Topic: Which JB do you like the most?

[DJ Doena]

[Achim]

I haven't seen any Jack Bauer and only parts of Jason Bourne...

James Bond has just way more exposure and variety and deserves the lead on this.

[RossRoy]

I haven't been exposed to James Bond much, mostly parodies. I've yet to see a James Bond movie in its entirety.

Jason Bourne, is ok, I like the movies but that's about.

Jack Bauer takes the cake for me. He's not afraid to bend the rules to get results, yet it's always for the good of the nation. And he's such a bad ass! He gets my vote.

[Jimmy]

Not a fan of any of the three.

I've seen a couple of Bond's movie but much more for the lady than him,
I've never watch 24 on tv since I don't like like the "USA! USA! we are the best" type of televison,
I own the first two Bourne's movie and I'm not impress, just action no substance.

So I can't vote, but the real Jason Bourne in the Ludlum's books would have my vote if he was included 

[Najemikon]

I love 24, but Bauer is a borderline thug compared to the other two. Jason Bourne comes second as he is much more sophisticated than Bauer, but he is merely a well designed weapon who doesn't even want the job. Quick note to Jimmy though: "just action no substance"? You obviously don't like action movies because I think of Bourne Ultimatum as one of the best pure action movies ever. It's just astonishing.

My vote goes to James Bond. A nuanced, fallible, but hero who carries the best of British spirit wherever he goes. Peerless. The biggest difference to the other two is he responds to and uses his emotion. He could kick both their arses into next week.

[lovemunkey187]

Bond.

I love 24, but Bauer is a borderline thug compared to the other two. Jason Bourne comes second as he is much more sophisticated than Bauer, but he is merely a well designed weapon who doesn't even want the job. Quick note to Jimmy though: "just action no substance"? You obviously don't like action movies because I think of Bourne Ultimatum as one of the best pure action movies ever. It's just astonishing.

My vote goes to James Bond. A nuanced, fallible, but hero who carries the best of British spirit wherever he goes. Peerless. The biggest difference to the other two is he responds to and uses his emotion. He could kick both their arses into next week.

I'm of the opinion that Ultimatum i the worst of the three, kinda like Spider-man they got steadily worse as they proceeded.

[Najemikon]

Bond.

I love 24, but Bauer is a borderline thug compared to the other two. Jason Bourne comes second as he is much more sophisticated than Bauer, but he is merely a well designed weapon who doesn't even want the job. Quick note to Jimmy though: "just action no substance"? You obviously don't like action movies because I think of Bourne Ultimatum as one of the best pure action movies ever. It's just astonishing.

My vote goes to James Bond. A nuanced, fallible, but hero who carries the best of British spirit wherever he goes. Peerless. The biggest difference to the other two is he responds to and uses his emotion. He could kick both their arses into next week.

I'm of the opinion that Ultimatum i the worst of the three, kinda like Spider-man they got steadily worse as they proceeded.

Oooh, no! Ultimatum has to be one of the finest action films ever. And while we're at it, Mr. Wrong, Spider-Man 2 was much better than 1. But 3 was a pile of cack, granted! 

[lovemunkey187]

Bond.

I love 24, but Bauer is a borderline thug compared to the other two. Jason Bourne comes second as he is much more sophisticated than Bauer, but he is merely a well designed weapon who doesn't even want the job. Quick note to Jimmy though: "just action no substance"? You obviously don't like action movies because I think of Bourne Ultimatum as one of the best pure action movies ever. It's just astonishing.

My vote goes to James Bond. A nuanced, fallible, but hero who carries the best of British spirit wherever he goes. Peerless. The biggest difference to the other two is he responds to and uses his emotion. He could kick both their arses into next week.

I'm of the opinion that Ultimatum i the worst of the three, kinda like Spider-man they got steadily worse as they proceeded.

Oooh, no! Ultimatum has to be one of the finest action films ever. And while we're at it, Mr. Wrong, Spider-Man 2 was much better than 1. But 3 was a pile of cack, granted! 

Which action scene?
Ultimatum had two scenes that I really enjoyed;
1. the rooftop chase/parkeur bit.
2. Padington Station avoiding the cameras.

You really thought that Spidey2 was better than 1?

[Najemikon]

Bond.

I love 24, but Bauer is a borderline thug compared to the other two. Jason Bourne comes second as he is much more sophisticated than Bauer, but he is merely a well designed weapon who doesn't even want the job. Quick note to Jimmy though: "just action no substance"? You obviously don't like action movies because I think of Bourne Ultimatum as one of the best pure action movies ever. It's just astonishing.

My vote goes to James Bond. A nuanced, fallible, but hero who carries the best of British spirit wherever he goes. Peerless. The biggest difference to the other two is he responds to and uses his emotion. He could kick both their arses into next week.

I'm of the opinion that Ultimatum i the worst of the three, kinda like Spider-man they got steadily worse as they proceeded.

