29 replies to this topic

[Dr. Shatterhand]

I can only say one thing about the article on Bond's new Aston Martin and the ejector seat saving his life.

Ridiculous!

Do you honestly believe that the Bond fans are going to accept this information which is completely speculative. Not to mention that someone (who is not connected with the production) went and drew four frames of storyboard to give everyone an idea what this scene might show - if it is filmed.

If I want to read tabloid garbage, I'll pick up the National Enquirer at the local grocery store.

This website offers some good tibbits of news about Bond 20. I find it disturbing when something like this comes out and wastes my time reading it.

[Dr. Shatterhand]

Dear Daniel Blue-Eyes,

The point I have made in this post is that this information is only at this site. There isn't any clarification anywhere else in the Internet or on other news wires.

Your site claims this is a reliable source. I have heard that said at this site and other sites as well. And yet, the news becomes false at times.

You claim that this is Bond 20 news. Fine, but news can be pure speculation and that is where the trouble begins. Your site is mentioned numerous times at other news sites such as Ananova.

Ananova even mentioned that your site yesterday had Will Yun Lee playing the part of Colonel Moon. Yet when Ananova asked for confirmation from EON, they only confirmed that he was hired to play a part. They did not confirm that his part is Colonel Moon.

But, with rumors like that floating around the Internet, speculation can become dangerous. Misinformation can spread so easily. That is why I felt the Aston Martin article (although presented nicely on your site - I had to say that) felt too speculative to me to warrent any credibility.

Please keep in mind that the title BEYOND THE ICE has been floating around the Internet since before TOMORROW NEVER DIES began production. I can remember the IMDB.com having that as a working title back in 1997, although it has been removed since then. Also, SHATTERHAND was a working title for TND as well as THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH.

I understand that Bond fans who frequent this site want up-to-date info on Bond 20, but please screen your info carefully. Just because someone says they are connected to the production does not prove much of anything.

Please don't take my demeaner the wrong way. I enjoy this site and some of the information that is posted. I just would like to read something that IS happening and not something that may not end up in the final film. That could only mean to me 'speculation'.

Now, does anyone else want to flame me?

[Blofeld's Cat]

Dr. Shatterhand (25 Jan, 2002 02:15 p.m.):
I can only say one thing about the article on Bond's new Aston Martin and the ejector seat saving his life.

Ridiculous!

Do you honestly believe that the Bond fans are going to accept this information which is completely speculative.  Not to mention that someone (who is not connected with the production) went and drew four frames of storyboard to give everyone an idea what this scene might show - if it is filmed.

If I want to read tabloid garbage, I'll pick up the National Enquirer at the local grocery store.

This website offers some good tibbits of news about Bond 20.  I find it disturbing when something like this comes out and wastes my time reading it.

Everyone's entitled to an opinion. I, for one, would love to see such a scene in Bond 20.

Whether it's actually true or not, the fact of the matter is that I would welcome such a scene.

It's original, it's creative, and.....it's got Bond written all over it.

[Mister Asterix]

Dr. S,
First let me say that your opinion is welcome and I am happy that this has not discouraged you from posting here. Some may not believe it but I have never posted a response on these forum with anger toward a user. I have had more than my share of heated conversations, but I do not ever intend to attack my fellow user, but their statements.

I have no problem with you having the belief that this story is not true. To me though, calling this a tabloid story and the comparison of it to the National Enquirer (a newspaper that has been sued for libel many times) comes off as an attack on not the story but the news-provider and the reporter. This may not be have been your intention, but this is the way it looked.

Dr. Shatterhand (28 Jan, 2002 01:57 a.m.):(edited)
...I never said that Blue Eyes was a 'no-talent-hack'  That was your statement...

No, my statement was that your statement was similar to saying that. A simil

[Dr. Shatterhand]

Now for the truth.

I would like to apologise to all who I offended in this post. This post was purely an experiment. My name is Steven Colt. I'm 20 years old and I'm a Psych major at the University of Maryland.

My experiment was to prove that by initiating a debate by using only a few key words (in this case 'garbage tabloid) I could insite anger and disgust in other people's feelings and posts.

Now, you're probably wondering why I chose this site - well actually I am a Bond fan and the two ideas seemed to come together one night. My professor reluctantly allowed me to do the experiment providing I don't do anything so bad that I could get sued.

Well, like I said, I'm sorry if I hurt any feelings. The experiment was successful on my professor's side. We all agreed how very interesting it was to read and that it seemed to be like disturbing a hornet's nest.

The results will be used in a study being conducted and hopefully it will teach others how to conduct themselves in forums such as this.

With all due respect to Daniel Blue Eyes Dykes, your site is very well done and I applaude your work.

Best regards,

Steven

[DavidFries]

[Mister Asterix]

I feel so used. Do I at least get a piece of cheese?

[Evil Doctor Cheese]

Well then all of our pent up hatred and sarcastic comments were in vain. Don't know whether I forgive you or dislike you more for being a pr*ck and messing about with the forums and using us as some sort of bloody guinea pigs...

Let's make it like the Roman times and dump you amongst the lions and see if they maul you up or leave you well alone shall we...?

[Dr. Shatterhand]

John Cleese's hair is dyed? That has got to be the lowest type of tablod garbage I have ever read here. (Just kidding).

I will admit though, just as Brosnan said in an interview, he thought the bungee jump in GE was hokey, but after it was filmed and edited, he saw how wonderful it really turned out to be.

I too, would be amazed if this ejector seat stunt ends up being true and works like magic on screen.

I will also come on this forum and offer an extreme humble apology to all who disagreed with me.

With that said, I end this post.

[James Page]

Dr. Shatterhand (28 Jan, 2002 08:36 p.m.):
Now, you're probably wondering why I chose this site...

Probably becuase you knew you would get a good solid argument? That's what I love about these forums, ppl know what they're talking about. Well.... Most of the time :-)

[Mister Asterix]

Dr. Shatterhand (28 Jan, 2002 02:08 p.m.):(edited)
John Cleese's hair is dyed?  That has got to be the lowest type of tablod garbage I have ever read here.  (Just kidding).  

LSHIAPM^*. Very funny, Dr. S.

^*Laughed So Hard I Almost Peed Myself.

[Simon]

Dr. Shatterhand (28 Jan, 2002 08:36 p.m.):
The results will be used in a study being conducted and hopefully it will teach others how to conduct themselves in forums such as this.

Hmm, ok. I'd be interested to see some results when you have something to show.

Is the study purely pertinent to forums or does it cross boundaries into everyday behaviour?

[Evil Doctor Cheese]

I think I'm the only CBN stallwart who hasn't "had a go" yet. But on a purely personal note... Daniel works his off to find newer and newer info on Bond 20 how ever big or small. Personally the article did not appeal to me because I don't want the actions sequences spoiled for me (my fault... I can't resist those "highlight to read" sections!!!). But I think the article was very news worthy.... most people on the forums want Bond 20 to hark back to the past Bond films so the return of the ejector seat is very newsworthy. I also have to say that I believe everything I read on this website because I know Blue Eyes always checks out his sources fully. He always mentions if it is speculated or if the mentioned sequence will not appear in the film... he also tells you how reliable he thinks his source is if he thinks the info is not totally true.

I have a bloody huge amount of confidence in Blue Eyes as a reporter and I won't have "the daddy" dissed in a post. Would i have taken two seconds of your precious time to have thought about your post and just say "I don't believe the ejector seat will feature in Bond 20" or just show your disgust in the pointlessness of this information by not posting anything in thread about the article. Blue Eyes is an excellent journalist and if his career being the next James Bond falls through then I think we'll see him working for a top film Magazine and not the National Enquirer!

PS I have never seen so many long and angry posts in one thread! I think Dr Shatterhand should apologise for the wording of his post although his opinion about it not being interesting to him is very valid. Bit of manner Dr S.... I can't image how terrible your bedside manner is!

[Blue Eyes]

That's just plain funny!

[JimmyBond]

I was under the impression that the Ejector seat rumor was true. Yes, the story boards are not from the production, but those were drawn to get a better idea of how the sequence would look.

[Mister Asterix]

One of the reasons I frequent this web-site is that they go to great efforts to tell you where you stand when it comes to the news. In this instance, the source is clearly stated as an insider and the storyboard is very clearly said to be a fans work. We all know that inside sources are not always reliable, Whether it is because they don't have the full story or were given misinformation or they are just lying, an insider can provide bad information. However, we also know that many times insider information is true. Daniel and Dave, have to make judgements on what the information means and whether it jives with what else they know and these fellows seem very good at weeding out the B.S. from the truth. Are they perfect, no, but neither are Woodward and Berstein.

I see no reason not to believe this. It sounds very interesting. And if you don't want to hear this sort of 'speculation' you should stick to jamesbond.com and wait for the official news to trickle out.

[Mister Asterix]

Dr. Shatterhand (26 Jan, 2002 05:13 a.m.):(edited)
...I just would like to read something that IS happening and not something that may not end up in the final film. That could only mean to me 'speculation'.
...

Then and I hope you complained to jamesbond.com for their 'speculation' that Ms. Pike's character would be called Gala Brand (I know I did). That is something that will never end up in the final film. And I must apoligize for pointing you to jamesbond.com. They really have proved to be most inacturate.

Dr. Shatterhand (26 Jan, 2002 05:13 a.m.):(edited)
Now, does anyone else want to flame me?

Flaming is kind when compared to your near slanderous original post. In the future, please find a way of saying you don't believe the story without implying that the reporter just made it up.

[Simon]

You must lead a very full life if 10 seconds wastage is something to be concerned about.

But since all "vaguely sourceable lead" rumours are to be posted and if someone wants to make the effort to give an artistic impression which can only be likened to fan fiction/artwork, then fine.

[mrmoon]

Dr.Shatterhand I am disappointed that you feel so strongly about this topic. When Daniel posted the information concerning the Vanquish he did not say it was confirmed and neither did he say that the Sketches I personally spent time drawing were official. It is very simple for a website to copy and paste a story from another site which takes no effort whatsoever, however Daniel received this information from a reliable source and all information like this should be shared with the fans and members of CBn. The titbits of Bond 20 information you suggest CBn post actually include breaking news and all official news is majoritively mentioned in some speculative form or another.For example Rick Yune was discussed for a long time before he was officially announced as a cast member.

I would also prefer it if you left it to me to decide whether or not I should draw sketches to accompany such stories, I won't ask for an apology just some respect as opposed to criticism about something I did for your benefit. If you can find a site which goes to more effort than CBn to provide such content I'd like you to post it in here please. Thankyou

[Dr. Shatterhand]

With all due respect to anyone's feeling here, I felt that the article did not merit what other articles have shown.

I apologize if I have hurt anyone's feelings here but since this is an open forum I felt I had an opinion.

I still feel that this is speculation merely by the fact that if Bond were to use his ejector seat to flip over his car, where would the seat go after it had hit the roof? Since he would most likely be in the driver's seat, wouldn't he get hurt.

Of course the possibilities might rise that he is using another remote control car device and that he is not in the car. But, that has been done before and I don't think the producers would go there. Also, by physics alone, the seat would hit the roof and the roof would hit the ground causing a counteraction that would not have enough power to flip a 2 ton + car.

As for your artwork, I also want to apologize if you felt that my opinion was directed at it. It was not, I just felt that someone went to a great deal of trouble to show what a storyboard might look like when the scene may or may not be in the film.

As for others who would like me to leave this site and wait for confirmation from JamesBond.com - forget about it. You will find many people in your life who will disagree with you. It does not mean you are wrong or right. But get over it. The best thing about free speech is that (as long as you don't threaten others) you can say something without the risk of losing your life.

Well enough sermon. I have made my peace.

[Mister Asterix]

Dr. Shatterhand (25 Jan, 2002 08:03 p.m.):(edited)
...As for others who would like me to leave this site and wait for confirmation from JamesBond.com - forget about it.  You will find many people in your life who will disagree with you.  It does not mean you are wrong or right.  But get over it.  The best thing about free speech is that (as long as you don't threaten others) you can say something without the risk of losing your life...

I am not asking you to leave CBN so much as saying this is what you will get if you stay here. CBN is, in my opinion, the best source for news on Bond 20 because they share information like that contained in this article and your comparisons to the National Enquirer to me is the same as calling Blue Eyes a no-talented hack. Which I didn't feel was quite fair.

As for the physics of the stunt, without all the information i.e. how this ejector seat works, the strength of the ejector seat, et cetera. I couldn't say whether this would work or not. I don't think it would have with the old DB5, but with this new car things may work a bit different. The stunt certainly sounds more plausable then a truck-cab popping a wheelie.

[James Page]

Hey guys, I understand the disagreement here.

