1. You selected one of 3 portrayals to prove a point. Hardly an endorsement of the character. Pleasance is my favourite too. Doesn't mean there can never be another interpretation though.

2. You know nothing about Waltz's mindset so the criticism is uninformed and insulting in regard to the pay check. You thought the performance 'bland'. It's a fair point but I'd say he was underplaying which is a valid way to go given that all past portrayals had been more in your face. I'm not endorsing his interpretation by the way. I think you are probably right about placing the fault with the writers. It's hardly the worst villain ever though. Too much is overstated when it comes to 'fan' criticism.

3. Strong words from me? I think not, I always measure my words carefully. When I referred to 'mafia' I was careful to blame both sides of what I consider equally extreme views. It's ok to have strong views but they should be presented coherently with evidence and considered opinion. Not presented as a rant because the world around you is not proceeding as you like it.

PS here is a challenge. Above you present Licence to Kill as a good example of Bond at its best. Before that you bemoaned the fact that Bond was being too feminist. And yet LtK presented one of the first and best strong female leads in Carey Lowell. How do you square your circle? Happy to hear your thoughts but please don't shout at me... convince me?

New James Bond film release put back by seven months

The release of the new James Bond film has been put back by seven months as coronavirus continues to spread.

The producers said they had moved the release of No Time To Die from April to November after "careful consideration and thorough evaluation of the global theatrical marketplace".

The announcement comes a day after the founders of two 007 fan sites called on the film studios to delay its release.

It will now come out in the UK on 12 November, and in the US on 25 November.

No Time To Die, which is due to be Daniel Craig's final appearance as the British secret service agent, had been due for release on 3 April.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51744374

Wow. Seven months is a bit extreme (there might not be much of an audience left for it then!) [emoji3]

Even though I've been to the cinema this week, I don't think this is the best time for hundreds of people to congregate in (relatively) small rooms with air that is circulated around the entire building.

If this is a decision based on safety, then that is perfectly understandable, just as it is if they think that people would rather stay at home fancied in a confined environment with someone with a cough.

I must admit, I don't fancy potentially risking my health for anything, but especially not modern cinema! :lol:

And then what happens to the other blockbusters? Could end up with a real entertainment hole in the coming months.

It's setting an awful precedent, you're right.

Might give smaller films a chance - assuming people aren't too scared to go to the cinema. Mind you, the cinema near me is so sticky there must be all sorts already waiting to attack any passing respiratory system.

They’re re-releasing 28 Days Later to install confidence back into the cinema going public......:behindsofa:

Really though,it’s ****ing grown arms and legs,once again fuelled by media frenzy.
Here’s an example,delivery guy comes into the shop today and asked me if I wanted to sign his phone with my finger as usual......and when I asked why wouldn’t I,he replied no one has signed their name today due to the risk of catching Corona virus....:loco:

Anyway,Scotland’s too cauld for it to breed anyway.......

God knows they need it.

Never ceased to amaze me that really decent bypassed my local cinema in London but Harry Potter was showing on six screens!