Success and a Bunny

[awanderingbard]

Made (and I do mean made, she was very reluctant) Mum watch the Tennant/Tate "Much Ado About Nothing", and she loved David Tennant (and the play), and has now agreed to give Doctor Who a go. Success! I have warned her he doesn't come in until Series Two, but she wants to watch from the beginning, so she will understand the plot. Nerd conversion is going very well. *evil wiggly fingers*

In other news, someone left a comment on "An Interesting Puzzle" on AO3, suggesting a sequel where Mycroft looks on 221B as a sort of field hospital and directs agents there. My little AU brain immediately thought of Bond being sent to 221B, and Q and Sherlock fighting over his earpiece while John quietly performs surgery on the coffee table. Which is not exactly as prompted, but...I kind of like the idea.

Stupid AU brain.

Comments

[awanderingbard.livejournal.com]

It depends on what you want out of a Bond film. If you're looking for silly gadgets and a suave, charming hero, the Craig films aren't for you. Craig's Bond is sort of a sociopath, not particularly likeable, but still charming and interesting. The fight scenes are a bit brutal, but well done, and the women get a bit of a better deal, but are still sort of...there. I like the action, and I like Craig as Bond. Casino Royale is one of my favourite films ever, but Quantum of Solace is a bit meh. Skyfall is very good, and not quite as violent. It's a bit more elegant, and explores the characters more.

[donutsweeper.livejournal.com]

Hmm, not sure they're my cup of tea then. Well, one of these days I'm sure I'll get to it.

[awanderingbard.livejournal.com]

No worries, I understand that. All you need to know is that Q is a technological genius hacker, who looks about twelve and is a sassypants. That's the whole of his character. You could probably get by on that, if you'd like to read the stories.

I think the Craig films take a more realistic view on the toll doing Bond's job would take on a person. They don't sugar coat his life at all. It's not...depressing, but they aren't a spy fantasy either.

[donutsweeper.livejournal.com]

I suppose by then they'd worked through Ian Flemming's stories and could go whatever direction they wanted.

[awanderingbard.livejournal.com]

My impression is that these ones are closer to the spirit of the original novels, but I've only ever read Casino Royale, so I can't comment on that. They're more Bourne Identity than anything else, I'd say.

I loved the Brosnan era, personally, but I like these ones too.

[donutsweeper.livejournal.com]

I really liked Goldeneye, we just never would up watching any others.

[awanderingbard.livejournal.com]

I love Goldeneye. It was my first Bond film. I love Tomorrow Never Dies, as well, even though the plot is completely ludicrous. The Bond girl in that one is awesome, and the action is brilliant. I think Brosnan was an awesome Bond.

[donutsweeper.livejournal.com]

My mom had a crush on Sean Connery so I saw ALL of the early ones. They're kind of fun in a totally ridiculous way.

[awanderingbard.livejournal.com]

I went through a phase several years ago where I watched most of them in order. I never made it to Dalton's movies, but I've seen all the others, I think. The ridiculousness is what makes them fun, I think. And that's what you won't get in a Craig movie. They're fun, but not ridiculous. Not in a gadgetty way, anyway.

[joonscribble.livejournal.com]

*butting in*

The Dalton ones were my first Bond films because my mother had a raging crush on Timothy Dalton years back. So I always thought James Bond was a terrible franchise and then I saw the Connery ones and the Brosnan ones and loved them. The Moore ones were a bit hit and miss.

[awanderingbard.livejournal.com]

Hee! I always liked the Moore ones because my mum had a crush on him, so they were her favourites. So, basically, it all depends on who your mum fancies, apparently. :-)