88 replies to this topic

[Alessandra]

I haven't seen Stealth, aside from the trailer, so cannot judge for sure. The trailer makes me want to see it, I like Biel, I LOVE Jamie Foxx and Top Gun is one of my all time favourite movies (YES THAT'S RIGHT!! SO WHAT??!). Stealth is being released next weekend over here, and I will go see it.

From all I've read on STEALTH, it seems the closest thing to a Bond movie released this year: a buttkicking babe in the shape of Jessica Biel, acres of CGI, at least one decent actor "slumming it" (Foxx), big, dumb action scenes, corny jokes, Thai-speaking North Korean troops, and weapons of mass destruction. Frankly, it looks like a blast.

I have every faith in Amy Pascal, whoever she is.

Couldn't agree more. I said above why I think it was a box office disaster and stick by that reason. The film cannot be that poor, from what I've seen in the trailer, and from the action scenes and actors they have in it.

[morganhavoc]

Just because I can't type, doesn't mean I don't have a point, pointing out I miss spelled a name only highlights my point. Stop nit picking everything just to make yourself feel important.
Yours is the superior intellect.

[Alessandra]

Just because I can't type, doesn't mean I don't have a point, pointing out I miss spelled a name only highlights my point. Stop nit picking everything just to make yourself feel important.
Yours is the superior intellect.

hey Morgan.. welcome! hope you have fun.. I don't think anyone wanted to pick on you, I think it was more of a joke than a serious critic..
Anyway... see?? many of us agree with you, and everybody including those who corrected a spelling mistake welcomed you... so we're not that bad!! lol
ciao!
Alessandra

[spynovelfan]

Just because I can't type, doesn't mean I don't have a point, pointing out I miss spelled a name only highlights my point. Stop nit picking everything just to make yourself feel important.
Yours is the superior intellect.

Well, I think you made some good points. But you did also stress that you had all the books and had *read* them. The implication was that some people here know not of what they speak, but that you do. I think typos are silly to point out - but 'Flemming' ain't a typo. It just means you don't know how to spell Fleming. Which is fine, and nitpicky - but I think considering the superior tone you took about your Bond knowledge, it was fair game for someone to point out you didn't even get the name of the character's creator right. If you can dish it out, you have to be able to take it, no?

But yeah, sure, this is a very silly subject for a thread.

And this is no big deal, really. Welcome to CBN.

[ACE]

I don't think Morganhavoc was being superior.
Morganhavoc was asserting a degree of knowledge of the film industry and how films are made and their own knowledge of Bond.

It is my opinion that Morganhavoc appears to have been frustrated by:

1) the premature and baseless negativity of this thread
2) the spectacular ignorance of some of the posters on this thread on the role of an executive and the way studio movies are made
3) the peacock display of the ignorance stated in 2) above

I totally agree with Morganhavoc that so many of the threads recently on CBn have been hugely negative and pointless for it.

As for the "superior intellect", let's not go there.
It would presuppose the existence of an intellect in the first place.
Which, in my case, is patently not true.

Hey guys, let's get along.

All you need is Bond love, man!



ACE

[spynovelfan]

All true. We're all Bond fans, after all.*







*Most of us, anyway.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

'Flemming' is a very easy mistake to make.

[Alessandra]

[quote name='ACE' date='7 September 2005 - 14:20']I don't think Morganhavoc was being superior.
Morganhavoc was asserting a degree of knowledge of the film industry and how films are made and their own knowledge of Bond.

It is my opinion that Morganhavoc appears to have been frustrated by:

1) the premature and baseless negativity of this thread
2) the spectacular ignorance of some of the posters on this thread on the role of an executive and the way studio movies are made
3) the peacock display of the ignorance stated in 2) above

I totally agree with Morganhavoc that so many of the threads recently on CBn have been hugely negative and pointless for it.

As for the "superior intellect", let's not go there.
It would presuppose the existence of an intellect in the first place.
Which, in my case, is patently not true.

Hey guys, let's get along.

All you need is Bond love, man!

Edited by Alessandra, 07 September 2005 - 01:33 PM.

[J J]

Back to Amy Pascal then. Here's an old interview with her to give you a bit of an idea what sort of person she is: http://www.hollywood...tent_id=2001137

[Seannery]

Cally did Tell Chubby that he wanted Dalton off the picture or he wouldn't fund goldeneye. Chubby stuck with Dalton. Cally went to Dalton and made him "an offer he couldn't refuse" and Dalton resigned his OO license.

What I really want to know is are there any real Bond fans on this message board? You all bitch and moan so much and criticize everything about the movies -- past , present and future. No one has ever or will ever please you guys.
I have seen all the movies, own all the movies and all the books by every bond author, Have every book about the movies and books ( and read them too). I have a degree in film production. Have written several films and crewed a few too. I teach film production and screenwriting.I went into film because of the Bond films.
My point is, stop complaining so much and let these people do their jobs. Even a bad Bond film is still a pretty good movie. Give them a chance and they may surprise you.
Oh and what kind of Bond fan am I? My son is named after Ian Flemming if that gives you a hint.

So well said, MorganHavoc. Bravo!

Talk about negativity. Pascal is being knocked based upon an erroneous view of how executives work and a warped view of the Bond development process. CBn is becoming like a Beatles fan site written by Rolling Stones fans.

At least give her a chance.

Most Bond studio executives are very well versed in the films and the novels.
Bond is their job.

Pascal has enormous responisibility. But if she will take the fall for CR being bad (Christ, talk about non-Bond fans), does Jeff Kleeman take credit for Goldeneye? Danton Rissner for The Spy Who Loved Me?

Be patient and wait and see.

We have 40 years of evidence to see that Eon more or less, on balance get things right.

What has changed since 2002?

ACE

Am with you. And contrary to others, I consider the Pierce Brosnan Bond movies good, and not mediocre. Especially Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies.
about the poor Pascal girl... guys, I mean let's be serious. do you have ANY idea HOW MANY factors influence the good outcome of a movie?! get real, ONE person can't take ALL merit or blame for a movie!
I haven't seen Stealth, aside from the trailer, so cannot judge for sure. The trailer makes me want to see it, I like Biel, I LOVE Jamie Foxx and Top Gun is one of my all time favourite movies (YES THAT'S RIGHT!! SO WHAT??!). Stealth is being released next weekend over here, and I will go see it. I know it's been a TOTAL box office disaster in the U.S., but in all the things you said you haven't mentioned ONE which I think is crucial and was underestimated: don't you think that RIGHT BECAUSE the U.S. are at war people don't have the FAINTEST intention to go see an action movie on war?!??! Think about it.. the biggest hit of the U.S. summer in movies was "the wedding crashers." A COMEDY. The Dukes of Hazzard was a big hit as well. it's not a coincidence. People do NOT want to see war at the movies..they want to be distracted and laugh, ESPECIALLY at times like these! Transporter 2 debuted last weekend and took first place from The 40-Year-Old Virgin, another comedy. The Constant Gardener is in third.
Which also shows: spy stuff is one thing (and that includes Bond... the various Mission Impossibles and Bourne Identities), war is another.
Only Tom Cruise in War of the Worlds managed to keep pace this summer...but that is CRUISE and SPIELBERG for heaven's sake... a combination which CANNOT fail. AND a sci-fi thing more than a war movie.
I don't think it's Pascal's fault if Stealth was a failure. Simply, they didn't reason enough on the psychology of the public, and it's also VERY difficult to forecast the state of mind of an audience when you are set to produce a movie which will be in theaters a LONG time after you start.
Opposite cases happen, low budget and low expectations then produce a massive hit, as it happened with The Matrix.
So let's just focus on: praying for them to have good vibes (and pay lots of money!) when they choose the actor (Lol) and script rewriting to be incisive and witty. That'll do.

Yes morganhavoc I largely agree with your point about too much baseless nitpicky negativity on this site AT TIMES. Like the wise Alessandra I too have a rather positive view of the Brosnan era. And your point that even a weak Bond is entertaining, I concur. That said if someone wants to indulge in some good old fashion bashing and negativity AT TIMES--I have no problem with it. Strong differing opinions(including negative ones) actually pay a compliment to Bond by showing the passion it produces. Not always perspective but definitely passion. And it's all good--provide some context at times when things spin out of control in a negative way BUT otherwise take it with a laugh and a grain of salt. And sometimes a negative view can be correct--at the very it least generates dialogue which leads ultimatley for a good number of people a more nuanced perspective.

[ACE]

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But before a film has even been made?

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But constructively, interestingly, not to start threads with "Does anyone else hate...?"

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But get facts right if seeking to use them to bolster your case.

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But this is a (no, the best, IMO) James Bond forum, allegedly, at times. Not a general movie site.

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But English Bob got beat real good by Li'l Bill Daggett.
For singing "God Save the Queen"....
...on Independance Day!

Edited by ACE, 07 September 2005 - 04:07 PM.

[Seannery]

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But before a film has even been made?

