Okay, very good. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. So I'll briefly go over the motivation for our talk and then introduce the governing equations for direct numerical simulations of fluid mechanical flows, discuss the role of dimensionless parameters and how the computational effort scales with them. That'll lead us to the need for turbulence modeling and I'll introduce two different approaches here and then I'll briefly touch on some other aspects of upscaling. So our interest is in performing high-resolution simulations in particular of turbidity currents, so of sediment transport flows from the continental shelf down the continental slope into the deep ocean. Just to remind everybody, turbidity currents are gravity-driven sediments flows down the continental slope. They represent an important part of the global sediment cycle. They're frequently triggered by storms or earthquakes or other natural reasons. They can also be triggered by man-made origins. They can be incredibly large. One turbidity current can transport many cubic kilometers of sediment. And just to give you an idea of their scale, they can travel over distances up to the order of 1,000 kilometers or more. They can have front velocities up to 10 meters a second and front heights up to 100 meters. So if we want to perform high-resolution simulations of such flows, we typically approach them as dilute flows, meaning we assume that the volume fraction of the sediments grains is on the order of 1% or less. We also assume that the grain radius is much less than the grain separation, so that collisions among sediment grains can be neglected. And we assume that the grains are relatively small so that they don't have any considerable inertia. Now, due to the small volume fraction of the grains, we can neglect their effect in the conservation of mass or in the conservation of volume equation, so in the continuity equation. Rather, the coupling between the fluid motion and the sediment motion occurs primarily through the momentum equation. So the sediment essentially varies the density, the local density field of the suspension, and then gravity acts on those density variations in order to trigger the flow. The sediment is also then assumed to follow the fluid motion and have a superimposed settling velocity. So these are then our governing equations. We have the fluid continuity equation, so conservation of mass. Here we have the conservation of momentum, where C is the sediment concentration, and so we see this is the effective density term here, and gravity then acts on those density variations in order to drive the flow. And the sediment is being tracked by means of convection diffusion equation, where we assume that the sediment moves with the fluid velocity, plus it has a superimposed settling velocity. So in making these equations dimensionless, we obtain three dimensionless parameters. There's the Reynolds number, which is the combination of characteristic velocity, such as the front velocity of the current, characteristic length scale, such as the height of the current, and the kinematic viscosity of water. There's also the Schmidt number, which is the ratio of the diffusion coefficients in these two equations, and the dimensionless settling velocity. Now the most important parameter here is the Reynolds number, and let's just see what kind of order of magnitude we have for the Reynolds number when we're looking at real field scale currents. So as I mentioned, they can have a front velocity on the order of 10 meters a second. They can be up to 100 meters tall, and this is the kinematic viscosity of water. So that gives us a field Reynolds number up to 10 to the ninth. Please keep that in mind. So Reynolds numbers in the field can be up to 10 to the ninth. Now if we want to do DNS simulation, so direct numerical simulations, we take a model configuration, which we call the lock exchange configuration. So this is essentially an apparatus that you initially divide into two compartments. So we have here one compartment into which we fill initially water and we stir sand into it, and then we have here clear water initially, and then we have here a little Gaussian bump just to introduce an element of complex bottom topography. At time t equals zero, we then remove the dividing wall between these two compartments, and now this combination of water and sediment is denser than the clear water here, so it slumps to the bottom and forms a current that propagates along the bottom of the container. So we have here the turbidity current propagating, and then the clear water has to get out of the way, and forms a counter-flowing current along the top of the container. So just for those people who are interested, a few facts on the numerical method that Mohammed developed in order to do DNS simulations of such flows. We're using second-order central differencing for the viscous terms, so-called ENO schemes for the convective terms, TBD, Runge-Kutta time stepping, so explicit time stepping. We use a projection method to enforce and compressibility and the domain decomposition approach in order to parallelize our code, and we heavily rely on the PETC software package that was developed at Argon in order to solve our systems of algebraic equations. We can also use non-uniform grids in order to resolve the regions near the bottom of the flow more finely because that's where more of the action occurs, and we have a very nice immersed boundary method that allows us to deal with complex bottom topographies in a very accurate way. So this is a DNS simulation, a movie of a DNS simulation that I want to show you that Mohammed made. So up here we will see the flow. In the plane below, we plot the values of the shear stress, and in the lowest plane, you see information on the deposit height. So here the current is developing. We see initially the development of so-called loben cleft instabilities. Then the current interacts with this three-dimensional bottom topography. It becomes fully turbulent. It's strongly three-dimensional. We see how these flow structures have a strong influence of the local shear stress behavior, which of course then has an effect on the erosional behavior. Maybe I can show this movie once again. And we can also see how the deposit height locally is very much affected by this topographical feature here. So, yeah, just to see that movie once again. So initially it's nearly two-dimensional. It develops some frontal instability, and then becomes strongly three-dimensional when it interacts with this Gaussian bump. And you can see here how that affects the local deposit height and how it affects the local shear stress along the bottom wall. So this is a DNS simulation, as I mentioned. It was carried out not for Reynolds number of 10 to the 9, so for the Reynolds number corresponding to a real field scalar current, but for a smaller Reynolds number of 2,000. Now if we think about what that means, that corresponds more to a front velocity of two centimeters a second to a length scale perhaps of 10 centimeters, and here again the kinematic viscosity of water. So this very much corresponds to a laboratory scale current, not to a field scale current. So we can do the DNS simulation for the laboratory scale, but not for the field scale, and that's of course something that we would like to overcome because eventually we would like to have simulations for field scale currents. Here's another simulation, another DNS simulation. This is one of a turbidity current that propagates down a submarine channel, and there are some, there are levies on both sides of the channel as well. And people have speculated that when a turbidity current like this encounters a bend in the submarine channel, then it might partially overflow, it's called flow stripping, and so we wanted to see if we see that in the numerical simulations as well. So here's our turbidity current propagating down the submarine channel, and indeed there's this flow stripping occurring in the bends of the submarine channel. So we see that these things are being reproduced in quite some detail. So to summarize, for DNS simulations we see they have quite a few advantages. They accurately reproduce the physics because we resolved all of the scales. They provide very detailed information on the flow field, on shear stresses, on deposit profiles and so on, and they require only a minimum of empirical modeling assumptions. The disadvantages are that they are computationally very expensive and they are limited to low Reynolds numbers. So the question then is why can we not do a DNS simulation at Reynolds number 10 to the 9? So why can we not simply say we want to resolve all the scales for such a high Reynolds number flow? Well, in order to understand that, it helps to think of the Reynolds number as effectively a measure of the ratio of the largest length scales in the flow to the smallest length scales in the flow. So the largest length scales in the flow, the so-called integral length scales, those might be something like the front height of the current, whereas the smallest length scales of the flow, the so-called comagorov length scales, those are the very tiny vortices that we have in the flow where viscosity is strong enough in order to convert kinetic energy into heat. So that's where dissipation occurs. And turbulence theory shows us that this ratio of the largest length scales to the smallest length scales scales with the Reynolds number to the 3 fourth. So DNS simulations, which of course need to resolve these smallest length scales, and at the same time have a control domain that's large enough to capture the largest length scales, they then require this kind of scaling, Reynolds number to the 3 fourth in all three directions, so that means they require Reynolds number to the 9 fourth grid points. In addition, the time step also has to scale with the grid spacing, so that tells us that in the end the computational effort is on the order of Reynolds number to the third power. So when you compare now that we did our DNS simulation for Reynolds number of about 10 to the 3, but the field scale current was for Reynolds number of 10 to the 9, then we see that the field scale simulation would require on the order of 10 to the 18 times the effort of the laboratory scale current. And the laboratory scale current of course already took several days on maybe about 100 processors, so even with Janice I'm sorry to say we're not going to overcome this factor of 10 to the 18 anytime soon. So the question then is how can we perform simulations at the field scale? So here the key idea is that the large scale flow features are unique for every flow, but perhaps we can assume that the very smallest length scales of the flow, the ones at which dissipation occurs, may be somewhat universal. So in other words the smallest length scale, the smallest vortices of turbulent flow fields may be very universal in nature and very similar in all kinds of flows. And so as a result it might be able to develop a turbulence model that allows us to model the effect of the smallest length scales without having actually to resolve them explicitly. And the most important effect of the smallest length scales that we need to capture is the energy that they extract from the largest scale. So we need to make sure that we can capture this effect of the small length scales to extract energy from the large length scales and if we do not explicitly resolve the small length scales then we need to have a model, a turbulence model that extracts the energy for us. And so there are essentially two established approaches in order to accomplish this. One is based on the temporal averaging of the governing equations so spatial filtering and that leads us to large eddy simulations. So let me just give you the key ideas of how these approaches work. So first on ranch simulations so here we want to do temporal averaging so we take all of the variables of the flow fields such as velocity, pressure, sediment concentration and so on split them into one time average value and into one fluctuating value. And then we take our governing equations that I had written down earlier we take the time average of all the terms in the governing equations in order to derive a set of equations for these time average quantities here. And then the hope is that if we can solve only for the time average values then we don't have to have as fine a grid. But the problem that appears is that we have non-linear terms in our equations both in the sediment transport equation and also in the momentum equation and these non-linear terms when you take the time average of them, of these products of the time average value and the fluctuating value then you get this term here the time average of the product of the two fluctuations that is not equal to zero and it's not negligible and so this is a term that we cannot get directly out of calculating just the time average values of the individual quantities. So this term here is essentially the crux of the problem because it doesn't disappear and because it means we cannot entirely neglect the fluctuating quantities and so we have a closure problem because we have more unknowns now than we have equations. So in some sense then this is the term that we need to model when we perform turbulence modeling and so many such models have been developed to capture the effects of these terms and you may have heard of a few of them mixing length models, K epsilon models Reynolds stress models and so on all of these problems they are of course at various degrees of sophistication but all of these problems all of these models involve several empirical constants and these constants again depend on the flow physics on the flow geometry on all kinds of things and so it's very difficult to determine reliable values for these empirical constants especially when we're looking at flows involving complex physics such as sediment transport, erosion, deposition and so on over complex topography so in complex geometries and so that means as a result there's a large amount of uncertainty associated with these empirical constants and so there's a large amount of uncertainty associated with the results of Rand simulations. So Rand simulations do offer some results but at the same time they have these drawbacks. While there's this alternative approach of large eddy simulations and so remember for Rand simulations we used a time averaging approach for large eddy simulation we essentially use a spatially averaging approach or a spatial filtering approach so we take our original velocity field and we then do this filtering process here and there's a spatial length scale associated with the filter and so in that way we get a filtered velocity which now contains only the large scales and not the small scales and so again the hope is that we can derive a set of equations just for these large scale quantities and so in that way we may not have to resolve the small scale quantities but just like for the Rand's approach we find that again here we do get a closure problem because we cannot entirely neglect the effect of these unresolved quantities and so again we need empirical models in order to capture the so called sub grid scale effect so the effect of stresses and transport that occurs at the smaller scales than our grid resolution tells us so we need then LES turbulence models and again a variety of models have been developed the most well known one perhaps is the Smogorinski model but again these models involve empirical constants now people have actually developed very sophisticated procedures so called dynamic models that automatically determine these constants within the course of a simulation so you do not have to prescribe these models all these constants before the simulation and then they stay constant but through a double filtering procedure actually these constants can be determined automatically during the simulation so that has brought some progress as a result LES generally can be considered to be more accurate than Rand's but it's also more expensive computationally as an approach so we can say that there's still some uncertainty associated even with LES modeling and so clearly there's more research needed on this whole issue of turbulence modeling but let me just show you a couple of results so these are simulations LES simulations that Centiel who's in the back of the room Paul Stock and my group has performed so here we see the low Reynolds number simulation that Mohammed did for Reynolds number of a thousand and then by comparison an LES simulation of the same flow for a Reynolds number of 200,000 you can see that the turbidity current in the LES simulation has moved much farther at the same time so it has a larger front velocity and also it shows much more small scale structure than the DNS simulation and that's exactly what we would expect for a large Reynolds number that we see a lot more small scale deformations of these concentration contours and small scale vortices and so on this is at a later time and again we see the same difference the high Reynolds number current has moved faster and it exhibits a much more small scale structure so we see there's certainly some promise in these LES simulations in order to help us to get closer to these field scale Reynolds numbers and we're currently working on further refining these LES models so that indeed we can go to Reynolds numbers up to 10 to the 7 10 to the 8 and 10 to the 9 so this turbulence modelling is one aspect of upscaling results so going from arbitrary scale currents to large scale currents there are a couple of other aspects of upscaling when we think of upscaling again is going from very small scale phenomena to large scale phenomena and I want to mention those as well so this is the work of Zach Borden who had a very nice experience of winning the poster award last night and so we can look at his work also as one aspect of upscaling in that what he does is he wants to use particle based simulations so simulations that resolve each grain of the sediment in order to gain a better understanding of erosion and the balance between erosion and deposition so that from these very detailed small scale simulations we can then get better correlations between for example wall shear stresses and effective erosion rates so the idea here is to carry out very small scale simulations that only resolve a few hundred or a few thousand sediment grains in order to obtain relationships which we can then use in much larger continuum based simulations so let me just show you this little movie that Zach made so here we have a flow propagating over a sediment bed and you see as soon as the flow starts it starts to erode sediment grains at the same time gravity wants to bring those sediment grains back down and so we have this balance of erosion and deposition and so we hope that these kinds of simulations will tell us more about this very important region where the turbidity current touches the sediment bed and allow us to develop better models for erosion and deposition so if we then can derive such continuum models then we can do simulations such as these where now erosion is just a function of the bottom wall shear stress and these are two simulations one is for a slope angle of three degrees and you see here erosion is weaker than deposition so here the flow dies whereas if we go to four degrees then erosion has become stronger than deposition and so in this case the amount of suspended sediment grows and we have an avalanche like effect the current accelerates and grows in in magnitude we can then take those kinds of calculations in order to try to get some first stratigraphic information so this shows a picture of a series of simulations the deposit profiles that come out of a series of simulations I think here we had about 40 different simulations they were polydispers so in each simulation we had both small particles which are given here by the blue color and large particles, large grains the red color and these currents all came from the left and then deposited their particles and we see initially of course more of the large red grains are being deposited the small blue grains are deposited further downstream but then we also see these interesting striations here so we see for example how the first current how the first current deposited the very large red particles then the somewhat smaller yellow particles on top then comes the next current depositing first the red particles then the yellow particles and so we do get some idea of what kind of deposit profile we may form here one other way in which we can look at upscaling is just sketched out here so we can again bridge the difference between small scales and large scales by saying okay let's use a course mesh for a very large domain but then let's zoom into a small region here and let's zoom further in so that we have a very small region here now which we can resolve with a much finer mesh so this is again another way in which scales can be bridged and this is what is called a nested grid approach so we have a fine grid here and a much coarser grid here and actually we're just starting a project that employs this kind of technique sponsored by BOEM in the Gulf of Mexico where we're trying to couple coarse grained ROMS model to a fine grained turbidity current model in order to study the interaction between the large scales and small scales in these Gulf of Mexico events so let me just summarize so if we do DNS simulations they have great advantages they give us all kinds of detailed information very accurate but their computational effort increases with the third power of the Reynolds number and so as a result for realistic field scale currents we cannot really perform DNS so that means there's a need for some turbulence modeling and we can do either RAND simulations or LES simulations however both of these approaches require some empirical constants, some empirical closure models and so as a result there are some uncertainties associated with them and then I briefly touched upon some other aspects of upscaling of bridging the divide between small scales and large scales such as going from