mjmooney

Like the Who/Zep thing, this is a pretty pointless argument. Are we voting for which band we most enjoying listening to? Or which was the most influential?

I love both the Beatles and The BBs (and Zep and The Who). I rarely play the Beatles' albums because I don't need to - they're all in my head, note for note, I grew up with them. So they have become over-familiar, and to be honest I'm a little bored with them as a result.

Whereas, outside of the the big hits, the BBs records are less well-known - and I've only relatively recently acquired the full set on CD, so I'm more likely to find something fresh in them. They all have their share of duff tracks, though - Our Car Club, Carl's Big Chance, Bull Session With Big Daddy, Vegetables, A Day In The Life Of A Tree, I could go on.

The nice thing is, it isn't either/or, we can have both.

The Who for me, I'd say why but I can't explain.

I love Who's Next, Who Sell out and Quadrophenia best but then again, my all time favourite track is Led Zep - Thank You from Led Zep II

Zeppelin. 'Tommy' was the only good thin The Who ever did.

At their peak Zeppelin were a fine, fine band, but for sheer length of career, versatility (from R&B band through witty pop singles, rock operas, intelligent lyrics and a powerhouse live act) it has to be the 'Oo.

Instrument for instrument it's a close call:

Moon v. Bonham. Probably a draw. The two greatest rock drummers of their era, with different styles, but both astonishing.

Entwistle v. Jones. Entwistle win, easy.

Daltrey v. Plant. Plant at his peak wins easily, but you have to say that RD made the most of what he had, and has kept in better shape for longer. Draw.

Townshend v. Page (as musicians). Looks like an easy win for Page, but I dunno. PT is not just a powerhouse rhythm player, he has real skill, and always harnessed it to the needs of the song. Multi-instrumentalist, too. Draw.

Townshend v. Page (as songwriters). Townshend by a street. Probably the most intelligent and thoughtful rock musician of his g-g-g-generation.

Love 'em both, though, and glad to have been around when they were both at their peak in the early 70s.

Nothing to add to all the other votes of confidence General, just this:

If you think Villa Park was rocking at your first "derby" game, you should start looking forward to European football. Let's qualify for UEFA this season and Champions' League next season. Floodlit European nights at VP are something else again.

Let's roll.

General Krulak here:

1. First, a request for help!! The Birmingham City Council have put the Club on notice regarding persistent standing. We can incur fines, etc. if this is not brought under control. Obviously, Randy, the Directors and the Club encourage standing and cheering the team over good play or to motivate. The problem is the issue of persistent standing. We recognize it is not just our fans...it is away fans to and we will be addressing them. At the same time, it does involve our fans and it could cost our Club dearly. Please help on this one. :winkold:

please don't post such large pictures

(Cough) :wink:

This is thread is turning into quite a useful "book club" for reviews and recommendations. Perhaps we should make it a sticky.

If I may recommend The Cousins' Wars... you kind of get a new perspective on the three civil wars of Anglo-America (though it must be said that the bit of hostilities during the Napoleonic unpleasantness (aka the real second world war)) with the argument advanced that all three of them were fundamentally different acts in the same conflict. It deserves kudos for at least trying to tell the history from both sides of the Atlantic.

I think Zarate might get in our starting XI.

I was quite gobsmacked that the venerable Mr Mooney had picked my fave book (Pillars) up in the first place, and then you qualified your original post with this one!

I have Bryson's "Everything" in the loo, just read the odd few pages now and then.

Getting near the end of "The March" now (very good), soon to start on Joe Haldeman's sf novel "The Forever War".

Current nonfiction is Austerity Britain, really enjoying it.

kid : candy store :: levi : barnes & noble (and other book megastores, too, I guess; there aren't any but b&n in my vicinity, though).

Cream - White Wall

Biffy Clyro - Machines

TBF the books IMO are not the greatest books ever. Fairly good is what they are.

As literature for "warm-blooded heterosexual males waiting for a train", they are unequalled, really.

Do they hold up today though? I read them in the late 1960s as a warm-blooded heterosexual 15-year-old, and they were the business.

I have recently been tempted to re-read them, but I don't know what this 21st century (and now rather better-read) 54-year old would make of them. I don't want to spoil the memories.

He said it and meant it, "Goodnight, you're an angel." At the same time, he knew, deep down, that love from Mary Goodnight, or from any other woman, was not enough for him. It would be like taking a "room with a view." For James Bond, the same view would always pall.

But who knows.

^^^

An advice, read the books, mate. I thought like you before, not anymore.

I cant understand why reading the books would change your mind. We are basing this thread on the movies we have watched for the last 40 years. Its the idea of James Bond we have seen on the screen. Wether you have read something different in a book is totally irellevant I'd say.

The new movie might be closer to the books, but its far from the charming, smooth movies we have seen for ages.

Personally, I read ALL the books (all the Fleming ones, that is, the rest don't count) before seeing ANY of the films - which naturally colours my perception of all things Bond.

In fact I'd love to see many of the Fleming novels re-filmed (anything not by Fleming doesn't count for me) with Craig, sticking closer to the books - You Only Live Twice in particular cries out for it as the original film was NOTHING like the book.

YOLT can't be done fully and faithfully without wrecking the series, IMO. It's tragic, but YOLT has to based around Bond avenging Tracy, which means either:

quite clearly Lev you are an expert but surely with Casino Royale they effectivtly went back to the begginning and thus all the possibilities are open again

However, the producers have generally avoided whole-cloth remakes of earlier films in the series (the two prominent exceptions being the pair of Moore films with little/no Fleming plots: The Spy Who Loved Me (remaking the film You Only Live Twice, even using the same director) and A View to a Kill (somewhat obviously Goldfinger)... arguably the second half of Die Another Day is a remake of Diamonds Are Forever, also).

That the reboot in CR wasn't total (keeping Dench as M, most notably), I think indicates that the producers don't totally view CR as outside of the series, so why would they remake the SPECTRE trilogy (especially since they still may not have the rights to Thunderball...) if some portion of the idea that it's all one series is kicking around?

In fact I'd love to see many of the Fleming novels re-filmed (anything not by Fleming doesn't count for me) with Craig, sticking closer to the books - You Only Live Twice in particular cries out for it as the original film was NOTHING like the book.

YOLT can't be done fully and faithfully without wrecking the series, IMO. It's tragic, but YOLT has to based around Bond avenging Tracy, which means either:

quite clearly Lev you are an expert but surely with Casino Royale they effectivtly went back to the begginning and thus all the possibilities are open again

Unibond is in a league of its own.

That's it, Levi on Mastermind, special subject James Bond. Two minutes starting from NOW....

Craig was good in Casino Royale - roughly true to the spirit of the book, although I'd have liked it even better if they'd not tried to make it contemporary, but set it in the 50s as was intended.

In fact I'd love to see many of the Fleming novels re-filmed (anything not by Fleming doesn't count for me) with Craig, sticking closer to the books - You Only Live Twice in particular cries out for it as the original film was NOTHING like the book.

Has Ian Taylor got an actual job at the Villa?

Trim returns to VillaTalk after appearing on "Ten Years Younger".

Connery. But I agree that Craig was good, and probably closer to the Bond of the books. Brosnan was OK. Moore should have been strung up by the balls for the effrontery to try and be Bond.

But then I'm old enough to have seen Moore on TV playing Ivanhoe, Bo Maverick, and The Saint, all of which ruled him out as a Bond for me.