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But constructively, interestingly, not to start threads with "Does anyone else hate...?"

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But get facts right if seeking to use them to bolster your case.

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But this is a (no, the best, IMO) James Bond forum, allegedly, at times. Not a general movie site.

No-one is saying not to criticize.

But English Bob got beat real good by Li'l Bill Daggett.
For singing "God Save the Queen"....
...on Independance Day!

I see your point but for the most part it just rolls off my back as inconsequential and sometimes amusing and occasionally an interesting point and perspective is made. If it goes too far i'll bark out against it or just roll my eyes AND others also do the same and speak out against the stuff that goes too far. But really it's small potatoes on a site that is very largely enjoyable--much doesn't go way overboard. It does give the pulse of things in certain corners. Interesting, sometimes slightly irritating but mostly no biggie.

[luciusgore]

I don't think Morganhavoc was being superior.
Morganhavoc was asserting a degree of knowledge of the film industry and how films are made and their own knowledge of Bond.

It is my opinion that Morganhavoc appears to have been frustrated by:

1) the premature and baseless negativity of this thread
2) the spectacular ignorance of some of the posters on this thread on the role of an executive and the way studio movies are made
3) the peacock display of the ignorance stated in 2) above

I totally agree with Morganhavoc that so many of the threads recently on CBn have been hugely negative and pointless for it.

As for the "superior intellect", let's not go there.
It would presuppose the existence of an intellect in the first place.
Which, in my case, is patently not true.

Hey guys, let's get along.

All you need is Bond love, man!

 

ACE

Fans are supposed to be negative. We want quality. We demand it. True fans want excellence, not mediocrity. Not WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH but FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. We know we're not going to get it, but we should demand it anyway. Look at what all the negativity surrounding "Batman & Robin" caused? It caused "Batman Begins," easily the best film in the series. We should be ENRAGED that they turned down Tarantino, turned down Brosnan, won't pay Owen, apparently turned down an offer from John Barry to return, brought back Purvis and Wade, etc. The more we get steamed about it, the more they are likely to listen. Warner Bros. listened, and got rid of George Clooney and replaced him with Christian Bale. They got rid of Schumacher and replaced him with Nolan. All because the fans got negative. With Pascal, McMahon, Purvis, Wade and the other names associated with "CR," and no lead star, the film looks like it could be another "Batman & Robin" of the franchise. It's important that we speak out, protest, and hopefully by Bond 22 they will be delivering exactly what the fans what, a la "Batman Begins."

[Spoon]

I basically disagree with luciusgore's entire message.

• This board is NOT here for us to communicate with Sony/Danjaq. It's here for fans to communicate with each other. There is already far too much "advocacy" posting, and far too little discussion of underlying thoughts and ideals. Let's not push in that direction any further.
• Anyway, the Batman series changed not because of anything hardcore Batman fans did, but because Batman and Robin was a SPECTACULAR FAILURE among EVERYONE ON EARTH.
• Pascal RUNS THE STUDIO. What exactly do you propose to do about that fact? Are Mike and Babs supposed to ask her to step down from running the studio? There is no way to get rid of her, so what is your advocacy even intended to accomplish?
• By the time Stealth came out, no one thought it was going to be a smash hit. As mentioned, Foxx was not yet a star when the film was made. And it came out July 29; you would never release a film on that date that you seriously expected to be a hit, it's too late in the summer. Now, if Pascal was responsible for sinking $130 million into Stealth to begin with (BTW, don't many, many people get involved in making such decisions?), then that was a mistake. And... so? Based on that and on Pascal being a woman, we're supposed to give up hope for Casino Royale? How does that make any sense at all? Are you afraid she's gonna give Bond five hundred million bazillion dollars; is that the big catastrophe we should fear? How could she even screw it up if she wanted to? What specifically do you expect her to do? And, what specifically can we do about it? (hint on that last one: nothing)

Edited by Spoon, 07 September 2005 - 04:44 PM.

[Jim]

I've no idea what's going on here any more.

Thunderball is lovely.

[Seannery]

I've no idea what's going on here any more.

Thunderball is lovely.

[Taro Todoroki]

I've no idea what's going on here any more.

Thunderball is lovely.

Agreed!

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

I've no idea what's going on here any more.

Thunderball is lovely.

Hahahahaha


I've said it before...we need news..we're all losing it.

[DLibrasnow]

I just find this whole thread bizarre. I don't see why Amy Pascal should get any of the credit or blame for Casino Royale

[triviachamp]

I just find this whole thread bizarre. I don't see why Amy Pascal should get any of the credit or blame for Casino Royale 

Well it's a slow newsday and the people worried about Casino Royale need something more to worry about!

[luciusgore]

I just find this whole thread bizarre. I don't see why Amy Pascal should get any of the credit or blame for Casino Royale 

The reason is her track record. Jon Calley had a very positive -- and has had a very positive -- track record, and it was his studio leadership that helped make Goldeneye a roaring success. Now, we have another "reboot" with a new Bond actor, and a new studio head in charge of the project: The woman who greenlit "Stealth" and "XXX: State of the Union."

[Eye Of The Tiger]

Amy Pascal was a Sony exec long before she became Pres of Production. She might have even been the exec on the original Spider-Man. She's one sharp cookie.

Then hopefully she will be smart enough to realize how important it is to bring Pierce Brosnan back for at least one more film!!!

[zencat]

[quote name='luciusgore' date='7 September 2005 - 14:02'][quote name='DLibrasnow' date='7 September 2005 - 19:00']I just find this whole thread bizarre. I don't see why Amy Pascal should get any of the credit or blame for Casino Royale

[Lazenby880]

I've no idea what's going on here any more.

Thunderball is lovely.

Yes, it is rather terrific.

And ACE, as a proud Brit - although one with worrying pro-European tendencies - why do you insist on spelling criticise as criticize? I thought your lot tended to dislike most things American.

Back to the thread in hand, I really do find the wholesale negativity baseless. Yes, this Mrs Pascal or whomever does probably exercise power and, possibly, some influence. But to then assume, on the basis of a couple of box-office failures in which we do not know how much influence she had, that she will be the cause of Casino Royale's prospective failure (when the film has not even begun shooting) is pretty ludicrous. Surely Mick'n'Babs have much, much greater responsibility? Or Martin Campbell? Or Purvis and Wade? Or a multitude of other people?

As we see the film unfolding then perhaps you can look for the heads responsible. Like when we find out who that James Bond chap will be, or when the picture begins filming. I shan't partake, but at least then you would have something vaguely concrete on which to base your criticism. And, before we write the thing off as a failure and go looking for someone to blame (and, frankly, if anyone is to blame should it turn out a mess I doubt it would be Mrs Pascal), perhaps we could all wait until we have actually seen it? You might be surprised. You might actually like it.

Anyhoo, Thunderball. Cracking film.

Edited by Lazenby880, 07 September 2005 - 11:39 PM.

[ACE]

Fans are supposed to be negative.

Er,

Well, I'm certainly in the right place then!

I suspect you didn't read my post.

And ACE, as a proud Brit - although one with worrying pro-European tendencies - why do you insist on spelling criticise as criticize? I thought your lot tended to dislike most things American.

Hmmm. My English dictionary says you can spell it both ways and be correct. In English. Which, BTW, is moving, live language subject to updating and common usage.

"My lot"? Even if I understood what this meant, I would disagree with you. Precisely as a proud Brit, I enjoy all things from around the world. I do not dislike "most things American" at all. Where did you get that idea from? I am very pro-America and dislike Olde Worlde snobberies about any society, especially one as dynamic and important and creative as America.

Agree with your post, Lazenby 880. Good stuff.

Thunderball, bit boring and sloppy but it does have Luciana being given shoes to wear in the bath.

Hmmmm, that makes a Bond fan of me everytime I see it.

Hey man, just trying to chill this forum out.

ACE

[Lazenby880]

Hmmm. My English dictionary says you can spell it both ways and be correct. In English. Which, BTW, is moving, live language subject to updating and common usage.

As does mine; I just loathe this use of 'z' instead of 's'. Yes I am clinging onto the past, but this incessant and unnecessary 'modernisation' to which you refer that has pervaded British culture and language is something with which I profoundly disagree. Another topic for another time, but what is wrong with 'criticise', 'realise' or 'publicise'?*

"My lot"? Even if I understood what this meant, I would disagree with you. Precisely as a proud Brit, I enjoy all things from around the world. I do not dislike "most things American" at all. Where did you get that idea from? I am very pro-America and dislike Olde Worlde snobberies about any society, especially one as dynamic and important and creative as America.

Sorry, another one of my evidently wholly misjudged attempts at humour. Interesting though, a 'very pro-American' Lib Dem. Great country and great people and great politics (again another discussion for another time), although prefer (somewhat irrevelevantly) 'colour' to 'color' and such like.

Agree with your post, Lazenby 880. Good stuff.