microscopic particle based models to large scale continuum models or using nested grids okay thank you very much again everything crystal clear yes just one question is how do the particles affect the turbulence in your model excuse me how? how do the presence of the particles affect the turbulence you mean in the continuum flow simulations? in the large eddy simulations in the large eddy simulations well the the turbulence is essentially generated because the flow is driven by density differences and so the particles determine the local density of the suspension and so if we have high concentrations of particles in some regions, low concentration in other regions then gravity will pull this region down much more strongly than this region and so that sets the fluid in motion and that generates the turbulence but when you look at the erosion processes near the bed it's probably affected by the presence of particles the turbulence stress and so on yes that's right and that's exactly why we're doing these microscopic particle based simulations because we want to see how exactly the turbulence and the particles interact and there clearly we have particle interactions so collisions among particles and so there the situation becomes much more complicated that's why we're doing these very refined small scale simulations okay so you have interactions in the model yes, yes the particles interact with the fluid and among each other and so the turbulence can be damped by the particles which is something that people have also observed in laboratory experiments so we expect that we will capture all those effects, yes very interesting one of your last slides you mentioned Gulf of Mexico but I think you showed Monterey Canyon that's right, that's right, yes but I was wondering where in the Gulf of Mexico is this study intended to be, is it a particular site yes, James do you want to comment on that over or why we picked a certain site


Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome. This is Melissa Arma with the stocks. What should I'm here today to review target? Guess what? It was a short today, and I just looked at this and like, you've got to be kidding me. It actually went to some huge big number into 11 o'clock, and I didn't get it down to the low of the day. The low of the day as of right now in this, which I don't know if holds or if it breaks it again is 65.50. I felt that it would get to 66 today. I felt that if it got to 66, it would break hard, exactly what it did. But it was so late, so late and so tough for me to hold late trains. I usually like to be done in the morning, but this went and worked, and it went to the number, and it went past the number, and it did it at 11 o'clock. So like five minutes into 11 o'clock, it did it. So let's go over the initial call that I made. Base, base, base, base, spaced, flips. Okay, Helen 68, a big bar here, so I wanted to wait for the confirmation, waited for the two-minute, broke, entering with 67.10. Big stop, though, over the high of the day. And here's the move into here, 25 cents from 66. And I really thought this would go immediately to 66. And then I thought if it would go to 66, this would break. And then when the, but which it did, but it was later, then when it hit, here, the five minutes, this looked amazing. Okay. It looked like it was going to break down here. Never followed through right in here. Of course, this is still way into the entry, but the problem is that I just didn't have the patience to hold this all the way down here until 11 o'clock. I wish that I would have. If you did the original train with the stop over the high of the day and wait until 11, you got the whole move. It was almost two bucks. Why did it take so long to go? I was thinking about this as looking at it. And this may set up again today, but the thing is that the two, two o'clock FOMC announcement, I think people should not be in trades, but this might, this might set up again, might set up in the 30 minute. The problem with the gap for the quick move today in this to get to the bigger number was that it was right into an area. Okay. That I knew was a short and I rated the gap. It was a valid short to watch to do. And it still set up early and it had the move. It just didn't go to the target till later in the morning was that it was in an area of congestion right in here. And so because of that, and it didn't have a high rating, it took longer to get going to the target. Target took longer to get going to the target. So that was the issue. But this by no means was a long. It absolutely was a short, which I knew. And I think a lot of traders might have looked at this as a long because it gap down here, fell hard here, gap down here, fell hard here, sold off hard the day before and gap down big, but it's still set up fast. Still set up in the first couple minutes of the day. But the problem was to get it to the target and needed time. It just needed time. It was back and forth with itself. People were trying to buy it. You can see the buyers in here, but the institutional position is to the downside. And that is why it was a short and had the short move and why it broke and was right on the day and broke and went to the number. It just took longer because it was really some traders were buying it, but the institutions were shorting it. Now you have this rallying in here. There's nothing to do with this though today. There's just nothing. The whole move in this in the morning is done. If you do a late trade in this, it has to be in a 15 minute or 30 minute or 60 minute chart, in which case you'd be in it till the close, even if it sets up. And because of the minutes of day or two, I don't think anyone should take a late trade unless that's in your trading plan. But it's, you know, you don't know what's going to happen. Stocks act while when they have announcements, but it was a good call. It was a good call this morning. I just was looking for too big of a number too quick. So this is where everybody has different styles of trading. If you're patient up to way to 11 o'clock in this, you got paid. Any questions, email me at melissathestockswush.com. And if you'd like more information, feel free to email me the classes this weekend, May 21st and 22nd. The target call that I made today did work and went to the number. It's just that you had to hold it and it was a big stop. So this is not a price point that I trade on a regular basis because I do like baby stops. It was, this was a dollar stop today, but the move in the morning did work and was profitable. But the big move happened later. And that really, when I went back and reviewed it, had to do with the fact that the gap rating was there, but it just wasn't high enough. So good thing to note for everyone, including myself. Have a good day, everyone. Email me at melissathestockswush.com if you want more information. Thanks, everybody. Have a great day.


Hey guys welcome back to my channel Drew here from Lone Fox and today we have a video focusing on bed styling which again I've kind of been getting into these videos where I'm focusing on something and doing it multiple ways to share with you guys a couple different ways to style your bed or you might have just recently saw my channel that I did a tablescape video which if you have yet to watch that I'll link it in the description box below or put a card up on the screen there because it's perfect for Thanksgiving which is right around the corner but today we are focusing on beds and beds honestly they are hard you guys it is hard to get the layers textures patterns colors everything completely accurate with a bed I feel like beds are just very hit or miss but I quickly want to mention three things before jumping in and the first one being that today's video is kindly sponsored by Helix which is the base of our bed I've had my helix mattress for around a year and I absolutely love it and just like I said this box here arrived on my doorstep a year ago and my life was changed ever since because I really do love my helix mattress I feel like my sleep has improved so much and the reason being is you get to start off with a sleep quiz which I love so the sleep quiz kind of goes through things like position what kind of feel you like so whether that's a soft medium or firm mattress the relief that you're looking for and just kind of ask you a couple of personal questions to essentially then determine what mattress would be best for you and I was paired up with the midnight lux mattress and I have been loving it and something I'm sure that you guys will love is that helix actually delivers your mattress right to your doorstep for free it comes rolled up in a box and it's extremely easy to set up yourself simply just unpackage it and let it fluff up for about 24 hours and you're good to go everybody's different and everybody's sleep it's different so I love how helix is a company that has taken that to mind to ensure that they have a mattress that really fits everyone's sleeping pattern or lifestyle and if it makes you nervous to buy something like a brand new mattress helix has a 100 night sleep trial so that you can go ahead and just test it out and if you don't like it they'll pick it up for free and no you don't have to put it back in the box you guys all know by now how much I love my helix mattress so if you're in the market for a new bed definitely check out helix you can go ahead and click the link in the description box below or head to helixsleep.com slash Drew Scott to get up to $200 off your helix mattress the second thing is that I really tried to utilize a bunch of my own linens and bedding and duvet covers and throw blankets and pillows so as much as I would love to go out and purchase a ton of stuff to make four perfectly curated different beds I really wanted to utilize things in multiple ways to show you how they could look different and last but not least I do want to mention that all four of the beds that I'm styling might not look perfect in this space you know with the backdrop and everything and the wall color behind me but do keep in mind this is my only bedroom and bed space to style on so that's why I'm just sharing with you guys all of them on this bed space but they might look better you know in another environment or even in your own home that's everything I wanted to touch on let's go ahead and dive on into how to style a bed these are my favorite tips and tricks and just different ways to do things that you may have not thought about so let's go ahead and get started for our first bed here I wanted to do a play on an all-white bed because I know all white bedding is extremely popular so I'm going to be doing a all cream bed starting off with a simple cream sheet set here I love this one it is so so soft so I added the fitted sheet first then the flat sheet on top I'm then going to go ahead and add right on top of that a quilt this is a linen quilt that I just love it has some nice square stitching on the front of it this is a great way to add texture to a bed so I'm just adding that right on top and then folding back both the sheet