just the 1950s in general. This is the same character who cured Pussy Galore's lesbianism with his cock, after all. (I think they even kept that in Goldfinger, though it might be more implied...)

    The movies tend to have little to no relation to the books pretty quick, though. A lot of them are chopped-up and remixed.

    All roads of his problems with women in the books lead back to Vesper, though, which is why it'll be interesting to see how they take bond in this movie and where he stands as far as his relationship with women. At the end of Casino Royale Bond positively despised Vesper, and while they kept the "the bitch is dead" line at the tail end of the movie, I got the impression movie Bond didn't really think she was a bitch, and was still very much in love with her. Then again, this may be a factor of modernizing the story more than anything else.

    Then again, the circumstances in the book were very different to that of the movie.

    In the books Bond hated her - and generally saw women as nothing but objects - until On Her Majesty's Secret Service, when he's destroyed again but this time by the love of his life being taken rater than betraying him. So he went back the same again.

    This doesn't come across as well in the movies because the books have a very different Chronological order. For those who've never read the books (and you really should), here's the differences in order:

    Casino Royale

    VS. Le Chiffre. Movie is very faithful to the book just with more action scenes - all the airport stuff is new, for example - all we're told in the book is Le Chiffre took a gamble on the stock market with his client's money and it all went south. In the course of the book Bond falls for Vesper, but she betrays him and kills herself - if I remember correctly with cyanide.
    Live and Let Die
    Largely unrelated to the overarching plot, very similar to the movie at least in the characters and overall plot. The book elements that were dropped later show up in For Your Eyes Only and License to Kill. Quarrel "Junior" introduced in the movie as the son of Quarrel - is actually the original Quarrel in this book, as the book chronology sees Quarrel introduced in this, dying in Dr. No.
    Moonraker
    Different to the movie. Doesn't include any inspired by Star Wars space bullshit and is a standard issue but delicious nuclear weapon stealing/threatening plot ala Thunderball. Hugo Drax is still the villain and very much the same character, and there are some plot elements shared with the movie.
    Diamonds Are Forever
    Largely similar to the movie, but there is no SPECTRE or Blofeld yet, so it is pretty much just Bond trying to work out what's going on with this smuggling ring.
    From Russia with Love
    Very similar to the movie, but again no SPECTRE or world threat - the novel is entirely based around the Russian Special Agency trying to entrap and ruin Bond for taking down so many of their agents.
    Dr No
    Similar to movie. Bond switches to Walther PPK - thus the scene with M telling him to ditch the Berreta in the movie - Q is introduced.. Yet again no SPECTRE or Blofeld. Instead of being a SPECTRE agent, Dr. No is a Russian operative.
    Goldfinger
    Pretty much identical to the movie, including the famous golf game, the top hat and whatnot. Main difference is Bond and Oddjob never fight - he turns out to be on the plane at the end of the movie, and when it depressurises, he gets sucked out while Bond stabs Goldfinger to death.
    For Your Eyes Only
    Shares plot elements with the movie such as the Bond girl and the reason her father was killed and why Bond is assigned, but is otherwise largely different. This also lends plot elements to License to Kill & A View to a Kill.
    Thunderball
    First introduction of SPECTRE and Blofeld, very much like the movie. Blofeld has a much larger presence in the book than in the movie where he's just a disembodied voice, but is still miles from the action and never meets Bond.
    The Spy Who Loved Me
    Nothing like the movie, written from the perspective of one of Bond's lovers, and considered by some to be almost outside of the main Canon.
    On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Identical to movie or near enough - Blofeld plans revenge on Bond - kills his wife, Bond is left in ruins at the end of the movie.
    You Only Live Twice
    Similar in a way to the movie - but this version portrays a dejected Bond who M is on the verge of letting go. M assigns him a near-impossible mission the hopes he'll quit, but when unexpectly Blofeld turns up in the mission Bond flies off the handle and really goes for it to avenge his wife. He has a sword duel with Blofeld and strangles him to death, but escaping his exploding lair smashes his own head in and loses his memory. He gets engaged to a Japanese woman who helped him with his mission, and genuinely believes he's a Japanese fisherman. She doesn't tell him his identity, because she knows he'll leave her. At the end of the book, Bond is browsing through her belongings and finds stuff pertaining to his identity - mistakenly suggesting to him he'll find information about his past in Russia. At the end of the book his wife-to-be (he never marries her) is pregnant. Bond does indeed (in the books at least) have at least one son out there.
    The Man with the Golden Gun
    A year on, within the service, bond is presumed dead, killed in the explosion at Blofeld's lair. Out of nowhere, Bond turns up in London demanding to see M. He's interrogated and his identity proved - and he's let in to see M. He tries to kill M. It transpires that he headed ro Russia from Japan, and, not knowing who he was - ended up captured. The Russians soon realised they could use this to their advantage, and brainwashed Bond into thinking he was a Russian double agent - and then sent him to kill M. After time being deprogrammed, Bond is offered the chance to earn his job back by M by taking out a famed assassin. From there, the book is similar to the movie.
    Octopussy - Similar(ish) to the movie.
    The Living Daylights - Same characters and overall plot, but the movie is vastly different outside of the characters and basic plot (the entire plot of the book is the first half an hour or so of the movie.)

    APZonerunner on
    APZonerunner | RPG Site | UFFSite | The Gaming Vault
    XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    edited September 2008
    Drez wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    I think looking forward to a Bond film is almost as good as actually seeing it. Also, in that clip, he expresses extreme tension by adjusting his tie. So much love for that man.

    Also, this is so very fine

    What the fuck is that?

    Is that David Bowie making fun of Quantum of Solace?

    It's Joe Cornish, of the Adam and Joe Show. English comedy duo who've done a lot of film pastiche stuff and occasionally make alternative theme songs for films.

    Trivia: Adam is the reporter in Hot Fuzz who gets brained with part of a church and Joe played a zombie in Shaun of the Dead.

    Bogart on
  • khainkhain Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    Ein wrote: »
    But that's the thing- James Bond is Her Majesty's thug. He's a ruthless, brutal killer.

    I will say that the newer movies (Royale and this Quantum one) seem to be pretty well suited to Craig's 'brawler' look, in that they're considerably darker and grittier and involve a lot less spying and a lot more 'I am going to beat the shit out of you vicariously for Britain'.

    It's not too much of a stretch to describe Ian Fleming's Bond as a sociopathic serial rapist. Dude had some serious issues with women.

    Oh yeah, definitely- though a lot of that was just the 1950s in general. This is the same character who cured Pussy Galore's lesbianism with his cock, after all. (I think they even kept that in Goldfinger, though it might be more implied...)

    The movies tend to have little to no relation to the books pretty quick, though. A lot of them are chopped-up and remixed.

    All roads of his problems with women in the books lead back to Vesper, though, which is why it'll be interesting to see how they take bond in this movie and where he stands as far as his relationship with women. At the end of Casino Royale Bond positively despised Vesper, and while they kept the "the bitch is dead" line at the tail end of the movie, I got the impression movie Bond didn't really think she was a bitch, and was still very much in love with her. Then again, this may be a factor of modernizing the story more than anything else.

    Then again, the circumstances in the book were very different to that of the movie.

    In the books Bond hated her - and generally saw women as nothing but objects - until On Her Majesty's Secret Service, when he's destroyed again but this time by the love of his life being taken rater than betraying him. So he went back the same again.

    This doesn't come across as well in the movies because the books have a very different Chronological order. For those who've never read the books (and you really should), here's the differences in order:

    Casino Royale

    VS. Le Chiffre. Movie is very faithful to the book just with more action scenes - all the airport stuff is new, for example - all we're told in the book is Le Chiffre took a gamble on the stock market with his client's money and it all went south. In the course of the book Bond falls for Vesper, but she betrays him and kills herself - if I remember correctly with cyanide.

    Casino Royale (book)
    While the over arcing story line is pretty close, in the book Le Chiffre is a agent of the Soviet assassination bureau, SMERSH, and Vesper is a Soviet double agent. The end of the movie is where the plot really diverges as the person who kills Le Chiffre is a assassin from SMERSH and carves a letter in the back of Bonds hand. Also Vesper suicides with sleeping pills in the book because she thinks the SMERSH assassin was after her and Bond for her disobedience. Also I believe the reason given in the book is that Le Chiffre loses money on a failed brothel chain.

    khain on
  • Mr BubblesMr Bubbles David Koresh Superstar Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    So the Bond books are worth reading then? Which is a good place to start?

    Mr Bubbles on
  • APZonerunnerAPZonerunner Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Well, if you wanna do it Chronologically, do it in the list I posted above. The book bond isn't necessarily a nice person, but Fleming's style is very raw and just captivating. I love the books.

    APZonerunner on
    APZonerunner | RPG Site | UFFSite | The Gaming Vault
    XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Mr Bubbles wrote: »
    So the Bond books are worth reading then? Which is a good place to start?

    uh... the guy a few posts above yours just listed them all in chronological order.

    So, I guess I'd start with the first one...

    Sentry on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Mr Bubbles wrote: »
    So the Bond books are worth reading then? Which is a good place to start?

    Definitely. I've read Casino Royale, Moonraker, and The Man With the Golden Gun. All fantastic.

    TubularLuggage on
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    edited September 2008
    Some are good, some are less good. One of my pet hates is the end of Goldfinger. In the film Bond points out how bloody stupid it would be to try and rob the place, and thus figures out that Goldfinger's not going to do any such thing. In the book, Goldfinger tries to rob the place. D'oh.

    The books are usually as good as the villain in them. Moonraker has a fantastic villain, while the spivs in Diamonds are Forever are pretty bland. Also, his casual racism and misogyny may grate on modern sensibilities, and sometimes he appears to lose interest in his own plots towards the end.

    Bogart on
  • FallingmanFallingman Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Just finished watching this (Casino Royale) then discovered that there's a thread. Awesome.

    I love Craig's new Bond. He's a bit more built than I'd have cast, but then when he's wearing a suit, he seems a bit more in proportion... I think he's great for the new style. I thought Brosnan was good as bond, and it was such a shame that the movies became a series of train-wrecks after Goldeneye...

    I assume that they will keep him hyper-physical, and that M wont know whether he's lost the plot or not.

    Fallingman on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Venkman90Venkman90 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Dalton: Greatest Bond, worst timing

    He had the best handle on the character, he was offered the role after Connery when he was only 22, if he had been given the chance to make Bond movies before the 80's bullshit action era he might not come off so badly...

    In fact, The Living Daylights intro actually had bond as a sniper / counter sniper assasin...first time in the films he was actually doing something resembling the characters actual job.

    Venkman90 on
Sign In or Register to comment.