You guys are good...I don't know some of these movies you are listing, so appreciate the info, and will be checking them out. :)

I have an extra room at the front of my house, it is attached, but only accessible from the front patio. It is a bedroom with a full bath and a closet, and I use it as a guest house. It has a daybed, my father's desk (which I had refinished and it looks awesome), a cabinet/bar piece, some bookcases, and gonna put a little couch in there too. I had it painted green (like the color of a bamboo leaf), and about ready to do some decorating. I am going to call it the BOND BUNGALOW and will be putting up Bond posters and placing whatever spy collectibles I have in there. I have a good collection of books which I should post here someday. Anyway, once I get it finished I will post pictures. It won't be to die for, but will be OK. There is a guy on that Bond message board that has unbelievable items in his collection, his name is Mantis and if I ever find the pictures of his collection, I will post that link...cause it will blow your mind. :)

Incredible world of Spy-fi Exhibit
Queen Mary
Long Beach, CA

Through Sept 2007

http://www.queenmary.com/index.php?page=spyfi

http://www.presstelegram.com/entertainment/ci_5802718

Exhibit includes James Bond's Walther PPK, The tarantula from "Dr. No" and Maxwell Smart's shoe phone

The exhibit has been previously displayed courtesy of the CIA.

https://www.cia.gov/spy_fi/index.html

[ Edited by: KING BUSHWICH THE 33RD 2007-05-03 16:06 ]

I would love to got to that...thanks for posting the links. Boy...there is a heavy collector and kewl that he is willing to share his passion through shows. Good way to support your addiction. :)

On 2007-05-03 12:28, VampiressRN wrote:
You guys are good...I don't know some of these movies you are listing, so appreciate the info, and will be checking them out. :)

I have an extra room at the front of my house, it is attached, but only accessible from the front patio. It is a bedroom with a full bath and a closet, and I use it as a guest house. It has a daybed, my father's desk (which I had refinished and it looks awesome), a cabinet/bar piece, some bookcases, and gonna put a little couch in there too. I had it painted green (like the color of a bamboo leaf), and about ready to do some decorating. I am going to call it the BOND BUNGALOW and will be putting up Bond posters and placing whatever spy collectibles I have in there. I have a good collection of books which I should post here someday. Anyway, once I get it finished I will post pictures. It won't be to die for, but will be OK. There is a guy on that Bond message board that has unbelievable items in his collection, his name is Mantis and if I ever find the pictures of his collection, I will post that link...cause it will blow your mind. :)

I've been finding out about movies up here that I had never heard of myself. I like to think that I know movies. There are some very good titles that have been mentioned by I think many of us.

I love the idea of your Bond Bungalow. That sounds amazing. I think it will be quite a fascinating place. Definitely post pics if you get the opportunity.

If you ever find the link to those pics of Mantis', then please share it with us. It will be interesting to see.

I live in an apartment. I've been doing some redecorating. Nothing special. I have been fixing my living room up more like a retro game room with posters of the Rat Pack, pin-up girls, etc. on the wall. I wish I had the room in there for a pool table. There's not enough room for a bar, but it would be nice to have like a bar cabinet or something of that nature. I am thinking of redoing my bedroom with a lot of posters of movies from like the 60's, stuff like Bond, Derek Flint, Matt Helm, and other spy movies. Also whatever else strikes my fancy.

This has been quite an intriguing thread.

This topic has been pretty inactive for awhile now. I thought I would see what everyone was up to.

So Vampiress, how is the decorating going?

I've actually been interesting in finding online companies that specialize in retro and vintage type of decorations, furnishing, etc. Anybody know of any good ones?

Being in a Bond mood, I actually rewatched "Dr. No" this past weekend. I love that movie. I was looking over Bond's apartment. I loved his style.

Not really Bond, but I was also rewatching "That's Amore" which is a collection of mostly clips from Dean Martin's tv show in the 60's/70's. I love a lot of the style on the sets.

I've been throwing Spy & Sleuth theme parties (based in the 1950s, '60s, and '70s) in public, then non-public for nearly every year for the last 12 years. I've enjoyed a great deal of the spy and detective shows and movies from these decades ever since I was a child. The Ian Fleming books (which bear little semblance to the films) I also enjoy. I even formed a group of session musicians to play out now and again called The Spy & Sleuth Orchestra. So what am I saying? Basically that I'm a nut for all that stuff. Or rather, I used to be.

But what attracted/attracts me to the spy fantasy world are the cultural and pop elements of the 1960s that defined the genre: the music (this is #1), the fashion (clothes, cars, decor, architecture, hair styles, etc.), the locales (many of which are no longer or have been completely altered), the sophistication, the cinematography and opening sequences, the politics, the actors, and, of course, the cocktails and cigarettes. The 1970s Bond films even worked well, despite the cultural changes.

But James Bond in the 1980s? Doesn't work. The Cold War is over. Culture has changed. Fashion and decorum has changed. Things have become decadent. AIDs is now present. And Las Vegas and many other adult playgrounds start the descent of becoming Disneyland. Bond in the 1990s? Even more so and even worse. And now Bond in the 2000s? Come on. It's called franchise; flogging a dead horse, whilst at the same time trying to keep up with the trends and reinvent it. It just doesn't work. It's 'The Friday the 13th' of spy films.

In my opinion the Bond franchise -- like the Dr. Who franchise -- has been subpar from the 1980s onward. Though large of budget and very professionally made, the Bond films of the 1960s and '70s were never serious movies to begin with. Making money was always an incentive, but what made the Bond films from those decades fun was gone in the 1980s, and continued to be absent in each subsequent release (especially in the current release). And again, what gave the films their flavour was the cultural elements of those decades, with a strong emphasis on the music, fashion, and general society.

Basically it comes down to style. And what gave the James Bond films popularity was style. That particular style started disappearing in the late 1970s and was gone by the 1980s. Politics, views, and the world had changed. The character was and is no longer believable. In fact, the character was and is pointless and out of place. (Despite its goofiness, even Austin Powers points this out.)

