From: mawillia@eos.ncsu.edu (MICAH ANTHONY WILLIAMS)
Subject: Re: a.f.j-b FAQ
Originator: mawillia@c00477-224wi.eos.ncsu.edu
Keywords: bond faq
Reply-To: mawillia@eos.ncsu.edu (MICAH ANTHONY WILLIAMS)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 22:47:25 GMT


In article <1992Nov18.172651.17274@b8.b8.ingr.com>, anthony@panzer.b17b.ingr.com (Anthony Shipman) writes:
|>Newsgroups: alt.fan.james-bond
|>Path: taco!rock!stanford.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uunet!infonode!ingr!b8!panzer.b17b.ingr.com!anthony
|>From: anthony@panzer.b17b.ingr.com (Anthony Shipman)
|>Subject: Re: a.f.j-b FAQ
|>Message-ID: <1992Nov18.172651.17274@b8.b8.ingr.com>
|>Keywords: bond faq
|>Sender: usenet@b8.b8.ingr.com (Usenet Account)
|>Organization: Intergraph
|>References:  <1992Nov18.145009.4792@julian.uwo.ca>
|>Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 12:26:51 EST
|>Lines: 17
|>
|>Much thanks to Darryl Bedford for putting this FAQ together. I for one really
|>enjoyed it. "Organization: Universal Exports" Heh, heh.
|>
|>Although your reviews of all the movies were GREAT, better than any
|>critics' or professional reviewer's I've ever read, I thought you were a tad
|>conservative on the ratings you gave the movies. You talked disparagingly  about
|>"Diamonds are Forever" yet gave it a B-, You called "Live and Let Die" a
|>big-budget blaxploitation film (and rightly so), but gave it a C+, then you raved
|>about "License to Kill" but only gave it a B+. But anyway, anyone with enough
|>taste to realize "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" is one of the best of the
|>genre is ok in my book.
|>
|>Congratulations on a job well done.
|>
|>Anthony
|>
|>p.s. "Moonraker" deserves a rating of triple-S ... for "Sux! Sux! SUX!"


	Thanks for the comments, Anthony. I rate the Bond Films not against
themselves, but against all movies in general.  I usually like to start the
films at a flat C grade..just expecting the average predictable Bond flick..
I add + increments accordingly, depending on how well the movie strikes 
me aside from the ususal things that earn all Bond  movies their 'C', which
would be good location shootings, special efffets, and stunts.  If the
film just starts getting ridiculous and petty, I start subracting from the
C, as I did with "Man with the Golden Gun" and "A View to a Kill".  At
the end of the film I get a ratio of all the plusses and minuses and then
offeset them from the C average grade I start out with at the beggining.
So in other words, every Bond movie is 'average' to begin with, if it does
anything special or goes beyond the call of duty with anything from 
extra special performances to an unusually good script, It gets plusses,
otherwise, if it breaks from the path or just gets shoddy, I'll add 
minuses.....There were a couple grades I was shaky on, for instance..
Like "Lincense to Kill" and "Moonraker"....


                                                           -Micah
-- 
                                                Micah A. Williams
                                                North Carolina State University
                                                Computer Science
                                                mawillia@eos.ncsu.edu
                                                willi-ma@aza.csc.ncsu.edu
                                                vega@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu
					        maw@desire.catt.ncsu.edu


                "STAYING IN TOUCH WITH THE WILLIAMS TRADITION"