Though of course imo not as perfect as Casino Royale, but immensely better than that confusing shit that was Quantum of Solice.

There simple and short explination of the movie

(No spoilers)

Just saw it, hated it.

Both were shit.

The only good 007 is the ones with Sean Connery.

Hey, man, most of the Roger Moore ones were awesome! And Goldeneye was great!

Bond movies aren't really the pinnacle of cinema anyway, but I haven't seen anything past Goldeneye that I'd rate as better than "average." I haven't seen Skyfall though, but the previous Craig movies are solidly mediocre.

Those are definitely my favorites, but there were others I enjoyed as well.

I particularly like how the early Bond films weren't quite as focused on action, gadgets, and explosions. Not that those things aren't fun sometimes too though...

Also, hats. I'm waiting for this fashion to come back.

I've enjoyed the Craig installments for what they are so far, though they have a rather different tone than the rest of the series.

I thought it built upon everything that made Casino Royale great, i.e. by turning the inhuman invincible killing machine of the pre-Craig era into the assassin more like the cynical, cold-blooded but yet still emotionally wrecked figure in the Fleming novels.

Maybe it was a touch too emotional, but still, THAT ending...

I am wondering if I will like this or not since I didn't like Casino Royale, other than Eva Green's purple dress, and everyone humps that movie with vigor.

I liked most Bond movies before it, for different reasons depending on the era, but Casino Royale felt like it was trying to hard and wasn't really a Bond movie.

I wish they'd make james bond movies again.

Tomorrow.

How exactly was Quantum of Solace confusing? SPOILERS AHEAD

Some environmental guy connected to political figures and powerful business men wanted to buy land in Bolivia to access the water. That's it.

SPOILERS DONE

As for Skyfall I was disappointed, the antagonist was only after revenge and he wasn't particularly interesting. Knowing more about M and the ending was decent on the other hand.

For bonds in general, I enjoy the old ones more especially the goofy ones with Sean Connery and some with Roger Moore.

Exactly.

They're decent movies, but just in line with everything else produced these days. I prefer the Bourne trilogy. And I miss the specificity of James Bond movies (even if they weren't exactly the specificity of the novels) : light-hearted indiana jones spy adventures with a classy and flegmatic spy. Nothing has come to replace this. James Bond (movie version) is a specific archetype, with a specific tone. These Craig movies have nothing in common with that, and are perfectly generic.

In a way, they're just some Bourne rip-off, exactly like old Bond movies had generated a whole genre of Bond rip-offs of their own...

I liked the roger moore ones because he gave Bond humor. I mean... Jaws anyone?

The latest are gearing towards lots of violence and gritty realism and that was not the reason i watched bond movies. Leave those to Jason Bourne and others. I much preferred the corny impossibilities coupled with cool gadgetry that older Bonds managed to pull off.

Saw it this afternoon. Like Quantum of Solace it was enjoyable, but not great. To me the pacing of those was just off somehow, and naturally due to Sam Mendes Skyfall was a little too chatty at times. Casino Royale got it just right.