and the quilt just about 12 inches or so to have a nice folded top and then tucking the entire quilt around the bed now this is the trick on getting a nice fluffy designer looking bed you're going to place your duvet towards the end of your bed pull it all the way up to the top and we're going to actually do a third fold where we fold it back down to the bottom and then right back up to that fold that was created to essentially create a tripled up duvet this is going to make it just look a lot more fluffy and then when you get into bed at night all you have to do is simply pull back your duvet and it's essentially how a normal bed would be made so at the top I'm going to add a couple of sleeping pillows these are just two cream pillows keeping it very casual with the pillows up here and then right in front of those I'm adding two black striped texture pillows just to add a little bit of contrast to the bed and then in front of that just a more decorative pillow this is a really pretty woven one and then lastly to the bottom to finish it off I'm going to be adding a chunky thrown-it blanket I think it just adds a lot of texture again especially when you have a tonal bed it's nice to incorporate a lot of texture for interest our first bed is complete and I figured I would go through kind of what I did to each bed after so you guys can get an understanding for why I did these selections so this bed here is more of a minimal kind of monochrome bed I know a lot of people really like white bedding light colored bedding so I wanted to do a full-on white slash light bedding option so I started off firstly with a simple sheet set now I do wish I had a sheet set that had a slight very simple pattern to it something just to add a little bit of texture to this area but this is not bad at all so this is from Brooklyn and love that then I added a quilt on top which I love adding a quilt especially during winter time now if you don't want to add this in the summer or whatever it might be you can just go ahead and pull your duvet a little bit higher however the quilt adds a nice bit of texture and separation between these two areas now the duvet here is from CB2 which I love this duvet you guys have seen this multiple times on my channel it's like the duvet I've always had on my bed so I just went ahead and folded that in thirds it's a really great tip to make your bed look a little bit more fluffy and overall a bit more designer vibes and lastly I added on just a really cute chunky throw blanket again going with those neutrals by adding a bunch of texture and then as far as throw pillows go I went pretty simple I did the sleeping pillows in the back two black with some texture striped throw pillows and then one more interesting one in the front there I feel like if this was going in this room I would do a pillow here that's a little bit more bold maybe some pattern and some color just to spice up the bed a bit but I wanted to keep everything neutral for this option so this is our first bed for our next bed we're going to be playing with pattern and texture so the first thing that I'm doing is adding this really moody sheet set from target it has this floral print on it now whenever you have a printed sheet set that's printed on one side I always suggest laying it pattern side down that way when you add your duvet on top like I'm doing at the moment when you fold back down the top section and pull your sheet over the top it literally looks like the underside of your duvet is the same exact material as your sheet set but it's really just your inverted sheet which is a really nice little tip there now at the bottom of the bed I'm actually adding this matless a coverlet this is a great way to introduce a coverlet a blanket a quilt whatever you have on hand but it just adds a lot of texture so I'm going to be pleading it back on the bottom of the bed here and almost allowing the coverlet to overflow the bottom of the bed just to add a very effortless lived in vibe and I think this adds again kind of that designer touch to a bed where almost looks like you don't want to get in it but at the same time you do and it's really not too hard to achieve now for the pillowcases I always do this when my pillows are too long I simply invert the ends of the pillowcase on the inside and kind of create this tuck which just makes them look a little cleaner on the top there I'm actually stacking my pillows I love doing this when I style a bed as opposed to leaning them against the headboard so I stack them in the back there and I'm adding a few different throw pillows these ones are not coordinating at all but I love the abstract look of uncoordinated pillows on a bed I think it just adds a little bit more interest and then the very last step is to add a nice throw blanket at the end of the bed I'm going to do this one a little bit less organic because the bedding is pretty kind of flowy itself so I just folded this one up into fourths and then I'm just adding it to the end of the bed like that and that finishes off this bed the second bed has been styled and this was actually a very similar bed to the one that I did for my fall bedroom makeover you guys remember and the reason I love this bed is because it actually utilizes a coverlet which I really have been loving those lately this matlessay one from Target is my absolute favorite I'll link it for you guys below I like it because of the texture but then it also has this really nice frayed end on it as well which just adds more texture to the bed I did this really really dark pattern sheet and I think it's really fun to play with dark colors like this and bold patterns because all you have to do is offset it with something a little bit more simple like this bottom section here I did really bold at the top here with the fitted sheet and then I placed my flat sheet actually face side down so when I folded it back it almost makes it look like the duvet is covered by the sheet or the duvet essentially matches our sheet set and then for the pillows I just used the one straight from the sheet set I love utilizing pieces from the same set because it creates cohesivity is that even a word probably not cohesiveness as I've been told so it creates cohesiveness which we love that so I did all three pieces from the sheet set here and utilized all of those elements and then did some simple white sleeping pillows on top or they're more of a cream tone to go back to our matlessay coverlet here and then over in the middle here I actually did three different throw pillows and I love doing different ones I know a lot of people like using the same throw pillows on a bed to make it look very symmetrical but I love the look of different throw pillows and then just at the bottom here to pull in a little bit of those throw pillow colors and add just a touch of warmth I added this plum throw from my online store I think this bed looks so cute and it's just like a fun little take on adding a coverlet to the bed and just making it look a little bit different this next bed here is probably my favorite one in the video and it kind of blends a little bit of one and two with the high contrast so I started off with my cream sheet set that I used in the first bed to show you guys that you don't need to have different sheets for all your different beds there's definitely ways you can make your bed look different without having to go purchase a bunch of different items so the next thing I did was the same exact duvet I added that right on top but for this one I actually just got a brand new quilt I folded it in half and added it towards the bottom of the bed there this is going to be our determining factor for we're going to fold over the top of the duvet so I just folded it right down to the top of where that quilt ended and then I ended up adding three 26 inch pillows in the back this is a fun way to get away with like a different pillow styling so what I did was add three 26 inch throw pillows in the back there which are I feel like normally used for sofas and then I went ahead and added two standard size pillows in front of those then I added two decorative pillows right in front of those again coordinating those as well and then right in front of that you can add a lumbar or a smaller pillow I had the square one from the flea market on hand and then what I lastly did was just went ahead and added a throw blanket and I tucked it right under the fold of that duvet which I really like and finished off the bed by tucking absolutely every aspect of the bed in to the base there the lines aren't perfectly straight but I feel like you guys get the vibe our next bed styling is complete and I think I like this one at the most honestly in the space so far I love how this kind of big chunky black section coordinates back to the board and baton in the back there but for this bed I actually did some simple layering on the actual bed itself because I really wanted to do a bunch with throw pillows now this is definitely hit or miss for some people some people enjoy more throw pillows some people enjoy less for this particular bed I did three more euro sized throw pillows in the back I believe those are 26 inches now I wish I was able to find three of this one but I wasn't able to so I grabbed one that was pretty similar just to give you guys a look and then these ones up here are actually some really pretty kind of quilted shams so I added those as well and then two decorative vintage kind of turkish woven pillows and I got this one actually vintage as well at a flea market so I feel like the interest for this particular bed is more top-heavy in the sense that the top of the bed is more interesting than the bottom but I feel like it's really balanced nicely because we have this dark section here and I did the throw blanket a little bit differently on this bed this is an alternate way if you guys would like to you know switch it up a bit or you just kind of fold it over and tuck it underneath when I worked at West Elm they did this a lot and I always loved how it looked something else I did on this bed in particular was I actually tucked in all of the bedding to expose a bit more of the wood honestly to contrast back with the throw pillows but it also kind of shortens and brings down the silhouette of the bottom of the bed a little bit so that we have more emphasis on the top of the bed but if you do want it to be more balanced you can totally make this nice and full at the bottom as well so it looks like a fully just overdone but balanced bed so that is our third bed I just loved what this one looks and for our last bed here I'm going to be doing a little bit of a simpler design but I feel like that's really been trending lately in interior design I've been seeing a lot of simple beds so I'm starting off with a basic cream sheet set once again but again you can totally alter these colors because a lot of these beds I'm just sharing with you guys the styling but you can switch up the colors to match your style for sure next what I'm doing is adding a quilt right on top and then folding it back and then once more back on itself to create that triple fold which I just love this look it just creates much more of a hotel looking bed and overall just makes your bed look a lot nicer now towards the top I'm going to be adding two sleeping pillows just stacked on top of each other these are in the same exact fabric as the sheet set so just creates a nice cohesive look and then towards the bottom I'm going to fold up a bed blanket and lay this right across the bottom I really feel like simple beds like this they're playing with shape and just minimalism in lines and fabrics and textures to make the bed interesting but still extremely simple so I'm adding two plaid throw pillows and a simple lumbar in front to finish off this design another bed for you guys this one's a little bit more on the simple side but I love it now again every single bed doesn't look perfect in this space but that's because I'm showing you guys different ways to style beds in one area so this is I feel like more for a tone down more minimalistic room someone who likes just very simple bedding I also feel like it does look better when you don't have a bed that has a little pop out lip like this wood here because it does make your bedding pop out when it's kind of straight flat down it looks a lot more crisp I did a simple quilt here this is actually from gap believe it or not I love it it's so pretty and it has like a nice kind of frayed edge to it as well and then what I did on top at the bottom was just folded up a bed blanket this one in particulars from bowl and branch but they have these at Ikea I'm just a nice little additional bit of warmth if you wanted to lay it out on the bed and then as far as the pillows go I actually kept these ones very very simple just two plaid ones which I love plaid right now I feel like it's such a universal pattern for male and female I just love the way that it kind of looks on a bed and then I added a small more camel toned kind of lumbar on the front there and just the sleeping bed pillows in the back so very simple for this one but still really effective at the same time I think it's really cute and you guys that finishes off today's video I hope that you enjoyed this bed styling video I really wanted to make it just full for you guys and give you a couple different options and ways to style beds and really include a lot of different tips and tricks on doing things and I hope that this was helpful in any sort of way even if you just pulled like one or two tricks from this video I think that could definitely be beneficial when you are styling your bed in the future or another person's bed and of course everything I did feature in today's video I will make sure to link in the description box below so if you saw any of these bedding pieces that you liked they will go perfectly with your brand new Helix mattress so if you guys are in the market for a new mattress definitely check out Helix I will link them at the top of the description box below I am obsessed with mine it is the most comfortable mattress ever if you would like me to style anything else again it could even be like a desk a bookshelf multiple different ways totally let me know in the comment section below do not forget to also subscribe to my channel for brand new home decor and DIY videos every single week and follow me over on Instagram and TikTok it is just Lone Fox Home I'll put it on the screen for you guys and I will catch you all in my next one have an amazing rest of your day bye guys


Hey there friends, thanks for checking in. Today we're looking at a new release from Springfield Armory called the Ronin EMP. EMP stands for Enhanced Micro Pistol. You'll notice they have a whole series of handguns in the EMP line. They also have a series of handguns in the Ronin line. And here's my 10 millimeter Ronin. It's a beautiful looking handgun. Fire is outstanding. This one's a 10 millimeter, but they make a whole bunch of Ronin's. And when this was introduced, it was met with wide approval. People love it. It's priced right. And the Ronin EMP is no different. Now they took the Enhanced Micro Pistol and the Ronin combined it together and made a Ronin EMP. And here it is. Introduced November 29th, 2021. I like that grip right there. It's a sharp looking grip.  A little smoother right there. Springfield Insignia. A nine round magazine and that gloss on the slide.  Has that silver look to it with that gloss black. It's just such a sharp looking pistol. I love the Ronin's. I speak very highly of the Ronin's because they shoot so nice. They look beautiful, but it's also a little bit cheaper than the EMP's. Now if you look at the EMP's Enhanced Micro Pistol series, you'll see that they go right around $1,100. This has a lower MSRP. Now if you go with this, you'll get the one nine round mag, a soft case, all the paperwork and everything else with an MSRP of $849. And that is, what's that $250 savings from the EMP nine millimeter. I just think it's sharp, but it's three ounces lighter and it's a good looking pistol. Now I've taken it to the range on a couple occasions and it is a nice shooting handgun. Just as fine as my 10 millimeter and I'm sure the 45's in the Ronin line, but the EMP, well I checked out the EMP concealed carry contour and that is a nice handgun. There's no doubt about that. I really enjoyed that at the range. You want to talk about accuracy, check out that handgun, but this delivers it just the same with a three inch bull barrel. And I was pleasantly surprised.  I should shoot it well. Well, with this, I can testify firsthand. It was outstanding a couple times. I've had it to the range already. The three dot sights, okay, tactical ledge right there, dots in the back. They are serrated with a fiber optic front sight and a trigger that I am measuring at five pounds and I love the 1911's. I just, I'm just a fan. Look at that reset right there. Five pound trigger pull with nine rounds of nine millimeter. It's got that nice flat main spring texturing right there, extended beaver tail, skeletonized hammer and trigger, bull barrel, bushingless. Okay. That is made out of forged steel. The frame is made out of forged aluminum. And if we look right there, I hope that'll pick up that says EMP. And right there it says Ronin. And Ronin, the Ronin line actually has gained quite a reputation throughout the last couple years. I know a lot of people that says, you know, the Ronin is one of my best shooting 1911's and I fully understand. All right. So here we have an unloaded Ronin EMP one pound. What's that one pound? There's 26 and three eighths ounces. If we go with the nine rounds, we'll see that it's at 30 and a quarter. Throw that round in there. 30 and five eighths ounces. So about 30 and a half ounces loaded with 10 rounds is what this is weighing in at. But it also has a little different disassembly. It's real easy. So let's go ahead and we'll disassemble it, put it back together and come back and talk more about the new 1911 Ronin EMP. To disassemble the Ronin EMP, it's not too hard. We'll go ahead and remove the magazine, show clear. And you'll notice that there is a cutout right there. I'm going to move the slide back and then from the opposite side, push this pin forward and then go ahead and remove it. At that point, the slide will come right off of the frame. You'll notice there is a dual recoil spring, all steel guide rod, but right there is a recoil spring guide rod bushing. So that'll have to be removed. We'll go ahead and take this out and you can see it came out a bit. And there it is. Move the link forward and out comes the barrel, the front end. And there is your three inch bull barrel. I'm gonna go ahead and wipe it down through a couple drops of oil in and we'll reassemble it. Let's go ahead and reassemble. We'll put the barrel in and get those barrel lugs seated. We want the link totally forward. I'm going to keep this recoil assembly together and place it in so that it fits on top of the barrel where those cutouts are. And then I'm going to move the link forward so that when I put the slide back onto the frame, that link will be aligned properly. And if I look, I can see that it is. So I'll put this pin in. You may have to move the slide forward or back a little bit depending on if you have it perfectly set. I'll go ahead and get this seated right there. And there it is. Reassembled. Simple process. I put the Ronin EMP in a full-size 1911 holster and you can see that it will fit in there. Just fine. Nice and snug fit. Although not necessarily ideal. I'm just making the point that it will fit in a 1911 holster. But there it is. A new release from Springfield Armory called the 1911 Ronin EMP. A beautiful looking and shooting handgun. I think this is going to sell well, especially when people get it in their hands. They'll see and feel that it is very lightweight. It's a nice shooting handgun. That bowl barrel is pretty sharp. Cuts down on the recoil. Like no recoil at that dual recoil spring. And it just is a straight shooter. What can I say? I was just so impressed with my shooting impressions with it that just had to brag it up a little bit and speak the truth because I shot this very well. If you like videos like this, please subscribe and share. I always appreciate thumbs up button. Thanks for watching and you guys be safe.


Every James Bond film ranked. Hey what's up guys it's Josh here today I want to do a little review on all 24 Bond films. This is before the release of No Time to Die so I'm not including this one and I'm not including the other ones like Never Say Never Again and The Old Casino Royale. The things that I'm going to rate it on is how Bond-like it feels. Just the general Bond feel that a big thing with me is interesting and nice locations I just have to have it for it to be a top tier Bond film. I have to be really easy to watch and enjoyable. A lot of these films are kind of campy they're kind of long. I like it to be really easy to watch while having a good story. I just don't like when he gets captured for most of the film or I don't like it when it's clearly not Bond dominating every moment that's what I'm coming here for. I don't mind if you do some stuff to make the film seem strong but I want it to be clear that Bond dominates it. If it's ever a little wishy-washy I don't like the film. Number 24 is Octopussy. Now this is the very first film to where I had come across some really slow points in films but Octopussy was the one where I was just like dragging through it like waiting for it to be over and it's not really the worst movie. I actually wish it was more around the whole Octopussy cult because I actually do like Octopussy as the actress. I actually think it's pretty nice chemistry between her and Roger Moore but it's just a diluted mess. They try to use Q a little bit more in there which I do like. It just really wasn't for me. This is the first one that I just really was not feeling. Nothing really hits home. They have the clown scenes which I just don't like 100% not for me. Number 24 is Octopussy. Number 23 the second one that was really really difficult to watch and that was A View to a Kill. Now I actually like a good amount of stuff in A View to a Kill. I like Christopher Walken. The Bond henchmen girl. I took me a little while to get used to her because apparently she was like famous back in the day but I had never really seen her because there was an earlier Bond movie where there was a guy dressed up like a girl. That's almost what I thought when I first saw her. I was like kind of didn't know what to expect but she actually plays a really unique Bond villain and I could see why they picked her. The only reason I put this number 23 is how old Roger Moore is. There's a couple of times when he smiles and he just looks scary. Like he goes like you know hey hey and it's like it doesn't look like a grandiose smile. It looks like damn you're scary. And then also this was the worst with the stunt doubles. I mean you could just see right away every single thing was like obviously a stunt double. He looked actually a lot shorter than Roger Moore. There was even a point where he would like race somebody in horses and just beat him. It's just every time I just was not on board with Bond being Bond in this one although I did like some other stuff. So number 23 A View to a Kill. Number 22 is Live and Let Die. Now this is probably the most unique Bond film on this list. This is really often in its own direction. It kind of brings magic into it but there's just a lot of stuff that didn't hit for me. I like really big like fancy sets. This one takes place in Louisiana so there's a lot of just kind of feels and cheaper style scenery. Nothing really elegant or over the top. I really like that bronze Sam D character. He was actually in the GoldenEye games growing up and he was actually in the last level and you had to kill him like three times. I actually was really looking forward to this movie for that bronze Sam D character and if they were to go further with it I actually would have really liked it. They barely ever used the bronze Sam D at all. The main villain I just felt like he needed a little bit more like I did like his his acting and everything but he just didn't have enough to be a Bond villain. He was just a little too simple. And then they had the guy with the claw. He was okay. I just preferred something like Dr. No and I already felt like it was kind of like a Dr. No style gimmick to where he has this kind of like death claw. I like Dr. No's hands a little bit better but overall this was his first film. It wasn't as bad as it could have been for how crazy they went out there and I actually did not mind it that much. Number 22 live and let die. Number 21 is the living daylights. Now I actually really didn't mind the living daylights. The only thing I could say is that I really liked the opening scene of this movie and then I really liked the last action scene of this movie. Everything else really didn't fit. I don't mind Timothy Dalton's portrayal of Bond but the lines are just set up for him to be flirty and he's just absolutely not flirty. And I just don't see this kind of personality that he has attracting as many women as he has and I almost think if they told him to play Bond closer to a more flirty, I don't even think he could do it. When I just look at his acting he just seems like he has a slight bit of awkwardness that doesn't portray that really flirty, suave, Bond-like atmosphere. But I really did like him in the serious stuff. It was really refreshing by far the most serious and most intense scenes as far as the action. I love him for the action but the flirty stuff just doesn't hit. He also has a little bit of a funky smile but definitely not the worst one. Number 21, Living Daylights. Number 24, Your Eyes Only. Now this one was pretty good in that it has the probably the best underwater scenes to this time. This movie was just very, very bland. Like it seems like they picked some random country with again a little bit of fields. Nothing really extravagant. This is supposed to be really grounded because it came right after Moonraker. This is just really simple but I gotta say I really enjoy the underwater scene. When you compare this underwater scene to something like Thunderball, this is by far by far the best underwater scene, the best underwater shots that we've had up until this point with Bond. It just is a little bland and also you could tell we're getting into the 80s but they don't have the 80s music. It's just really, really simple. This movie was just really, really bland. I know that's kind of what they were going for after Moonraker but I just am not looking for bland in another Bond film. All right, number 19, Die Another Day. Now I actually think this had a lot of promise. I do enjoy maybe the first 20, 30 minutes of this movie. I do like the idea of they're really trying to rethink a new story that they could give 007. It seemed like the two movies after Gold and I were just coming out so quick. This one where they were trying to come out with a different story, come out with a little bit more complexity. I really did like the ice area that they end up going to. I really liked the big mirror in the sky that would mirror the sundown, kind of similar to a man with the golden gun. There's like a villain in the very beginning and at the end it's supposed to be the same guy but it's a completely different actor and it just doesn't hit. But there was a lot of little stuff that I liked. I liked the ideas. I liked when the diamonds get shot in this face. I'm like, that's totally Bondy. I do like Halle Berry. I think she looks great in this. I just don't think she has great chemistry with Brosnan. And then people actually say they like that Frost girl or the other Bond girl in here. To me, she just doesn't hit. She seems like somebody who's really soft in real life who's acting tough. That's just me. It does not come across correctly. So number 19 is Die Another Day. Number 18 is From Russia With Love. Now I know people put this by the top objectively. This is one of the better Bond films. This is the first time you get Q. This is the second one. So this one is actually a lot more complex than Dr. No. Just there's something about this film that just feels slow and bland. And I actually watched the first three Sean Connery films around like 2005. So I had already seen this one. And then I also played the game that came out on like PlayStation 2 or something. And people said that because they played the game, they actually liked the movie. I don't know what it is about this story in particular. It just does not interest me at all. And then on rewatch, it just was really bland. And the thing that really nailed it in the coffin was how many times like Bond is outwitted. He gets outwitted at the gypsy scene. The guy's right behind him decides not to kill him. And the guy comes up again and gets to jump on him again. And he has to use some Q gadget to get out. It just was Bond getting dominated. All this stuff feels bland. Although I like Connery and his earliest roles because he has great acting. But anyways, number 18 from Russia With Love. Number 17 is Dr. No. Now I just prefer this movie a hair over from Russia With Love just because of how easy it is to watch from Russia With Love. It has more complexity to it. But I even think just the beach scenes in Dr. No are just refreshing. I don't remember seeing anything from Russia With Love that I really just enjoyed. I can't picture one scene that I just really enjoyed. Dr. No, it has girls pretty good. The beach scene is pretty good. Obviously it's really old. This was the first one and he delivers that Bond James Bond. For me, if I had to watch one, I would pick Dr. No. I found that it's had bit easier to watch. Although objectively, I see where people would say from Russia With Love is better because it is more complex and they entered. This is like the first time they had Q and it's just a great film. I totally understand. But for number 17, number 17, Dr. No. Number 16 is The Man With The Golden Gun. This is a film that could have been maybe top five or top 10. I think this probably has top five villain duos of any James Bond. I really like the idea of this hit man and he has this golden gun with golden bullets. And he's just like an expert marksman, like all that kind of stuff. It just is a great idea. He does these hit jobs for a million dollars a hit. It's just, I love the whole idea. And then on top of that, the Nintendo 64 game of GoldenEye, you'd have the golden gun. It would be like a one shot kill. So I was actually really looking forward to this game because of all the little nostalgia that they put in GoldenEye for the golden gun. So, but unfortunately this movie just kind of falls flat. Like I remember the whole middle of the movie, really nothing happens. Kind of like the end scene when he's with Bond. You know, it does get a little bit better, but they just really missed the mark and did not use the golden gun nearly as much. I mean, they barely even used that at all. They barely even used the film at all. But I really do like Scaremanga and I really do like Knickback. Probably some of my favorite combinations of villains. And then I also did like their hideout where they're out on the beach and they got the little sun magnifying thing and they're going to make this gun out of the sun magnification. Similar to dying another day, but obviously done first here. Just a really classic Bond, especially coming from Living Let Die. This was much more Bondy in my opinion. Number 15 is You Only Live Twice. Now this is a very interesting film because it starts off like a really Japanese themed Bond. And I really like the idea of him pretending to kill himself. So his villains or the enemies kind of think he's dead. It gives him a chance to be a spy again. 