I do very much agree with most of what you have been posting recently, this ceaseless negativity towards a Bond picture that has not even begun filming is a bit bizarre.

Thunderball, bit boring and sloppy but it does have Luciana being given shoes to wear in the bath.

As well as the most gorgeous Bond woman to grace the series Claudine Auger wandering around in a bikini for half of the picture. Hell of a woman. As is, of course, Luciana Paluzzi. Especially in the leathers. Thunderball, it's gr-reat!

* Before anyone mentions it I am aware that in certain words (mainly 'realise') Fleming does use 'z', as does Amis and other writers. It is just a personal peeve, and I think it unfortunate that the universal American 'z' for suffixes is increasingly being used here.

Edited by Lazenby880, 08 September 2005 - 01:13 AM.

[ACE]

So, let's get this right, Lazenby880.

Ahem...

Whilst my spelling was perfectly good in English, English you sought to question my use of English (a skill I happen to be professionally trained in and the wielding of which I happen make a living by - although you wouldn't guess it by some of my posts!!!) by my choice of 2 perfectly sensible and equally appropriate alternatives (used incidentally by High Court judges, policitians, barristers and solicitors and advocates throughout this fair land) based on your personal peeve?

Hmmmm. No wonder "your lot" (I think I understand what you meant but we'll leave this form of reductive party politics out of these forums) are in problems....! Damn this unnecessary modernization!.

U r lcky I dnt wrt in txt spk. Innat what u yngstrs and yr m8s wrt in ths dys?

You may disagree with moving culture but culture, by definition, evolves. As does language. Who are you (or I) to blow against the wind?

BTW, a lot of so called Americanisms are actually old English-isms which the Americans retained. A lot of so-called British traditions are actually relatively new inventions (Coronations until this century were very dull affairs, the Royal Family - whom I support - changed their name to avoid unpopular Teutonic associations this century, etc. etc.)

BTW, it is not American to spell with a "zee"

Hey, Lazenby880, concentrate on what matters....

...like the fate of Casino Royale and the powers that be.

Just had dinner with an ex-colleague of Michael Lynton, Amy Pascal's partner at Sony. Interesting fellow this Lynton. Bond is safe hands, according to my friend as word in the industry is that Sony does not want to be seen as the guys who messed Bond up. My friend also rates Amy Pascal.

Lazenby880, agree with you about Claudine Auger. Hoo-hah!

Let's keep the British End up, eh?

ACE

Edited by ACE, 08 September 2005 - 09:46 AM.

[Lazenby880]

[quote name='ACE' date='8 September 2005 - 01:22']So, let's get this right, Lazenby880.

Ahem...

Whilst my spelling was perfectly good in English, English you sought to question my use of English (a skill I happen to be professionally trained in and the wielding of which I happen make a living by - although you wouldn't guess it by some of my posts!!!) by my choice of 2 perfectly sensible and equally appropriate alternatives (used incidentally by High Court judges, policitians, barristers and solicitors and advocates throughout this fair land) based on your personal peeve? BTW, it is not American to use a "zee"

Edited by Lazenby880, 08 September 2005 - 01:59 AM.

[ACE]

To be honest with you Lazenby880, I actually share your peeve. Well, used to.

But having informally studied the English language and the history of this country (suggested reading if you have not already read them: Mother Tongue by Bill Bryson, The Isles by Norman Davies), I was amazed at what is taken for granted is actually a myth. So many British people are so ignorant of their own history it is untrue!

Listen you young fogey, we all can't write as well as you do: "Dead Cold", "Smokeheart", "Knight of Shadows". Don't flaunt your talent upon us lesser mortals. Just because you're young, gifted and blue!

Anyway, let's confine this interesting conversation to email.

I've gotten all Briddish-ified. Hey, bud, I'll wride you when I redurn frarm golfing. I prarmise nart to total my golfcard lige I did affter thad lasst time I was in England in Gleneagles. Boy, you sure could'a cridicized me for thad, Lasenby880!



ACE

[Napoleon Solo]

I think it's a misconception that LTK "ruined" the series. Sure, it was an ultra-low-budget entry, and poorly marketed, but the big hiatus had more to do with unrelated legal wranglings than with a decline in the quality or profitability of the films themselves. If McClory had been dealt with earlier, I doubt the six-year break would have occurred.

I don't think Kevin McClory had anything to do with the 1989-1995 hiatus. MGM had been sold to someone that Eon didn't trust or want to do business with. Also, Eon had sued MGM over proceeds from TV telecast rights to the 16 Bond films Eon had produced up until that time.