Quote:
Originally Posted by orlok
Your friend is probably right. I kept feeling that Deaver was trying to write with an eye on what the cinematic effect would be. He even says at one point about the reflection of flames in a woman's eyes "It was a striking image". I felt this got in the way of the storytelling.
He also tries to reference back to the older Bond stuff - one character is called Felicity Willing (echos of Pussy Galore etc.), and in the Daniel Craig days of a grittier Bond, I didn't think it worked.
|
hmmm that's upsetting, the new bonds (with craig) have been more in your face and modern in a way. he's more rogue than suave agent and i think that appeals to the newer generation of bond viewers. you'd think the days of silly character names in bond were over, guess not. i was hoping for an in your face, bournesque espionage romp.