A character based in the 1950s and early '60s simply does not work in the 1980s, 1990s, and especially today, no matter who plays the role. And aren't there already enough Bond films? The style changes to be more 'modern', but the formula is exactly the same. Perhaps if 'Casino Royale' had been properly set in the 1950s with no modern special effects and traits, with an actor who resembled the character in the book (in manners, looks, and personality -- believe it or not, Bond was based on Carey Grant), it may have proved a film worthy of more attention. After all, it was the only Ian Fleming Bond book that hadn't been made into a film (and the 'Casino Royale' camp comedy of the 1960s has nothing to do with the Bond book).

Out of respect 'Casino Royale' deserved better treatment.

In any case, for a more serious spy film from the 1960s, watch 'The Ipcress File' with Michael Caine. Better yet watch the series 'Danger Man' with Patrick MacGoohan, which predates the first Bond film, and really has that swingin' '60s feel, even before it was really swingin'.

[ Edited by: DJ Terence Gunn 2007-05-22 12:44 ]

I know a lot of hard-core Bond fans share your same sentiments DJ. I have always tried to keep an open mind and am very appreciative that the Bond movies are still being made. (However, never was a fan of the Roger Moore films....but watch them from time to time for amusement.)

I'm giving up my master bedroom to my sister and her husband when they stay with me next week, so that means I move to the Bond Bungalow. That should be a perfect time for me to do some Bonding in there. I have plenty of books and such to put on the book cases. What I have is all the movie posters in a laminated format. Of course I would have liked to had all of them very nicely framed, but don't have the mula for that. I am going to see what they will look like on the walls. Maybe placed at different angles as opposed to in graphical straight lines. If there is room to do that I think it will add more pizazz. Once I get it done I will post pictures.

My favorite Bond is Sean Connery. I prefer his Bond films over any of the others. Part of it is the era that they were made in. I adore the 60's. I also like a lot of the other spy movies that were made during that time period. I do, however, still enjoy the Bond movies that have been made over the years. I'm not saying that part of me doesn't think it would be neat if they were all set in the 50's/60's, but that's not going to happen. I'm glad they are still making the movies though. Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan are my two least favorite Bonds.

Good luck with staying in the Bond Bungalow. I hope you are able to get it decorated like you want it. I know that I for one am intrigued and interested to see pictures of it when you get finished with it. I think it sounds fascinating and should be quite the place for a spy fan to stay.

Oh yeah. My latest two blog posts on MySpace have had to do with Bond girls. The latest of the two deals with Ursula Andress as Honey Ryder. Here's my blog's address if anyone wants to check it out:

http://blog.myspace.com/roguespy007

On 2007-05-23 21:35, VampiressRN wrote:
I know a lot of hard-core Bond fans share your same sentiments DJ. I have always tried to keep an open mind and am very appreciative that the Bond movies are still being made. (However, never was a fan of the Roger Moore films....but watch them from time to time for amusement.)

I'm giving up my master bedroom to my sister and her husband when they stay with me next week, so that means I move to the Bond Bungalow. That should be a perfect time for me to do some Bonding in there. I have plenty of books and such to put on the book cases. What I have is all the movie posters in a laminated format. Of course I would have liked to had all of them very nicely framed, but don't have the mula for that. I am going to see what they will look like on the walls. Maybe placed at different angles as opposed to in graphical straight lines. If there is room to do that I think it will add more pizazz. Once I get it done I will post pictures.

Though I prefer Connery, as most Bond fans do, in the Bond role (even though he doesn't come very close to the character of Bond in the novels), I find it amazing how many people do not/did not like Roger Moore in the James Bond role; and yet Moore played Bond in seven movies -- proof that the Bond role was not dictated by a public popularity contest. Before playing the role Moore was hardly a stranger to the genre: The Saint, The Persuaders, etc. Though he may not look dangerous and is not dark of hair, he was tall, handsome, slender but muscular, could kick some serious ass, was dry of wit, and was stylish and debonaire -- traits the Bond character in the movies was/is known for. But at the same time, I suppose I'm indifferent to Roger Moore as James Bond: I neither like nor dislike him in the role; he's credible in the role and works well enough. And Moore's second Bond appearance, 'The Man With The Golden Gun', ranks as my second favourite James Bond film.

On the same token, my favourite James Bond film is 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service'. Of all the Bond films that capture the essence of the Ian Fleming novels, 'OHMSS' comes the closest -- in Lazenby's portrayal of Bond and in the story itself. What makes this film so terrific is that it contains all the attributes one has come to expect of a Bond picture, but at the same time it departs from some of the former trends, and shows Bond as a vulnerable human being with feelings and emotions, rather than as a hollow, womanising, joke-cracking, wooden super hero like Connery (and Moore). I thought Lazenby was an excellent Bond in all ways. And contrary to popular belief, Lazenby decided to call it quits as Bond just after the film was released. He was not sacked because people thought he was terrible in the role. (Once again, I reiterate that Roger Moore was not well-received, either, and he did seven consecutive Bond films.) Frankly, I would've liked to have seen Lazenby play Bond throughout the 1970s. Film goers had been weened on Connery, so no matter who replaced him, there was ultimately going to be mixed reviews. And until Dalton took over in the mid-1980s, no Bond actor (Connery or otherwise) had been in a story faithful to Ian Flemings novels, or approached the role of Bond as Ian Fleming had written. George Lazenby was (again until Dalton) the best portrayal of the Bond character, and 'OHMSS' the most faithful Bond film.

'OHMSS' also has the best music score; it features Diana Rigg and Telly Savalas and Bernard Horsfall; there's actually two stories that are interwoven into one, thus creating more complexity; Bond is actually shown to do some real espionage work for a change (disguising himself as and learning the speach, manner, and vocal tone of Sir Hilary Bray); the fight scenes and stunts are far superior to any Connery film; and the amazingly-shot ski chase scenes are the absolute apex of physical Bond action in the all of the Bond films. It's all top-notch.

As with life, when it comes to Bond, I see the forest rather than just the trees.

[ Edited by: DJ Terence Gunn 2007-05-28 16:43 ]

I do prefer Sean Connery to Roger Moore, or any other actor who's played Bond for that matter. I have been pretty negative about Moore in some discussions I've had. I think I've been a little too hard on him. He played 007 in seven official Bond films. That's more than any other actor did, including Connery. He must have been doing something right. Plus some of his Bond flicks are among my favorites of the franchise. I really love "The Man with the Golden Gun" myself. He also did two of my least favorite though, "Moonraker" and "A View to a Kill." I do like the way you described Roger Moore, his appearance, and characteristics. I'm not going to try to add anything to that. I think you did a good job with that. I do think that I prefer Moore as Simon Templar in "The Saint" over his take on Bond. He did though contribute a lot to the Bond franchise and he deserves the recognition and acclaim. He's not my favorite 007, but he's not my least favorite either. That dishonor goes to Pierce Brosnan, who played in a couple of really good Bond films, but just never did anything for me as Bond.

My favorite James Bond film is "Goldfinger." I did really love "On Her Majesty's Secret Service." It's one of my favorite films and it's actually my favorite of the Ian Fleming novels. I did like seeing the emotional side of Bond. I thought George Lazenby did an outstanding job as Bond. It's a shame that he didn't take another swing at Bond. I wish he would have stayed on instead of Connery coming back for "Diamonds Are Forever." I understand that people have this misconception that Lazenby was canned because of whatever reason. We know that's not the case. It would have been nice to have seen him do a few more Bond films. He got a raw deal with the public like Dalton did. There's all these misconceptions that Dalton was the second choice. He only got the role because Brosnan was tied up with "Remington Steele." When in fact, the producers had been after Dalton multiple times. Also he wasn't canned from the role either. He stepped away. I wish he would have done more than two Bond flicks.

I do think that no matter who stepped into the role after Connery they were going to have gotten some heat. Connery made pretty much back to back Bond movies. They were rolling them out. He was identified with Bond. That's the image people had of who 007 was. Lazenby stepped into some big shoes. I do wish he would have gone on to have done "Diamonds Are Forever" and maybe even the first couple of Moore's. Then I would have liked to have seen Dalton take over from Moore by "A View to a Kill." I think Moore was getting a little too old by then. Dalton could have then done his two and then some of Brosnan's. Leave off "Die Another Day."

Although I, too, have a fondness for the Sean Connery Bond, I have an infinitely greater fondness for Ian Fleming. Around the time that You Only Live Twice was coming out, I had started reading the books. I read them all before most of the movies were made and, as is often the case with movies based on books, I preferred the book versions. I consider Octopussy to be a hybrid as Fleming died before he finished it. James Lawrence picked up where Fleming left off and completed the work.

Probably the main reason that I preferred the books in the case of Bond was that Fleming's tales were based to a considerable degree on his experience in British Naval Intelligence. So many of his fictional characters, places, and schemes were taken from real life characters, places, and schemes. As the Bond film productions became increasingly unrealistic, the Fleming connection within them faded.

As for Roger Moore, I both liked and disliked his portrayals, however, I do not really blame him for the shortcomings reflected on the silver screen. You see, when Fleming sold the movie rights to Harry Saltzman, he already knew who he wanted to play Bond. If I recall (from accounts in the 60s), Fleming had two luminaries in mind David Niven and Roger Moore.

I'm not sure which or the two was his first choice. He probably could have gone either way. Both were suave, debonair and had savoir-faire. Niven was a more widely known headliner at the time. Moore physically looked quite a bit like Fleming, who of course, was the real Bond.

But Saltzman and his co-producer Cubby Broccoli wanted, insisted upon, and got Sean Connery. By the time that Dr. No, From Russia with Love, and Goldfinger came out, I don't think the public had any clue that Connery was not the first choice. Can't blame Connery. Plus, I'm a big enough Connery fan (from Darby O'Gill and the Little People to Time Bandits to Entrapment...).

The fact that David Niven was one of Fleming's top choices to play Bond gives at least some redeeming quality (however miniscule) to the first Casino Royale. David Niven was one of the Bonds.

The fact that Roger Moore was corny, had ridiculous gadgets, and even more ridiculous storylines didn't make the transition from "household Bond" Connery to some guy that nobody knew actually looked like the real Bond (Fleming) and was one of Fleming's top choices. Moore came across very well in The Saint. It's the studio that we have to credit with the circus act that the Bond films became.

Well, those are my twopence.

[ Edited by: The Gnomon 2007-06-14 12:28 ]

Carey Grant was the first choice to play Bond, as, I reiterate, Grant was whom the Bond character was based. And that is a bit strange, as Bond in the books is described to look like a cross between Pierce Brosnan and Timothy Dalton, but with a scar across one cheek. Before Connery was given the role Peter Anthony had won the role of Bond, but lacked the acting ability. Before Anthony, yes, Roger Moore and David Niven had been asked, as well as James Mason, Steve Reeves (an American), Patrick McGoohan, Richard Johnson, Richard Burton, Trevor Howard, Rex Harrison, Ian Hendry, and William Franklyn. I'm sure there were others, and some were American actors.

Barry Nelson (an American) was, however, the first actor to play James Bond (on the small screen), in a rather tame adaption (it was 1954, afterall) of 'Casino Royale' for the American TV show 'Climax'.

And to bring up George Lazenby again, he was, in fact, offered the role of Bond for 'Diamonds Are Forever', but he was turned off (much like Connery) of the intesity involving the whole Bond phenomena, so turned it down. Connery was called upon again, and because he hadn't had success since his last Bond film, and was offered an enormous sum of money to come back again, accepted the role one more time. Roger Moore was quite the veteran by this time, and he loved attention and loved to be loved, so finally accepting the role of Bond seems so fitting some how. By that time Moore required larger shoes to step into.

