<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The best Bond gadgets ever remembered and rated</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2008/10/29/the-best-bond-gadgets-ever-remembered-and-rated/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2008/10/29/the-best-bond-gadgets-ever-remembered-and-rated/</link>
	<description>Technology news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:15:02 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: DaveBG</title>
		<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/10/29/the-best-bond-gadgets-ever-remembered-and-rated/comment-page-1/#comment-143571</link>
		<dc:creator>DaveBG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 22:09:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.blorge.com/?p=7978#comment-143571</guid>
		<description>IIRC we had 22 Bond movies working with the &#039;old formula&#039;.

I find Daniel Craig&#039;s Bond a refreshing change.

If the quips and gadgets really are missed they can always come back but I really do think that after 22 or so running the same kind of themes the change had to come &amp; is for me at least very welcome.

I think it makes the Bond movie interesting for all the right reasons again, he&#039;s more real, edgy and watchable.
The movies have pace and are aimed at a more adult audience.

I&#039;d far rather that then them relying on curiosity for what gizzmos they might come out with, what mildly amusing one-liners he might use or how glamorous the women in it are (no complaints about that one but some of the Roger Moore stuff particularly was so ridiculously cheesey).

Some of the gadgets were nice (if sometimes silly - the underwater Lotus springs to mind) but surely the big deal with the &#039;classic&#039; Bonds was always the huge set-piece finale 
(making the most of Pinewood&#039;s famous vast stage)?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IIRC we had 22 Bond movies working with the &#8216;old formula&#8217;.</p>
<p>I find Daniel Craig&#8217;s Bond a refreshing change.</p>
<p>If the quips and gadgets really are missed they can always come back but I really do think that after 22 or so running the same kind of themes the change had to come &amp; is for me at least very welcome.</p>
<p>I think it makes the Bond movie interesting for all the right reasons again, he&#8217;s more real, edgy and watchable.<br />
The movies have pace and are aimed at a more adult audience.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d far rather that then them relying on curiosity for what gizzmos they might come out with, what mildly amusing one-liners he might use or how glamorous the women in it are (no complaints about that one but some of the Roger Moore stuff particularly was so ridiculously cheesey).</p>
<p>Some of the gadgets were nice (if sometimes silly &#8211; the underwater Lotus springs to mind) but surely the big deal with the &#8216;classic&#8217; Bonds was always the huge set-piece finale<br />
(making the most of Pinewood&#8217;s famous vast stage)?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
