Ian Fleming. Moonraker. Signet, 1960s, originally published 1955. 175 pages.

Very slow to get started. The first part (of three) is just a card game, more-or-less unrelated to the plot. Once it gets going there’s some fun action, but it’s not anywhere near as good as the first two books. This is the point in the series where it turns into the cartoonish melodrama that Bond is now famous for, complete with a monologging evil genius who inexplicably leaves Bond to die a creative death instead of shooting him. That sort of thing can be fun in its own way, but Fleming is still trying to drive the story with suspense, which doesn’t work in such a predictable setting. 6/10 (Okay).

Jag vet inte hur många gånger jag sett det här klippet. Vad tänkte han egentligen, målvakten? Exakt i vilket ögonblick, i vilken nanosekund, är det han tappar konceptet? Hur såg hans liv ut efter detta? Tänk att en människas förnedring kan glädja en annan människa så. Jag står för det. Jag älskar det.

Klippet får mig att tänka på en novell av Bo Widerberg: Anteckningar från en straffpunkt från novellsamlingen Författarnas Fotbollsbok från 1994. Han berättar om hur jobbigt det var att träffa Staffan Tapper på gatan, att han hellre sneddade över till andra sidan för att slippa behöva stanna till och tvingas prata om allt utom det enda han egentligen ville prata om: Den missade straffen mot Polen som innebar sorti för Sverige ur Fotbolls-VM 1974.

I novellen gör han en jämförelse mellan Staffan Tapper och Bo Larsson (som Widerberg och alla andra som såg matchen tyckte skulle lagt straffen). Han skriver: ”Säg mig vad du läser, och jag ska tala om ifall straffen går in eller ej. På Staffan Tappers nattduksbord där nere i Mönchen-Gladbach kan ha legat ”På spaning efter den tid som flytt” eller en Flaubert. På Bos bord låg bergis en Bond. Kanske med risk att avslöja mig som djupt antiintellektuell bekänner jag vid denna skrivmaskin att jag har större förtroende för den straffläggare som läser tre kvarts sida Fleming innan han kvällen före matchen slaggar in än för den som ligger vaken en timme för mycket med Proust.”

I det här klippet är det målvakten som läst en timme för mycket, säkert en semiotikrapport av Umberto Eco. Anfallaren spelade troligen Call of Duty 4.

Se sex sekunders oförklarlighet. Beskåda förvirring när den är som mest underbar.

The SyFy Channel will be airing a total of sixteen James Bond films this Thanksgiving weekend. Below is the full schedule:

Thursday – November 26th 2009

8:00 AM -  Dr. No
10:30 AM – Licence To Kill
1:30 PM -  Live And Let Die
4:00 PM – The Spy Who Loved Me
6:30 PM – Tomorrow Never Dies
9:00 PM – Casino Royale

Friday – November 27th 2009:

12:00 AM – For Your Eyes Only
2:30 AM – The Man With The Golden Gun
08:00 AM – Thunderball
10:30 AM – From Russia With Love
1:00 PM – You Only Live Twice
3:30 PM – Diamonds Are Forever
6:00 PM – Casino Royale
9:00 PM – GoldenEye

Saturday November 28th 2009:

12:00 AM – Goldfinger
2:30 AM – Never Say Never Again

All times are EST.

You Only Live Twice

TYPE: Action, Mystery

RATING: 7/10

REVIEW:

This one didn’t seem to have the flair that is usually associated with James Bond. Maybe it’s just because of the fact that I’ve watched too many movies and have a feel for gadgets. Either way this one was a gadget-less mission.

Bond seems to be on the verge of breaking down. He keeps irregular timings, he keeps making mistakes meant for a much lower class of me, and there is an aura of forgetfulness around him.

M is then given advice by a psychologist friend to allow Bond to recover slowly by giving him a mission that will bring him back to his senses. It is then that Bond is sent for a diplomatic visit to Tiger Tanaka in Japan who is a high honcho in the secret service. To retrieve something that England needs, Bond finds himself trapped in the necessity to overcome death itself by trying to kill a world-wide crimnal who harbors an Island of Death.

Text About IAN FLEMING

Text About IAN FLEMING:

Terrorism Is Like Nazism, A Bug That we Have to Erase now Definitely. And I can’t do It alone with This novel. So, I’m about to buy tomorrow, Friday, November 28, 2009, One IAN FLEMING james BondNovel, From Russia With Love, and John Le Carre, A MOST WANTED MAN, To learn more About good Writings and Improve My literacy Style, in a short while. Because, I decided to stop the movie industry, as a producer, just now An Adviser and An Actor (with AKA FRED KELLY), I feel FREE to Begin THE NEW STEP: Step-Writing Of a Novel: F-COP: Aftermath. It’s Not anymore the Old Cop, you know and That Hollywood Refused, It’s a Young man, with The same Name, Me? VINCE SAUVAN, My hero, my Character, this Time in a double double, double Crossover, double Spinoff, Story, Joined By VeLvEt EyEs Partner-Wife, VALENtine Douglas, Leather Gloves, One of the Heroes you prefer on My WordPress, right?

F-Cop in a double Combat, In Cyber-Space, Heroic Fantasy World, and On Earth In VeLvEt EyEs Universe, Will Couter=Attacks with Gloves the Terrorism because It’s The evil Chaos organized that stop The progress Of our Civilization, A NOVEL conceived Like a Film, a Feature one, A Story already in progress on my papers At home, It begins Now and I want to Thank FLEMING And LE CARRE For The challenge I have Now To be Not too bad in my Writings, iN front Of These 2 great Masters, Not only of Mine. See you on the Blog, Next time, Soon!

MIKE FULLER,
November Thanksgiving, 26, 2009
Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.

Ian FLEMING, If He Was There, He Would Help Us To Destroy This Al Qaeda that Harass Our Country Since 2001! A Novel Can Change The World, even If Army and Authorities are The Ones who Fight The Evil Organization, On Location!!

 

Music:
CONFIRMATION InDIaN SuMmEr Tour Dates NOW 2 Hours Before Show Open-Mic, Regarding Fact Heavy Work On Blog, Twitter And FV own Agenda COORD!!

5:48pm: Breaking News: The Q&A Regarding The Real Show TWITTER FV (about 2 change tilte) Is DELAYED 2 Tomorrow, Wednesday, Morning Due 2 Priorities!

Fred Has Enough 2 Read In VARIETY: Hollywood kind Of SICK (Biz feeling), LIKE In Lindsay LOHAN Song: DISCONNECTED, So LET’S WritE A NOVEL!!

From The Tweets:
TIMEFRAMES, Hollywood: TOWN, Neighborhood, CONCEPT (?) -we don’t think so – The SIGN Is Now Ready To Partner With Us, I Hope, On AMBITION!!