It's interesting how such a successful and overwhelmingly popular movie phenomena evolved on such clumsy calculation, last minute saves, and more misses than hits. But it did. And I'm not just referring to the role of Bond. Nearly every aspect of the Bond films have interesting stories behind their evolution.

Hoagy Carmichael. Bond looks like Hoagy Carmichael.

Got so long-winded on the last one I forgot to mention a couple of things.

I liked all of the Connery productions. Among the rest, I probably liked OHMSS the best. I do, however, find it annoying when certain special effects are way off.

For example, in any outer space explosion the effects should never show any billowing. Billowing is something that requires an atmosphere. In a vacuum, explosions move in all directions with great uniformity, so the explosions should be mainly spherical. Of course, when there are variations in the energy being released, that would generate spikes or other effects on the spherical emanation. But the billowing effects immediately demonstrate that the explosion is not in outer space, even though the story says so.

A couple of special effects annoyances that I recall from OHMSS was that in the car chases the tires always screeched in the turns. That would be fine on dry pavement, but all of the chases were on snow-covered roads. Screeching not possible. Similarly, engine sounds and other road noise is muffled when there is two feet of snow on the ground. The car chases all sounded like they were on the streets of Monaco.

Another in OHMSS that really bothered me was when Bond is being chased by skiers and he manages to stop before going off a cliff with a ± 1000 foot drop. He trips the skier that was on his tail, sending him over the edge of the cliff. With a vantage point of looking over the edge of the cliff, we get to see the guy fall for several seconds and eventually hit the ground below. At the same instant that we see the guy hit the ground we hear him hitting the ground. That's another distracting impossibility. We should have seen him hit the ground and then heard him hit about a second later.

I'm assuming the studio pondered that issue and opted to go with the simultaneous sight and sound of hitting the ground. If they had made it more realistic, it probably would have confused a significant segment of the audience and/or come across as a funny mistake. The falling guy was screaming all the way to the ground. So if it was done with consideration for the speed of sound, after the guy hit the ground you'd still hear him screaming and about a second later you'd hear him hit the ground and stop screaming.

Gotta go now. Mind your Ms and Qs.

On 2007-06-15 12:52, The Gnomon wrote:
Got so long-winded on the last one I forgot to mention a couple of things.

I liked all of the Connery productions. Among the rest, I probably liked OHMSS the best. I do, however, find it annoying when certain special effects are way off.

For example, in any outer space explosion the effects should never show any billowing. Billowing is something that requires an atmosphere. In a vacuum, explosions move in all directions with great uniformity, so the explosions should be mainly spherical. Of course, when there are variations in the energy being released, that would generate spikes or other effects on the spherical emanation. But the billowing effects immediately demonstrate that the explosion is not in outer space, even though the story says so.

A couple of special effects annoyances that I recall from OHMSS was that in the car chases the tires always screeched in the turns. That would be fine on dry pavement, but all of the chases were on snow-covered roads. Screeching not possible. Similarly, engine sounds and other road noise is muffled when there is two feet of snow on the ground. The car chases all sounded like they were on the streets of Monaco.

Another in OHMSS that really bothered me was when Bond is being chased by skiers and he manages to stop before going off a cliff with a ± 1000 foot drop. He trips the skier that was on his tail, sending him over the edge of the cliff. With a vantage point of looking over the edge of the cliff, we get to see the guy fall for several seconds and eventually hit the ground below. At the same instant that we see the guy hit the ground we hear him hitting the ground. That's another distracting impossibility. We should have seen him hit the ground and then heard him hit about a second later.

I'm assuming the studio pondered that issue and opted to go with the simultaneous sight and sound of hitting the ground. If they had made it more realistic, it probably would have confused a significant segment of the audience and/or come across as a funny mistake. The falling guy was screaming all the way to the ground. So if it was done with consideration for the speed of sound, after the guy hit the ground you'd still hear him screaming and about a second later you'd hear him hit the ground and stop screaming.

Gotta go now. Mind your Ms and Qs.

No offense, but those are petty criticisms. One could easily take apart ANY film with special effects in them. Some films' special effects are of a higher budget than others, some more realistic than others, but none -- especially the ones with the more elaborate stunts, sets, demands (fantasy and sci-fi, for example), etc. -- are fully realistic and perfect. The whole concept of films is about the willing suspension of disbelief. Special effects are about 'effect', not necessarily realism. They're there to add something sensational.

Anyone with a working brain knows that there is no loud noise when someone gets punched in the face; that explosions in space make no sound; that lightning always precedes thunder, even if directly overhead. Effects artists know this. Annoyingly unrealistic, yes, but a punch without a loud noise, a silent explosion in space, and lightning unaccompanied by thunder at the same time isn't as sensational; isn't as effective or entertaining.

For me, films have always been about entertainment, not realism. I'm more concerned with the acting, the story, the dialogue, the music, and the style in which the film is done in, rather than the realism of the special effects and the credibility of the story or the world it is set in. However, I will agree that a great deal of special effects can detract from one's enjoyment of a film. But if the film is of any worth, best to overlook such things in favour of the things that make the film worth while.

