Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar
From: barmar@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: Never say never again
Message-ID: <795@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 9-Oct-83 03:24:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.795
Posted: Sun Oct  9 03:24:11 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Oct-83 13:42:33 EDT
References: <793@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 25

I saw the new Bond film tonight, and while I enjoyed it very much, I was
also disappointed by the many traditions that they gave up.  While it is
quite understandable that there should be a new M (this guy was even
pretty good, in a weird sort of way), I thought it was stupid to trade
in Miss Monnypenny and Q.  I think that the CIA agent was supposed to be
the same character played by Jack Lord ("Hawaii 5-O") some movies ago,
and I thought that it was silly to attempt this continuity on such a
minor character without using the same actor.  I also missed the nude
silouettes under the titles, although I admit that putting real action
under them is a close second.  I spent the entire movie waiting for him
to say "Bond, James Bond"; he eventually did say it, but not with any
feeling.  He was at a party in Casino Royale, but he didn't even go near
the Baccarat table (that was a roulette table he was hanging around for
a moment).

So, after all this, why did I enjoy it?  The action was good.  There
were a number of humorous touches.  The love scene with Fatima was a bit
shocking; there was an small child (around eight years old, I'd guess,
but I'm bad at that) with his parents in front of me, and I was
wondering how they must have felt.  On the other hand, the opening scene
was wonderfully done.
-- 
			Barry Margolin
			ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics
			UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar