Google PlusFacebookTwitter

Bonds, BOnds, BONds, BONDs and the best of the BONDS

By on Nov 29, 2006 in Reviews | 7 comments

Share On GoogleShare On FacebookShare On Twitter

Craig’s the youngest Bond, but is he also the best? I certainly think so.
Critics place Connery right up there, but have one ever seen a fatter Bond (see Goldfinger), or a more balding one? Connery was neither the handsomest, nor the best while carrying out stunts, and in the first few of his Bond (mis)adventures, he looks completly out at sea. Why, I’d prefer Alfred Molina over Sean Connery for the part.
On the other hand, look at Craig. He is young, an excellent actor (he proved this in Munich) and CERTAINLY NOT BALDING or PAUNCHY. In Casino Royale, he again delivers a gritty performance. All those stunts couldn’t be easy, and that now famous torture sequence? THAT is acting,and it’s here that Craig pips Connery as the best Bond. True, he was helped a lot by a decent script, but that doesn’t take anything away from the intensity with which he did the part. Others played Bond, Craig BECAME Bond.

P.S.: Don’t listen to the (not so )Great Quizzard if he tells you that Bond is neandarthalish. After all, what kind of neandarthal drives an Aston Marin or uses cell phones to track down baddies? And what’s all this nonesense about Bond not being the best spy??



7 Comments

  1. Great Quizzard

    November 29, 2006

    Post a Reply

    Does anyone even remember this Craig chap from Munich or Tomb Raider? He is a non-entity! And he seriously looks so OLD, I think so, because of his eyes that look glazed like doughnuts all the time.

    Agreed this one was better, but compared to Ethan Hunt, Jason Bourne or anyone else, Bond simply DOES NOT make the cut, and don’t listen to Nonsensical Character (I guess that’s pretty evident from his name itself).

    When I said Neandarthalish, I meant brains, which clearly Bond lacked in earlier films (somewhat rectified in this one); and especially in his attitude towards women of ‘doing and leaving’ (LMAO).

  2. Great Quizzard

    November 29, 2006

    Post a Reply

    BTW, someone not that great either forget that it’s Aston Martin, rather than Marin.

  3. Rach

    November 30, 2006

    Post a Reply

    Damn the typing error.
    Ethan Hunt movies are all abt the action, not abt the brains. As for Bourne, wat else do u xpect out of movies based on books? Movies based on books have GOT to have brains, like Casino Royale did.
    And, don’t tell me that Johnny English or Austin Powers had more brains than Bond.
    As for the looks, I think that Craig suited the part because of his boxer(not the dog, dumdum)-type looks, and that, I think is what a gritty spy shud b like.

  4. Abhishek

    December 2, 2006

    Post a Reply

    MI3 was crap and so was Ethan Hunt. This movie was much better than the original movie made from the first of Ian Fleming’s series of Bond novels.

    Mr. GreatQuizzard seems to have some problems accepting the new bond. I would suggest he watched all the movie again and then make any judgment.

    And anyway, even if you’re the odd one out, one doesn’t really care. I guess you can become friends with Nikhat Kazmi(probable spelling error) who gives 4 stars only to only romantic movies.

  5. Rach

    December 2, 2006

    Post a Reply

    Nikhat Kazmi doesn’t know anything abt movies. He put Russell Crowe into Kingdom of Heaven(read his review on Good Year in the TOI, Dec 02, 2006.)

  6. Great Quizzard

    December 2, 2006

    Post a Reply

    Actually, I have a problem accepting ANY Bond, not only this new one. Guess it’s somewhat prejudice, but then, can’t I have my own opinion? :P

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *