Which Daniel Craig Bond film started with him shooting up a consulate? Her Majesty doesn’t consider that secret at all. The Fast and the Furious clowns could do that.
[Giving a description of his era’s spy type ] … vocationally devoted, sublimely disinterested. Hardly a description of that sexual acrobat who leaves a trail of dead beautiful women like so many blown roses behind him - that bounder to whom you gave my name and number.
It’s sort of ironic that Daniel Craig complained that Austin Powers ruined the Bond franchise and the Bond writers end up using one of the Powers plot points as a big reveal.
SPECTRE was one of those movies where the best scene happens at the start and literally everything else is a downhill slide, it just gets dumber and dumber with each passing minute.
That has nothing to do one way or the other with what I said (granted it was several pages ago now). Yes, Frodo didn’t want to give up the Ring. That would be true whether the Eagles carried him there or whether he walked there himself. Heck, getting him there faster presumably means he’s less corrupted.
But, again, arguing about the minutiae of the Eagles is kind of ignoring my point, which is that it’s kind of jarring. There’s a reason that so many movie-watchers-but-not-super-in-depth-lore-knowers have the same reaction. It would have been nice if Peter Jackson had come up with a way to spell it out a bit more.
Y’know, it occurs to me that for the movie, they could have just cut from the destruction of the Ring to the hobbits at home, without making it explicit how they got there. If you don’t introduce the Eagles at all, then nobody would ask why they weren’t used before. And if folks were to ask how they got home, well, the simple answer is “They cut that part for time, because it wasn’t as interesting as getting there”.
That Lily Bart from The House of Mirth by Edith Wharton, no need t for her to succumb to her own insufferable demureness. At the very least she ought o have said fuck Gus trenner taken her legacy$ and run to Monte Carlo
Strictly, in the Marvel comics Death the anthropomorphic incarnation isn’t about the condition of “being dead”, which is rather a contradiction of terms. She/it is the personification of dying, of ceasing to exist, of passing into the nonexistence of Oblivion (which is another anthropomorphic personification).
The story presents a future in which citizens serve out sentences for crimes they have not yet committed. Two “pre-criminals”, “Blotto” Otto Henck and Nicholas Crandall, manage against all the odds to serve out two full terms for murder in an off-world penal colony. They are returned to Earth as minor celebrities with the right to kill one person each
In the end, the protagonist decides not to kill the person he’d planned to kill. He tosses away his weapon, which breaks a window. When a cop tries to arrest him for vandalism, he shows his “free murder” certificate, and says, “Take it out of that”.
Kaffee: You made it clear just a moment ago that your men never take matters into their own hands. Your men follow orders, or people die. So Santiago shouldn’t have been in any danger at all, should he have, Colonel?"
Jessup: These two men did not follow orders, and Private Santiago died. Anything else?
Even worse, the US Navy entered the war with their roundels having a red dot, akin to the (larger) hinomaru on Japanese planes, apparently leading to a lot of friendly fire incidents, resulting in it being eliminated in 1943.