On December 14 2014 03:51 Velr wrote: Best bond Movies: Roger Moore. Best Bonds: Connery and Brosnan.
The Daniel Craig movies just don't feel like Bond at all, well Skyfall a bit more than the others. In general they just lack humour.
I agree, however I think what Craig is really lacking is charm. Even if you gave him a script like one of the Moore movies he wouldn't be able to come off as charming nor as a gentleman.
Brosnan was a great bond, but he had to work with some pretty awful scripts aside from Goldeneye. Craig is just a terrible Bond, and even a good script like Casino Royale couldn't really make him convincing.
Most of all, Craig doesn't look charming at all. Pierce Brosnan is 60 years old now and still looks younger and more handsome than Craig does at 40-something.
Are you serious ? What do you expect journalists to do with that kind of information ?! It is now public information they have no reason not to report about it, would you prefer to go through the hundreds of terabytes of data yourself ? Also none of the websites I have visited did publish any of these documents, they paraphrase or explain what's in there, not more.
Since we're sharing our opinions, I really really like the new Bond movies.
I'll admit Quantum wasn't great, but I still liked it and I really liked the other two.
Pierce Brosnan is fun to watch, but with the exception of Goldeneye, those movies are not very good at all. I think that the new take on Bond is very exciting and sophisticated while at the same time trying to be elegantly simple, yet refined. I also think that it's brilliant that he's not young. That's been done a lot. I think it's a great take that he's older and that they play on that.
It's not easy to do, but I want to see this next Bond film also be great.
I really like them.
In my opinion the top 5 could be: Goldfinger Casino Royale A View to a Kill Skyfall Goldeneye
then honorable mentions would be Thunderball, A View to a Kill, Moonraker, then Man with the Golden Gun.
Maybe something like that... Anyway, can't wait for the new Bond!!!
Bond's funny. If you watch the old ones, it's amazing how clear the Austin Powers movies were meant to be a parody of that, but it is strange how they weren't -actually- that far from the Bond movies themselves. I mean, obviously Austin Powers is way over-the-top satirical and not at all serious, but the old Bond movies were actually much closer to that than the current Bond movies, imo. They had humour and oneliners and joked in serious situations, presenting bond like a suave gentleman that was also a secret agent. It's like hollywood decided to extract all the humour from Bond and channel it into Austin Powers, and just keep all the seriousness and badassitude for Craig Bond.
Roger Moore movies for sure. But not the Connery ones. Goldfinger, From Russia with Love and Dr. No were all serious. The comedy in them was accidental. All the Roger Moore movies were basically action comedies.
Not sure if this belongs in the North Korea thread or here, but this has gone a long way from some embarrassing e-mails and leaked movies to actual threats of terrorism. Basically, the Guardians of Peace hacker group threatened a terrorist attack on theatres playing The Interview, so all the big theatre chains withdrew it from their schedules. Obviously, Sony has no choice but to cancel the release altogether. Some smaller theatres planned to show Team America: World Police (which features Kim Jong-il) in protest, but now Paramount (the movie's owner) has stepped in and prohibited them from doing so.
On top of all this, it's pretty much official that GoP is either North Korean or working under orders from North Korea.
What a sad, sad turn of events. Looks like North Korea wins this one.
On December 19 2014 08:10 Warlock40 wrote: Not sure if this belongs in the North Korea thread or here, but this has gone a long way from some embarrassing e-mails and leaked movies to actual threats of terrorism. Basically, the Guardians of Peace hacker group threatened a terrorist attack on theatres playing The Interview, so all the big theatre chains withdrew it from their schedules. Obviously, Sony has no choice but to cancel the release altogether. Some smaller theatres planned to show Team America: World Police (which features Kim Jong-il) in protest, but now Paramount (the movie's owner) has stepped in and prohibited them from doing so.
On top of all this, it's pretty much official that GoP is either North Korean or working under orders from North Korea.
What a sad, sad turn of events. Looks like North Korea wins this one.
I'm less bothered by Sony's choice, than I am with New Regency and Fox. Sony was actually hacked and actually threatened (even if the threats are suspect) and their movie was about killing a sitting leader.
New Regency and Fox just chose on their own, out of a shameful fear of things they haven't even been threatened with for a movie that (as far as we know) doesn't even have anything objectionable in it. I would be less surprised if it was some 'bleeding heart liberals' who made the decision, but for such a decision to come out of a company like Fox takes a fat dump on all the "tough on terrorism" talk you get from their Fox News network.
A source close to the project confirmed that production company New Regency had stopped development on the untitled film after Twentieth Century Fox pulled distribution plans.
On December 13 2014 16:31 Chexx wrote: I cant believe that it was really north korea
I do not believe it is North Korea either. I had a feeling last week this might be some propaganda by the US to get some "cyberterrorism" bill passed in a couple weeks to limit the internet and our sheeple will buy it hook, line and sinker.
False flag anyone? Powell UN Security Council 2003 meeting?
What are your thoughts? Or am I just another "conspiracy theorist"?
Since we're talking Skyfall, it was fucking awful. To quote myself
This was awful, awful, awful!
A brief timeline 20:00 Shit he's got all the identities 30:00 It's personal, he's out to get M 35:00 We have to hunt him down before he releases identities 60:00 He releases identities, M gets into trouble 120:00 It's personal, he's out to get M, maybe if we hide M then he'll forget that he has all this leverage from the identities and come to us 130:00 He comes to us
It undermines the entire premise of the film. If they'd just hidden M at first then he'd have come to them and just tossed the list of all the agent's identities apparently. The entire first two hours were spent on something which turned out to be entirely irrelevant, there was all this subplot about calling into question M's competence and ability to deal with a modern threat and then the threat failed to materialise because the villain forgot he had it. If they'd hidden M and he'd been like "okay I'm going to keep releasing the identities until she comes out of hiding" and loads of agents had died and she'd had her reputation ruined and everyone hated her but she was willing to accept that and continue to stay as bait in the trap because they'd eventually kill him and that was just the price of it then there would be some message there. But no, he just completely forgets that he has leverage on them.
Other issues. Judi Dench says it's okay that she fucked him over because he was not as useful as he had been and she got six other agents back because of the sacrifice. That's great, one flaw with that argument, you're old and the lives of hundreds of your agents are at stake, just trade yourself for the list. Jeez.
The plot was a complete mess, not only was it absurd it wasn't even internally consistent. With Bond villains I'm willing to accept a hollowed out volcano because it's what they like to do but to spend two hours chasing a guy to get a list and then, with no new information, learn that the list isn't relevant at all is just bad storytelling.
They go to Scotland and he should just go "????? But I wasn't trying to kill you, you know I wasn't trying to kill you, when I blew up your office you looked right into the camera and told the audience I wasn't trying to kill you, I was trying to use a list to discredit you. A list which, incidentally, I still have!!! The same list which recovering from me was the entire plot of the film up until now."
"The U.S. should bear in mind that it will face serious consequences in case it rejects our proposal for joint investigation and presses for what it called countermeasures while finding fault with" North Korea, the spokesman said in a statement carried by Pyongyang's official Korean Central News Agency, or KCNA.
"We have a way to prove that we have nothing to do with the case without resorting to torture, as the CIA does," he said, adding that the U.S. lacks any specific evidence tying North Korea to the hacking.
"The U.S. should bear in mind that it will face serious consequences in case it rejects our proposal for joint investigation and presses for what it called countermeasures while finding fault with" North Korea, the spokesman said in a statement carried by Pyongyang's official Korean Central News Agency, or KCNA.
"We have a way to prove that we have nothing to do with the case without resorting to torture, as the CIA does," he said, adding that the U.S. lacks any specific evidence tying North Korea to the hacking.
That's the thing about dictatorships: they don't really care about having a moral high ground. They will, however, enjoy calling you a hypocrite when you lose yours.
Lmao if this is true then this is hilarious. If NK is responsible for the hacking I'm sure they hired someone to do it or they are really holding back on what they have in terms of computer knowledge.
One thing I've always been fascinated by is how huge franchises/studios, as is obviously the case here, apparently can't find anyone who can write a decent script? And shell out tons of money to writer(s) for these laughable scripts and ideas. It's bad enough when shit is objectively confusing/disappointing to mainstream audience members. But then when you see actual comments within the studio like those in this article, or by critics after the fact, about problems you hadn't considered on a first pass/watch, it's just mindblowing sometimes.
Are there really no decent writers to find for a fucking BOND movie? One of the biggest film franchises in history? And why does everything need to be so complicated these days? Simple scripts might feel unoriginal at times, especially in a long-running series basically aping off the same formula for decades, but as long as the film itself and actors/characters are great the audience won't care.
This isn't really specific to this case, just a commentary on the industry. It's so bizarre sometimes.
On December 21 2014 13:09 BongChambers wrote: Lmao if this is true then this is hilarious. If NK is responsible for the hacking I'm sure they hired someone to do it or they are really holding back on what they have in terms of computer knowledge.
Doesn't take that much knowledge when it sounds like Sony's internal security was basically non-existent.
On December 21 2014 13:09 BongChambers wrote: Lmao if this is true then this is hilarious. If NK is responsible for the hacking I'm sure they hired someone to do it or they are really holding back on what they have in terms of computer knowledge.
Doesn't take that much knowledge when it sounds like Sony's internal security was basically non-existent.
I wonder about this sentiment. On the one hand, Sony seems to have had disgracefully low security in a world where most networks are already considered dangerously vulnerable. On the other, this appears to have been a well planned, well executed attack on Sony and its interests.
So I guess it bears asking explicitly - is it very hard to do what these hackers did? And is it totally crazy that NK did this on their own, so they needed external help?
On December 21 2014 13:09 BongChambers wrote: Lmao if this is true then this is hilarious. If NK is responsible for the hacking I'm sure they hired someone to do it or they are really holding back on what they have in terms of computer knowledge.
Doesn't take that much knowledge when it sounds like Sony's internal security was basically non-existent.
I wonder about this sentiment. On the one hand, Sony seems to have had disgracefully low security in a world where most networks are already considered dangerously vulnerable. On the other, this appears to have been a well planned, well executed attack on Sony and its interests.
So I guess it bears asking explicitly - is it very hard to do what these hackers did? And is it totally crazy that NK did this on their own, so they needed external help?
Most major hacks generally involve finding one tiny hole, and going from there with what you find. Sometimes it can be as simple as a list of usernames, and then brute forcing the passwords with the easiest guesses (usually trying the most common ones like "password" and "123456", etc.) until you get access. From there you get emails, access to other servers or permission-based areas, and getting more connections and openings from there.
Judging by what Sony had in their internal databases, it looks like any hole in the network basically opened up everything.
Which pretty much means something like this could've been managed by anyone who got lucky enough. A lot of the most "famous" hacks are just kids using known exploits on major systems until they find someone who hasn't updated properly.
I always wondered how come terrorists arent more interested in hacking than cutting peoples head of on the internet, seems like they'd have a bigger impact by breaking into Sony than killing the random people they can.