152 replies to this topic

[Streetworker]

And I'm only telling you like it is. For the same reason, I would advise people never to write letters of complaint to film or TV companies. If you knew how the letters and their writers are derided (and emailed round sniggeringly to others in the industry), you'd be horrifed. That said, I must admit that I've been just as guilty of this as other colleagues.

Oh, I agree. I also used to be in the entertainment industry, and I know what you're referring to.

I had a chat with one of the accountants of Goldeneye (cannot remember his name) actually at EON's Piccadilly home. He said that that fan groups were laughable, and had no regard for them.

The problem is though. These people have a mundane job, and have no interest in the subject they're dealing with. So of course they'd rebel against fans of a subject they have no interest in.

Not all of them have mundane jobs; mine is far from it as I'm at the "creative" end. And I've loved every show I've worked on; but I have to confess that hasn't precluded my joining in the joshing of fans of said shows. It might not be honourable, but it's human nature. And regarded very much as a perk of the job. Naturally, my love of all things Bond leads to me being mocked mercilessly as well. But my shoulders are broad; I can take it...

[spynovelfan]

Nope. You are wrong. Next!

If you believe that, how do you explain the comments by both John Glen and Michael G. Wilson.

Darren, what happened to this:

I don't expect to convince any of the unbelievers.....just like they should not expect to convince me.

And who are you trying to convince in the first line of your signature, incidentally? Yourself?

It is *extremely* unlikely that the producers of the films considered this. Of course it is. But as the films stand right now, Robert Brown played a character called Hargreaves, and then a character known as 'M'. Some people are suggesting that the producers *did* consider it, and that they created a backstory for Hargreaves to become M. As there's no evidence for this in the films, the onus is on those people to convince us of their idea.

I don't see how Michael Wilson's comments count as evidence. Firstly, he apparently said - according to Darren - that they had no 'plans' to recast Miles Messervy after Lee's death, but would 'probably' introduce a new character as M, or bring in a previously introduced character. That's not evidence - they could have changed their minds. They change their minds every two minutes. During production, sometimes. And there's no monkey in DR NO. The magazine with Wilson's comments apparently came out two years before Brown first appeared as M.

Mister*'s evidence is from the films. It's an open and shut case, *surely*?

Lee Tamahori said in interviews promoting DIE ANOTHER DAY that 'James Bond' is a codename. Do we therefore take it that this is the case?

I can see this is a geekboy superweb experience for you, Streetworker - but nobody is forcing you to take part! I just think that people who come up with theories about who characters are and insist on their theory being correct, dammit, need to provide evidence - or risk being told they're talking nonsense. Of course we could - should, perhaps - let it go, and allow Darren his theory even though Mister* has just comprehensively exploded it. But if anyone could just wander into these forums with madcap theories but refuse to present any decent evidence for them, and get away with it, well, WHERE WOULD THE MADNESS END? There might be Bond fans all over the world believing that in Ian Fleming's books James Bond was a ruthless cold-blooded assassi... Oh, sorry. They might go around telling people that daft idea that Timothy Dalton appears in NEVER SAY NEVER... Hold on. They might insist to all and sundry that Ian Fleming hand-picked Roger Moore for the role after seeing him in THE SAINT...

Of *course* we're anal about it. We're Bond fans. You seem to be in the film industry. If I announced in some film forum that I believe Steven Spielberg didn't direct SCHINDLER'S LIST, wouldn't you expect people to challenge me on it? If I refused to provide any reasonable evidence for the idea, but kept insisting it were true, would the members of the forum be so strange to continue to challenge me?

Perhaps they would be, beyond a certain point. But let me tell you something, Streetworker - we Bond fans laugh about those pitiful film forum geeks the whole time before we go to Bond conventions.

Darren. If you were in a pub quiz and the question was 'The character of Admiral Hargreaves appeared in which James Bond film?', and you answered all the films with Brown in and then objected when the points were given to those who just said TSWLM, what would you say to the red-faced chap adjuicating the contest when making your complaint? That you remember Michael Wilson saying in an interview in a magazine in 1981 that they would probably introduce a new character as M in the next film? But you've lost the magazine?

That wouldn't wash in a pub quiz. This is a James Bond forum. If your theory is just for yourself, fine. Perhaps it's time to change your signature, though, and stop mentioning the idea if you don't want people to take you up on it. If you want to convince Bond fans you're right - what's your evidence?




This entire post is ironic, which lets me off the hook for being an intense, anal, geekboy window-licker.

[Harmsway]

If Brown's M is not Hargreaves, he's not Sir Miles. And I'm choosing to believe that much, if only out of personal preference.

[Streetworker]

Nope. You are wrong. Next!

If you believe that, how do you explain the comments by both John Glen and Michael G. Wilson.

Darren, what happened to this:

I don't expect to convince any of the unbelievers.....just like they should not expect to convince me.

And who are you trying to convince in the first line of your signature, incidentally? Yourself?

It is *extremely* unlikely that the producers of the films considered this. Of course it is. But as the films stand right now, Robert Brown played a character called Hargreaves, and then a character known as 'M'. Some people are suggesting that the producers *did* consider it, and that they created a backstory for Hargreaves to become M. As there's no evidence for this in the films, the onus is on those people to convince us of their idea.

I don't see how Michael Wilson's comments count as evidence. Firstly, he apparently said - according to Darren - that they had no 'plans' to recast Miles Messervy after Lee's death, but would 'probably' introduce a new character as M, or bring in a previously introduced character. That's not evidence - they could have changed their minds. They change their minds every two minutes. During production, sometimes. And there's no monkey in DR NO. The magazine with Wilson's comments apparently came out two years before Brown first appeared as M.

Mister*'s evidence is *from the films*.

Lee Tamahori said in interviews promoting DIE ANOTHER DAY that 'James Bond' is a codename. Do we therefore take it that this is the case?

I can see this is a geekboy superweb experience for you, Streetworker - but nobody is forcing you to take part! I just think that people who come up with theories about who characters are and insist on their theory being correct, dammit, need to provide evidence - or risk being told they're talking nonsense. Of course we could - should, perhaps - let it go, and allow Darren his theory even though Mister* has just comprehensively exploded it. But if anyone could just wander into these forums with madcap theories but refuse to present any decent evidence for them, and get away with it, well, WHERE WOULD THE MADNESS END? There might be Bond fans all over the world believing that in Ian Fleming's books James Bond was a ruthless cold-blooded assassi... Oh, sorry. They might go around telling people that daft idea that Timothy Dalton appears in NEVER SAY NEVER... Hold on. They might insist to all and sundry that Ian Fleming hand-picked Roger Moore for the role after seeing him in THE SAINT...

Of *course* we're anal about it. We're Bond fans. You seem to be in the film industry. If I announced in some film forum that I believe Steven Spielberg didn't direct SCHINDLER'S LIST, wouldn't you expect people to challenge me on it? If I refused to provide any reasonable evidence for the idea, but kept insisting it were true, would the members of the forum be so strange to continue to challenge me?

Perhaps they would be, beyond a certain point. But let me tell you something, Streetworker - we Bond fans laugh about those pitiful film forum geeks the whole time before we go to Bond conventions.

Darren. If you were in a pub quiz and the question was 'The character of Admiral Hargreaves appeared in which James Bond film?', and you answered all the films with Brown in and then objected when the points were given to those who just said TSWLM, what would you say to the red-faced chap adjuicating the contest when making your complaint? That you remember Michael Wilson saying in an interview in a magazine in 1981 that they would probably introduce a new character as M in the next film? But you've lost the magazine?

That wouldn't wash in a pub quiz. This is a James Bond forum. If your theory is just for yourself, fine. Perhaps it's time to change your signature, though, and stop mentioning the idea if you don't want people to take you up on it. If you want to convince Bond fans you're right - what's your evidence?

I rest my case.

If Brown's M is not Hargreaves, he's not Sir Miles. And I'm choosing to believe that much, if only out of personal preference.

The voice of common sense.

[spynovelfan]

I rest my case.

Not really. I *know* I'm wasting my time in this thread.

A long post isn't *necessarily* an anal one. If you read it. Hard to believe, I know.

But then - I'm not a bigshot movie insider like you, Streetworker.

That name of yours! I've just twigged!

You don't believe in the codename theory, do you?

[Streetworker]

I rest my case.

Not really.

I *know* I'm wasting my time in this thread.

At last, something on which we can all agree... we're all wasting our time on it...

I rest my case.

That name of yours! I've just twigged!You don't believe in the codename theory, do you?

I'm afraid you're far cleverer than I am if you see some hidden meaning in my name. I hate to disappoint but it was chosen only because there was an item on the news about the government possibly legalising Brothels in the UK at the same time I was signing up!

[spynovelfan]

At last, something on which we can all agree... we're all wasting our time on it...

Thing is - some of us are happy to wast our time discussing the topic, while others are fixating on how above it all they are.

Both are pretty pointless, I agree - but your position seems more so to me.

Even a little intense.

It's a fan forum, old man. You could go into any fan forum on the worldwide intergeek and interrupt threads saying how anal people are being over small points.

Insisting that others be light-hearted in an aggressive and arrogant tone rarely succeeds.

[Streetworker]

At last, something on which we can all agree... we're all wasting our time on it...

Thing is - some of us are happy to wast our time discussing the topic, while others are fixating on how above it all they are.

Both are pretty pointless, I agree - but your position seems more so to me.

Even a little intense.

It's a fan forum, old man. You could go into any fan forum on the worldwide intergeek and interrupt threads saying how anal people are being over small points.

Insisting that others be light-hearted in an aggressive and arrogant tone rarely succeeds.

I wouldn't presume to insist anyone do anything. I was merely trying to highlight how the debate might look to others. But I apologise if I've touched any raw nerves. Although if you will permit me to make a suggestion... defensiveness rarely succeeds in a debate, either.

[Bondian]

I can feel a Python sketch coming on.

Anyway. Now it's

[Streetworker]

[quote name='Bondian' post='515609' date='9 February 2006 - 22:26']
Anyway. Now it's

[Bondian]

[quote name='Streetworker' post='515611' date='9 February 2006 - 22:28']
[quote name='Bondian' post='515609' date='9 February 2006 - 22:26']
Anyway. Now it's

[Streetworker]

[quote name='Bondian' post='515613' date='9 February 2006 - 22:32']
[quote name='Streetworker' post='515611' date='9 February 2006 - 22:28']
[quote name='Bondian' post='515609' date='9 February 2006 - 22:26']
Anyway. Now it's

[spynovelfan]

I wouldn't presume to insist anyone do anything. I was merely trying to highlight how the debate might look to others.

You mean Babs has logged on?

But I apologise if I've touched any raw nerves. Although if you will permit me to make a suggestion... defensiveness rarely succeeds in a debate, either.

Defensive? Me? Whatever gave you that idea? I am NOT being defensive!

I bet Darren's loving this. The longer we bitchfight over the bitchfight, the longer he doesn't have to come up with his Michael Wilson article.

[Bondian]

Only by reputation..

LOL. How about Ray Knight?.

Actually being a Manchurian, you're pretty safe from these unsavoury characters.

[Streetworker]

I wouldn't presume to insist anyone do anything. I was merely trying to highlight how the debate might look to others.

You mean Babs has logged on?

But I apologise if I've touched any raw nerves. Although if you will permit me to make a suggestion... defensiveness rarely succeeds in a debate, either.

Defensive? Me? Whatever gave you that idea? I am NOT being defensive!

I bet Darren's loving this. The longer we bitchfight over the bitchfight, the longer he doesn't have to come up with his Michael Wilson article.

At last! A flash of humour. See, that didn't hurt, did it...?

But, for the record, I have to say, on balance if really pushed, I'm much more inclined to sit on his side of the fence on this one...

[Mister Asterix]

Again. And I need to get out more?

[Streetworker]

Only by reputation..

LOL. How about Ray Knight?.

Didn't he play Admiral Hargreaves in the 1954 version of Casino Royale?

[DLibrasnow]

I bet Darren's loving this. The longer we bitchfight over the bitchfight, the longer he doesn't have to come up with his Michael Wilson article.

I'm just trying to figure out what you guys are talking about. I step away from CBn for a couple of hours and the thread has taken a bizarre twist.

Okay, so the thread was bizarre anyway...carry on. And I gave the article details already.

[Streetworker]

Again. And I need to get out more?

I do, too, tonight. I'm stuck in a corner of a studio in London (oh the joys of television), idling away time. And am feeling like a bored tom cat who's found a half-dead mouse behind the settee to play with.

I bet Darren's loving this. The longer we bitchfight over the bitchfight, the longer he doesn't have to come up with his Michael Wilson article.

I'm just trying to figure out what you guys are talking about. I step away from CBn for a couple of hours and the thread has taken a bizarre twist.

Okay, so the thread was bizarre anyway...carry on. And I gave the article details already.

It has become surreal. I reckon tiredness (or the crack cocaine) is kicking in.

[Bondian]

Again. And I need to get out more?

No, my friend. Just dye them shorts "boy". ROFL.

Didn't he play Admiral Hargreaves in the 1954 version of Casino Royale?

Oh, shut up.

I'm just trying to figure out what you guys are talking about. I step away from CBn for a couple of hours and the thread has taken a bizarre twist.

Okay, so the thread was bizarre anyway...carry on. And I gave the article details already.

What else can you expect when ol' Bondian gets involved.

I do, too, tonight. I'm stuck in a corner of a studio in London (oh the joys of television), idling away time. And am feeling like a bored tom cat who's found a half-dead mouse behind the settee to play with.

You're not Anne Robinson are you?.

[Streetworker]

Only by reputation..

Actually being a Manchurian, you're pretty safe from these unsavoury characters.

That's a sweeping generalisation. You should see some of the sights tottering along Canal Street on a Saturday night (think Soho, but with more leopard skin). But I'm working in London, right now. And, as I said earlier, stuck in a studio watching actors up perfectly simple lines.

[Mister Asterix]

I'm just trying to figure out what you guys are talking about. I step away from CBn for a couple of hours and the thread has taken a bizarre twist.

See DLib and I agree on somethings.

[Streetworker]

Again. And I need to get out more?

No, my friend. Just dye them shorts "boy". ROFL.

Didn't he play Admiral Hargreaves in the 1954 version of Casino Royale?

Oh, shut up.

I'm just trying to figure out what you guys are talking about. I step away from CBn for a couple of hours and the thread has taken a bizarre twist.

Okay, so the thread was bizarre anyway...carry on. And I gave the article details already.

What else can you expect when ol' Bondian gets involved.

I do, too, tonight. I'm stuck in a corner of a studio in London (oh the joys of television), idling away time. And am feeling like a bored tom cat who's found a half-dead mouse behind the settee to play with.

You're not Anne Robinson are you?.

Not quite. I'm the picture in her attic. And can you imagine what I look like...?

[Bondian]

That's a sweeping generalisation. You should see some of the sights tottering along Canal Street on a Saturday night (think Soho, but with more leopard skin). But I'm working in London, right now. And, as I said earlier, stuck in a studio watching actors up perfectly simple lines.

That's all part of the "character development", dear boy.

As Lord Sinclair would say "Actors are like politicians. We say what we're paid to say!".

I've never know an actor or a singer to get anything right until they're doing it for 'real'.

See DLib and I agree on somethings.

What, the shorts?.

Sorry. Back on topic please.

[spynovelfan]

At last! A flash of humour. See, that didn't hurt, did it...?

No, but that did! I've been making jokes all evening.

Yes, you had to actually read the posts to get them.

But, for the record, I have to say, on balance if really pushed, I'm much more inclined to sit on his side of the fence on this one...

Yes, we'd already figured that one out. Any particular reason? Or is it, as it appears to be with Darren, some mystical thing you keep believing despite Mister Asterix finding a blindingly obvious problem (the bloke being demoted). You said yourself the production doesn't think about stuff like this. But they thought 'Let's promote Hargreaves to M! Only that's too simple. Let's demote him to M!' Or what?

Just curious, after this long, to know what it is that spurs the faith in this.

I do, too, tonight. I'm stuck in a corner of a studio in London (oh the joys of television), idling away time.

Streetworker, forgive me for asking a personal question, but do you have a really really high-powered job in the entertainment world? Are we all supergeekboyfanheads who you're happy to advise and condescend to for a few minutes while you experience a fractional pause in your glamorous life? (Before you wonder how I've come to this conclusion, there were a few hints in about three dozen of your posts in this thread.)

And I gave the article details already.

This just in from the Red Lion:

'No, Mr Harrison, I'm afraid I will not award you the point unless I can read the article for myself!'

And even then: 'probably'? Would that be good enough in your professional life?

'I'm sorry to be anal, Darren, but could we actually have the quote, rather than a paraphrase of something you half-remember?'

A vital piece of Bond trivia - and perhaps a future modus operandi for this forum - depends on your handling of this, my man! Are you really so convinced of this by a half-remembered interview with Michael Wilson and an unofficial CD-ROM?

*Really*?

Why?

These are easy questions to understand. Don't duck them, now, will you? Or we'll be stuck indoors for weeks.

[Streetworker]

[quote name='spynovelfan' date='9 February 2006 - 23:19' post='515642']
[quote name='Streetworker' post='515619' date='9 February 2006 - 22:45']


Streetworker, forgive me for asking a personal question, but do you have a really really high-powered job in the entertainment world? Are we all supergeekboyfanheads who you're happy to advise and condescend to for a few minutes while you experience a fractional pause in your glamorous life? (Before you wonder how I've come to this conclusion, there were a few hints in about three dozen of your posts in this thread.)

[quote]
[/quote]


Depends what you consider high-powered. I think a lot of people think my job is glamorous, but anyone who's spent any time in a film or TV studio knows there are long spells of inactivity, which is why I can sit here in a corner with my laptop; although recording has just finally finished as I write this. But I would think that the fact I can sit here doing that would indicate I'm not too far down the food chain. And I wouldn't presume to condescend to anyone on this site, of which I am also a member. I perhaps just wear my geekiness a little more lightly...

[DLibrasnow]

'I'm sorry to be anal, Darren, but could we actually have the quote, rather than a paraphrase of something you half-remember?'

I have so much more to do than wade through boxes and boxes up in the attic to get a quote from a magazine that you've already indicated (or someone in this thread did) will not sway your viewpoint anyway.

[spynovelfan]

And I wouldn't presume to condescend to anyone on this site, of which I am also a member. I perhaps just wear my geekiness a little more lightly...

Can you see the link between those two sentences?

(Incidentally, I love the irony of you complaining earlier that nobody spotted your use of irony.)

Anyway, Streetworker, could I just say on behalf of all of us *real* geeks here at CBn that we are deeply honoured to have you here spending time with us - we know it must be tough for you to trawl through and respond to every single one of our tiresome posts with your tales of a more refined life where people don't type crap all night on the intraweb.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a conference call with Barbara and Michael in a few minutes. Catch you later!

[Streetworker]

Anyway, Streetworker, could I just say on behalf of all of us *real* geeks here at CBn that we are deeply honoured to have you here spending time with us

Happy to oblige.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Everyone is right in the way they want to see it.