1 hour ago, Logan007 said:

Craig is the worst.  He's a thug that can't act.  Connery, Moore, Brosnan...the rest are moot.

Lol! This is insanity......great actor, finally a Bond who's both the suave ladies man AND actually looks like he's been in a gym and could actually perform some of the physical things a Bond is supposed to be able to do. By far the best Bond, IMO....

1 hour ago, Logan007 said:

Craig is the worst.  He's a thug that can't act.  Connery, Moore, Brosnan...the rest are moot.

ugh Moore was terrible. Craig is good. 2nd favourite after Connery. 

Let's not forget about George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton

13 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Let's not forget about George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton

Thinking about Lazenby/OHMSS I wonder if that's now considered the first reboot as Bond had not met Blofeld yet in that movie. Darn good movie. Would like to have seen his work in the next one instead of Connery.

Edited September 9, 20169 yr by FrostyWinnipeg

14 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Let's not forget about George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton

Why not? Everyone else already has. 

30 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Let's not forget about George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton

I liked both of them.

Moore would have been better if the stories weren't such ****. He was good in Live and Let Die (best Bond song) but Moonraker and a View to a Kill were just terrible movies, regardless of who was playing Bond.

Dalton best moment was the end of the 2nd film. Too little too late.

Funny how Moonraker is a nearly identical story of the previous film - TSWLM and thats considered his best.

Loved Moore and all the camp that went with him.

And Daniel Craig cannot act.  He's nothing but a 2 dimensional actor.  But hey, if you like him, all the power to you.

 

FYI, Connery used to bodybuild.  He was in a Mr. Universe competition in 1953.  No other Bond beats Connery.

42 minutes ago, Logan007 said:

Loved Moore and all the camp that went with him.

And Daniel Craig cannot act.  He's nothing but a 2 dimensional actor.  But hey, if you like him, all the power to you.

 

FYI, Connery used to bodybuild.  He was in a Mr. Universe competition in 1953.  No other Bond beats Connery.

Or Zardoz.

lmao zardoz was such a steaming pile....

 

speaking of steaming piles, I heard they are going forward with the crow reboot. truth be told I was having trouble sleeping the last few nights and so I decided to put myself through the torment of watching the crow part 2, 3 and 4.  HOLY **** what garbage.

The 4th crow movie, despite having edward furlong, tara reid, Danny trejo, Dennis Hopper and marcus chong, you would think at the very least it could rise to the level of "B movie" not even close.... I loved Furlong as the young John connor in Terminator 2 but man that guy destroys movies, worst choice for a "crow" imaginable.

I watched Now You See Me 2.... Despite the poor reviews I thought it was enjoyable and possibly better then the first one. Third one is green lit so this is good.

Mr Sinister confirmed for Wolverine 3

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/765861-mister-sinister-confirmed-to-appear-in-wolverine-3#/slide/1

Always one of my fav Xmen villains, however I dont recall much focus between him and Wolverine on a stand alone. He was a biochemist obsessed with gene splicing but the only stuff I remember with wolverine and any kind of labs was already covered with Stryker and a few of the Xmen/origin movies.  I suppose I'll keep an open mind to this, but I would have saved Sinister for the next Xmen movie myself

Edited September 14, 20169 yr by Taynted_Fayth

Well that article only says he appears in the movie & the main villains will be the Reavers & Weapon X so this might just be their way of introducing him and then having him in a bigger role in future movies.

So no Old Man Logan?

Edward Furlong was flat awful in everything...except T2.

27 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

So no Old Man Logan?

Edward Furlong was flat awful in everything...except T2.

I think there will still be old man logan, both have some similarities as they've been around since the 1800's both have healing powers..etc It wouldnt surprise me if they tie in a bit of the beginning of the Origins movie that starts off with Logan being sick as a kid and Nathaniel Essex (Mr Sinister) coming to check on him, but taking some of his DNA in the process for his research. 

I believe Sinister has a role in cloning wolverine into a female counter part called X-23 as well

2 minutes ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

I think there will still be old man logan, both have some similarities as they've been around since the 1800's both have healing powers..etc It wouldnt surprise me if they tie in a bit of the beginning of the Origins movie that starts off with Logan being sick as a kid and Nathaniel Essex (Mr Sinister) coming to check on him, but taking some of his DNA in the process for his research. 

I believe Sinister has a role in cloning wolverine into a female counter part called X-23 as well

Did you even read the article you linked?

Quote

It stands to reason that Sinister’s role in the film will be tied to the creation of X-23, the young female clone of Wolverine

 

 not really just linked it to confirm the news lmao

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

So no Old Man Logan?

Edward Furlong was flat awful in everything...except T2.

American History X?, Pecker, Detroit Rock City?

Just a lil slack for Furlong.

I figured X-23 would show up if Sinister was involved seeing as how he's huge into cloning.  This would also pass the torch of Wolverine onto the new actress....only thing is, this is set in the future not the "present" 1980's X-Men.  I don't get how they're going to do this.  I wish they'd just scrap everything except Deadpool and start over in the "Deadpool" X-Men universe.  If they cross over with any of their movies X-Men/Deadpool/Wolverine/New Mutants, there's going to be SOOOOO many plot holes.  Deadpool and, I believe, New Mutants will be in the present.  X-Men in the past, and female Wolverine the Future.  It's all so screwed up.  I think I'm done with Singer being the mind behind all these movies and just start over with actual continuity.

Didnt see Detroit Rock City.  Have virtually no memory of Pecker other then knowing I didnt think it was very good.  And Furlong was passable in American History X.

 

http://screencrush.com/jumanji-first-look-cast-photo/

Finally got around to watching Star Trek Beyond (dvd version up on Kodi), I`m not a Trekkie by any means, but I found this one to be the worst of the 3 so far. Lots to complain about but i`ll just leave it at Sabotage by the Beastie Boys.

On 9/14/2016 at 0:31 AM, Taynted_Fayth said:

Mr Sinister confirmed for Wolverine 3

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/765861-mister-sinister-confirmed-to-appear-in-wolverine-3#/slide/1

Always one of my fav Xmen villains, however I dont recall much focus between him and Wolverine on a stand alone. He was a biochemist obsessed with gene splicing but the only stuff I remember with wolverine and any kind of labs was already covered with Stryker and a few of the Xmen/origin movies.  I suppose I'll keep an open mind to this, but I would have saved Sinister for the next Xmen movie myself

Wow!  I loved Mr Sinister when I was a kid.  Definitely a top villain.

1 hour ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

Finally got around to watching Star Trek Beyond (dvd version up on Kodi), I`m not a Trekkie by any means, but I found this one to be the worst of the 3 so far. Lots to complain about but i`ll just leave it at Sabotage by the Beastie Boys.

Yeah the digital download is available legally next week, a month b4 the bluray. So movies are now 2 months from theatre to digital. Wow.