TIMEFRAMES, Hollywood: In This TOWN Inside The City Of LOS ANGELES, The Audience Is Small But Good To Understand What Works And What Don’t!

TF, h: 2 Partner ON A NOVEL. Fred-VIDAL Is Traumatized By Failure Of His previous Project, The “FRENCH” COP, French Like The Fries, or Kiss!

TIMEFRAMES, Hollywood: TOWN, Neighborhood, CONCEPT (?) -we don’t think so – The SIGN Is Now Ready To Partner With Us, I Hope, On AMBITION!!

SO Trauma Is Good When You Do A Post-TRAUMA Therapy, We heard, I Mean GOOD Experience/Not Memories, It’s BIZ-Therapy, Fred NEVER DEPRESSED!

• Homage-Text to IAN FLEMING By MIKE FULLER,
  Before Midnight, Today, Nov 24!

Yesterday, Monday:
Breaking News (November 23, 6:45am)
From http://twitter.com/fredvidal

F-COP: AfTeRmAtH (The DARKPOL LegacY)  Is AbouT To Be PuBlIsHeD oN WORDPRESS FV In December (F-COP is new name of FRENCH COP). ThE WRIting Will Be A 31 Day One, From DecembeR 1 2 31st. SigneD FV (Mike FULLER).  The LAST Sequel NOVEL Of Series Of FILM-PROJECTS FC-DP Is Also SPINOFF Of THe MaN WiTh ThE VeLvEt EyEs (2 be Explained Tuesday On The BloG). F-COP: AFTERMATH Is Definitive End SAGA FRENCH COP, Writings Began In 2006!! The NOVEL Will be Offered To NY Publishers Jan.!

With F-Cop: Aftermath, Fred VIDAL, PhD Begins The Writing Of An e-Novel Against Terrorism & Evil Organizations Like Al-Qaeda! It’s Daily On This Blog On WordPress Until 2010!

On TWITTER FV: http://twitter.com/fredvidal

This Morning:

BREAKING NEWS: Fred VIDAL, PhD AKA Mike FULLER, & Team, To Begin Today Writing Novel ‘F-Cop: AFTERMATH’, An e-NOVEL Vs Terrorism & Terror!!

In This Unique SpinOff’s Crossover, The F-COP Works With LEATHER GLOVES 4 MORE RESULTS + the NOVEL Franchise 2 Be USEFUL 4 Our Country & Us!

You Can’T ChangE The World, BUT You Can ContributE, When NOVELIST (Fred) To ImprovE It!! We Don’T AccepT Terrorism And F-COP To FiGht 4 USA!

Explanation: This is 2 Technical!! CROSSOVER: 2 Characters Of Different UNiverses MEET, SPINOFF: One Character Of One UNIVERSE Has OWN SHOW!

Fred VIDAL: In The Man With The Velvet Eyes, The Character Of VALENTINE DOUGLAS Isn’t Developed Yet, So it’s Time To write about Her, Right?

Fred VIDAL: F-COP: AfTeRmAtH, It’s About – DON’T SEE IT AS A MOVIE or Possible feature film, It’s A Novel – Vince & VALENTINE (see TMVTVE)!

SAUVAN, In the VELVET EYES Universe (Diplomacy, espionage, Arts, Weird Environment, History) Won’t Be The Same exactly Because He’s + MATURE

No, It’s Fantastic 4 Team, Hurrah (because it’s something important)! IT’S A DOUBLE SPINOFF! We Understood: ONE CHARACTER Of Each Story tgt!

ONE CHARACTER Of Each Story together: VS from F-franchise + Valentine “LEATHER GLOVES” Douglas of TMWTVE, in her UniVeRsE, VELVET EYES 2010!

DOUBLE SPINOFF Done: ONE CHARACTER Of Each FRANCHISE Together in Same Story One Universe Female Character! This Is Not Brilliant, BuT Very!!

Vince Sauvan (I don’t like name, don’t like mine, I like only one, names are not the persons) IS NOT (A) BOND!! He’s Counter-Terrorist Agent

It’s Written in 2006, I Follow The Screenplay / Before The UFOs, not Only On TWITTER! He’s noT A Soldier, even If He Works with Them, Often!

He’s DARKPOL but You already READ about DarkPol. He’s Not Freelance In this (Last? oR 1st?) MISSION, He’s In VELVET EYES Saga’s Network USA!

Picture: Roger MOORE, After Sean CONNERY, 1st % Forever To Have Been BOND For The Big Screen, Is For FRed VIDAL, The Man Who Had The Most Influenced His Life In The CINEMA SHOW, movie Industry Until TIMEFRAMES!! Homage To Him And The JAMES BOND Franchise That The Author Of VELVET EYES Will Keep In Mid As A Good Example To Follow For The NOVEL’s Writing Of F-COP: Aftermath!!!

Roger MOORE, After Sean CONNERY, 1st % Forever To Have Been BOND On The Big Screen, Is For FRed VIDAL, The Man Who Had The Most Influenced His Life In The CINEMA SHOW, movie Industry Until TIMEFRAMES!! Homage To Him And The JAMES BOND Franchise That The Author Of VELVET EYES Will Keep In Mid As A Good Example To Follow For The NOVEL's Writing Of F-COP: Aftermath!!!

AN IMPORTANT FIRST TEXT OF THE WEB-NOVEL F-C:A IN THIS POST THIS AFTERNOON! ThanK You To The FANSHIP And THE FRIENDOM!! Let It Rock!!

Fred-VIDAL, Phd, November 23, 2009
From Los Angeles, California

TF: JAMES BOND, The Latest Movie, It Was Splendid, From The Screenplay 2 Theaters Results With American Moviegoers Who ADORE ACTION Movies!!

TF: So, Beginning January 2006, Fred VIDAL Was Thinking 2 This Great Success 2 Build His Own WITHOUT IMITATION, Just A Motivation/Biz Master

TIMEFRAMES: The JAMES BOND Franchise Is The Best Example Of Successful FRANCHISE, In The Industry (With STAR WARS, probably That is Unique)

Why JAMES BOND COMPARISON? French Cop, NO Sorry F(rederic)-COP, no basically Letter F… 6th Letter Alphabet, F-COP Has Nothing 2 Do With JB

F-COP Has Nothing 2 Do With JB, Maybe More With G-FORCE – team laughs – (Title can Change), Is An UNIVERSE, The same Style, to Some Extend!!

FV Never Read Really JAMES BOND by Ian FLEMING (to Be confirmed, He has SO MANY memories!), Looks like MASTERPIECES, Movies TOO, HeRo Great!

