I Agree That Craig’s Bond Has Been a Masterstroke

of nostalgia and ‘older heads’ dealing with modern problems that the modern Establishment doesn’t have the stomach to solve anymore. It’s the triumph of 007’s reinvention. One I was personally dubious about when I first heard Craig was cast to the role. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/james-bond-spectre/daniel-craig-007-casino-royale-skyfall/

And I have to admit these Bond writers are smarter, and slicker than any since the original team with Sean Connery. Not that they’ve been flawless. I thought the ending of Skyfall a bit too contrived. And of course, Quantum of Solace was a placeholder that is almost as forgettable as most of the Brosnan and Moore eras.

There is one thing I disagree with from the article: That is, that Craig’s Bond would’ve voted for Cameron. Cameron is entirely too hipster-friendly for this James Bond. This Bond’s skepticism of Establishment and cynicism toward the government that employs him, would make him an unabashed supporter of UKIP. And that might be one more reason I like him. 😉

Simon Pegg befouls his nest

Love his movies and wit. Also amusing what he says here given he has co-writing credits in the next Star Trek movie. http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2015/05/20/nerds-nerd-simon-pegg-renounces-geekdom-rips-on-comic-book-films/

My own thoughts? Weeeeelllll… first of all, whenever someone says, “Movies used to be about (x),” I get amused. Yes, there were “important” movies in the old days. There were also pure camp films (Flash Gordon in all its iterations). And sorry Simon, but parents always took at least guilty pleasure in these. Nor is it correct to say there aren’t ‘important’ movies today. For Hollywood’s given definitions of important. They don’t do as well because the would-be ruling class of the entertainment industry has discovered that forcefeeding its agenda to the ‘masses’ that disagree with them results in dangerously low profits. That’s another reason we get these cycles of reboots and comic properties: They’re among the few things that are *safe* for studios to make.

Given the cost of making major motion pictures, as opposed to say, printing an e-book, it’s safe to assume ‘independent’ films will remain as committed to Hollywood’s ideas of importance as it has. There’s simply no plausible alternative until the cost of putting flicks on screens comes down. But, I think it’s fair to say given the dichotomy between the purveyors of dreck and the audience, you are going to continue to see ‘safe’ choices in movie making for the foreseeable future.

Sorry Simon. Guess I’ll see you and the gang in another spoof. 😉