Oooh, no! Ultimatum has to be one of the finest action films ever. And while we're at it, Mr. Wrong, Spider-Man 2 was much better than 1. But 3 was a pile of cack, granted! 

Which action scene?
Ultimatum had two scenes that I really enjoyed;
1. the rooftop chase/parkeur bit.
2. Padington Station avoiding the cameras.

You really thought that Spidey2 was better than 1?

Those two, yes, and the final car chase. But in general, it was how the whole thing was put together that made it seem so fresh. Dovetailing the story with part two was clever and the way the handheld method meant there was no room for gimmicks like slow mo or bullet time or staged choreography in the fights. It had a raw immediacy.

I find most superhero films hobbled by their origin stories and I'm usually more interested in the sequel as that's where they cut loose. X-Men 2, Dark Knight, etc. Plus Spidey 1 cocked up the origin! Spidey 2 seemed funnier, more ambitious and confident. The only bum note was the ridiculous finale to the train sequence where everyone agrees they won't reveal his ID. Crap! They'd be onto the papers the next damn day!

[lovemunkey187]

Those two, yes, and the final car chase. But in general, it was how the whole thing was put together that made it seem so fresh. Dovetailing the story with part two was clever and the way the handheld method meant there was no room for gimmicks like slow mo or bullet time or staged choreography in the fights. It had a raw immediacy.

I find most superhero films hobbled by their origin stories and I'm usually more interested in the sequel as that's where they cut loose. X-Men 2, Dark Knight, etc. Plus Spidey 1 cocked up the origin! Spidey 2 seemed funnier, more ambitious and confident. The only bum note was the ridiculous finale to the train sequence where everyone agrees they won't reveal his ID. Crap! They'd be onto the papers the next damn day!

A key point that you raise in regards to Bourne is one of the things that turns me against it(and also Tony Scott's latest films).
The constant jarring of hand held camera work.

In what way did they cock up Spideys origin? He got bitten by a radioactive spider and developed abilities. Sounds about right to me.
Ok, theres that bit in the cafeteria and the bit in the hallway that were crap, but the rest of the first one is pretty good.
It should've been Gwen Stacy in the first one and then MJ introduced in the second.

I still maintain to this day, from very the first time I heard about the casting that Tobey Macguire was way wrong for Peter Parker, Kirsten Dunst was the wrong choice for Mary Jane and as much as I like Sam Raimi's work on the Evil Dead films, he wasn't a good fit for being in charge of this.

[Najemikon]

Those two, yes, and the final car chase. But in general, it was how the whole thing was put together that made it seem so fresh. Dovetailing the story with part two was clever and the way the handheld method meant there was no room for gimmicks like slow mo or bullet time or staged choreography in the fights. It had a raw immediacy.

I find most superhero films hobbled by their origin stories and I'm usually more interested in the sequel as that's where they cut loose. X-Men 2, Dark Knight, etc. Plus Spidey 1 cocked up the origin! Spidey 2 seemed funnier, more ambitious and confident. The only bum note was the ridiculous finale to the train sequence where everyone agrees they won't reveal his ID. Crap! They'd be onto the papers the next damn day!

A key point that you raise in regards to Bourne is one of the things that turns me against it(and also Tony Scott's latest films).
The constant jarring of hand held camera work.

In what way did they cock up Spideys origin? He got bitten by a radioactive spider and developed abilities. Sounds about right to me.
Ok, theres that bit in the cafeteria and the bit in the hallway that were crap, but the rest of the first one is pretty good.
It should've been Gwen Stacy in the first one and then MJ introduced in the second.

I still maintain to this day, from very the first time I heard about the casting that Tobey Macguire was way wrong for Peter Parker, Kirsten Dunst was the wrong choice for Mary Jane and as much as I like Sam Raimi's work on the Evil Dead films, he wasn't a good fit for being in charge of this.

Shaky-Cam does take some getting used to for some. I found I liked it once and on a second viewing, it was essential and flowed beautifully.

I concede Raimi should have been better and his personality should have infused the already bonkers premise. Somehow it turned into a very good blockbuster, but not much more.

My issue with the origin is this: in the comic, Peter is alone in a lab working on an experiment with gamma. A spider, minding its own business wanders into the path, gets hit by the ray, which pisses it off that it bites the nearest person (the only person) and then dies. A one in a million, truly freak occurence.

In the film, Peter's science skills are played down to being a decent student on a field trip where he is shown 13 genetically engineered spiders. They've been enhanced by scientists way beyond Peter's level and they can't look after them. Why does one choose to bite Peter? If it can do that to Peter, do we know it died and isn't doing it to more? Even if it didn't die, it has 12 escapologist siblings with potentially similar affects.

Basically, there could be about 20 spider-people using this origin, plus scientists who only need to read the papers and put two and two together to work out that maybe they had something to do with the weird guy pretending to be a spider! Think about it. They enhance 13 spiders, one goes missing and now there's a bloke called Spider-Man?