TF synchronicity: Fred’s Not at all Talent Ian FLEMING or Same Literary Objectives, But It means, We will wait For Opportunity A  LONG TIME!

Si hay en nuestra época (últimos sesenta años, fin de la segunda guerra) un novelista infravalorado ese es sin duda Ian Fleming. Resulta extraño, en medio de un horizonte dominado por las más variopintas revisitaciones, que todavía sea poca la gente (entre ellos Umberto Eco) que se haya dedicado a estudiar su obra en serio. Quizá en su día no repercutió en el prestigio del creador de James Bond el hecho de que sus novelas se vendieran en formato de papel barato (“pulp”) equiparándolas así a otras de calidad más cuestionable. Quizá la adaptación cinematográfica, gamberra y superficial para que pudiera producir lo que se entiende por “clásicos”, repercutió en que la palabra “James Bond” no se asociara en mucho tiempo a nada serio; es decir, a cualquier forma de arte que, trascendiendo el cliché y el estereotipo, descubra la personalidad de un autor.

Encadenados de Hitchcock: en el espionaje no hay sitio para el amor.

Un revelador caso de todo ello se concreta en el papel que juega el elemento sexual. El carácter lúdico del encuentro sexual, ya en las primeras adaptaciones de las novelas, es potenciado hasta el extremo. El sexo no deja resaca ni heridas, se nos dice ya en la primera película (“Dr. No”, 1962) tras el encuentro que Bond mantiene, al principio, con una morena que no saldrá en lo que quede de película. El espectador, como el protagonista, se olvidará rápidamente de ella, centrando su atención en Ursula Andress. No es precisamente ésta la sensación que el lector tiene al terminar la primera novela de Fleming (“Casino Royale”, 1953), cuando se constata la tragedia en que acaba un proyecto amoroso que parecía realizable: la amante de Bond, Vesper, en realidad una espía soviética, se suicida al enamorarse del hombre al que le habían ordenado traicionar.

Este patrón narrativo (por el cual una relación amorosa se frustra debido a los letales ases que ella se saca de la manga) sostenido, en última instancia, en la explotación de la figura de la femme fatale que produce el género negro, no será habitual en las novelas posteriores, cuyas historias se suelen resolver en exitosas conquistas sexuales. Este es el formato que definitivamente se adaptará al cine. Sólo en dos de ellas dichas conquistas se frustrarán (en mayor o menor grado), bien porque la femme fatale volverá a hacer acto de presencia (Desde Rusia con amor) o porque la mujer amada es asesinada (Al servicio secreto de su Majestad). Sin embargo, una lectura más atenta, nos dará cuenta de que el carácter traicionero de los personajes femeninos que inventa Fleming se proyecta en otras relaciones (la del villano con “su chica”, sin ir más lejos) beneficiando de hecho protagonista de que éstas se rompan. Esto ocurre prácticamente en todas las novelas: la “chica” fomenta la lucha que protagonista y antagonista mantienen por ella, dándole ella además término por medio de un acto de traición que acelerará las cosas. La influencia del género negro es aquí evidente.

Ahora bien, una situación semejante trasladada al mundo del espionaje, en la cual la mujer, además de incitadora de enfrentamiento, se siente, como Vesper de Casino Royale, moralmente culpable de ello debido al conflicto entre sus deseos y sus obligaciones debidas, es tratada paralelamente por Hitchcock en “Encadenados (1946)”. En este caso, la película nos habla de un hombre, interpretado por Claude Rains que, como Bond, se entrega irracionalmente a una Ingrid Bergman que, como Vesper, en realidad es espía del enemigo. El personaje de Ingrid Bergman no disfruta, además, como Vesper, de su doble juego: la culpa le atenaza constantemente, así como el miedo a la reacción implacable de sus superiores al constatar cualquier desvío. Es el mismo miedo que conduce a Vesper al suicidio. ¿Fue Fleming, en este caso, influido por la película Encadenados? No resulta descabellado pensarlo, máxime cuando el propio Fleming defendía que Cary Grant fuera el actor destinado a adaptar a su personaje en la pantalla. Con toda seguridad estaba recordando el papel que el propio Grant hizo cuando actúo de espía en Encadenados. No en vano, el papel protagonista que tiene Grant en dicha película se aleja del hombre gris, incapaz de vivir, que fundó la literatura de espías (v.g. el Ashenden de Sommerset Maugham), adquiriendo un carácter más aventurero, como el de Bond (recordemos que Encadenados es siete años anterior a la novela Casino Royale). Esto nos lleva precisamente al segundo aspecto del asunto, aunque mejor será dejarlo para otro día.

Bienvenidos a todos a este blog, creado para emprender el desciframiento de los códigos cinematográficos, sacar a la luz su genealogía. El cine se ha revelado en el último siglo como un poderoso ámbito prefigurador de la experiencia ordinaria. Las producciones cinematográficas contribuyen al desarrollo de un lenguaje no sistemático que atraviesa los cuerpos y mediatiza su interacción, creando así ese tipo de experiencia que se ha dado en llamar “cultura popular”. Aquellas redes de signos que, recorren y atraviesan películas, libros, videojuegos, productos de consumo audiovisual en general forman un todo de influencias cruzadas y diversificadas en múltiples recorridos, si bien el significante-película es, sin duda, la fórmula que más eficazmente contribuye a expandirlos, que mejor y más velozmente se adapta (se ha adaptado) a las condiciones materiales de la interacción. Lo que aquí queremos es, por tanto, arrojarnos a esa multiplicidad de significantes que subyacen al Significante y sacar a la luz sus “parecidos de familia”, configurando así constelaciones que den cuenta de dicha diversidad de influencias cruzadas. Así pues, os animo, queridos lectores, a que acompañeis mi tarea con vuestra atención y comentarios.
El siguiente post irá dedicado a la influencia que la obra de Hitchcock ejerce sobre las novelas y películas de James Bond

By Brenda Wise

It gives me great pleasure to bring to you the final reprint of the magnificent author Geoffrey Jenkins 16 reprint novels “A HIVE OF DEAD MEN.”  Just in time for Christmas to add to your collection.  ISBN:  978-1-4401-9101-5  U.S. $21.95

Each reprint represents the wonderful works of Geoffrey Jenkins wonderful stories of action and adventures along the coast of South Africa.  I have been asked by many if I have a favorite ‘thriller’ story, and I have to say, that each one has a special place in my heart with their own suspence.  Geoffrey Jenkins was truly a ‘gem’ of his time and I thoroughly enjoyed being a huge part of getting his novels back in print.  Much gratitude goes to Geoffrey Jenkins son Dave Jenkins and my partner Ronald Payne for allowing me to be a part of this exciting adventure.

