Skip to main content

Bonded To Bond

Ever since I read my first Ian Fleming novel I have been hooked on to the whole espionage (as they say now) genre and have consumed several stories in print and film. James Bond has some sort of aura that is goofy at times yet hard to resist. I am convinced the marketing genius behind the franchise has me sold on this one. So much so that I have also amassed the movie collections on DVD format so I can watch it over and over. That is addiction. Trying to see what I might have missed the last time so I can regale in the sequences of exotic girls swooning and trying to say something clever at the same time; to the humanly impossible stunt that transports this modern superman to battle his nemesis. The reincarnations of the role have occured in film by changing who plays that role - from my memory its Roger Moore, Sean Connery, a rat faced Timothy somebody to the suave Pierce Brosnan to the current hunky Daniel Craig. Its funny and I am sure I would not get too many agreements on this but my favorite has been the newest Bond - Craig. Connery is the next best. The three films that Craig has portrayed 007 have been Casino Royale (sort of a prequel to the whole Bond series now released again with a new cast) to Quantum of Solace (by far the most idiotic plot ever conceived yet somehow I own it on DVD) and the latest with Javier Bardem as the villian in Skyfall. The last role for Craig also had Madame Dench kicking the bucket in her role of M. We will never know if her name was indeed Emma or something else? The plot thickens as we await the next release with perhaps more of the luscious Naomie Harris as Moneypenny and Ralph Fiennes' finesse as he plays the new M.. after 50 years its still a wonderful timepass.

Comments

  1. By a strange coincidence, I watched parts of Die Another Day on TV last night..the one liners are a great part of its charm, I think. Mel Brooks is the only American equivalent for those I can think of.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

But What If We're Wrong?

I attempted to read this book by author Chuck Klosterman backward to forward but it started hurting my brain so I decided to stop and do it like any other publication in the English language.  Start from page 1 and move to the right. Witty, caustic and thought provoking this is a book you want to read if you believe that the status quo might, just might be wrong. At times bordering on being contrarian about most things around us it tries to zero in on the notion of what makes anything believable and certain in our minds.  The fact that there is a fact itself is ironic.  Something analogous to the idea that you can never predict the future because there is no future. Many books and movies have tried to play on this concept - best that I recollect (I think I am) was 'The Truman Show'.  This book by Klosterman attempts to provoke the reader to at least contemplate that what they think they know may be wrong. He uses examples like concept of gravity, and how it ...

You are important to us

Followed by piano music.   Followed by 'we are experiencing heavier than usual call volume'.  Sounds macabre like bleeding during menstruation or after a ghastly attack with a weapon on a hemophiliac.  Sorry Mrs. Johnson but it appears little Gertrude here has been bleeding heavier than usual what with her night time activities competing with the woodchucks in your neighborhood. Some services even go as far as to pick a random day to say - 'if you were to call us during the Chinese lunar month when the moon is axiomatically hugging the polar star with Jupiter intravenous when call volume is light'.  Well I will be damned.  I thought  I had checked with my astrologer before I placed this well focused call but  I guess this is what you get for listening to a quack. Umph! I am not sure which marketing genius came up with this personal touch concept of informing the caller that you are really a jackass for actually calling the customer serv...

Of Jims and Johns

Here is another essay on the subject of first names. As in birth names. Or names provided to an offspring at birth. While the developed world tends to shy away from the exotic like Refrigerator or Coca Cola for their new production there is a plethora of Jims and Johns and Bobs or Robs. Speaking of which I do not think there is a categoric decision point at the time of birth if a child will be hereafter called as Bob. I mean have not yet met a toddler called Bob or Rob for that matter. At some point though the parental instinct to mouth out multiple syllables runs out and they switch from calling the crawler Robert to simply Robbie to Rob. Now speaking of - it is strange that the name sounds like something you would not want Rob to do - i.e. Rob anyone. Then why call someone that? After all Rob Peter to Pay Paul is not exactly a maxim to live a young life? Is it? Perhaps Peter or Paul might want to have a say in it? Then there is this matter of going to the John. Why degrad...