Oaks

I still can't believe that camp slime ball Brosnan has more vote than Craig and Dalton put together. Come on who voted Brosnan, whos seen Die another Day/ The world is not enough/ Tomorrow never dies?????

Bond needs to be rough (Connery), he needs to be elegant (Brosnan), he needs to have the natural ease with ladies (Moore) and he needs to fit the role as a an agent for the British government. Daniel Craig is an instant action hero, I totally liked Casino Royale, but it is not a classic, it did not have any real characteristics of being a Bond-movie other than the given plot, music and effects. You never got, well I didn't get the "feel". I am a Moore-fan, but I think he and Sean Connery were (equally good) the best characters, and the third best in Brosnan was more of a modern Bond.

Roger Moore - 6/6 (Elegant and great with the ladies, natural fighter and brought with him skiing to the movies, which is cool. Yeah it was actually his idea, 7 movies

You who say he is not a real Bond, what are you talking about??? He was Bond the longest, and he kept it interesting after Connery quit)

Sean Connery - 5+/6 (The oldest Bond, old movies and footage. Yet he is recognized as the best. He was the best fighter, did lack a bit in the elegance department, but that was also due to the time he was Bond, which was the 60's primarily. He played 6 movies. -0,5 for his involvement in "Never Say Never Again", which sucked!)

Pierce Brosnan - 4+/6 (Easily a great Bond in my eyes. Natural elegance and probably the best handler of weapons. Looks great as an agent, cool guy overall)

Daniel Craig - 4/6 (Remember I am rating as Bond, not action figure. Does not really convince me as a lady handler, but he is a great fighter and agent. Bond is very much down to being bullish with the ladies, and it just didn't seem very natural. I would have wanted Julian McMahon to be Bond, he would be awesome)

Timothy Dalton - 3 (He was OK, but never good enough to continue for long. His movies was also in the 80's, which made them much too Miami Vice)

George Lazenby - 2 (His looks was boring, his voice was weird and his fighting was pretty dull. Didn't last very long and rightly so)

The problem with Brosnan was he wasn't "elegant" he was slimy. You watch his interaction with Berry in Die another day, and you realise he had to go. Dalton was a great Bond, because as with Craig, he could act, so brought depth to the roll there previous "actors" couldn't bring.

The casting people certainly deserve an honourable mention for giving Craig the role as from an outside view he not Bond.....but it just worked!!

didn't really take a genuis casting director.

Anyone who has seen Layer Cake (great film) would have realised that Craig would make an excellent Bond.

Did you really think that when watching Layer Cake Jon....Hmmmm? :winkold:

Anyway there is a lot of difference between thinking he would make a good Bond and putting your money/reputation where your mouth is, for that reason he/she deserves cudos!

I did i remember coming out of the cinema really enjoying Layer Cake and saying, he could be a very good Bond, but i never expected him to get it because of his look.

Ican't believe that Brosnan has 4 votes. Lazenby did more for Bond in 1 film than Brosnan did in 4. Brosnan has the look of what bond should look like, but thats it. He wasn't even a good enough actor to pull Bond off.

Dalton is way underrated outside Bond fans. Lazenby stared in what might be the best Bond film. Although he wasn't that good himself, On her majesty's secret service is the most underrated Bond film there is.

Connery and Moore are still the Kings though for different reasons.

Come on who voted for Brosnan? Are you having a laugh?

Been at the club for 10 years, so yes he deserves a testimonial. But i wouldn't go.

A point about the kits. Do you think it will be possible to be out before the summer holidays, because i never get to wear my new Villa top on my summer jollys. In the past, sometimes its not out before the start of the season. I always got jealous of other fans showing off there new kits, and not ours.

I want them to stay down another 2 years, and miss out on the new premiership money and lose there parashoot payments too, while we are getting better and hopfully get into europe and then the champions league and then let them up o we can piss all over them.

I feel its mostly to do with Genetics, but that does open a can of worms too, because if the "cure" is found, wouldn't most Gays have the cure? Especailly around the difficult teen years.

I pledge £20 to VillaTalk of we break the £10 million barrier on 1 player in the summer. I already owe £20 because we signed 3 permanent deals in the January window, so i hope to pay another one in the summer, and i hope its for Darren Bent.