With Christmas approaching quickly, make sure you order your copies.  Available through www.iuniverse.com and many book stores worldwide.

The ‘Geoffrey Jenkins’ novels, are truly a treasured keepsake!

SOUTHTRAP  ISBN:  978-1-4401-7744-6  U.S. $24.95

A TWIST OF SAND ISBN:  978-1-4401-1996-5  U.S. $16.95

A BRIDGE OF MAGPIES ISBN:  978-1-4401-3514-9  U.S. $16.95

A DAYSTAR OF FEAR ISBN:  978-1-4401-4909-2  U.S. $18.95

HUNTER KILLER ISBN:  978-1-4401-3530-9  U.S. $15.95

A RAVEL OF WATERS ISBN:  978-1-4401-7740-8  U.S. $16.95

SCEND OF THE SEA ISBN:  978-1-4401-7765-1  U.S. $13.95

THE WATERING PLACE OF GOOD PEACE ISBN: 978-1-4401-7718-7  U.S. $15.95

A CLEFT OF STARS ISBN:  978-1-4401-7713-2  U.S. $14.95

IN HARM’S WAY ISBN:  978-1-4401-4761-6  U.S. $19.95

THE UNRIPE GOLD ISBN:  978-1-4401-7721-7  U.S. $18.95

THE RIVER OF DIAMONDS ISBN: 978-1-4401-3522-4  U.S. $17.95

A GRUE OF ICE ISBN:  978-1-4401-8201-3  U.S. $16.95

FIREPRINT ISBN:  978-1-4401-3529-3  U.S. $17.95

HOLD DOWN A SHADOW ISBN:  978-1-4401-4908-5  U.S. $19.95

Copyright 2009 Geoffrey Jenkins, Dave Jenkins, Ronald Payne, Brenda Wise

Starring: George Lazenby, Telly Savalas, Diana Rigg
Director: Peter R. Hunt
Writer(s): Ian Fleming, (novel) Richard Maibaum, Michael Reed (screenplay)
Studio: EON
Runtime: 140 min
Rated: PG
Official HZ Cinema Score: *** 3/4 stars

James Bond 007 is back!

Hello everyone and welcome to the sixth installment in my series of reviews chronicling the entire James Bond film franchise. In this edition for the first time since I started writing these reviews we have not only a different sort of Bond movie to explore, but also a brand new Bond to examine as well. The film is 1969’s On Her Majesty’s Secret Service directed by Peter R. Hunt and starring none other than the infamous model turned actor, George Lazenby, in the role of British Secret Service Agent 007. That’s right, we’re reviewing that movie. This movie is one that sharply divides both die hard and casual fans of this series alike in their opinion of it. Commercially it was among the biggest Bond flops of all time at the box office (although it did turn a substantial profit), and even today it is rarely if ever seen on television due to its rather long running time. And even during the Christmas season when you can normally find James Bond films a plenty on many networks in multiple movie marathons spanning the course of several days sometimes, this movie is still neglected to the point that you could almost say it has been black balled by popular cinematic history to such an extent that whenever someone takes over a role from another well established actor that it has become a fashionable passing joke to say so and so is the ‘George Lazenby’ of their particular franchise..

That is kind of a shame I think, because, personally, I feel this movie deserves a solid spot in at the very least, the top five movies in the entire franchise. So what, besides the running time you ask, keeps this classic movie from getting the recognition it truly deserves in my opinion? You could almost sum the entire diagnosis up in one name, “Connery, Sean Connery”, that is. Up until this point the role and the persona of James Bond had been Connery’s alone, and to the movie going public, to put an actor, any other actor, at that time anyway, other than Connery in that role was tantamount to Bond blasphemy. In later years after Connery finally relinquished the role many other actors would settle comfortably into Bond’s shoes with little resistance, but in 1969, for George Lazenby, the first successor of Sir Connery, he had a bloody uphill battle that was near impossible for him, or anyone for that matter, to come out on top of. It probably didn’t help that before this movie he had zero acting experience whatsoever, and his only experience of any kind in front of a camera, was in the form of being a male model. Other than Lazenby, the role of James Bond in this movie was also offered to Timothy Dalton, another future Bond actor who can sort of feel a kinship with Lazenby in that he is one of those Bonds that divides fans and critics alike in their opinions of both him and the movies made while he was under contract for the role. Dalton of course, turned down the part at this point, feeling that at the time, being in his mid twenties that he was too young to be James Bond. And so with that George Lazenby received the call up and the position was his.

So the question goes, how do I think he did with this role? This is a hard question to answer on many fronts. In comparison to Connery of course he was an absolute farce, and even when compared to later actors like Roger Moore, Tim Dalton, or Pierce Brosnan, he falls far short of each of them for the simple reason that at the time he made this movie he was not an actor, because the people who made this movie felt, I think wrongly, that a true actor was not required for the role of James Bond, but rather just a stuntman. In the case of this movie which I would say is probably one of the most emotionally demanding of any Bond film in history, that an actor the caliber of Connery was absolutely essential. But with all that being said, I personally cannot come down too hard on old Lazenby, as when you consider the difficult place he was put into, he did a more than adequate job of at least not embarrassing himself, or the franchise, when it came to portraying James Bond. In his own special way George Lazenby brought that classic Bond wit, charm, and style, not in droves like Sean Connery did mind you, but enough of it and in the important parts and places anyway, and also when it came down to the heavy emotional scenes, including probably the heaviest scene in the film franchise’s history, I thought and still think, even after multiple viewings that Mr. Lazenby was, if nothing else, a ‘sufficient’ actor to portray James Bond in this movie, which is the nicest thing I can think to say about him in retrospect.

It would have been interesting to see what he could have developed into had he had more time to grow into the role in subsequent pictures, but alas, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service was to be his one and only entry into the series, making him the only actor so far in the official EON cannon, not to be brought back for at least one more picture. I cannot and will not heap him with praise and admiration for being one of the best James Bonds to dawn a tuxedo, but, I can say with no shame that I do admire him for stepping up to a very challenging role, and giving us one of the most memorable James Bond movies in the history of the series.

There has been a lot of speculation over the years how Connery would have done with the role of James Bond in this movie. Some suppose that the bored Connery who made ‘You Only Live Twice’ would have been a disaster in this movie. I personally do not think so. Had he not been so adamant about wanting to do something different, which I can respect, and taken this role, I think he would, out of respect for the great script, have upped his game and as a result, this movie, not Goldfinger, not even From Russia With Love, would have been remembered for all time afterward as the one true defining James Bond film to the set the standard for all that would follow it. As it stands now, it is still one of the best in the series, but one that gets heaps and heaps of disrespect and neglect piled upon it.

