124 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

You don't like "sucks up to"? How about "bends over backwards to avoid causing any offence to"?

[Qwerty]

You don't like "sucks up to"? How about "bends over backwards to avoid causing any offence to"?

No, I don't think they were putting the effect this film would have on China as a number one priority to watch out for in the making of Tomorrow Never Dies.

[Loomis]

Well, I disagree with you (I'm sure they felt that China was an important future market worth making overtures to), but we'll leave it there.

BTW, I'm pretty sure I've explained in detail why I feel TND sucks up to China on other threads in the past, but I can't really be bothered to look for them right now.

[Qwerty]

Well, I disagree with you (I'm sure they felt that China was an important future market worth making overtures to), but we'll leave it there.

BTW, I'm pretty sure I've explained in detail why I feel TND sucks up to China on other threads in the past, but I can't really be bothered to look for them right now.

Fair enough.

And yes, no need to bother looking, I remember reading it.

[YOLT]

Look at the inflation adjusted revenues Qwerty. Thunderball is still in the lead. With far to reach. Isnt this tellin something. We now have more technology more people in the world. But none of the Bond films have reached the hight of TB. Its just the reality.

Not to mention the fact that whole new markets are open to James Bond now! In the 1960s,70s and most of the 80s the Bond movies were banned in some countries. Those countries now release 007 movies so Connery and Moore made more money with a smaller pool of possible viewers!

Definitely. Its very obvious that Bond has lost its share in the cake over the years. And I fear it will continue.

[Turn]

Factor in when talking about viewers, the differences -- today there are video games; hundreds of cable and satellite television stations; home video; etc. Several more distractions than there were in the peak years of the franchise.

Just because the films don't make what they once did in terms of money doesn't mean there isn't a place for them. Unless they make another TWINE

[Qwerty]

Factor in when talking about viewers, the differences -- today there are video games; hundreds of cable and satellite television stations; home video; etc. Several more distractions than there were in the peak years of the franchise.

Just because the films don't make what they once did in terms of money doesn't mean there isn't a place for them.

Exactly. No kidding Bond doesn't have the same "share" it had when it started those kind of action movies in the 60's. Bond WAS those action movies then. Period.

Not losing their share today, they just have stiff competiton. That's to be expected.

[DanMan]

DAD did better B.O. than most other action movies (save for the MEGA-blockbusters such as Matrix Reloaded, Star Wars, LOTR...) and DAD also became one of the highest selling DVD's of 2003 so I'd say that Bond still has a pretty big piece of the cake.

[Qwerty]

DAD did better B.O. than most other action movies (save for the MEGA-blockbusters such as Matrix Reloaded, Star Wars, LOTR...) and DAD also became one of the highest selling DVD's of 2003 so I'd say that Bond still has a pretty big piece of the cake.

It was indeed. I was speaking of how many other films are apart of that cake though.

[DLibrasnow]

Qwerty...the Bond films have always had stiff competition at the box office, so you cannot say that DAD had stronger competition than any other Bond movie because it's not true. Give me a Bond movie and I'll quote you the competition - Do you realize that Moore's $540 million The Spy Who Loved Me was competing with the original STAR WARS - which was a living and breathing phenomenon...Also don't get the Dalton fans talking about the summer of 1989.

[Qwerty]

Qwerty...the Bond films have always had stiff competition at the box office, so you cannot say that DAD had stronger competition than any other Bond movie because it's not true.

I did not say that DLibrasnow.

I'm saying the amount of competetion and films now are greater than there were in the 60's.

[License To Kill]

Qwerty...the Bond films have always had stiff competition at the box office, so you cannot say that DAD had stronger competition than any other Bond movie because it's not true. Give me a Bond movie and I'll quote you the competition - Do you realize that Moore's $540 million The Spy Who Loved Me was competing with the original STAR WARS - which was a living and breathing phenomenon...Also don't get the Dalton fans talking about the summer of 1989.

What was the competition for LTK?

Edited by License To Kill, 05 August 2004 - 03:50 AM.

[Qwerty]

The Living Daylights hardly had the competition Licence To Kill had.

[License To Kill]

Refresh me on what the competition was for LTK's release.

[Qwerty]

http://www.the-numbe...7/19870731.html

The Living Daylights

[License To Kill]

Outstanding site!

Thanks Qwerty.


Never knew Batman, Lethal Weapon 2 and Honey, I Shrunk the Kids opened against our beloved Timothy in 1989.

Edited by License To Kill, 05 August 2004 - 03:55 AM.

[Qwerty]

Licence To Kill: (July)

http://www.the-numbe.../index1989.html

Welcome

[DLibrasnow]

STAKEOUT, DIRTY DANCING, ROBOCOP, LA BAMBA, NO WAY OUT, LOST BOYS. I guess the only movie that didn't provide too much competition was THE FOURTH PROTOCOL which starred one over the hill actor (Caine) and one overrated TV actor (Pierce Brosnan).

[Qwerty]

The Living Daylights really didn't have too stiff competetion when you look at it.

[DLibrasnow]

No Brosnan was no competition for Dalton, I'll give you that Qwerty!

[Qwerty]

No Brosnan was no competition for Dalton, I'll give you that Qwerty!

Don't think it would have made a huge difference no matter which of them debuted in it.

[Jack Bauer]

Hmm...well, I guess the more films you do, the better chance you have to make a sour one. I like all his films, though.

I like Moore a lot, he's by far my favorite. He is just so lively, and charming, yet kicks so much butt. I don't know why, he rocks my socks.

[Qwerty]

Hmm...well, I guess the more films you do, the better chance you have to make a sour one. I like all his films, though.

True, Connery and Moore both.

Although on CBn, I'm willing to bet it's a different case with one Pierce Brosnan.

[Moomoo]

I believe the appeal of Roger Moore may be more deep-rooted and complex than we think.

I think there is a compelling argument to be made that humans (as a collective whole) need the hero-myth. That is, characters they can look up to and admire. Now Bond is the ultimate hero, and most casual Bond fans would say Moore was more appealing as Bond than Dalton. Why? Well, it's because we admire heroes who are not too serious, not too angst-ridden, ones that can save the world without breaking into too much sweat. Moore's Bond typifies that. When we see Moore's Bond we are seeing a hero in its purest form. Fantastical, over the top, yes, but still a true hero.

Moore's Bond is the closest we have ever got to a superhero Bond. American culture, in particular, loves superheroes. Superman, Batman and Spider-man are part of the nation's cultural consciousness. If we extrapolate that ideal worldwide, it's not hard to understand why Moore's superhero Bond was such a success.

Moore may have lacked the killer-edge, Moore may have got stuntmen do his stunts, but his Bond was essentially likeable. And if you ask most people what they would most like from life, most would say to be liked. And there's your answer to why Moore was a success and why he is liked by many on CBn.

Moomoo

[Jim]

Now Bond is the ultimate hero, and most casual Bond fans would say Moore was more appealing as Bond than Dalton. Why? Well, it's because we admire heroes who are not too serious, not too angst-ridden, ones that can save the world without breaking into too much sweat. Moore's Bond typifies that. When we see Moore's Bond we are seeing a hero in its purest form. Fantastical, over the top, yes, but still a true hero.

Moore's Bond is the closest we have ever got to a superhero Bond. American culture, in particular, loves superheroes. Superman, Batman and Spider-man are part of the nation's cultural consciousness. If we extrapolate that ideal worldwide, it's not hard to understand why Moore's superhero Bond was such a success.

I disagree. The point of Batman and Spider-Man (if that crashingly boring sequel I've just sat through is anything to go by) seems to be that they are angst-ridden.

Moore's Bond delights as deceptively superficial (and not in a bad way; there's nothing wrong with superficiality). But his Bond may be the most universally accessible; that point may be valid.

[Loomis]

Great post, Moomoo. And here's my pick for Rog's greatest (super)heroic episode (it's from a film generally considered, with some justification, among the worst of the Bonds, but never mind):

A VIEW TO A KILL - Showing not the slightest sign of panic at any point, Bond rescues Stacey from the lift and carries her on his back down the firemen's ladder (and if that's not an image of the he-man, the sorta Flemingian gorilla-in-a-suit tough guy, rescuing [in reality, claiming as his prize] the damsel in distress, I don't know what is), before indulging in some postmodern quippery that makes it clear to the audience that the average American blue-collar cop (a dull and dull-witted "regular guy" who's really only there to make 007 seem even more exotic, sophisticated and thrilling than usual) considers "James Bond" a comic book icon along the lines of "Dick Tracy", and (in a sequence that recalls Richard Donner's SUPERMAN) whizzing around San Francisco in a fire engine, causing as much unintentional comic carnage (for instance, exposing an amorous couple) as deliberate damage to his pursuers.

Fleming? No. Great fun? Yes. This sort of thing is why boys wanted to grow up to be Moore's Bond (and not Dalton's).

[Qwerty]

Now Bond is the ultimate hero, and most casual Bond fans would say Moore was more appealing as Bond than Dalton. Why? Well, it's because we admire heroes who are not too serious, not too angst-ridden, ones that can save the world without breaking into too much sweat. Moore's Bond typifies that. When we see Moore's Bond we are seeing a hero in its purest form. Fantastical, over the top, yes,  but still a true hero.

Moore's Bond is the closest we have ever got to a superhero Bond. American culture, in particular, loves superheroes. Superman, Batman and Spider-man are part of the nation's cultural consciousness. If we extrapolate that ideal worldwide, it's not hard to understand why Moore's superhero Bond was such a success.

I disagree. The point of Batman and Spider-Man (if that crashingly boring sequel I've just sat through is anything to go by) seems to be that they are angst-ridden.

Jim makes a good point as well. If Roger Moore's James Bond was the hero without the cares that made him angst-ridden, then the same cannot be said about Toby Maguire's Peter Parker/Spiderman I think. They're just not exactly in the same league.

Otherwise you make some very nice points in there, Moomoo.

[Moomoo]

Yes, fair point about Spider-man being a bit more angst-ridden than I thought! What I was trying to get across was the notion most comic book superheroes are fairly basic in character and don't have too many human frailties. Superman is perhaps the best example. I think the basic appeal of most superheroes is they don't have the same weaknesses as us mortal people, and that's where I see the connection with Moore's Bond. His Bond was pretty much a superhero type Bond, whereas most of the other Bond actors portrayed 007 as being a little closer to reality.

Plus, Roger's Bond could disarm even the most dangerous foe with the raise of an eyebrow. I'm sure Ian Fleming would approve.

Moomoo

[BondIsMoore]

Roger Moore helped people to realize not to take the Bonds as serious as the previous bonds. Moore made it fun and acceptable to have over the top stories and sti;; be serious at the same time. Moore kept bond alive.

[Qwerty]

Roger Moore helped people to realize not to take the Bonds as serious as the previous bonds. Moore made it fun and acceptable to have over the top stories and sti;; be serious at the same time. Moore kept bond alive.

I would partially agree with that. Moore brought an interesting side to Bond. He wasn't just a Connery clone, and I'm glad that he wasn't.

Variety works in the Bond films.