Date: 2006-11-22 12:53 pm (UTC)
I'd agree with everything you said except for one small bit: we see "Bond, James Bond" in the very last scene. Why they didn't make a bit more of it is beyond me. Bond in the very tailored 3-piece suit, French cuffs on the tailored shirt, shiny shoes, hair tidy. This is the Bond that got re-invented through the course of this movie. We won't know if Craig can pull that off consistently until the NEXT movie.

Mostly I liked this movie as classic Bond straight up. After Thunderball they got too hokey, but I grew up reading the novels.

Oh, yes, my resident poker expert says that it wasn't TEXAS Hold 'Em, but some other form of Hold 'Em. He gave me the reason which I can't remember. I also agree that it doesn't have the same exotic glamour of the old games, but is, apparently, the high stakes game of choice right now.

So, it was a curious combination of past and present. That's what ultimately sat uneasily with me. Do Bond's past, but do it consistently, putting uncouth Bond actually in the past. Or do Bond now, and allow him the sardonic humour and savoir faire that Bond has "now". Instead we had a rather anachronistic story line in a modern setting.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

December 2011

S M T W T F S
    123
456789 10
11121314 151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 21st, 2025 04:39 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios