For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
#1878098
skydriller wrote:
Jim Jones wrote:What’s the betting the next Bond will be a reboot set in 1962.?
(The Star Trek film series did this quite well, with the crew in Starfleet Academy. )


That is not a bad idea... but I wonder how they would do the gadgets?
Many of the 60's & 70s gadgets, everyone now has on their phone anyway.

Regards, SD..

If it is true to the books, the gadgets will be hardly in evidence. The books were about the personalities and places, and even a plot! Somewhat in contrast to the movies after the first three until Mr Craig refreshingly came along.

G
Rob P liked this
#1878099
Rob P wrote:A prequel?

What Bond did in the Navy to get recruited into the secret squirrel world.


There are some half decent graphic novels in existence which cover that - Bond, the talented linguist and schoolboy Judo prodigy losing loved ones in the Glasgow Blitz, leading to recruitment into both the RN and SOE, jumping between submarine and undercover missions.



G
Rob P liked this
#1878223
Genghis the Engineer wrote:
Rob P wrote:A prequel?

What Bond did in the Navy to get recruited into the secret squirrel world.


There are some half decent graphic novels in existence which cover that - Bond, the talented linguist and schoolboy Judo prodigy losing loved ones in the Glasgow Blitz, leading to recruitment into both the RN and SOE, jumping between submarine and undercover missions.



G
.

Don’t you mean “cunning linguist” ….
#1878612
Genghis the Engineer wrote:Quite possibly, they indicate that certain personal interests started relatively young!

G


ISTR that one of the original Fleming books mentioning that he had been expelled from his boarding school because of improper interaction with a young female domestic servant :wink:
#1880316
I thought it not a patch on Skyfall.

Far too long, no chemistry between the two mains, totally wasted appearance by the (stunning AND funny) Paloma, the usual hackneyed villains with the usual acned (see what I did there?) features, the secret lair with stormtrooper staff all employed to be shot up with a never ending supply of bullets.

Sigh.

And did I say it was too long?
Colonel Panic, Rob P liked this
#1880366
I've seen Skyfall several times and it's right up there with Casino Royale.

You may be right and Paloma (Ana De Armas) should have had more screen time, certainly more than the stand-in 007.

Time will tell, but I definitely didn't find it too long. I would happily have sat through another two hours of Craig's swansong.

Rob P
#1880382
Got to see it this afternoon. I thought it was OK as Bond films go. There were some worrying signs (for me) that the franchise is flirting with what some call “woke”. The ending was unexpected but will probably be proved in the next one to be illusory. Yet one more notable support character who has featured in, as far as I recollect, every film since the first in 1962 was surprisingly killed off. The theme tune was not as memorable as most recent ones.

An enjoyable diversion for an afternoon but not a classic. Sad that it will be Craig’s last outing as for me he has been easily the most convincing of them all as a cold-blooded killer. Sad that Naomi Harris had less exposure than normal as Moneypenny.

It will be interesting to see the cast of the next one. Get that as wrong as I now fear and it could be a downward spiral for the franchise.

PW
Rob P liked this
#1880388
Propwash wrote: ...one more notable support character who has featured in, as far as I recollect, every film since the first in 1962 was surprisingly killed off.


Surprising?

They did die in the books.

Rob P