"Bond 22" Update

James bond is now what Star trek was years ago. When the new star trek came with patrick stewart, some of the peoples was very despointed and some of them give a warm welcome! After so many years the franchise need to change, blabla..We all ear that. And now what do we see, the old star trek coming back, the original one ! With the old fashion kirk and spock ! So, now let s say it s the new james bond style time, but one day or one other the old fashion english gentleman with his old fashion gadget will come back ! You all already guess, I prefere the other bond, that s movie is a good one but it s like MI I and the TV series, nothing to compare...just the name are the same

Daniel Craig has exceeded everyones expectations in this role. I am actually quite pleased that Clive Owen turned down the job. I am, however holding my breath on calling him the best James Bond since Shaun Connery. I mean it has only been one film. Lets wait for about three films, before establishing his legacy. I do believe that The director has played on his strengths to make him the most edgiest Bond we have seen. It is good news that they are keeping with the same flow as the first film, and as Neil Purvis mentioned Q so far is unnecessary. By the way ex-fan I really don't think you can compare Star Trek to James Bond...Peas and carrots man..You can compare the new James Bond to Jason Bourne though.

loved this bond so far...have to agree with - thucydides1967, the director sure played on Craigs strengths...really edgy and dont take $#%$

C.R. prob only worked this one time, I don't think the new Bond has the legs for more of the same.

Bond doesn't need Q anymore. I like that the movie didn't make a big deal out of the toys Bond had. Reality has caught up with the Bond movies, so it would just be natural that he would have these tools of the trade. Maybe he could have a care package with a special tool delivered from the "Q" department, but I don't see the need for the Q character. Casino was my favorite single Bond film, and if Craig delivers in the next film, he'll be my favorite Bond. The producers tried to make Dalton the edgier, dangerous Bond, but failed because they were still stuck using the Moore comedy and gadget platform for the stories. Casino broke the mold and delivered an exciting new Bond, and Craig delivered in a BIG way!

It doesn't really bother me either that Q and Moneypenny won't be there. I am loving the new Bonds and I like the direction they are going. Can't wait for the next one.

And Wess, I disagree about Dalton using the Moore comedy. I think the one liners have not really changed over the years, but Moore was way sillier than Connery and Dalton combined.

Don't get me wrong I love all the movies.

Maybe it was the delivery of the one liners. Craig had some, but he delivered them differently. Moore and Dalton almost seemed like they were winking at the screen when they did them. When Craig said them, it was just him being a badass with a bit of an attitude. That's how it came across to me.

Things had gotten too silly since Roger Moore took over as Bond to the point where it was so out of control they were forcing Pierce Brosnan to do things that didn't feel right to him for the character. All the gadgets reminded me over and over again of a kid with a new toy. He might as well have been Maxwell Smart or Austin Powers as we were leaning this way by this time and victory seemed more a matter of luck too often. After Jason Bourne's films came along these were just looking so weak. I began remembering the Ian Fleming books I read and how this just didn't compare. Sean Connery and George Lazenby had done better than this and even James West on the Wild Wild West. Here was a guy who when he fought fought dirty and fought to win. He was kind of a small guy, but he was tough like a wolverine. They really messed this up in the Will Smith movie as they made that one weak like Bond had become. Of course the Q of that show was Artemis Gordon. Updating the Casino Royale story for today looks like a good move now. Here we have a Bond who is computer saavy enough to be a pretty good hacker. In fact if anything Bond seemed to be a bit on the nerdy side, but built for toughness with the brutal mentality you need for this job. Here he has not developed the sauveness that we've seen before, but he is quick to get right to it as a killer would. We did see him here with a weakness for a certain lady, but now maybe that is stamped out perhaps for good or until the remake of On Her Majesty's Secret Service (if that ever happens). Perhaps this death is what spurs him on to remaining detached even when he can get so close to the lady of the moment. I don't think you need a whole lot of Q or Moneypenny, but I imagine they'll be along from time to time when appropriate. Here we have an M that is only concerned of the wellbeing of her agent as long as he's useful and can drop and replace him when necessary, but she's honest with him too. Certain elements of this remind me of Dexter and his father.

I was very sceptical of DC, but this was the best movie I saw last year and I can't wait for the next one. You know it's funny, I didn't even realize Q was missing until days after I saw CR. I really like the way they distanced CR from previous bond movies, it was dark and serious. The funny stuff in it seemed natural and not forced one-liners we have become so accustomed to. I can only imagine the new Bonds getting better and better.

They start shooting next year?! i thought the movie was supposed to come out next year and be filmed later this year.