It is interesting to read about what men look at in these films. I never catch half of that stuff. :lol:

Guess I am too busy trying to take in all the great locations, vehicles, clothes, gadgets and Bond. In a way, I guess the foley artists really have the viewers trained to what they think as opposed to reality. I prefer to live in the make-believe. :)

On 2007-06-15 21:52, VampiressRN wrote:
It is interesting to read about what men look at in these films. I never catch half of that stuff. :lol:

Guess I am too busy trying to take in all the great locations, vehicles, clothes, gadgets and Bond. In a way, I guess the foley artists really have the viewers trained to what they think as opposed to reality. I prefer to live in the make-believe. :)

Now I feel bad because I look for the same stuff in the Bond flicks you, but I'm a guy. lol

Going back to some of the other posts. Roger Moore wasn't one of my favorite Bonds, but he wasn't a bad 007 either. I mean he was the first actor I saw in a Bond flick. That was "For Your Eyes Only." He made some really great movies as Bond. He also made a couple of clunkers. I just preferred the style and attiude that Connery and some of the others brought to the role. I do think he was too old by the time of "A View to a Kill." It was time for him to have retired from his tenure. I would have liked to have seen if Timothy Dalton could have done anything differently with the mess that was "AVTAK." Of course the movie had problems besides Moore. I don't think Tanya Roberts was one of the better Bond girls. Neither was Grace Jones. She makes Medusa love like a supermodel.

I do wish Lazenby had stayed on. "Diamonds Are Forever" is my least fav of the Connery Bond films. I don't think he should have come back. Plus this is during the time period that I think Connery was starting to look the worse. He didn't age well in his 40's.

On 2007-06-15 14:08, DJ Terence Gunn wrote:
No offense, but those are petty criticisms.

Petty to some, not to me. You might be surprised to know that I ended up seeing OHMSS in the theater several times, in spite of the fact that the tires were screeching in the snow.

:lol:

Obviously for all the hiccups, looks like most of us watch for the genre of 007. I really liked Timothy Dalton and also Pierce Brosnan, and should they have had good scripts, I think would have done quite well. Interestingly enough I didn't really care for George Lazenby.

Last night TV was abominable, so I watched Casino Royale and also the extra DVD that had interviews, the Bond Girl documentary by Maryam d'Abo (one of my favorite Bond girls) and it also had a section about the stunts in CR....which I found fascinating. Has anyone watched that?

On 2007-06-18 19:13, VampiressRN wrote:
:lol:

Obviously for all the hiccups, looks like most of us watch for the genre of 007. I really liked Timothy Dalton and also Pierce Brosnan, and should they have had good scripts, I think would have done quite well. Interestingly enough I didn't really care for George Lazenby.

Last night TV was abominable, so I watched Casino Royale and also the extra DVD that had interviews, the Bond Girl documentary by Maryam d'Abo (one of my favorite Bond girls) and it also had a section about the stunts in CR....which I found fascinating. Has anyone watched that?

I'm more of a Sean Connery and Timothy Dalton fan. My bro is a Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan fan. I do think that Dalton and Brosnan both suffered in some of their films by having poor scripts, lame Bond villains, or no talent Bond girls.

I've got the book on Bond girls that Maryam d'Abo did. I love it. She's also one of my favorite Bond girls. "The Living Daylights" is one of my favorite 007 flicks.

Here's a thought about the Bond films. I'm 50 now so I sort of grew up with it all. Everyone has their favorite films, Bonds, women, etc. and Bond fans can be a pretty critical bunch. What I noticed about myself anyway, was that after OHMSS (my favorite), no matter how silly they got, there were always things in each one that made the experience worthwile. It did start to seem like you went just for the one or two good parts, but Roger Moore running on the backs of aligators or Timothy Dalton waterskiing behind the plane, or...or...well I'm sure Pierce did something good...Those things were pretty fantastic! I'll also admit that I enjoy Roger Moore. I don't think the series would have survived some of those awful films if not for his... Roger Moore-ness. (Can you see even Connery saving something like Moonraker?)

I've always thought it was unfair to blame the actor for the films they were in. they didn't write them or direct them. What do you guys think?

[ Edited by: spy-tiki 2007-06-24 19:43 ]

I agree....I think you said it well there. I am just glad that we have had so many good films and diversity that matches so many interests. I haven't watched the extras on the other dvds I have, but gonna do that, cause the backgrounds are very interesting. (insert small 007 gun logo here) :)

On 2007-06-24 19:42, spy-tiki wrote:
I've always thought it was unfair to blame the actor for the films they were in. they didn't write them or direct them. What do you guys think?

That's what I meant when I said...

On 2007-06-14 12:27, The Gnomon wrote:
As for Roger Moore, I both liked and disliked his portrayals, however, I do not really blame him for the shortcomings reflected on the silver screen.

On 2007-06-24 21:40, VampiressRN wrote:
(insert small 007 gun logo here)

Done

On 2007-06-24 21:40, VampiressRN wrote:
I agree....I think you said it well there. I am just glad that we have had so many good films and diversity that matches so many interests. I haven't watched the extras on the other dvds I have, but gonna do that, cause the backgrounds are very interesting. :)

Ooooooooh....where can I get that.....cute. :)

On 2007-06-29 06:08, VampiressRN wrote:
Ooooooooh....where can I get that.....cute. :)

What? This?

I made it for you. This post is where you get it.

It's already on the TC system now as [ img]https://tikicentral.com/uploads/7085/46813921.jpg[/img], so there's no need to upload it again.

Just get rid of the extra spaces I put inside the image tags (in front of the "i" in the first [ img] and behind the "g" in the second [/img]) so you could see the code in this post.

Any image that's residing on the system you can use by clicking the Edit button, then scrolling down to find the image address.

See it there at the bottom?

So the best way is to "edit" my post, scroll down to the image code, then copy and paste it wherever you want.

But otherwise, you just right click over it and Save Picture As... some filename.

I've mentioned before here my favorite actors who played Bond. There were just certain guys that I preferred their interpretation of the role. That doesn't mean I don't like the other actors or their contributions to the franchise. I respect each of them. As far as the movies themselves, most of the blame should lie with the producers, etc. They are the ones who decide that direction the franchise is going in. Sometimes they've made the right choices and sometimes they've been way off.

I've been thinking lately about Bond theme music. Right now I'm listening to the "Best of Bond...James Bond." It has all the theme songs up til "The World Is Not Enough." Anybody else have this CD?

