Sverdlovski said:
Damn, another one.
LOL! To be honest, I haven't been following all the hoopla with the casting on the latest Bond film. MJZ posted a pic of Craig over in the SV forum a week or so ago. If it wasn't for that, I wouldn't have even known what Craig looked like. Kind of funny, actually. I think with Bond, there's less of a perceived notion of what he should look like than say Superman, if only because there were more actors in the past fifty years or so to play him on film. But that opinion is coming from somebody who honestly could care less who was cast as the character. I'd imagine there are many people who have the same opinion on the Superman casting as well, though Reeve does apparently loom in people's heads.
That said, Craig is "okay," but he doesn't scream James Bond to me. He's also not *nearly* as good looking as other actors that have played the character in their prime, IMHO. For example, I first saw Timothy Dalton in Flash Gordon and man, now HE was hot. LOL
No, I'm talking about another woman that says Daniel Craig is not bad looking...
Thanks for the correction, Sverd. Seems like there's been an epidemic of foot-in-mouth disease lately. What's up with that?
Milkman95 said:
Yes it is, but most people like to hear a better reason behind that opinion, but oh well, to each their own.
See, the "problem" here (if you can call it that) is the likelihood that this particular person's opinion is a product of a gut feeling. It's connected on an emotional level. Men often have a hard time understanding this about women. (I'm not being flip.) She could "explain" her reasoning till the cows came home and I guarantee, most of the guys here would try to offer all these logical rebuttals for why she's "wrong" in thinking the way she does, but it's not gonna change her mind, nor should it. It's not rocket science. It's entertainment. I found her comments interesting not necessarily because I'm in agreement, but because I understand where she's coming from in the thought process.
Hopefully your sister might change her mind after seeing more footage and seeing what Richard Donner has to say........
If there's something under the surface that crinkles her nose about this particular film, the best trailer in the world isn't necessarily gonna magically change her mind. Nor would the comments of the cast and crew. It's why I don't bother arguing with people when they say SV disrespects the mythos. Hey, to each their own. DogofKrypton's sister falls into the same category.
I think most of the general public will just say "It's a new Superman film, we haven't seen him in a while, let's check it out", but I could be wrong.......
No, I think you're right on there. In fact, I'd put money on it. I think most fans will be interested to see the effects and the epic qualities that routinely define such an event film. But in order to be the box office extravaganza Warner's is hoping for, the film has to attract people on the fringe - fair weather theater goers that make their decisions on seeing a film based on the prevailing buzz. The film also needs to garner repeat customers.
I went this morning before work - trying something new
I'm kind of a nut - get up early and do abs and aerobics, and then hit the weights at night. Hubby says I'm obsessed. Well... yeah. I suppose. That could apply to a lot of things though. LOL
Back on topic...
Here's one ringing endorsement for folks: the guys at the comic book store I frequent (Wakefield, MA) have had that first pic of Routh in the suit up on their computer's wallpaper since it was released a year ago. Jeeze! I get board with my wallpaper after a month or so and have to rotate 'em out with another picture - even the ones of Welling. LOL