So this is definitely an early 2000s film.

There's a degree of like the way that it's shot, the way that it's edited primarily

that has a kind of like, I mean, it's not, what's the right word?

Like, it's not jarring.

It's not confusing.

But there's a stylistic choice of like the fading shots, the juxtaposing shots, like showing scenes that are

happening with other people while, like, for example, you're following Daniel Craig's

narration of his own life, and yet it's also kind of showing the counterpoint of like dumb

flash geese or idiot gangsters, et cetera. To me, like the shots with like their fucking on

without skipping ahead in the plot, like a scene kind of gliding into the next where like it focuses on an object and then that then immediately transitions to another scene with other characters, stuff like that.

To me, that's the only thing that made it seem really dated.

Other than that.

And of course, a version of London that's not falling apart, you know?

That's true.

And also...

Sort of 2004, probably, like, kind of you're getting to the point where it's, like,

high watermark of quality of life in Britain, maybe.

Like, it's that kind of era.

Well, much like Love Actually, you see them building, uh is it, 33 St. Mary Acts, the Gercin.

It's under construction in some of the like the setting shots that take place,

establishing shots of London. So maybe that implies that by building the Girkin, they incurred

God's wrath, that it was too erotic of a building,

...