Also what are your favorite theme songs from the Bond franchise?

On 2007-07-07 16:58, roguespy007 wrote:

I've been thinking lately about Bond theme music. Right now I'm listening to the "Best of Bond...James Bond." It has all the theme songs up til "The World Is Not Enough." Anybody else have this CD?

Also what are your favorite theme songs from the Bond franchise?

I've had 'The Best Of James Bond 30th Anniversary Collection' 1 & 2 disc set since its release in the early 1990s. It goes as far as 'Licence To Kill' (which is a bit too far for my musical taste in Bond themes), and has some rareities like Anthony Newley's version of 'Goldfinger', Shirley Bassey's version of 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang', a demo version of 'You Only Live Twice' (sung by an unrecognised singer), as well as some tracks from 'Goldfinger' that were -- at the time -- previously unreleased.

I also have all the Bond soundtracks on CD up through 'Moonraker', including some of the remastered and expanded ones released in 2003. Though 'A View To A Kill' was a terrific theme song and soundtrack, I don't care much for the Bond music (or films) of the 1980s onward.

Favourites Bond themes and Bond music from the 1960s (I'll do the 1970s later):

1. 'The James Bond Theme' (of course!)
   (Incidentally, for those of you who still don't know, John Barry wrote the theme, but Monty Norman was credited for it, as Barry was paid to write it with the credits going to Norman. Barry got 200 pounds for it, and had to write it quickly over a weekend. Norman's version of the Bond theme can be heard on the 'Dr. No' soundtrack -- the only Bond soundtrack he scored/performed -- on track 17. This lame Bond theme is the reason Barry was called upon. Vic Flick's signature guitar sound and riffs can be heard in a couple pre-Dr. No John Barry Seven songs -- further proof of Barry's claim to the composition.)

2. 'From Russia With Love': both the instrumental version and the Matt Monro sung version. Also off the soundtrack and in further Bond soundtracks, the secondary James Bond Theme, '007', as well as 'James Bond With Bongos'.

3. 'Goldfinger': Shirley Bassey vocal version, as well as the rockin' and rippin' instrumental off the soundtrack. Also off the soundtrack 'Bond Back In Action', 'Dawn Raid On Fort Knox', 'The Laser Beam', and 'Pussy Galore's Flying Circus'.

4. 'Thunderball': Tom Jones vocal version and the light cocktail instrumental version. Also off the soundtrack 'Into Miami', 'Switching The Body', '007', and 'Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang'.

5. 'You Only Live Twice': Nancy Sinatra vocal version. Also off the soundtrack 'Capsule In Space' (another theme that was used in several subsequent Bond films), 'Tanaka's World', 'Mountains And Sunsets', and 'James Bond -- Astronaut'.

6. 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service' (the BEST Bond soundtrack!): Main Theme. Also off the soundtrack 'This Never Happened To The Other Feller', 'Try', 'Ski Chase', 'We Have All The Time In World (Instrumental)', 'Over And Out', 'Journey To Draco's Hideaway', 'Gumbold's Safe' (quite possibly my favourite incidental Barry Bond composition!), 'Bond Settles In', 'Bond Meets The Girls', 'Sir Hillary's Night Out', and 'Escape From Piz Gloria'

Dayum Gnoman...that is way kewl. Wish I had those smarts.

DJ Terence: That's a great post. I prefer the more classic Bond theme songs. I'm not a big fan at all of the last two by Madonna and Chris Cornell.

My favorite two are from the Connery years. I love "Goldfinger" by Shirley Bassey and "Thunderball" by Tom Jones. I do love "You Only Live Twice" by Nancy Sinatra too. My favorite one from the Moore years is "Nobody Does It Better" by Carly Simon. I did like "Goldeneye" by Tina Turner and "The World Is Not Enough by Garbage from the Brosnan years.

I was just watching my Gilligans Island DVD's a short while back and saw Richard Keil (JAWS).... as a russian spy in one episode..

It was a crack up... they even dubbed over his voice... and they never showed him in the same scene with the other actors .... I mean he is huge but why not show him next to alan hale or bob denver...

I was very surprised to see Jaws with a bad makeup job and bad russian accent on Gilligans Island...

LOL...too funny MM. Great roles for evil-doers on Bond movies.

Rogue....Thunderball is my favorite and I love Goldfinger too as far as title songs. And I really like The World Is Not Enough by Garbage also...it has a powerful feel to it. I have several Bond music CDs and enjoy listening to them. :)

Well this thread has also made me nostalgic for the 007 toys I had as a child. Does anyone remember getting the little Aston Martin with the flip up bullet shield on the trunk and escape hatch roof? Or the Odd Job figure that could actually throw his derby?

Also very cool, and my all time favorite Christmas present (well, besides the Lost In Space robot) was the James Bond secret attache case that shot bullets and had a hidden knife and gun and passport and . . . awww, so many cool things.

Here's a link that will bring back memories to all of you who may have also been so fortunate.
http://www.feelingretro.com/view_toy.cfm?id=97

Just wanted to contribute a little something to this great Bond discussion. I can't match the expertise of most here, but a little trip down memory lane to more innocent times is good for the soul. (That is if you are old enough to remember, like me.)

Thanks for that link MFTIKI..great post. Unfortunately, little girls in the 60's typically didn't play with boys toys...so I never got that neat attache....how I would love to have it now!!! But...my sister and I did have the Rockem Sockem Robots (which I always thought was bizarre). I had tons of Barbies and I still have my Chatty Cathy....she has no teeth and her underware and shoes are missing...but I can still pull her string and she says "I love you". Of course having a Sean Connery doll that would say the same thing would be more fun!!!

On 2007-07-10 21:04, VampiressRN wrote:
Dayum Gnoman...that is way kewl.

You can trash that one. I made you two others that match the two alternating backgrounds of this site. You just have to know which background your post is going to land on, or you might have to go back in and swap the wrong one out afterwards.