007 has been getting so big and so popular and it kind of makes sense. Like what can you do? Like what's some new idea you could take it? And I really do like them pretending to kill himself and all that kind of stuff. But him turning into a ninja, that was just kind of weird. I feel like this was created when maybe Kung Fu movies were getting famous, but it's just weird. I still don't get why he has to do it. He needs to like dress up like a Japanese guy. He needs to take Kung Fu classes. And I don't really get why he needs to do it. Maybe to be on some island. It has nothing to do with the ending. What makes this movie so high up is basically the whole ending scene. The big ending set, probably the biggest set we've had so far with Blofeld's kind of cave area. I love the whole idea of it being hidden in a volcano. I love the idea of Blofeld. This is where Dr. Evil came from. I actually had no idea this was a real character. Dr. Evil was exactly this character from this movie. Until I watched it. Just very classic. And then on top of that, he's also Dr. Loomis from Halloween. So I just really like this character. And the whole ending sequence is just such classic bond to me. Unfortunately, this is probably Sean Connery's worst performance here. But it still is okay. Number 14 is Moonraker. Now, I think Moonraker is just a right down the middle solid film. It comes after The Spy Who Loved Me. I do think Roger Moore was better in the 70s than he was in the 80s. And this film has a very, very similar template and feel to The Spy Who Loved Me. Compared to For Your Eyes Only, which came out only two years later. It's way different feel than Moonraker and Spy Who Loved Me. I like that they brought back draws. People complain about the ending in space. To be honest, I think like this movie's two hours. And they don't even go into space for the first hour and a half, hour and 45 minutes. So it almost feels like they, I don't even know that they were going to go to space. Because I've seen so many of people's reviews, I know that they go into space. But it almost feels like it's a grounded movie because they spent so much time on the ground. It's just a solid middle of the pack. There's a lot of problems with it, but it also is okay. I'm going to have to give number 14 Moonraker. Number 13 is Diamonds Are Forever. Now people say, you know, talk about Sean Connery kind of losing the role at this time. I honestly think that Sean Connery was just a little bit out of shape for this role. I actually felt like he was probably the most interested in this role, besides when he was up to Goldfinger. When you compare Thunderball and You Only Live Twice to Diamonds Are Forever, he seems a lot more into it. But he seems about 10, 15 pounds overweight. So he seems a little bit slower and not as agile. But I think if he were to lose a little bit of weight, he could have played Bond forever. And I'm pretty sure that he was like only about 41 in this movie. Roger Moore started playing Bond at like 43, 44. Pierce Brosnan started playing Bond at 43, 44. So literally this was the end of his movies. And he was younger than the first films of other Bond people. And when you also see him in Never Say Never Again, he seems more mentally there than Roger Moore does in a view to a kill, in my opinion. He actually seems really solid. One of the things I don't like about it is, again, I do not like bland sets. And this takes place in Las Vegas. So you get a lot of dirt scenes. And although you get the casino scenes and that's nice, I just like big extravagant set pieces and nice scenery. And I do not like the desert. So number 13 is Diamonds Are Forever. Number 12, probably one of the most controversial entries on this list. I was almost positive this movie was going to be number one or number two. And upon a rewatch, I really did not like it for the Bond films. This was the third film that I just really did not want to watch. And that is Casino Royale. Now, I understand that this is, in certain aspects, this is a really good film. But for a Bond film, I just was not wanting to watch this movie at all. I remembered all the twists. I remember all the turns. There was a few points this movie that is kind of bland. But this is just not Bond to me at all. I just did not like it. I mean, they spend way, way more extra time on his girl and they make him so weak compared to other Bonds. And then on top of that, they just throw it all away. To me, I like when Bond is just dominant and gets everything the way he wants. I mean, literally the very last scene and maybe the very first scene, Bond dominates. The rest of the movie, he kind of seems like he's dominating but he's always getting screwed. Yes, he wins the Casino Royale. Oh, but then he's tortured. Oh, but he can't even kill the guy who is torturing him. So it's like everything that happens in this movie, he just seems like he's getting screwed. And the very last scene, yes, he does feel pretty Bondy. They make Bond way too emotional in this movie. I will say this is probably the best paste of all the Daniel Craig movies. The story kind of has the best flow but it just is not what I'm trying to watch for Bond. I really did not want to watch this movie. I didn't even want to turn it on. And I'm surprised that I just really wasn't into it. I think this is better as like a first time viewing. But besides that, I don't know anybody who watches Casino Royale just to watch it. I really did not like it. I have enough respect for it not to put it any lower than this. I'm not putting it like top 24 or whatever or 24 or 23. But wow, I would probably watch everything but Octopussy and A View to a Kill before I would watch this one again. Just not, not for me, not for me at all. So number 11 is the world is not enough. Now I was actually gonna put the world is not enough above this. But I would rather watch the world is not enough versus Casino Royale. Now I know the world is not enough kind of fails on a lot of aspects. I totally get that.  This movie doesn't have that very good sets. The snow scenes was okay, but it kind of doesn't make sense. When I was a kid, Renard, the guy who doesn't feel pain, I actually kind of liked that idea. And this movie, he just doesn't hit. I don't think there was any point where I was like, oh Bond is fighting this guy who doesn't feel pain. So how is he going to beat him? I never really felt that. I mean, Christmas Jones, probably the worst, the worst Bond girl out there.  You know, the other girls, maybe there was a Bond girl who was kind of bland. She was kind of quiet.  And it's like, I feel like Brosnan works well with so many actresses, but just not Denise Richards. You know, this movie failed on so many aspects. But because of that opening scene, because I like Pierce Brosnan, Pierce Brosnan is probably my favorite Bond. Sean Connery is probably my second. So this one was just decent enough to watch and I would watch it more than Casino Royale, 100%. All right. Number 10 is Skyfall. Now, this was a movie that when I first watched it, I really liked it, but I was really turned off by the main villain referring to M as mom and mommy. And I just, it just really killed me upon the first watch. So I was interested to see about this second watch, how much I like it. And this movie, it just, it's okay. It has a lot going for it. The way that they build up the enemy in this movie, he could have been one of the best villains. But I mean, literally almost no scenes between him and James happen. I mean, there's like an initial scene where they meet and they're doing this target practice scene. I really like that. And then there's another point and where they meet up, they battle a couple of shots through the smoke. That's it. I mean, this movie is mainly about M and I really like M, but I feel like they just, it was too much about M. And then on top of that, I like big bold set pieces. The ending of this movie, they go to James Bond's old house out in the boonies and they use all these like makeshift like things and traps. That's not Bond. Like to me, Bond is just really high-classy, elegant, blowing your mind with new technology that you're seeing, not with this movie. It just didn't hit. It had so much it could have connected on, but focusing too much on M and then not enough of James Bond and the villain, like give me a good 20 minutes of fighting and chasing with the villain. That's what I want to see, you know what I mean? But just wasn't in this movie. Although it has a lot of production value and a lot of things, right? And they introduced Money Penny and I think they also introduced Q actually like that. It just did not hit for me. All right guys, number nine. I know, I know you guys gonna hate me, but I'm gonna have to put Quantum of Solace. Now the only reason I put Quantum of Solace right here is because of how easy this movie is to watch. Like this movie is the shortest Bond movie. It's about an hour and 45 minutes. I think most of these Bond movies are too long, especially Roger Moore and Daniel Craig. They could all be cut off like, Daniel Craig's you could probably cut off 15, 20 minutes, Roger Moore is probably about a solid 10 minutes, but I like the films.  Quantum of Solace, super short, right to the point. If you're not gonna be dragging too much, this is probably the most brutal you ever see Bond. This is like the coldest you see Bond out of any of them. He actually looks pretty young and pretty good in this one. They have some jump cuts and stuff. And I did notice that a little bit in the beginning, but later on it didn't bother me. And I was noticing that they would let some scenes, they would leave a little bit before they would cut. So it wasn't like there was jump cuts every time. I just really liked how brutal and intense this one is. Like this is Bond that cranked up to 10 emotionless. And like at the very end of this movie, he kind of becomes more balanced. He kind of loses that aggression like in that killer instinct that he has the whole movie. But I just really liked this one for how easy it was to watch. Yes, there's a few flaws. The ending set of this movie, I wasn't really impressed by the whole desert place that he's got. But I think it's way better than Skyfall. I think the whole desert scene at the end is way more impressive than Skyfall. So this one was just super, super easy to watch, super aggressive. The most aggressive James Bond action movie that there is, super easy to watch. And then number eight was Spectre. Now, Spectre has a lot of problems to it. I think that they try to tie in too much. I kind of liked Spectre back in the day because it wasn't really overly explained. You didn't really know where Blofeld came from. You didn't know how many numbers he has because he has henchmen with these different numbers. This one, they try to make it very, very clear. Like everything that's happened is just a very, it lines up way too easy. Then on top of that, they try to make Blofeld James' brother. I think that's what they try to do in Austin Powers, right? Think about this in classic Bond terms. He's got his Bond gadgets. This is the first movie he's got Bond gadgets. This is the first movie where he doesn't have this big grudge or vendetta. The first two movies he's getting screwed over and Skyfall, he's hurt half the time. So this time he's on his A-game. I love that opening scene. I love the cars. I love when he has the exploding watch. I'm like, this is Bond. This is what I want to see Bond, you know?  Like the villain would be one step ahead sometimes, but he would do something to where it's like, yeah, that's right, you're dealing with Bond. Like he's just gonna mess some people up when you didn't expect him to. So really like this one. It's definitely the most Bondy feeling of all the Daniel Craig's. Yes, it has a lot of problems, but I like Bond-filling movies. And this is the most Bond-filling Daniel Craig movie there is. It's number seven. This was the most enjoyable Sean Connery movie that I watched and that was Thunderball. Now I know a lot of people don't like Thunderball for a lot of reasons. This is when Sean Connery seems to be slightly over it, but he's not as bad as he was and you only live twice. This is just a Sean Connery summertime James Bond. Like this is the most summery James Bond that's probably almost ever been created. I just love the summer theme to this one. There's so many good shots. This is the longest James Bond up until this point and it just seemed like they had a lot of good stuff going for it. He doesn't really get captured most of the time. Like I can't stand when James Bond gets captured. He's almost captured not at all in this movie. The girls are okay. The girls that he gets with. I like the idea of the boat, things like that. I like the idea of the guy with the eye patch because he was also the guy from Austin Powers. I like that they brought back the Blofeld character in this movie because from Russia With Love you see him talking with the cat and then you go to Goldfinger and Goldfinger they don't show Blofeld whatsoever at all.  