eddhead Posted March 27, 2007 Report Share Posted March 27, 2007 is it just me...or you guys also agree that this new bond is not as attractive as the previous bonds? as well as shorter in height too? Hate to sound gay...but brosnan, connery, moore and dalton had alot more flair and was more attractive ....by quite a bit in my books too. I seem to be in the minority view on this board, but i HATED brosnan in that role... the others especially connery were top notch. As to the flair, remember this is supposed to be bond before he became Bond.. in other words, early on, before he developed the flair and charisma. You start to see it come out in the last scene though. I think the next episode will show him to be a bit more eurudite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfreeman420 Posted March 27, 2007 Report Share Posted March 27, 2007 In the books he is not described as an attractive man but more rough around the edges and develops charisma as he develops his spy skills. There has never been a gadget that Q could use to improve his looks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted March 27, 2007 Report Share Posted March 27, 2007 Hate to sound gay... Um, sure you do. Ok, I was dead against Daniel Craig when he was announced, but having seen the film, I was happy to admit I was wrong. He was an excellent fresh double-oh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veja74 Posted March 28, 2007 Report Share Posted March 28, 2007 is it just me...or you guys also agree that this new bond is not as attractive as the previous bonds? as well as shorter in height too? Hate to sound gay...but brosnan, connery, moore and dalton had alot more flair and was more attractive ....by quite a bit in my books too. It must be a "guy thing" that we don't get... watched the movie over the weekend with my wife and she couldn't shut up about his face, his hair, his perfect body... She specifically said that none of the other Bond's had the kind of appeal that Craig did. I guess the question of who is more attractive remains with the ladies... ...or the gays Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marrickvilleboy Posted March 28, 2007 Report Share Posted March 28, 2007 It must be a "guy thing" that we don't get... watched the movie over the weekend with my wife and she couldn't shut up about his face, his hair, his perfect body... She specifically said that none of the other Bond's had the kind of appeal that Craig did. I guess the question of who is more attractive remains with the ladies... ...or the gays enough said huh..... you're right - only ladies can truly answer these questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddeenbob Posted March 28, 2007 Report Share Posted March 28, 2007 I always felt like after Sean Connery the Bonds became more pretty boys and played up more to the Bond humor. It was refreshing to me to see a return to the rougher character. I enjoyed this one more than the last few. James did get his butt kicked a bit though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted March 28, 2007 Report Share Posted March 28, 2007 he is not described as an attractive man but more rough around the edges and develops charisma as he develops his spy skills. That sounds like our Neil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted March 28, 2007 Report Share Posted March 28, 2007 you're right - only ladies can truly answer these questions. ... and they don't shut up answering them! Yes, I get it, I'm not as buff as James Bond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falco Posted March 28, 2007 Report Share Posted March 28, 2007 Movie was cool, but was expecting more gadgets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.