Haggis - Robert Wade Reaction
#31
Posted 01 September 2005 - 04:28 AM
#32
Posted 01 September 2005 - 04:52 AM
You know what.....I'm betting that the majority of the people who are dissing the reboot idea will be in the theater that weekend.
I'm hoping its a reboot instead of just another *yawn* Bond movie with the same tired music, terrible dialogue and cliched lines. If I want that I'll just throw in a DVD of an old Bond movie.
I'm not aginst the idea of a reboot, however I would like the right actor who can convince me he's James Bond as the role. And that's defenately NOT Daniel Craig or Julian Mcwhateverhisnameis.
#33
Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:00 AM
#34
Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:15 AM
So, basically, there will be 5 people in theaters that weekend when Casino Royale opens. The reboot idea is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard. Yeah, we just came off a big, successful Bond, let's throw everything we have done in 40 yrs out the window for no other reason then because everyone else is doing prequels. There is no originality, no spark, not one shred of vision for this series right now. Gone as the days when Bond led the pack and set the bar.
Your absolutely right! It just doesn't make any sense at all!
#35
Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:17 AM
I don't see why a re-boot is such a great idea, even if they really want to copy what everyone's been doing this year. CR is coming out at the end of 2006, we're in mid-2005 right now, and the prequel and re-boot trend is starting to wind down, so why does EON think that it would be popular again in late 2006? It's just not going to happen, and I seriously doubt that they're going to go through with it. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
On this, we agree!
#37
Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:34 AM
I don't see why a re-boot is such a great idea, even if they really want to copy what everyone's been doing this year. CR is coming out at the end of 2006, we're in mid-2005 right now, and the prequel and re-boot trend is starting to wind down, so why does EON think that it would be popular again in late 2006? It's just not going to happen, and I seriously doubt that they're going to go through with it. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
I agree with this, but I also throw up the caution sign on the whole idea. What if it fails? This is certainly a possibility. If it fails, IMHO, then you'd have this rebooted series that nobody wants. You'd have to reboot the damn thing again with a whole new actor as Bond just to get back on track. It would be somewhat like On Her Majesty's Secret Service all over again.
I don't believe it'll be the "orgin" reboot thing anyway. It makes no sense. Why hire Judi Dench if this is the case? That confuses the entire matter and... John Cleese? He's obviously a different character than Boothroyd and although he might not appear in Casino Royale, he may (most likely) appear in Bond-22 and how do you explain that? That Bond-21 takes place before Dr. No and the rest, but Bond-22 is post-Die Another Day? Come on. "It's all so [censored]ing hysterical." - Daniel Craig (Road to Perdition)
#38
Posted 01 September 2005 - 10:53 AM
I agree with this, but I also throw up the caution sign on the whole idea. What if it fails? This is certainly a possibility. If it fails, IMHO, then you'd have this rebooted series that nobody wants. You'd have to reboot the damn thing again with a whole new actor as Bond just to get back on track. It would be somewhat like On Her Majesty's Secret Service all over again.
I had never thought about that, but it's true. If they fail with the re-boot, then they'll have to re-boot it again to get the series back on track, and with a different actor for the role. If they are having this much trouble finding one actor for Bond, then how are they going to be able to do a quick turn around if CR fails and select another actor for the role, because I'm sure that if CR's re-boot were to fail with the public, then they wouldn't want another 4 year delay while they search for yet another new Bond, the third in 3 films.
#39
Posted 01 September 2005 - 11:42 AM
#40
Posted 01 September 2005 - 11:48 AM
#41
Posted 01 September 2005 - 12:06 PM
So, basically, there will be 5 people in theaters that weekend when Casino Royale opens. The reboot idea is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard. Yeah, we just came off a big, successful Bond, let's throw everything we have done in 40 yrs out the window for no other reason then because everyone else is doing prequels. There is no originality, no spark, not one shred of vision for this series right now. Gone as the days when Bond led the pack and set the bar.
You said yourself that there is originality, no spark, not one shred of vision and yet, they should continue with exactly that?!
Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?
I don't think you have read the script and heared the ideas, so you can't possibly know if a reboot will work or not.
And neither can I.
But I think trying something new is never bad, especially if you have a 40 year old series.
I say, bring on the reboot, even if it sucks we have to deal with it!
At least it's going to very interesting.
#42
Posted 01 September 2005 - 01:37 PM
Edited by Forever007, 01 September 2005 - 01:38 PM.
#43
Posted 01 September 2005 - 02:19 PM
I don't think you have read the script and heared the ideas, so you can't possibly know if a reboot will work or not.
Bond fans said that EON would change its idea after the Batman reboot failed at the box office. Instead that movie was a giant success so they have to take cheap shots at the idea.
Besides...all these fans will be there opening weekend and Casino Royale will be a BIG success...they are just sore because its not the Bond they want.
They would prefer to have the same old worn out formulaic Bond on another mission film instead of something fresh and exciting.
#44
Posted 01 September 2005 - 02:42 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing something different. I am pretty sure it will be a big success, also.
I don't think you have read the script and heared the ideas, so you can't possibly know if a reboot will work or not.
Bond fans said that EON would change its idea after the Batman reboot failed at the box office. Instead that movie was a giant success so they have to take cheap shots at the idea.
Besides...all these fans will be there opening weekend and Casino Royale will be a BIG success...they are just sore because its not the Bond they want.
They would prefer to have the same old worn out formulaic Bond on another mission film instead of something fresh and exciting.
My reservation is will CR be following a trend instead of setting them, as the Bonds have tended to do in recent years? It seems CR will follow a couple of recent successes: 1)return to the down-to-earth action of the Bourne films and 2)the origin thing showing how a hero got started.
My thing with the whole Batman Begins approach is will people call this as following a trend and will it go stale by November 2006? By that time, Batman Begins will not only have had its theatrical run (that's probably about finished now), had its video debut and probably played pay cable networks, be it HBO or Starz or whatever.
Add to that equation the Superman reboot film that will be the big summer event film in '06. That along with other reboots like the Jack Ryan film and such, will it make people burned out on the whole approach? Will it seem desperate and too similar to other successes and therefore appear old hat or will that turn people off?
I like the films in the series that take chances - OHMSS and LTK, for example. I won't mind if CR takes chances as long as its a good film and not a cash-in on a trend. That's the big thing with mixing up the formula. The image that pops into my mind: New Coke.
#45
Posted 01 September 2005 - 02:46 PM
It's nice that there is some glue to hold the series together (i.e. musical queues, M scenes, etc) despite there being some very, very different films within the collection (for example compare LD with Moonraker or TWINE with Dr.No)
What would actually be a greater challenege - and a sweeter victory if it works - is to take the established formula, but re-work it to produce something which is distinctly different [fresh and exciting].
Edited by return of the saint, 01 September 2005 - 02:46 PM.
#46
Posted 01 September 2005 - 02:53 PM
#47
Posted 01 September 2005 - 02:57 PM
That's the mystery. You hear little clues here and some there and it seems up in the air as to what it will be.Does everyone understand Reboot to be the same as 'Bond Begins'? To me they are very different things. Reboot is sort of like repainting your living room, freshens the series up, maybe a different style of sorts. The 'Bond Begins' idea is what it says on the tin - a story about Bond's first mission. I don't mind the former, but the latter is idiotic. It wouldn't be a Bond movie.
#48
Posted 01 September 2005 - 03:13 PM
The easiest way is to have the pre-title sequence be one of his first missions and then bring it current to solve a crisis. Similiar to Goldeneye.
The most important thing in my view is to bring a new vitality to Bond. The right actor (seems like Butleris our best hope at this point), the exotic travelogue feel, a return to hedonism(ie sex with a min of 3 girls and not being PC or ashamed of enjoying it), a great villian and serious storyline that is plausible(FRWL)are the core elements that have been missing for many years.
Add to that the important of a quality marketing campaign, which also has been lacking since the Moore era, and a great musical score and we have rebooted the series with respect.
#49
Posted 01 September 2005 - 03:18 PM
Well said, Bondesque. Bring it up do date, but don't lose what drew so many to this series to begin with.The most important thing in my view is to bring a new vitality to Bond. The right actor (seems like Butleris our best hope at this point), the exotic travelogue feel, a return to hedonism(ie sex with a min of 3 girls and not being PC or ashamed of enjoying it), a great villian and serious storyline that is plausible(FRWL)are the core elements that have been missing for many years.
Add to that the important of a quality marketing campaign, which also has been lacking since the Moore era, and a great musical score and we have rebooted the series with respect.
#50
Posted 01 September 2005 - 04:09 PM
Does everyone understand Reboot to be the same as 'Bond Begins'? To me they are very different things. Reboot is sort of like repainting your living room, freshens the series up, maybe a different style of sorts. The 'Bond Begins' idea is what it says on the tin - a story about Bond's first mission. I don't mind the former, but the latter is idiotic. It wouldn't be a Bond movie.
I agree. I don't mind a "re-boot" as long as it's similar to what we saw with the transition from Roger Moore to Timothy Dalton. That would be a great way to go about it, transitioning from Pierce Brosnan to a grittier, more realistic James Bond. Going with "Bond Begins" would be a bad idea, IMO.
#51
Posted 01 September 2005 - 04:15 PM
Edited by return of the saint, 01 September 2005 - 04:15 PM.
#52
Posted 01 September 2005 - 04:18 PM
I hope Higgis reads Casino Royale (the book) before doing his re-write. When I read it I didn't imagine it to be Bond's first mission - but rather the first one which Fleming wrote about an already quite well seasoned agent.
You're right, Casino Royale was not Bond's first mission, especially since we are given two accounts in the novel about previous missions that Bond had undertaken.
#53
Posted 01 September 2005 - 04:50 PM
#54
Posted 01 September 2005 - 05:07 PM
OK.......I feel a little better now
#55
Posted 01 September 2005 - 05:12 PM
I don't think you have read the script and heared the ideas, so you can't possibly know if a reboot will work or not.
Bond fans said that EON would change its idea after the Batman reboot failed at the box office. Instead that movie was a giant success so they have to take cheap shots at the idea.
I don't recall this. I don't know a person who actually had a negative thing to say about Batman Begins prior to its release. I think everybody wanted a reboot there. Afterall the previous film was Batman and Robin and that was a catastophic failure for every living soul on earth. Batman is a money making franchise and WB blew it. Rebooting it was the only way to make that series good again.
Bond is completely on the different side of this coin. His franchise is still successful even if you didn't like Die Another Day. The critics did and it obviously did well at the BO and on DVD.
#56
Posted 01 September 2005 - 05:15 PM
Does everyone understand Reboot to be the same as 'Bond Begins'? To me they are very different things. Reboot is sort of like repainting your living room, freshens the series up, maybe a different style of sorts. The 'Bond Begins' idea is what it says on the tin - a story about Bond's first mission. I don't mind the former, but the latter is idiotic. It wouldn't be a Bond movie.
I have nothing against a reboot in the same vein as Licence to Kill -> GoldenEye or AVTAK -> The Living Daylights. I'm totally against an orgin story though.
#57
Posted 01 September 2005 - 05:30 PM
I agree with Skudor. There are plenty of ways to have a reboot to the series without making it Bonds first mission (which is insane given the history of the series)
The easiest way is to have the pre-title sequence be one of his first missions and then bring it current to solve a crisis. Similiar to Goldeneye.
That's a brilliant idea. Do a pre-title sequence set early in Bond's career, and have Le Chiffre in it in some capacity, but he and Bond never actually meet; or maybe they briefly make eye contact across a crowded room or something. The PTS will be about Bond killing Le Chiffre's associate or partner, someone who is the money man in Le C.'s organization; his death eventually leads to Le Chiffre's financial downfall, and "Ten Years Later" or something the Casino Royale story begins.
#58
Posted 01 September 2005 - 05:39 PM
In the PTS we see the demise of Le Chiffre. We see Bond killing him ( but we don't know who it is yet ) and the rest of the movie we see what happened for Bond to have to kill him.
OK. I'd admit the idea is crazy, but someone with a better imagination maybe able to improve upon this idea.
Cheers,
Ian
#59
Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:12 PM
Add to that equation the Superman reboot film that will be the big summer event film in '06...
[mra]For the record, the Superman film is not a reboot. They are taking the approach that it is of the same series as Superman and Superman II. Any changes will be of the same sort of
#60
Posted 01 September 2005 - 06:48 PM