I'd rather wait until the summer and see if better options (Ashton, Nugent, Bent and others) are available.

Keane is a decent player but he'll never get you 20 league goals and is quite injury prone.

Agree i like them 3 alot more.

General Krulak here:

8. Platini's Plan will not impact us when we win the Premiership.

There was not a better answer to my question thanks

I can honestly say i dont hate West Brom. Why? Well since ive been a fan(88-89) They have never beaten us. They have never looked close to beating us. Most of there fans are not retarded unlike the Small Heath Vermin.

As for Wolves. My mate is a Wolves fan, he seems to think Villa and Wolves, and West Brom and Small Heath have a similar sort of respect for each other. I disagree. He doesnt call Wolves just Wolves, he calls them the mighty Wolves, which pretty much sums there fans.

So, 2 years ago, Gary Neville wasnt worth £10m? £15M? £20m?

No. No one payed that money for him.

The full backs, in my opinion are still the least important positions on the pitch. To spend £15+million on one baffles me, it really does(unless your chelsea of course).

Stupid price for a full back.

I point you in the direction of Gareth Bale, 12 million of your finest. Now THATS stupid money for a full back.

Micah Richards? £15m is a bit steep, I'd say closer to £10m and he'll be seen as a bargin within 2 years.

I'd love him, but it aint gonna happen.

Nope a stupid price for a full back.

Stupid price for a full back.

Good article my man, very good indeed.

The first time I saw Hendrie play, it was for the youth team against the Blosers. He was clearly the pick of the bunch, and I remember predicting to my Dad that he would make his debut the season after. He did, and got sent off, which about sums his career up in a small way...

I do have an interesting theory about Hendries progress, and who is to blame - albeit only in a small way - for him never fulflling his potential.

Stanley Victor Collymore.

:?:

Yep, Stan. See, when Hendrie first started to make an impression on the team, he had Yorke & Savo up front, who would hold it up to allow the midfield to make runs through & link up with, too.

Hendrie was always linking up well with them, making sharp passes and generally contributing in a positive way.

When Collymore started playing, he would often drift out to the wing, and half the time would not hold it up as well as either of the other two. This had a knock-on affect to Hendrie, who all of a sudden had a missing option for the 'zip' pass he used so well, and consequently was often having to hold on to the ball longer and would no longer have the same impact on the team, as he was not really linking much with the forwards anymore.

Now yes, Hendrie should have been good enough to compensate for this, and ultimately he wasn't. But clearly the confidence started to drain from him at a crucial time in his career, and I can't help but look back & think that maybe the slight tactical change in the Villa side was a contributing factor.

Is it the main reason? Not at all. The lifestyle of Lee Hendrie, his temperment issues and overall average-ness speaks for itself.

Seems only a small thing, but it is something I noticed in the team at the time and I still believe it now. Maybe I just spend too much time analysing tactics!

yeah blame someone else for his poor form. Lee should look squarely at himself. He had great natural ability, just not the heart or the head to be great. Im not too disappointed Lee is leaving, he should have done 2 years ago. As for a testimonial, it could be the worst attended one ever. I can't see more the 3,000 turning up. How sad is that.

Dear Genaral,

What are your opinions on Platini's plans to reduce the amount of clubs in the champions league. Does this affect the so called 5 year plan?

Yours Oaks.

I dont know whether we will sign any more, because all 3 signings were strong rumors.

Ive just herd a rumor we might be swapping Baros for John Carew. I'll get back you you when i here more.

You herd it here first.......................................ish.

Ive just herd a rumor we might be swapping Baros for John Carew. I'll get back you you when i here more.

A rumour from tonight on the BBC website says we're going to sign Steve Sidwell on Monday. Would be a pretty good player to have in the squad.

I doubt it. The 3 main problem areas going into the window were, right full back, (Bardsley), right midfield(Young) and a striker. Only 1 yet to fill(if we get Young), and its been a decent months of business, in my opinion.

West ham haven't yet signed anyone i would want, but they do seem to have more money to spunk away, so i hope they go down.

still 2 hours left Jez