Now down to the basics of the movie itself, which I will try not to spoil too much, as this is a movie that deserves to be experienced for itself, although I will probably, unavoidably end up giving away a few things, so read on at your own peril. Throughout the movie there are a lot of well done and subtle little nods to the former Connery Bond movies, which, in hindsight probably wasn’t the smartest thing to do, since even without them it is hard enough to watch this film without getting a pining feeling for Connery not all that dissimilar to what I imagine it would like to be on a date with a woman who was in many ways like an old ex-girlfriend you carried a heavy torch for, but at the same time, you are forced with the disconcerting reality that no matter how hard you wish her to be someone she is not, or wish Lazenby to morph from a British underwear model into a Scottish badass, it just isn’t meant to be, even when he at one point puts on a Scottish Kilt, which must’ve been done solely to needle Connery. But with that caveat behind us, I did get a chuckle from the intro in which Bond, who had just rescued the main ‘Bond Girl’ of this movie from an attack by two would be killers, and after that she repays him not by falling droopily into his arms for a session of divine romance, but rather, scurries up the hill into her sports car, and speeds away… to which Lazenby quips, straight into the camera ‘This never happened to the other fellow’… Indeed it did not.

The girl in question there was none other than Contessa Teresa di Vicenzo, or Tracy for short, who would be the main Bond Girl for this movie, although to stick her with a title like that is almost unfair in a way, as she would go down in history as the one girl for who would be to Bond something more than just a one night stand or a quick aid in a sticky situation. She would even be referenced in later Bond movies by the likes of Roger Moore and with subtle allusions made in the Dalton movies as well. She was the one girl capable even of bringing James Bond to tears, and it was through her that what before had basically been a very fun action caricature, actually became a living breathing character with flesh and blood, and true emotions. Now I know what you’re thinking, “C’mon man, this is James Bond here, we don’t need none of that crying crap!” which is fair enough, but I think when viewed on its merits as a stand alone feature, the infamous ‘crying’ scene in this movie is for my money the most powerful moment in any James Bond movie right up until the end of 2006’s Casino Royale. It, like the aforementioned movie, gave added insight into how the slick, sleek and sophisticated servant of the Queen became the curt, jaded, alcoholic, womanizing, ruffian that we all know and love from both previous and future movies.

Other than the Countess, Bond’s other allies in this film come in the form of the ever reliable Q, M, and of course the ever lovely Miss Moneypenney, and Tracy’s father, and head of his own criminal enterprise Marc-Ange Draco. The primary villain in this film as in the last one and the film following this one is head of S.P.E.C.T.R.E, Ernst Stavro Blofeld, played here in what for me may be tied only with Donald Pleasence’s portrayal from the previous film, by Telly Savalas. In between the last film and now Bond has been unsuccessful in finding and apprehending this criminal mastermind, a failure that troubles him so much that at one point he vows that if he cannot find Blofeld, he will retire from Her Majesty’s Secret Service and devote his own personal time to bringing this madman to justice by himself. As you can guess, eventually he does catch up with Blofeld in his mountain resort in the Swiss Alps, which provides a stunningly beautiful location for this film, which in many ways deserves top billing with the actors themselves. Blofeld’s current scheme involves a group of brainwashed girls he calls his ‘Angels of Death’ who live with Blofeld in his mountain hide-away, and whom he is feeding subconscious messages to and equipping with various feminine beauty products that all contain chemical weapons of mass destruction of some kind or another. It’s basically your typical zany evil plot perpetrated here by Blofeld.

After a certain number of movies, you’d begin to think after a while, that he probably in the end, didn’t really expect or even intend to get away with his devious schemes for world domination or destruction, but rather, being an evil genius, he probably just didn’t have anything better to do with his time. The majority of the movie’s running time is spent inside this state of the art facility with Bond seducing one ‘Angel’ after another while slowly but surely getting closer to the truth of what Blofeld is attempting to do to the free world. One thing that is puzzling about this movie though is that Bond’s gadgets, which are normally state of the art, are somehow less advanced than they had been in previous films, as in this movie he uses a bulky unwieldy device to crack into a safe containing important information, whereas in the previous film Connery had used a similar device that he was able to slip into his pocket. So, if just for this one movie, technology it seems, had for once gone in the opposite direction of what it normally does.

Also scarcely seen here are the classic Bond cars with their ejector seats and rocket propelled tailpipes. I can’t say I really missed them that much though as the action itself when it finally kicked in was stimulating enough to take your mind off of all that, with the great fight scenes from beginning to end, and especially the fantastic ski-chase scene during the movie’s climax in which Blofeld and his assistant Irma Bunt along with a horde of S.P.E.C.T.R.E agents chase Bond down a snowy mountain hillside during a starry night… It is probably my favorite chase in any Bond movie, if for nothing else than the great scenery provided. That chase manages to spill into a sleepy little village in the middle of a Christmas celebration, and through all sorts of various twists and turns too numerous to detail.

In the end, my favorite scene in the movie was probably the one in which James and Tracy both find themselves bunkered down in an abandoned barn in the middle of a raging blizzard for a cozy little love scene. It’s in scenes like this that you really get the sense that this was no ordinary Bond girl. I won’t spoil what happens after this, although I’m sure many of you already know. Suffice to say that it’s with this scene in mind that makes this movie’s “dark ending” as effective as it is for me, although I did not care for how they casually jumped from that right into the up-tempo Bond theme music after which was kind of disrespectful… But anyway, to wrap this review up, if you haven’t yet seen this fine Bond movie thus yet, don’t beat yourself up, “you’ve got all the time in the world” but still, I wouldn’t recommend tarrying too long, as this is truly a classic, flawed as it is, that I think you will not regret giving at least one chance to. Thanks for reading, and James Bond, and more importantly, Sean Connery will return next time in my review of ‘Diamonds Are Forever’. See you then.

Jules

I’m happy to announce that Licence To Blog (formerly known as Brown on Bond) has reached its one year anniversary!

Many more to come, I hope.

Keep reading. Keep enjoying. Thanks for the views!

The is seeking authors to write studies and commentaries about James Bond movies and novels. Some of the suggested topics from a Web page by the group:

Quantum of Solace hit the theatres and many criticized it as being too much like the Jason Bourne movies? Is this accurate?

Raymond Benson or James Gardner as Bond Novelist Presumably they mean John Gardner.

How does James Bond novel Devil May Care by Sebastian Faulks stand up as a direct sequel to Man with the Golden Gun by Ian Fleming.

The Post Fleming Novels

Time is getting short, however. The submission deadline is Dec. 15. To view all the information (including the contact information and more details about the conference, which will be in New Mexico): just CLICK RIGHT HERE.