You only have to look at a rival site's forums (you know the one I mean :-) ) to see how much slagging and bitching goes one there.

The thing I love about these forums is that posters are well informed clued up Bond fans, not people looking for a flame war. So when the odd battle crops up it normally flares up over something small.

Stick around Dr., it's good to hear views that are different to the majority, now how does Tom Crown say it, ah yes, "as long as they don't run too contrary to my own" :-D

[Simon]

Dr. Shatterhand (25 Jan, 2002 08:03 p.m.):
I still feel that this is speculation merely by the fact that if Bond were to use his ejector seat to flip over his car, where would the seat go after it had hit the roof?  Since he would most likely be in the driver's seat, wouldn't he get hurt.

Of course the possibilities might rise that he is using another remote control car device and that he is not in the car.  But, that has been done before and I don't think the producers would go there.  Also, by physics alone, the seat would hit the roof and the roof would hit the ground causing a counteraction that would not have enough power to flip a 2 ton + car.

Without wishing to perpetuate the argument and create an aura of "don't I know a lot", I would say that the physics, both in the movie and in real life would be entirely possible.

When stuntmen wish to flip a car in front of a cardbox, in an attempt to suggest that the cardboard box was sufficient reason to flip said car, they use a section of telegraph pole and compressed air ram to create an equal and opposite reaction.

The ram forces the telegraph pole out into the ground while the car is moving and the force of the pressure is sufficient to create the opposite effect of flipping over the car. This device is usually sited in the passenger seat area and has been used to long and recurring effect.

Just check out all the A-Team TV series and look for the hole under the car. You can even see the pole from time to time.

[Blofeld 2010]

Just goes to show that all forums are a microcosm of everyday society.I hope you major!WHOOPS,i see you have!

[Simon]

Dr. Shatterhand (26 Jan, 2002 05:13 a.m.):
Now, does anyone else want to flame me?

Can I have another crack?

So ok, that was kinda light hearted. God knows I have been in the middle of a couple of scraps and, as a result, I have been told to quit while I'm ahead. There are pros and cons to standing your corner and for the pros side of life, I believe it does shake things up a bit and inject a new fire into things that can otherwise just be a stream of "The title will be" and "Bond 20 title is" and "My thoughts on, yes you guessed it, the next title".

The ultimate point to be made here is;

Can you do better?

Here's a chap and team who are doing this as a part time interest. There's no salary involved. (Is there?) The result is professional and through the course of time, they are taken seriously and the audience is starting to demand.

No problem with that, but try to remember where they're coming from and what they are standing for. If there is a big enough problem with their output, then ultimately, you have to decide whether you could provide better meat and stand up to be counted. There is still the best part of a year before it becomes history, so go ahead and put your nuts on the line.

Your call.

Best.

[White Persian]

Now, please tell me the Whitney Houston thread was also a socialogical experiment.

[Blue Eyes]

Dr. Shatterhand (26 Jan, 2002 05:13 a.m.):
The point I have made in this post is that this information is only at this site.  There isn't any clarification anywhere else in the Internet or on other news wires.

That's because no other site on the Internet covers Bond news as CommanderBond.Net does. We are the most frequently updated James Bond site on the Internet.

Your site claims this is a reliable source.  I have heard that said at this site and other sites as well.  And yet, the news becomes false at times.

Name me a publication that hasn't included false information from time to time. I can't think of one that hasn't.

Ananova even mentioned that your site yesterday had Will Yun Lee playing the part of Colonel Moon.  Yet when Ananova asked for confirmation from EON, they only confirmed that he was hired to play a part.  They did not confirm that his part is Colonel Moon.

And what does that prove? I quote "But Eon have so far refused to reveal the name of his character". Does that mean that it's not Colonel Moon? That's a rhetorical question btw.

That is why I felt the Aston Martin article (although presented nicely on your site - I had to say that) felt too speculative to me to warrent any credibility.

That's fine. Then don't read it, and if you do 'don't complain'. I run a free service. It costs you nothing to log onto my site. It costs you nothing to read the news. You know how much I've made from the past year working on CBn? Nothing! I've got a free book and some people (forum users) have been nice enough to send me a few things which are greatly appreciated. Of the money that has been donated we've upgraded the server for people such as yourself. If you're one who donated some money then you have the right to complain, but not in a public forum. Address me personally.

Please keep in mind that the title BEYOND THE ICE has been floating around the Internet since before TOMORROW NEVER DIES began production.

Beyond The Ice actually comes from an article published by The Mirror. And it was a working title used by Eon.

Just because someone says they are connected to the production does not prove much of anything.

No, it doesn't. That's why I ask questions and ask for proof.

I just would like to read something that IS happening and not something that may not end up in the final film.  That could only mean to me 'speculation'.

It is happening. It's been storyboarded and considered. Whether or not it's able to be filmed is another matter altogether. But should the information that it existed in the first place then be lost to history?

[Blue Eyes]

Dr. Shatterhand (26 Jan, 2002 05:13 a.m.):
Ananova even mentioned that your site yesterday had Will Yun Lee playing the part of Colonel Moon.  Yet when Ananova asked for confirmation from EON, they only confirmed that he was hired to play a part.  They did not confirm that his part is Colonel Moon.

And I'd like to add to this the fact that it was a source of ours that told us Will Yun Lee would be in Bond 20. I then looked into the validity of that news.

[Dr. Shatterhand]

In this case, dry roasted nuts.

I will stop defending myself with this post because, like quicksand, I keep sinking further.

But then again, I can always float for awhile.

As for Mr. Daniel Blue-Eyes Dykes and others, I am relatively new to this forum and therefore do not know the monetary cost or donations of this site. I do know what it takes to run a website because I do it professionally. Therefore, I offer high kudos for your site. It is presented very nicely.

Now onto the flaming:

Of course, I feel that it was not in anyone's best interest to bring up the monetary cost of this site as an argument against my original post. I had an opinion - it made some people upset - I apologized - and yet some of you said the following:

I would also prefer it if you left it to me to decide whether or not I should draw sketches to accompany such stories, I won't ask for an apology just some respect as opposed to criticism about something I did for your benefit.

- I never said anything bad about your drawings. I simply said that the information was tabloid garbage - as in evidence without evidence. You created the artwork to give everyone an idea. Fine - some of the news tabloids show aliens shaking hands with President Bush, they created it - it is not a real picture.

Now onto another complainer who spinned my post a different way:

CBN is, in my opinion, the best source for news on Bond 20 because they share information like that contained in this article and your comparisons to the National Enquirer to me is the same as calling Blue Eyes a no-talented hack. Which I didn't feel was quite fair.

I never said that Blue Eyes was a 'no-talent-hack' That was your statement. I said if I want to read tabloid garbage I'll read the National Enquirer. Again, let me point out that the article has no other credible source to back it up around the Internet. This site is the only one mentioning it. Therefore, it reads like a tabloid article. Other articles on this site have been excellent and have sources that have been clarified at other sites. This article has yet to prove itself.

And yet another statement from someone else,

Flaming is kind when compared to your near slanderous original post. In the future, please find a way of saying you don't believe the story without implying that the reporter just made it up.

My opinion in this forum is exactly that 'my opinion' - I don't think that my comment was slanderous. That would mean that I have commited a crime against this Blue-Eyes. If that were the case then no one would be able to offer their opinion.

If you want to continue to flame me on this post - go ahead. But before you do, please show me more credible evidence that this was or is to happen in Bond 20. Otherwise, let this post fade away and time will eventually tell.

Nuff said - I hope.

[Blue Eyes]

Dr. Shatterhand (25 Jan, 2002 08:03 p.m.):
I still feel that this is speculation merely by the fact that if Bond were to use his ejector seat to flip over his car, where would the seat go after it had hit the roof?  Since he would most likely be in the driver's seat, wouldn't he get hurt.

I don't know. Is it just me or does the PASSENGERS seat eject in GF without any damage to Bond? Maybe my screen is a little fuzzy.

Let me respond to your original post.

1) I don't care if you believe the news or not. That's completely your choice.

2) If you think that's tabloid garbage, you've got another thing coming to you. Tabloid garbage is crap like all the Bond girls will return. What was printed was a little bit of information for true Bond fans who appreciate Bond to enjoy. Everyone loves GF and there's a bit of information to those people to enjoy about Bond 20.

3) If an article is such a waste of time for you reading it. Then don't read it. Is anyone forcing you to click on the heading? I don't think so.

Sorry that you're life is so full of important stuff that a simple little bit of news wastes your time, and that you can't enjoy a bit of Bond news.