Bond, James Bond...

Yep, saw it on Saturday......thought it was excellent, but I suggest you try and get a seat near the back as some of the action sequences are so fast and intense that your eyes/brain can't take it all in if your too close!!

I didn't see Casino Royale, but compared to previous films/Bonds it seems much more dark and broody.....more action and less humour.
 
i've heard mixed reviews, not a fan of daniel craig as bond so am undecided as to whether to go see it

would be interested to hear from the people on here though
 
I went Friay morning, the 11.30 showing - and it was still packed full. Had to sit right at the front.

I must say that I miss Q and all the gadgets :p
 
Haven't seen it yet but thinking about visiting the cinema rather than waiting for the DVD.

I thought the 2006 version of Casino Royale was very very good. I always thought Sean Connery was the best Bond but if Daniel Craig is as good in Quantum of Solace as he was in Casino Royale I think he'll take that spot.

I didn't miss all the regular things like the gadgets, Bond films had become a little formulaic imo.

But Craig said in an interview that as this was a new series of Bond films (with him the lead role, that is) they were taking their time to establish the character and that Q, M and the gadgets would likely be introduced again in the future.

I think Craig and the new style of Bond is an improvement, whilst still retaining a soft spot for the older films.
 
floppybootstomp said:
I think Craig and the new style of Bond is an improvement, whilst still retaining a soft spot for the older films.
Click to expand...



Couldn't agree more, but like you I think Sean Connery was the best..
 
My head say's the gadget days were fun, but my heart say's that Bond is back to it's humble beginnings.
Best 007 probably Connery, but Lazenby was good & Mr Craig may well be just what the 007 films needed.
 
I'm not going to pay £30 and take a bird there too expensive. The cinema is too expensive it is not worth visiting unless.

a. it is a very very good film with exceptional ratings
and
b. I am guaranteed a result with the bird. But not in the cinema. :_)
 
psd99 said:
I'm not going to pay £30 and take a bird there too expensive. The cinema is too expensive it is not worth visiting unless.

a. it is a very very good film with exceptional ratings
and
b. I am guaranteed a result with the bird. But not in the cinema. :_)
Click to expand...

Carry on reffering to them as birds and i'll bet you get no results matey....:lol: :bow::lol: :lol:
 
Madxgraphics said:
Carry on reffering to them as birds and i'll bet you get no results matey....:lol: :bow::lol: :lol:
Click to expand...

I don't call them birds to their face silly!!!
 
Of course but "bird" isn't a derogatory word in my opinion. Anyway why you getting so worried about it Noddy?
 
psd99 said:
I'm not going to pay £30 and take a bird there too expensive. The cinema is too expensive it is not worth visiting unless.

a. it is a very very good film with exceptional ratings
and
b. I am guaranteed a result with the bird. But not in the cinema. :_)
Click to expand...
You should go see it at a more rural cinema - costs £15.70 for 2 out my way :p
 
Not bad at all would that include a drink or some other stuff to eat and quite possibly parking?
 
Parkings free - and bring your own sweets if your hungry :p
 
psd99 said:
Of course but "bird" isn't a derogatory word in my opinion. Anyway why you getting so worried about it Noddy?
Click to expand...


lol bird might not be derogatory in your opinion, but in others it might...Noddy not getting worried at all..Actually Noddy don't give a flying f*ck....Anyway the thread is about James Bond, so lets keep it to that..:) :) :p :thumb:
 
Back
Top