By Brenda Wise

The Fiction/Thriller ‘SOUTHTRAP’ is now available to the public in large print.

 Old Version New version

Available through www.iuniverse.com

ISBN  978-1-4401-7744-6  U.S. $24.95

We now await the final reprint “A HIVE OF DEAD MEN.”

Copyright 2009 Geoffrey Jenkins, Dave Jenkins, Ronald Payne, Brenda Wise

www.geoffrey-jenkins.co.za

Título: Espião e Amante
Autor: Ian Fleming & Vivienne Michel
Género: Romance
Tamanho: 155
Formato: Pdf

O espião que me amou chamava-se James Bond e a noite em que ele me amou foi de gritante terror no "Dreamy Pines Motor Court", nos Adirondacks, no norte do Estado de Nova York. Esta é a história de quem eu sou e de como, através de um pesadelo de tortura e da ameaça, de violência e morte, cheguei a uma madrugada de êxtase. É tudo verdade, absoluta verdade. Se assim não fosse, Ian Fleming não teria arriscado a sua reputação profissional servindo como meu co-autor e convencendo Jonathan Cape a ser o meu editor. Generosamente obteve, também, permissão para algumas pequenas violações da Lei de Segredos Oficiais, que eram necessárias à minha história.

Download

From the Tripped over Something Interesting department, filed under You Learn Something New Every Day:

Loelia Ponsonby

A website most of us, I suspect, would have little reason to visit is David Patrick Columbia’s New York Social Diary. It’s exactly what it sounds like — Mr. Columbia reporting on what happened at parties he’s been to, and what people in his orbit (and, presumably, the reader’s,) are doing. I’m sure it’s interesting stuff for its intended target.

His latest column will be of interest to James Bond fans. Through a chain of associations, Mr. Columbia comes to reflect on a person considered to be one of the Bright Young Things in 1920s Edwardian society: Loelia, Lady Lindsay, a.k.a. Loelia Ponsonby, wife of the 2nd Duke of Westminster, a.k.a. James Bond’s secretary in the Ian Fleming novels Moonraker and Diamonds Are Forever — yes, that Loelia Ponsonby!

In real life, she definitely did not need to work as a secretary. As Columbia writes,

Loelia Mary Ponsonby was born on Feb 6 1902, the only daughter of the courtier Sir Frederick Ponsonby, later 1st Lord Sysonby. ‘Fritz’ Ponsonby was assistant private secretary to Queen Victoria, King Edward VII and King George V, and wrote Recollections of Three Reigns.
Young Loelia once occupied the lap of Edward VII and amused His Majesty by seizing his beard and demanding: “But King, where’s your crown?”

Noel Coward and Ian Fleming were mutual friends of hers; Coward wrote the forward to her memoirs, while Fleming immortalized her in popular fiction as 007’s secretary. (Mr. Columbia mistakenly writes of her as the inspiration for M’s secretary, the famous “Miss Moneypenny.”) Sharp-eyed readers might also infer parallels between the story of her ruined marriage, and Fleming’s tale of a similarly toxic relationship, “Quantum of Solace.”

The whole story is included in his report Cooler but far from chilly for mid-November, and will add just a little bit more to your store of James Bond knowledge.

Nov. 11 is the birthday of the literary James Bond, as set by author John Pearson in his “biography” of 007, with a birthdate of Nov. 11, 1920.

So much that could be said, but we’ll suffice with happy birthday, Mr. Bond.

In love with William Tempest’s Spring / Summer coral satin dresses and bunny suits.

This 23 year old London College of Fashion grad’s third collection titled “A View to Kill”

is influenced by the visuals of the infamous Crazy Horse Paris burlesque show and Ian Fleming’s secret agent James Bond.

visit his blog here

Daniel Craig has confirmed that production for the 23rd James Bond film will begin in late 2010. He stated this while as a guest on the Regis and Kelly Show in New York City.

The plan is to start shooting the next one at the end of next year, so it’ll be ready for 2011. We’ve got a lot of work to do.

Click here to see the full video.

BY BRENDA WISE

OLD VERSION   NEW VERSION

The wind struck another hammer-blow.  The whaler wheeled away stern-on, and then came up with a sickening thump.

‘One anchor cable gone!’ Minnaar shouted about the roar of the wind.  ‘The other…’

he never finished.  The whaler sprang free as the second cable parted.  She had been secured facing south-west and now she pluged back into the maelstrom.  The water poured ankle deep on the bridge…

“Killer deserts, grizzled prospectors, mass suicides, savage nomads…and a vanishing U-boat patrol.  I enjoyed it more than any other novel for ages.”  –Daily Telegraph

“Top-class, fascinating, scientifically plausible…a brilliant example of how to mix the mundane and the fantastic.”  –Observer

GEOFFREY JENKINS was born in 1920 in Port Elizabeth, South Africa and educated in the old Transvaal, where he wrote his first book-a legal history-at the age of seventeen.  After leaving school he worked as a sub-editor in Zimbabwe, later becoming a newspaperman in both Britain and South Africa.  He combined a most successful career in journalism with a life-long interest in the sea, and his knowledge of ships and sailing has provided the background to many of his novels.

His first novel, “A TWIST OF SAND,” was published in 1959 and immediately became a bestseller; it was later filmed.  Eight more most successful novels followed having sold over five million copies in twenty-three different languages.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THE RIVER OF DIAMONDS available at www.iuniverse.com  1-800-AUTHORS

ISBN:  978-1-4401-3522-4  U.S.  $17.95

We now await for the last two of the (16) reprints, “SOUTH TRAP,” AND “A HIVE OF DEAD MEN” to come off the printing press.

COPYRIGHT 2009, GEOFFREY JENKINS, DAVE JENKINS, RONALD PAYNE, BRENDA WISE

As we approach the final production of the 16 Geoffrey Jenkins reprints, we have received ‘A GRUE ICE.’   We are waiting for “THE RIVER OF DIAMONDS,’ ‘SOUTHTRAP,’ AND ‘A HIVE OF DEADMEN.’

Many thanks go to iUniverse for their wonderful publishing team (of which there were many.) 

A GRUE OF ICE BY GEOFFREY JENKINS ISBN  978-1-4401-8201-3  U.S.  $16.95  WWW.IUNIVERSE.COM AND MANY OTHER BOOKS STORES

CLICK HERE for a slideshow presentation: 

With Christmas quickly approaching, order your collection!

COPYRIGHT 2009, GEOFFREY JENKINS, DAVE JENKINS, RONALD PAYNE, BRENDA WISE

It’s not unheard of; Maud Adams played both Andrea Anders and Octopussy in the Roger Moore era of Bond flicks, and for good reason. I don’t think Eon Productions should abandon this concept, as there were a handful of Bond girls from previous Bond films who could still fill the role of a credible Bond girl today.