They're still building who it is. So I like that they keep the same theme. I really enjoyed this movie. Now people also complain about the sped up scenes. Now there is a lot of sped up scenes and I understand they are a little hard to watch. However the first 10, 15 James Bond's they all had sped up scenes. Like all very, very, very clearly sped up scenes. This one was the worst. I understand but I did notice it. And then people also say about the underwater scenes were too long. They're referring to probably the last fight at the end. That's like 15 to 20 minutes but the whole movie is like two hours. So that's all it is. It's 10, 15, 20 minutes at the end. There was a little bit of scuba diving earlier in the movie but that part I don't think people are complaining about that part. And then I also did like when he escaped underwater with the sharks. This is the first time they feature sharks in the James Bond movie. And it doesn't feel corny like it kind of does later on. I just really, really enjoyed Thunderball. If I had to watch another Sean Connery film right now it would be Thunderball. Number six is Tomorrow Never Dies. Now this was a movie that I really was not impressed with when I revisited Bond a little while ago. I actually really, really liked this movie. Tomorrow Never Dies although it has a lot of issues that don't make it the best Bond. It's not really this big complex story. It's kind of just a little fast. This is probably one of the easiest to watch James Bond movies that's out there. Like if I was gonna pick one movie just to throw on if I had some people over just to be easy to watch it would be this movie. He doesn't really get undermined too much. There's a lot of good action scenes. I'm mainly that one when he drives the car remotely. That's really good. I remember when he's on the bike with Wei Li. That was really good. It did fall apart. It doesn't really have the best ending. I wish it kind of went to another set piece for the finale versus the ship that we had seen before. It's a little simple. It's a little bit rushed. I do think Brosnan was a little bit skinny in this role versus I think he might look a little bit better physically in GoldenEye and role is not enough. But this movie was just ridiculously easy to watch. Although it has a lot of flaws and isn't as complex as it could be. Number five is on Her Majesty's Secret Service. Now it's really tough to rank all these movies guys. I really do enjoy them all but this one is just a really well put together movie. They spend I think like an hour and 20 minutes around this ski resort. Like Bond shows up to the ski resort, infiltrates the ski resort. He has to escape the ski resort and like literally he like escapes the ski resort, falls asleep and the next scene he's at the ski resort again. So it's like an hour and 20 minutes at the ski resort. Another thing I didn't like about it was that it was clearly not him on the mountain. Like they would show this skier and then they would have him at just like a green screen and I was like just just put him on the mountain. I don't need to see him skiing but just show me a video of him on the mountain not in a green screen. But this movie was very solid. I actually do not mind this actor as James Bond. The only thing that I do wish is that he had up some more movies just because James Bond has this kind of feel and this kind of vibe and it's nice to have lots and lots of reviews, lots of chances to see him do different stuff. And in this movie it's hard to get on board with him as Bond just because he only does one. However, I thought he fit the role good. He wasn't too young. He wasn't too old. He wasn't out of shape. I actually thought he was pretty solid as Bond in this movie. I think this movie is very solid. The ending, it goes to a unique area. It tries to do things it's never really done before. It's just a solid Bond film. Definitely not number one for me but it is very, very solid. It's number four and it's crazy to think that this film got so high and it's like I like it but I guess I just have to put it as high as I am and that is licensed to kill. It's amazing that the other Timothy Dalton one was so low and this one was so high but I just remember this movie having very little flaws. It almost has like a scar face kind of feel. The villain is pretty good. I just remember the whole time I was pretty much engaged with this movie. It starts off with a really great opening scene of James with his friend and his friend's getting married and everything's great and the whole movie is basically that this guy ends up killing his friend and his wife and he's going for revenge. The one thing I do regret about this movie is that he barely makes it known at the very end why he's even chasing him down and it would have been nice if there was like a real dramatic point to be like this is why I've hunted you down this whole time because of this, you know what I mean? But really solid. Don't have a lot of bad things to say about it. It's only number four just because of how complete of a movie it was. I didn't feel like it had very many faults in my opinion. So number four is a license to kill. Number three is Goldfinger. Now I gotta say I probably enjoyed Thunderball a little bit more than Goldfinger, but Goldfinger's just got so much classicness to it. It's by far better than Dr. Noh from Us With Love. He's really interested in the role. Sean Connery is very interested in the role. It's great. There's so many classic scenes in this movie from the girl playing a gold to odd jobs to Pussy Galore. I will say Pussy Galore. She's a little simple. Like she doesn't really have anything extra. That name is really interesting. I do like the name, but the main thing that holds this back from me liking it a lot more than I do is because James Bond kind of outdoes Goldfinger a little bit. Then Goldfinger catches him and then he just kind of convinces him, hey, don't kill me. Just like keep me around. So for like 40 or 50 minutes, he's captured and it's just kind of like, I can't stand that in Bond films. He's literally captured to almost the end and it just kind of makes me suspend the disbelief a little bit. But for all the other classic stuff in this movie, I think it deserves a number three. All right, guys, number two. I'm so shocked this is number two, but this has got to be the closest thing that's ever been done to a classic Bond film and that is The Spy Who Loved Me Now. Man, do I love this film. I actually feel like Sean Connery never had a perfect Bond film. I felt like a lot of films were really, really good, but they didn't have one complete great film. I think The Spy Who Loved Me is a complete great film. I love this movie from the beginning to the end. It's got so many great Bond moments. It's got a great new story of him versus Agent XXX.  And so you have this kind of like back and forth to the very, very end.  What's gonna happen at the very end? Who knows? I love the submarine car in this one. I like the villain's layer. He's got probably the coolest looking underwater layer or water type layer of any kind of Bond films. I love the opening scene, especially for somebody like I like snowboarding. In the opening scene, he's in a cabin on top of the mountain getting chased off by people and he does a flip. He goes off the cliff, pulls his air chute and I was just like, man, this is as perfect as you could get to a classic Bond in my opinion. Number two is The Spy Who Loved Me. Number one, you should know by process of elimination, but it is GoldenEye. Now to be honest, when I rewatched all these films, GoldenEye was the very first film that I watched. So I have not been able to watch GoldenEye having seen all these other films. However, I just don't think anything's going to be GoldenEye. I just absolutely love it. Pierce Brosnan is my favorite James Bond. This movie just does everything right. I love the set pieces where it kind of ends up with the last part with the satellite. I love the Bond girls, both of them are perfect. I think Boris with the exploding pens, a perfect quirky villain. I think 006 is an amazing villain too. I love the introduction of M. I love the opening scene. So I really liked the video game of this and I revisited this movie around 2009 and I wasn't really as impressed as I thought it was going to be. But rewatching it, man, I really enjoyed it. And this is the reason that I watched all these movies because I watched all the Pierce Brosnans and then I was like, well, let me watch all of them so I could say for sure GoldenEye is the best. And it is, it still is the best. And I think for some people, they're going to have their own opinions, especially younger people, like in the more newer ones. But this is also a great mix of classic and new. It doesn't feel too old, but it doesn't feel too new. And Pierce Brosnan just absolutely nails it. I think he's more intense than Sean Connery. I would say he's just about as flirty in a different way than Sean Connery. I don't know if I could put him one or the other. They're both perfect for Bond. I just love this movie. Everything pretty much does right. There's a few dole spots like the Muffy scene or when he's meeting up with the US people or a couple of times they have like some funky 90s music, especially when they're driving the car. That is a little cringy. And then there's also a couple other times where they inserted these kind of 90s kind of tones in there. But it's very light. GoldenEye also has this other type of soundtrack that isn't really 90s sounding that I really like. So half the soundtrack I really do enjoy. Half of it is a little bit older. Some of the CGI too on like the Jets, hitting the Soviet base looked a little fake, but gotta put GoldenEye number one. It's a classic to me. It's so easy to watch, so enjoyable. But what is your favorite Bond films? Name your top five, but be very interested to see. I thought I was gonna have to put Casino Royale number two or one and just be just like everybody else. But I absolutely could not stand Casino Royale. And if you like Casino Royale number one, it's a solid movie. It's the best paste. But no Casino Royale. Did not like it. I am not looking forward to watching it again. But we're on the road of 50,000 subscribers and I couldn't do without any of your guys' help. You guys are the best. I'm having a great day out here. Hopefully having a great day at home. See you all in the next video. Peace.