This is for background A (#082c00) and this is for background B (#333333) .

On 2007-07-13 20:42, ManFromT.I.K.I. wrote:
Well this thread has also made me nostalgic for the 007 toys I had as a child. Does anyone remember getting the little Aston Martin with the flip up bullet shield on the trunk and escape hatch roof?

My friend at the time got one a those for his birthday. I was burning with jealousy for a good month or so. My parents could only afford to get me the little Hot Wheels-sized one that didn't do anything but roll. Still cool, but you couldn't fire missiles into people's eyes...

Yeah, those were the days . . . when toys had the high probability for causing bodily injury. Manufacturers couldn't get away with half that stuff today.

Hey Vampiress, at least you still have some vestige's of your childhood left in what remains of your dolls. I had a look at what some of the Bond stuff goes for today $$$$$$ Wow!(BTW my sister who is youngest of four with 3 brothers used to watch us open our gifts of space/army/spy etc. stuff, then she'd open her package with a doll inside and just start crying.)

Anyway, more to the topic I guess Roger Moore's rep as Bond does suffer more from the scripts of a lot of his films, than for him as an actor, per se. I have noticed that most I talk to prefer Connery by far, as do I. They really got it right the first time. I also like how the earlier movies relied more on character and story and less on spectacular special effects. The later ones with Moore had gotten almost campy at times--intentionally so. The self-references and playful nods to spy movie cliches with a wink to the audience made it seem at times that they were spoofing themselves too much.

To be sure, there was always a bit of tongue in cheek about the character, but I preferred when it was less overt.

Maybe it's all due to what was stated earlier. It gets harder to present Bond with straight face in modern times--especially since we're all so aware of the spoofs and satires of the character that have been made since. And let's face it, casinos and nightclubs and other location (as well as fashion, cars and Bond babes) just don't look as hip and swingin' as back in the '60's, which is a huge part of the appeal for me.

Has anyone seen this?

What James Bond Really Drinks

It's kind of old (May 18), but I just ran across it today looking for something else.

I think part of the problem with Roger Moore's Bond films is the script and too much reliance on special effects, etc. The Connery Bond films relied more on character driven stories Sure there was action, but it's was overdone like some of the latter films have been. I also think Moore's Bond could be a little too cheeky and campy at times. I do like Moore. He's not my favorite, but I did his turn as Bond. After all, he's the first Bond I ever saw. "For Your Eyes Only" was my first Bond film. As a teenager, Moore was Bond to me. Then I went back and saw his older movies and Connery's.

Since we are talking about Moore some, what are your favorite and least favorite Roger Moore films as Bond?

By the way, I just posted a blog on "Live and Let Die" over at my MySpace page. Check it out if you like.

http://www.myspace.com/roguespy007

Hey roguespy007, enjoyed some of your thoughts on "Live and Let Die" in your blog. Nice observations on the unique qualities Moore brought to the character. No matter what one thinks of some of the movies during his tenure as 007, he brought a continuity to the series that I think was important. Seven movies over about 14 years was it? I hate to think what would have happened over the same period if it was like today with a new Bond every couple of movies or so it seems.

Roger Moore Bond movies actually had more of an impact on me being that they coincided with some coming of age milestones for me, so they will always be linked in my mind for that. "Live and Let Die" when starting High School and the McCartney theme all over the radio at that time. Then "The Man With the Golden Gun" after that (was it?). And "The Spy Who Loved Me" when I was starting college. That was still when the Bond movies were big events that everyone anticipated. Again, the theme playing on the radio with Carly Simon--who's voice I always liked. There are things that will always make you remember where you were, and hearing those theme songs still take me back instantly.

I will have to do my own "Bond fest" sometime, since it has been a long time since I saw those. I want to say that my favorite Roger Moore film is between "The Spy Who Loved Me" and
"For Your Eyes Only". But like I said, it would be fun to see them all again in order, and to see how much my opinions or tastes may have changed in the meantime.

Hey ManFromT.I.K.I.! Thanks. Glad you enjoyed my blog on "Live and Let Die." Even though Moore's not my favorite Bond, I still respect what he brought to the franchise. From 1973 to 1985, he did 7 films as 007. He must have been doing something right. For many people, he was the Bond they grew up with. "For Your Eyes Only" was my first Bond film. It hold special meaning to me for being my first, plus it was the last movie I ever saw at a drive-in theater. I turned 11 that year. Until I started seeing the older Bond movies, Moore was 007 in my mind. When he took over as Bond, the franchise was going through some tough times. He was the third actor to play 007 in a Bond movie in a row. This was a new decade. He had the experience and so forth to come it and give his take on the role. He helped the series to survive and thrive. I will always be grateful for him. He made a lot of really good Bond movies. There were some great theme songs in his movies as well.

Am I the only one who caught The Blue Hawaiians' exceptional version of Goldfinger at TO VII?

Truly delish!

No you most certainly are not...I was hooting from the patio of the Islands restaurant...it gave me a thrill!!! I can name that tune in 2 notes. :D

Some news about 2008....#22 in the James Bond series...

Writer Paul Haggis talks about the story for Bond 22 and confirms some long running rumours. MI6 rounds up the latest pre-production news...Bond 22 Pre-Production Diary
26th August 2007

As with Casino Royale, Paul Haggis has now taken over the screenplay for the next James Bond film from a draft penned by regular scribes Neal Purvis and Robert Wade. Whilst Haggis was promoting his new film "In the Valley of Elah" today, which he wrote and directed, the chance was not missed by press to get the latest scoop on Daniel Craig's second outing as 007 - "Bond 22".

When talking about what it is like to work on Bond as a writer, Haggis told ComingSoon, "Bond is just pure imagination; you just get to have fun. It's escapism and it's fun, but I try to ground him as a human being."