The Top 5 Girls Who Should Return

1. Sophie Marceau (Elektra King, The World Is Not Enough, 1999)
What a waste of talent. In my opinion, The World Is Not Enough was trash, despite being one of Brosnan’s better Bond flicks.  It’s a shame that Sophie Marceau’s wonderful acting abilities were wasted in this film. Though she played the part of Elektra King extremely well, I’d love to see her come back to the series in the form of a better-written, and more primary character. Perhaps the main Bond girl, instead of being over-shadowed by the bad acting and bouncing jugs of Denise Richards.

2. Izabella Scorupco (Natalya Simonova, GoldenEye, 1995)
Though her talent wasn’t quite as wasted as Marceau’s in Brosnan’s debut film, GoldenEye, I’d still like to see her return in a stronger role. GoldenEye worked pretty well as a post-Cold War, 90’s action thriller, and so did the character of Natalya; if you’ll recall, she was basically a computer technician caught in the middle of all of the action. I wouldn’t mind seeing her return as a primary Bond girl who is more involved with the film’s plot, rather than just being a pretty face on the side. Scorupco’s a good actress, and it’d be nice to see her get a role that she deserves — seems like she’s been signing onto a lot of trash lately.

3. Rosamund Pike (Miranda Frost, Die Another Day, 2002)
As many will agree, Die Another Day was an absolute atrocity of a Bond film. Rosamund Pike seems like she had lots of potential in Brosnan’s final Bond outing, but it seems like the dynamic duo, Purvis and Wade, seemed to under-write the character. To me, there wasn’t much to Miranda Frost. Yeah, she betrays Bond … just like the Bond girl in the film before Die Another Day. And she sleeps with the villain … just like the Bond girl in the film before Die Another Day, also. That’s about all there is to her. Plus, her death allows Halle Berry to mutter the brilliant line, “Bitch.”

4. Jane Seymour (Solitaire, Live and Let Die, 1973)
Not much to say here, other than she’s a great actress, and she’s looking as good as ever.
I guarantee that this wouldn’t disappoint fans at all.

5.  Olga Kurylenko (Camille, Quantum of Solace, 2008)
Quantum of Solace was given some mixed reviews after its release. Whichever side of the fence you’re on, I’m sure you can say that Olga Kurylenko’s performance was neither outstanding or horrific. Certainly, she did much better than some of the more recent, past Bond girls. The only problem was that it seemed she wasn’t written very well — a recurring theme with Purvis and Wade… hmm. Anyhow, I’d like to see her play a character with more depth. She’s certainly got the looks, also.

The cultural-observer website, When Falls the Coliseum, has posted today really terrific column by crime and espionage journalist, Paul Davis. In Through a Thriller Writers Eyes: The Life and Work of Ian Fleming, he celebrates Fleming’s two nonfiction books, Thrilling Cities and The Diamond Smugglers. The former volume, a collection of pieces on cities the author found particularly fascinating, was reprinted this year by Ian Fleming Publications.

Mr. Davis has a unique appreciation for the Fleming travelogue:

I carried a paperback copy of carried a paperback copy of Thrilling Cities with me throughout my time in the U.S. Navy in the early and mid-1970s. I was thrilled that I was able to visit many of the cities Fleming wrote about two decades before me.

The article concludes with an interview with the Bond creator’s nephew, Fergus Fleming; you can read it all RIGHT HERE. Mr. Davis’website, Paul Davis on Crime has his comments about the column, and a recently posted appreciation of the 1969 James Bond film classic, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, as well as a plethora of other interesting goodies.

Daniel Craig, as James Bond, has made it onto the cover of the Decemeber edition of British film magazine Empire.

This edition of the magazine has 10 different special edition covers, marking the 10 most popular icons from the last decade. The other covers include:

• Jason Bourne (Matt Damon, The Bourne Trilogy)
• Aragon (Vittigo Mortessen, Lord of the Rings Trilogy)
• The Bride (Uma Thurman, Kill Bill Vol 1 & 2)
• The Joker (Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight)
• Maximus (Russell Crowe, Gladiator)
• Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe, The Harry Potter Films)
• Shaun (Simon Pegg, Shaun of the Dead)
• Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp, Pirates of the Caribbean Trilogy)
• Wolverine (Hugh Jackman, The X-Men Films)
• Ron Burgandy (Will Ferrell, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgandy)

It is said that Bond has always been a bankable cover icon for Empire.

Here’s a picture of the artwork:

ஒரிஜினல் லிஸ்ட் இங்கே. பாஸ்டன் பாலாவுக்கு நன்றி!

சைரனோ டி பெர்கராக், Cyrano de Bergerac – எட்மண்ட் ரோஸ்டாண்ட் எழுதிய புத்தகம். வெகு நாட்களுக்கு முன் படித்த நாடகம், கதை மட்டுமே மங்கலாக நினைவிருக்கிறது. ஹோசே ஃபெர்ரர் நடித்து ஒரு முறை, ஜெரார்ட் டிபார்டியூ நடித்து ஒரு முறை வந்திருக்கிறது. இரண்டையும் கமல் குறிப்பிடுகிறார், இரண்டையும் நான் பார்த்ததில்லை.

ஸ்பார்டகஸ், Spartacus – ஹோவர்ட் ஃபாஸ்ட் எழுதிய நாவல். ஸ்டான்லி குப்ரிக் இயக்கி கிர்க் டக்ளஸ் நடித்த புகழ் பெற்ற படம். என் கண்ணில் சுமாரான படம்தான். நாவல் படித்ததில்லை.

எ க்ளாக்வொர்க் ஆரஞ்ச், A Clockwork Orange – அந்தோனி பர்ஜஸ் எழுதிய நாவல். படித்ததில்லை. ஸ்டான்லி குப்ரிக் இயக்கி மால்கம் மக்டொவல் நடித்தது. பிரமாதமான படம். குப்ரிக் கலக்கிவிட்டார்.

லாஸ்ட் டெம்ப்டேஷன் ஆஃப் க்ரைஸ்ட், Last Temptation of Christ – நிகோலாய் கசான்ட்சாகிஸ் எழுதிய நாவல். மார்டின் ஸ்கொர்ஸஸி இயக்கி இருக்கிறார். பார்த்ததுமில்லை, படித்ததுமில்லை.

பீயிங் தேர், Being There – ஜெர்சி கொசின்ஸ்கி எழுதிய நாவல். ஹால் ஆஷ்பி இயக்கி பீட்டர் செல்லர்ஸ் நடித்தது. படித்ததில்லை, ஆனால் படம் பார்த்திருக்கிறேன். சுமாரான படம்.

