Genrewriter: Bebopfoot-Put me down for twenty on it lasting until a mod steps in.
...If a mod steps in with something that moves the conversation forward rather than laterally -- I'm all for it.
Blox
Does Connery really disassociate himself from the Bond series? If so, why?
Started by
Loomis
, Sep 08 2003 07:10 PM
160 replies to this topic
#152
Loomis
-
- Veterans
-
- 21862 posts
Commander CMG
Posted 26 September 2003 - 11:52 AM
Originally posted by Blox
Genrewriter: Bebopfoot-Put me down for twenty on it lasting until a mod steps in.
...Looks like you owe him twenty.
Well, Blox, before turning in last night I saw you'd made a whole string of new points, citing various sources, and I was planning on responding to them today, so I enter this thread and what do I find? Surprise, surprise, that once again you've been re-editing with a mania not seen since George Lucas decided there was room for improvement in his STAR WARS trilogy. Your post that I was going to respond to is now gone. Hopefully, Blox, you'll find a debating opponent made of sterner stuff than I, but I'm finding it hard to keep up with all your chopping and changing, and am becoming deeply bored by your insinuations (which you seem unable/unwilling to substantiate) that I am making personal attacks on you, and by your refusal to answer many of my Connery-related questions.
So I'm out of this discussion and won't be coming back. Bye.
#153
Blox
-
- Crew
-
- 279 posts
Sub-Lieutenant
Posted 26 September 2003 - 02:38 PM
Loomis: Hopefully, Blox, you'll find a debating opponent made of sterner stuff than I, So I'm out of this discussion and won't be coming back. Bye.
...Au revoir
Blox
...Au revoir
Blox
#154
Loomis
-
- Veterans
-
- 21862 posts
Commander CMG
Posted 26 September 2003 - 02:55 PM
Originally posted by Blox
Loomis: citing various sources, and I was planning on responding to them today, so I enter this thread and what do I find?
...Wisdom. I can understand your being floored by it. I cut out the fat and redundancies out of respect for the poor souls who actually feel compelled to slog through 6 pps of this pigs garbage.
This has been a long time coming, Blox, but your overweening arrogance and rudeness (I'm a "pig", am I?) is the chief reason that I am not prepared to debate with you any longer. I am no longer interested in anything you might have to say on the subject of Connery or Bond. I suggest you look very, very hard at your behaviour towards other members on this site. I might add that, based on private messages I have received, I am not the only member to have noticed your unpleasantness.
If there is any repeat of this sort of thing, I shall be contacting CBn staff, and do not be surprised if you find yourself reprimanded and/or banned. This site does not tolerate the behaviour you are displaying.
#155
Jaelle
-
- Veterans
-
- 1406 posts
Lt. Commander
Posted 26 September 2003 - 02:58 PM
Originally posted by Loomis
If there is any repeat of this sort of thing, I shall be contacting CBn staff, and do not be surprised if you find yourself reprimanded and/or banned. This site does not tolerate the behaviour you are displaying.
I'm surprised none of them has stepped in yet, frankly. You've been remarkably civil, Loomis.
#156
DLibrasnow
-
- Enlisting
-
- 16568 posts
Commander
- Location:Washington D.C.. USA
Posted 26 September 2003 - 03:04 PM
I am also surprised that CBN staff have been so mute?!
#157
bebopfoot
-
- Crew
-
- 202 posts
Sub-Lieutenant
Posted 26 September 2003 - 04:07 PM
No way, I'm with Blox on this one. He's simply been arguing his point, and Loomis' exit, while very gracious, doesn't mean anybody won. But Blox did nothing wrong, and I don't think he should be made out to be a villain.
#158
Blox
-
- Crew
-
- 279 posts
Sub-Lieutenant
Posted 26 September 2003 - 09:46 PM
Loomis: This has been a long time coming, Blox, but your overweening arrogance and rudeness (I'm a "pig", am I?)
...No, not at all.
Loomis: is the chief reason that I am not prepared to debate with you any longer.
...You are mistaken. I didn't call _you_ a pig. I was referring to the quality of the sometimes repugnant _exchanges_ from others in this thread. ("Pig's garbage" = "trough slop" & relates to content quality -- not you personally).
Loomis: I suggest you look very, very hard at your behaviour towards other members on this site. I might add that, based on private messages I have received, I am not the only member to have noticed your unpleasantness.
...I should think that some here who have elected to post offensive comments about Sir Sean's character ought to look very very hard at _their_ behaviour. Some of what I have read in this thread has been highly repugnant and offensive for me to have to slog through. I have absolutely no apologies to make to people in this thread who have elected to make rather uncivil statements that malign Sir Sean's character.
Blox
...No, not at all.
Loomis: is the chief reason that I am not prepared to debate with you any longer.
...You are mistaken. I didn't call _you_ a pig. I was referring to the quality of the sometimes repugnant _exchanges_ from others in this thread. ("Pig's garbage" = "trough slop" & relates to content quality -- not you personally).
Loomis: I suggest you look very, very hard at your behaviour towards other members on this site. I might add that, based on private messages I have received, I am not the only member to have noticed your unpleasantness.
...I should think that some here who have elected to post offensive comments about Sir Sean's character ought to look very very hard at _their_ behaviour. Some of what I have read in this thread has been highly repugnant and offensive for me to have to slog through. I have absolutely no apologies to make to people in this thread who have elected to make rather uncivil statements that malign Sir Sean's character.
Blox
#159
Genrewriter
-
- Veterans
-
- 4360 posts
Cammander CMG
- Location:South Pasadena, CA
Posted 27 September 2003 - 01:25 AM
*Sigh*
And the song remains the same. Blox, I don't think Loomis pulled you back in. You made a conscious decision to bring yourself back in. Not that I care either way, but it's the way it is.
Could we please get a mod in here? The repetition is really getting ridiculous.
And the song remains the same. Blox, I don't think Loomis pulled you back in. You made a conscious decision to bring yourself back in. Not that I care either way, but it's the way it is.
Could we please get a mod in here? The repetition is really getting ridiculous.
#160
DLibrasnow
-
- Enlisting
-
- 16568 posts
Commander
- Location:Washington D.C.. USA
Posted 27 September 2003 - 01:39 AM
Yes please, moderator in this thread!!
#161
Blox
-
- Crew
-
- 279 posts
Sub-Lieutenant
Posted 27 September 2003 - 04:01 AM
...Nice to see so much interest in a discussion about Sir Sean from all of those "Roger Moore" icons. However, their efforts to distract from the substantive focus of the thread are transparent, and I am undeterred. For those of you just joining us, this thread began this way:
Loomis: Does Connery really disassociate himself from the Bond series?
If so, why? I've read a number of comments about Connery disassociating himself from the Bond series. Is this actually the case, or just fanboy overreaction to his failure to do such things as record commentaries for the Bond DVDs? If it is indeed the case that Connery distances himself from Bond, why all the bad blood? I know that Connery was unhappy around the time of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, feeling that his Bond contract was restrictive and so on.... but didn't everyone kiss and make up around the time of DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER? What happened? Did Connery and Cubby Broccoli have an almighty falling-out in the early 70s, or something like that?"
...That's the focus of this thread. Here are some observations: Connery stated in a TB interview that his sole "grumble" was that there was less for his character to do. Journalists covering the shooting of the next Bond, YOLT, averred that he was bored. Connery commented after YOLT that he didn't think the result justified the year it took to make. (Peter Hunt, who cut YOLT, stated in an interview many years later that he didn't like it either.) After YOLT, Connery reportedly wanted to be cut in as a partner, get into the creative side - and was turned down. Peter Hunt reportedly tried to sign him right up to the start of shooting on OHMSS, and was turned down. Connery came back in DAF for a $1.25 million fee, back end profiit sharing totaling 6 million, a tighter shooting schedule, and an agreement by UA to back two other films ("The Offense," etc) Despite his departure, boredom, etc, Connery stated in an interview that those who think he disliked the character are mistaken. During the mid seventies, Connery and Moore were often photographed together. In 1975, when McClory regained the legal right to remake the TB properties, Connery was asked to work creatively on treatments & scripts. Connery's stock answer for many years after DAF was that he would return to Bond "if they came up with a good script." He was reportedly interviewed by MGM/UA brass for Octopussy, but, for whatever reasons, signed to play the part, and work creatively behind the scenes in NSNA. MGM/UA sued NSNA throughout the production -- right up to release. A few years later, Connery sued Broccoli for merchandising back end, and reportedly settled for $7 million -- a figure that surpassed his reported front and back end take for DAF. Connery, whose desire to help produce the Bonds was rebuffed, wrote scripts, created his own production company, and executive produced films. Recent reports indicate his interest in creating a film studio in Scotland. When Cubby Broccoli died, Connery was reportedly the first to phone the family with condolences. Sir Sean's site presently contains images of him as Bond. In between all of this, there were lawsuits, rancor & acrimony.
Now if someone has something substantive and civil to add that relates to the focus of this thread, have at it.
Blox
Loomis: Does Connery really disassociate himself from the Bond series?
If so, why? I've read a number of comments about Connery disassociating himself from the Bond series. Is this actually the case, or just fanboy overreaction to his failure to do such things as record commentaries for the Bond DVDs? If it is indeed the case that Connery distances himself from Bond, why all the bad blood? I know that Connery was unhappy around the time of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, feeling that his Bond contract was restrictive and so on.... but didn't everyone kiss and make up around the time of DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER? What happened? Did Connery and Cubby Broccoli have an almighty falling-out in the early 70s, or something like that?"
...That's the focus of this thread. Here are some observations: Connery stated in a TB interview that his sole "grumble" was that there was less for his character to do. Journalists covering the shooting of the next Bond, YOLT, averred that he was bored. Connery commented after YOLT that he didn't think the result justified the year it took to make. (Peter Hunt, who cut YOLT, stated in an interview many years later that he didn't like it either.) After YOLT, Connery reportedly wanted to be cut in as a partner, get into the creative side - and was turned down. Peter Hunt reportedly tried to sign him right up to the start of shooting on OHMSS, and was turned down. Connery came back in DAF for a $1.25 million fee, back end profiit sharing totaling 6 million, a tighter shooting schedule, and an agreement by UA to back two other films ("The Offense," etc) Despite his departure, boredom, etc, Connery stated in an interview that those who think he disliked the character are mistaken. During the mid seventies, Connery and Moore were often photographed together. In 1975, when McClory regained the legal right to remake the TB properties, Connery was asked to work creatively on treatments & scripts. Connery's stock answer for many years after DAF was that he would return to Bond "if they came up with a good script." He was reportedly interviewed by MGM/UA brass for Octopussy, but, for whatever reasons, signed to play the part, and work creatively behind the scenes in NSNA. MGM/UA sued NSNA throughout the production -- right up to release. A few years later, Connery sued Broccoli for merchandising back end, and reportedly settled for $7 million -- a figure that surpassed his reported front and back end take for DAF. Connery, whose desire to help produce the Bonds was rebuffed, wrote scripts, created his own production company, and executive produced films. Recent reports indicate his interest in creating a film studio in Scotland. When Cubby Broccoli died, Connery was reportedly the first to phone the family with condolences. Sir Sean's site presently contains images of him as Bond. In between all of this, there were lawsuits, rancor & acrimony.
Now if someone has something substantive and civil to add that relates to the focus of this thread, have at it.
Blox