Which is series is best- Bond vs Mission Impossible vs Bourne

[ringtail]

``

 

[Zim Hosein]

Bond, James Bond.

:thumbsup:

Cheers BladeVenom! :beer;

 

[sandorski]

Bond. Simple reason: It's had so many incarnations and leading men that you really never know what you're going to get. All of the Bond movies have been essentially classics. Each Bond front man makes every movie interesting in its own right. Some have been more tongue-in-cheek, some have been rather dramatic, some have been very action oriented, and some have been rather gritty. It's refreshing to see that kind of depth.

Pretty much. The older ones had an excellent balance of gadgets, comic book heroes/villains, babes, action, and humour.

That said, for more Drama and Action, Bourne is best on the list.

MI, I have seen the first 2, but none others. It's ok, it just doesn't wow me much.

 

[Muse]

Don't feellike "trying" to like Brosnan out of sympathy because his wife died. I read him as a prissy egomaniacle intellectually-dim prick, can't stand him.

Seems like you've developed some allergies there. I'm not so experienced. I liked Brosnan in L.A. Confidential. Haven't seen his Bond stuff. I noticed the new complete EON 22 Bond collection coming out on blu-ray in the fall, preorders now for 87 British pounds at Amazon UK. Enticing. Suppose I'll wait until it comes out, certainly.

This thread is really an apples vs oranges affair, pretty different stuff.

 

[nanette1985]

Bond, James Bond.

This.

Also The Bond movies have inspired the most great parodies.

 

[sdifox]

Bond

 

[Puppies04]

Bond
/thread

 

[Doppel]

Definitely not Mission Impossible.

this

 

[schneiderguy]

Bourne. Matt Damon is hawt.

Sean Connery is way hotter than Matt Damon.

 

[Broheim]

Bourne. Matt Damon is hawt.

Matt Damnon looks like he rode the short bus to school...

 

[theprodigalrebel]

The Bourne Trilogy > Mission: Impossible (as bad as no. 2 was) > The Bond Movies (disclaimer: I haven't seen any of the pre-Golden Eye Bond movies; don't tase me bro!)

Jason Bourne is definitely the more interesting character out of all three. Also, I'm kind of biased because I love Matt Damon and everything he does.

 

[Childs]

Seems like you've developed some allergies there. I'm not so experienced. I liked Brosnan in L.A. Confidential. Haven't seen his Bond stuff. I noticed the new complete EON 22 Bond collection coming out on blu-ray in the fall, preorders now for 87 British pounds at Amazon UK. Enticing. Suppose I'll wait until it comes out, certainly.

This thread is really an apples vs oranges affair, pretty different stuff.

I dont think Brosnan was in LA Confidential. Guy Pierce was in it, not Pierce Brosnan.

And MI3 was pretty damn good. The others, not so much.

 

[Balt]

Have to go with Bond. Even if you only consider the Daniel Craig Bond, there's a coldness there that basically doesn't give a fuck about doing anything but getting the mission done at any cost. Bourne still has a conscience of sorts.

I guess to some degree it's actually sociopathic behavior that Bond displays, which is not something that should be considered admirable. Still, as long as it's for good and not evil...

You have to admire the Bourne movies though. Until I saw them I didn't realize how many different things could be used as a weapon (like a textbook). And it's not even in a hammy kind of way, since once you think about it you realize it would actually kinda work.

Edit: And it's hard to deny that the Daniel Craig Bond movies were influenced by the Bourne style. He suddenly became a lot more physical than he had been in any previous Bond incarnation. The Connery Bond survived mostly by cunning. The Craig Bond just breaks people in two.

 

[Muse]

I dont think Brosnan was in LA Confidential. Guy Pierce was in it, not Pierce Brosnan.

Ah, right. :$ Guess I don't know WTF Pierce Brosnan is.

 

[Muse]

Have to go with Bond. Even if you only consider the Daniel Craig Bond, there's a coldness there that basically doesn't give a fuck about doing anything but getting the mission done at any cost. Bourne still has a conscience of sorts.

I guess to some degree it's actually sociopathic behavior that Bond displays, which is not something that should be considered admirable. Still, as long as it's for good and not evil...

You have to admire the Bourne movies though. Until I saw them I didn't realize how many different things could be used as a weapon (like a textbook). And it's not even in a hammy kind of way, since once you think about it you realize it would actually kinda work.

Edit: And it's hard to deny that the Daniel Craig Bond movies were influenced by the Bourne style. He suddenly became a lot more physical than he had been in any previous Bond incarnation. The Connery Bond survived mostly by cunning. The Craig Bond just breaks people in two.

Sean Connery was so devilish as Bond, it was masterful. But I think Matt Damon worked a lot harder in the Bourne series. I watched some of the Bourne extras and they explained how Damon prepared. I somehow doubt that Connery did anything too difficult. They probably had doubles do that stuff.

Yes, a whole lot of the Bond stuff was super hammy, and it gets a bit much! The Bourne trilogy steers clear of that, fortunately. And there are only 3 of them, right? Much more tidy.

The Bourne Trilogy > Mission: Impossible (as bad as no. 2 was) > The Bond Movies (disclaimer: I haven't seen any of the pre-Golden Eye Bond movies; don't tase me bro!)

Jason Bourne is definitely the more interesting character out of all three. Also, I'm kind of biased because I love Matt Damon and everything he does.

I'm a Damon fan too. Watched The Departed again a couple of weeks ago. Damon's work in that was stupendous!

Sean Connery is way hotter than Matt Damon.

Actually, I heard he's kind of a jerk... but I don't want to believe it.