ட்ரெய்ன்ஸ்பாட்டிங், Trainspotting – இர்வின் வெல்ஷ் எழுதிய நாவல். ஸ்லம்டாக் மில்லியனர் புகழ் டான்னி பாயில் இயக்கியது. பார்த்ததுமில்லை, படித்ததுமில்லை, கேள்விப்பட்டதும் இல்லை.

பர்ஃப்யூம், Perfume – யாரோ பாட்ரிக் சுஸ்கிண்ட் எழுதியதாம். டாம் டைக்வர் இயக்கியதாம். பார்த்ததுமில்லை, படித்ததுமில்லை, கேள்விப்பட்டதும் இல்லை.

சிட்டி சிட்டி பாங் பாங், Chitti Chitti Bang Bang – ஜேம்ஸ் பாண்ட் புகழ் இயன் ஃப்ளெமிங் எழுதிய சிறுவர்களுக்கான புத்தகம். டிக் வான் டைக் நடித்தது. படம் சிறுவர் சிறுமிகளுக்கு பிடிக்கும். நாவல் படித்ததில்லை.

க்யூரியஸ் கேஸ் ஆஃப் பெஞ்சமின் பட்டன், Curious Case of Benjamin Button – ஸ்காட் ஃபிட்ஸ்ஜெரால்ட் எழுதிய சிறுகதை. ப்ராட் பிட் நடித்து டேவிட் ஃபிஞ்சர் இயக்கியது. இந்த வருஷ ஆஸ்கார் போட்டியில் ஸ்லம்டாக் மில்லியனருக்கு பெரும் போட்டியாக இருந்தது. படித்ததில்லை, இன்னும் பார்க்கவும் இல்லை.

ஃபாரஸ்ட் கம்ப், Forrest Gump – வின்ஸ்டன் க்ரூம் எழுதியது. டாம் ஹாங்க்ஸ் நடித்து ராபர்ட் ஜெமகிஸ் இயக்கியது. சராசரிக்கு மேலான படம். பல ஆஸ்கார் விருதுகளை வென்றது. ஆனால் அந்த சமயத்தில் வந்த பல்ப் ஃபிக்ஷன், ஷாஷான்க் ரிடம்ப்ஷன் ஆகியவை இதை விட சிறந்த படங்கள். புத்தகம் படித்ததில்லை.

மாரத்தான் மான், Marathon Man- வில்லியம் கோல்ட்மான் எழுதிய நாவல். டஸ்டின் ஹாஃப்மன், லாரன்ஸ் ஒலிவியர் நடித்து ஜான் ஷ்லேசிங்கர் இயக்கியது. பார்த்ததுமில்லை, படித்ததுமில்லை.

மாஜிக், Magic – இதுவும் வில்லியம் கோல்ட்மான் எழுதிய நாவல். அந்தோனி ஹாப்கின்ஸ் நடித்து ரிச்சர்ட் அட்டன்பரோ இயக்கியது. பார்த்ததுமில்லை, படித்ததுமில்லை, கேள்விப்பட்டதும் இல்லை.

டிராகுலா, Dracula – ப்ராம் ஸ்டோகர் எழுதிய நாவல். கமல் ஃப்ரான்சிஸ் ஃபோர்ட் கொப்போலா இயக்கிய படத்தை சொல்கிறார். நான் பார்த்திருப்பது பழைய பேலா லுகோசி நடித்த படம்தான். லுகொசி ஒரு eerie உணர்வை நன்றாக கொண்டு வருவார். நாவல் சுமார்தான், ஆனால் ஒரு genre-இன் பிரதிநிதி.

காட்ஃபாதர், Godfather – மரியோ பூசோ எழுதியது. அல் பசினோ, மார்லன் பிராண்டோ நடித்து ஃப்ரான்சிஸ் ஃபோர்ட் கொப்போலா இயக்கிய மிக அருமையான படம். நல்ல நாவலும் கூட.

கமல் கொஞ்சம் esoteric படங்களை விரும்புவார் போல தெரிகிறது. எனக்கு மிகவும் பிடித்த, மிக அற்புதமான நாவலும், அருமையான படமும் ஆன To Kill a Mockingbird-ஐ விட்டுவிட்டாரே!

கமலின் லிஸ்டில் காட்ஃபாதர் மட்டுமே நல்ல புத்தகம், மற்றும் நல்ல படம் – என்னைப் பொறுத்த வரையில். நான் படித்திருக்கும் புத்தகமும் அது ஒன்றுதான். கமல் சொல்லி இருக்கும் படங்களில் நான் பாதிக்கு மேல் பார்த்ததில்லை. பார்த்த வரையில் காட்ஃபாதர் மற்றும் எ க்ளாக்வொர்க் ஆரஞ்ச் மட்டுமே பார்க்க வேண்டிய படம். ஆனால் அவர் சொல்லி இருக்கும் படங்களில் பல பிரபலமான படங்கள் – ஸ்பார்டகஸ், ஃபாரஸ்ட் கம்ப், பெஞ்சமின் பட்டன், சிட்டி சிட்டி பாங் பாங் – இருக்கின்றன. பார்த்திருப்பீர்கள். படித்திருப்பீர்கள். நீங்கள் கமலின் தேர்வுகளைப் பற்றி என்ன நினைக்கிறீர்கள்?

தொடர்புடைய பதிவுகள்
கமல் சிபாரிசுகள் – சிறந்த திரைக்கதைகள் உள்ள தமிழ் படங்கள்

En una reciente entrevista, y a pregunta expresa de los reporteros, el actor Daniel Craig aseguró que la entrega número 23 de la saga del 007 es un hecho, y que estará comenzando a filmarse para fines del 2010, donde él seguirá encarnando al agente secreto. Mencionó que desconoce aún el título de la nueva cinta, pero que se volverá a utilizar una de las historias originales de Ian Fleming como base. Recordemos, sin embargo, que para Quantum of Solace sólo se tomó el título del relato, así que el hablar de tomar como base puede ser muy discutible.

According to Access Hollywood, actor Daniel Craig told fans that Bond 23 starts up in late 2010.

An extra year will probably help MGM sort out their current financial situation, also.

As of now, we know that Bond 23 is being written by  Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, and Peter Morgan, who penned “The Queen” and “Frost/Nixon”. David Arnold will return to compose his sixth Bond film score. However, producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson have yet to announce a director.

This is good news. Perhaps it’ll give the Bond team a chance to develop a fresh story, with fresh characters. Maybe they’ll use the time wisely to seek out an experienced director, too.