He was also keen to draw a distinction between his vision of Bond's character and the one that shot and bonked his way around the world in previous decades, "My Bond is an actual assassin; when he kills someone, he kills them with a knife, they're bloody and he pays a price. He denies that he pays a price, but he does."

"When he sees a woman who witnesses something horrific, and he sees her taking a shower, he doesn't just go in there and f*ck her, like the old Bond would have done. He sits there with her, and she says, 'I can't get this blood from my fingernails.' So he helps her get the blood from her fingernails; that's what he does, that's my Bond. So it's a different guy; it's a guy who's much more like these guys, these heroes (in 'Valley of Elah')."

Haggis confirmed long-running rumours that Bond 22 would follow directly on from the events of Casino Royale ("It picks up 2 minutes after the last one, and it's going to be fun") and that it would follow the tone of the last film and not be jokier, but also took the opportunity to shoot one down ("Carice van Houten's great, isn't she – but she's not going to be in this one"). He added a cautionary note to those speculating about the plot of the next film, "everyone says they know what the ending is, and they're wrong. Everyone thinks they know about the Bond Girls, and they're wrong."

You Didn't Bring Any Chocolates?
Some scenes of the 22nd James Bond adventure could still be filmed in Switzerland, according to local press. The report comes off the back of rumours citing the Swiss Alps and a ski sequence as potentials for Daniel Craig's second outing as 007.

"As soon as we knew that Marc Forster grew up in Switzerland and would direct the next James Bond film, we had to offer our services", said André Brice of the Swiss film commission (Film Location Switzerland). "Still nothing is definite, but the chances bode well", he added.

It would not be the first time that the world's most famous secret agent had visited one of the well-known mountain ranges or a Swiss city. Both "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and "Goldfinger" have shot in the country.

Forster recently commented that due to the heavy use of the country in O.H.M.S.S, filming scenes there may add nothing new - but added that decisions are far from complete, MI6 reported this month that some filming has already taken place in Siena, Italy - and exclusively revealed that more Italian locations are planned, including the Basilicata region in the south of the country.

Produced by Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli (Eon Productions), BOND 22 (title to be announced) is scheduled for release November 7th 2008 and will be directed by Marc Forster. Principal photography will start in December 2007, at Pinewood Studios (UK) and foreign locations to be announced. The draft screenplay has been handed in by regular scribes Neal Purvis & Robert Wade, and Paul Haggis will polish. The story will be a direct continuation of the events of Casino Royale. It is British actor Daniel Craig’s second outing as James Bond, following his debut film Casino Royale released November 16th 2006. Dame Judi Dench (M) and Giancarlo Giannini (Mathis) will also reprise their roles.

Great article there about Bond 22. I am so ready for this one. While Sean Connery and his take on Bond will probably always be my favorite, I did enjoy Craig in "Casino Royale." I love how the new Bond flick will pick up right after the last one. That's really cool. I am interested to see what they do with this one. It will be cool to see who are the Bond girls, the settings, the plot, the villains, theme song, whether Q or Moneypenny are in this one. I can't wait.

David Niven was the best James Bond,IMO, even though the first "Casino Royale" was a spoof. Charles Grey was the best Blofeld in "Diamonds are Forever". There is a legend that Charles Grey, as a young actor, met Aleister Crowley on a train, and modelled much of his subsequent "act" on him. I don't think the "badness" of the Roger Moore Bonds was really Roger Moore's fault so much as the new script writers who took over just in time for Sean Connery's last Bond... "Diamonds are Forever" , which is where the "over-jokey" rot set in. DAF is effectively a "Roger Moore Bond" that still has Sean Connery in it!

I know "Live and Let Die" is supposed to be cheesy and was the first of the crappy Roger Moore Bonds, but I'm tellin' ya, when we saw it in a theater it blew people away right out of their seats. People LOVED it.

It was over the top, actually scary, genuinely funny, real sexy and exciting. Right from the opening song to the sign reading "Trespassers Will Be Eaten" every scene was a home run. I listened to the voiceover comments on the DVD last year and the stunt problems were crazy; the speed boat chase was shot just like you see it on film; there were no FX of any kind.

That's why the rest of the Roger Moore ones were so doubly bad, they were a letdown from L&LD AND they just sucked in general....

Hey, did Burt Bacharach compose the Casino Royale theme song? I thought Herb Alpert did, but it looks like he just played it.

It was Herb Albert. It might be confusing as there are several songs that were shared between the two of them, just a few stats below.

"Casino Royale"
(Instrumental Version) by Herb Alpert & The Tijuana Brass

"The Look Of Love"
(Instrumental Version) by Herb Alpert & The Tijuana Brass

"The Look Of Love"
Music by Burt Bacharach
Lyrics by Hal David
Sung by Dusty Springfield

"What's New Pussycat?"
(Excerpted)
Written by Burt Bacharach

"Born Free"
(Instrumental) (Excerpted)
Written by John Barry

====================================================
Cammo...I think you hit on a real important aspect of the Bond films...all of these films are big screen musts. A lot of people don't think about the media aspect of the films. They were sensational for their times as they matched what was going on in the world in relation to evilness, fashion, transportation and gadgetry. The big screen is the best way to experience these films. If you think about the laser beam that was about to seer the private parts of Bond...well that blew everyone away because it seemed so far-fetched, but it was scientific stuff that was already going on. Then the ridiculousness of Moonraker...well that coincides with the space program. Sometimes the things that seem too futuristic are in reality already occurring. Now with the craziness of terrorists, the threats that James faces are a lot more real. Big screen is better for car chases, explosive events, etc.

No, it was Burt. He wrote all the songs in the movie, including the theme. They were performed by the best of the day, though, and their own signature styles were such a perfect match with Bacharach that it seems to this day that THEY wrote them;

Very good Cammo...I only researched through the movie...should have researched the LP. Thanks for clearing that up. Can you get that soundtrack as a CD? I can't find it, but would like it. :)