Shocking Bond Confessions


Feeling objective is not being so. But it gets easily confused.

In the end, it´s just about stating a preference.


I agree , but it’s making a fun commute to work . I would happily watch either at any time over any number of other movies.


GE, often touted as Pierce’s best, has to be better than Quantum, right?


Again, that’s subjective, but I’d say so, yes.

Mind you, I wouldn’t go out of my way to see either of them.


Again I would place them about equal


QOS slightly edges GE for me. I do consider GE Pierce’s overall best, yet I simply prefer the tone of Craig’s films over his.


“Conversations With McCartney” by Paul Du Noyer.

Yes, it was quite illuminating in spots and paints McCartney as a surprisingly normal person, considering the life he’s led. It goes deeper than the “thumbs-up” goofball character he’s constructed – willingly or not – over decades of five-minute interviews, without straying into the kind of supposition and psychoanalyzing that a lot of third-party biographers indulge in. It had neither the defensive, sanitized air of an “officially approved” bio nor the tell-all prurience of countless junk reads.

I checked it out from the library because I’ve already got too many Beatle/McCartney texts and I’m running out of shelf space. But I have considered giving in and buying a copy, even if it means swapping it out for something I’ve already got.


i will definitely check this out. The best one I’ve read so far was Fab: The Intimate Life of Paul McCartney. I’m also waiting (and waiting) for the second Mark Lewisham Tune In: All These Years book to come out.


In an effort to bring this (sort of) back to Bond, the best McCartney revelation of last year for me had to be hearing his early take on “Live And Let Die”, a bonus track on the re-released “Red Rose Speedway” album. There, I could hear plain as day Paul singing “…but in this ever-changin’ world in which we’re livin’…” which made me all kinds of happy. As a language nerd, it’s always grated on me that he says, “this ever-changin’ world in which we live in” on the official track. Now I can dismiss that as a slip of the tongue and not just sloppy English.

Of course that’s in defiance of McCartney’s own (half-joking) declaration that if he sings someone else’s song wrong it’s a mistake, but if he sings his own wrong, it’s a re-write. :slight_smile:


Apple music might be referencing the “official” lyrics registered with ASCAP, which I won’t deny is the grammatically incorrect version. It might be more instructive to run it through a closed-captioning service (though those are notoriously inefficient, too).

I am willing to admit the possibility I’m doing some “wishful hearing,” but if evidence is introduced that counters my interpretation, I can easily do the reverse, pushing my index fingers into my ears and humming as loudly as possible.


You could well be right. Or if there’s a human at the keyboard doing the transcribing, they could just be familiar with the song, and so they “hear” the part in question as it’s always been known to be, as opposed to what’s said in this one performance.

Anyway, it’s a nice, clean recording, but it really gives you an appreciation for the contributions of George Martin and that full orchestra.

What’s most remarkable about the song is how it shows (not for the first time) how Paul was able to take a left turn into completely unfamiliar waters and come up with something wildly different from anything he’d done before. I know his experiments could yield colossal face-plants as well as triumphs, but what an exciting period that was from him.


I too still hear “we”.


No, he’s clearly saying “Yanni.”


Are you deaf?!? It’s Laurel!


And the dress color?