[Criminal Number 18F]

Uncanny. The professor who talks about how the Bond series is all about imaginary Hollywood type villains (like when Clancy's The Sum of All Fears morphed its bad guys from Arab jihadis to... European Neo-Nazis in its slimy progress from page to screen), apparently has not read the books. While the books often did create fanciful villains, there is never a moment's doubt as to whether the Russkies were good guys or not. (Come to think of it, this prof, like most of his kind, probably came through the cold war without a moment's doubt as to whether the Russkies were good guys or not -- of course, his answer would be "good guys.")

As far as the film goes, I'll skip it. This actor Craig seems like a lightweight compared to Connery or Moore. Heck, he's a lightweight compared to George Lazenby.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[Eurotwit]

As for Craig, I think it is the exact opposite.

The first manly Bond since Connery.

Cheers.

[fight_truth_decay]

Check some of the reviews here. Now, I have actually seen this Bond film can offer my recommendation.

[the scotsman]

Mate,if you think he is a lightweight,you aint seen the film.

Craig is the toughest Bond since Connery and in parts FAR more brutal...he is excellent in the role.

I really do recommend it,like the rest of us here.

Criminal,you WONT be disappointed.I know a few 'anti-Craig for Bond' people and EVERY ONE has admitted to me this week that they were wrong..

WELL WORTH your dollars,mate.