454 replies to this topic

[Domlense]

[quote name='spynovelfan' date='11 October 2005 - 14:35'][quote name='Domlense' date='11 October 2005 - 14:29']I feel like the Frog Prince has just been named Bond.

McMahon, Jackman, Travolta, and Visnjic at least had the look going for them.

[The Dove]

Isn't the Daily Mail a tabloid?? And we all know how reliable those are!!! I still feel confident that this story is full of "a usefull four-letter word!" Daniel Craig is too old to play a young Bond between 28-33..

[Stephenson]

Here I was thinking I was on the thread for Daniel Craig, and all of a sudden I realize that we're only talking about ethics in journalism....

Ah, this is just one of the reasons I miss being able to visit as much as I once did.

[richcom1]

I am sure that I am not alone when I say that I am fet up with the arrogance of the producers. Regardless of who is playing Bond, except for Pierce, they have lost their paying audience. They have forgotten their focus, forgot about the public, who will be the deciders of the future of Bond, and speculate what the public wants instead of giving the public what they want. I will never endorse another Bond film again. I think they are looking for a tax write off for the billions that Pierce made for them.

[spynovelfan]

the fact she was the first one to report something on Brosnan A)doesn't at all make her right on everything she does subsequently and hasn't been yet proved because until the next Bond is announced nobody can say for sure Brosnan is out!

Agreed. But the fact that major news agencies haven't reported this doesn't mean she's wrong, either.

What if they put an actor to play young Bond and another one to play older Bond at the end of the movie, for example (man... no, TWO actors to guess is just too much!! lol , forget about this!)

Yes, let's!

The fact she was the first to report about Brosnan doesn't at all mean that she was the only one to have it. Newspapers have priorities and different means to run stories. Even when we're at a press conference some people report facts a minute later and others report them HOURS later, and others do it the day after, and others don't do it at all, because of different technical means and different priorities of each news organization.

No, that's just nonsense. You'd have to be a very badly run organisation not to recognise that the guy who plays James Bond being axed because he's too old isn't a major scoop. Seriously. Her story was from an 'EON insider' - every subsequent story was a rehash of hers, simply paraphrasing her story. The insider, if they existed, just told her.

I didn't say at all that she had to quote the source that gave her the piece of news but that if she has a scoop she'd have quotes (FROM UNIDENTIFIED SOURCES) that other people don't have. and details, and times, and facts that others don't have.

Well, okay, having read the piece again, that's true - she doesn't have any quotes (apart from a very old one from Craig, in which he seems to suggest casting himself would be insanity). She did have quotes from an unidentified EON source in her Brosnan story.

I tend to agree that this is a bogus story - but your reasoning seems mighty odd. I can buy the quotes stuff - but the fact that other agencies don't have it? Nah. Insiders do exist. Someone broke that Brosnan story to her - admit that that is looking very likely, at least.

[bonded56]

Haven't seen any of the movies for these guys, just pictures. I think Moore only dyed his hair in LALD. A Pic of Cavill:

[Alessandra]

now. serious journalism is facts. The rest is opinion and/or
judgement in the best of cases (columnists are paid for this but they do say they are expressing opinions and not facts, thus not breaking news or having scoops), and speculation in all the others.

So are you saying that you simply listen to what everybody says to you and write it down, without stopping to think about whether they are biased or giving you a skewed opinion of the truth? You heard the Fiat guy say that Bond will drive the Panda. Now are you just taking him as read, or have you stopped to think that he may be embellishing the truth somewhat as he may have a little to gain/not be in full posession of the facts himself? Plus we know Aston have said a similar statement. Which do you think is more likely? I'm not asking for an opinion or speculation, but an accurate version of the truth to the best of your knowledge, using your intelligence to divine which is more likely than the other. That's what journalists do.

And again; why should anybody have heard what this Mail woman has? She was the first to hear of Brosnan's leaving as spynovelfan says; was she wrong because no-one else reported it? You make no sense.

I already replied to the brosnan part of this.
and well sorry, no, we do not agree at all on what a journalist (also known as REPORTER) does. Journalists report facts. the reader draws his or her conclusions. now if i also have to give a definition of facts (you are hinting lies in official statements) well then we're way far from making sense here. Lies are lies and not facts. Facts are when something is officially announced, and Elkann officially announced the deal for the Panda ok? it's nothing else, it's official stuff. It's not insider sourcing, it's not people familiar, it is an official announcement. A fact.
now as I said, because of what happened yesterday, they may as well say "forget about it" and cancel the deal, but as of now, it is on.
and if Aston Martin has officially announced they have a deal for the Bond movie, well they may as well have an agreement with Aston Martin too! with all the cars Bond destroys, can't he have a fully armored Panda and a fully armored Aston Martin??
I do not know what producers decide, I am not one of them! I just report facts.
As for your beginning on how I would do my job (you simply write down and report?).. of course I write down and report accurately, what do I have to do, justify what I write to you, explain to you that when I quote someone I of course say who they are and what they do??? a journalist must NOT give judgements. those are for the reader. you read who the person is and what he or she says and you draw your own conclusions.
please.. it's the second time you try and teach me how to do my job. I know from years on it, thank you. a journalist is not there to JUDGE but to REPORT. in fact the correct word is REPORTER.

[Hitch]

I think the score stands at 30-all, with Spynovelfan to serve.

New balls, please.

[spynovelfan]

Facts are when something is officially announced, and Elkann officially announced the deal for the Panda ok? it's nothing else, it's official stuff. It's not insider sourcing, it's not people familiar, it is an official announcement. A fact.
now as I said, because of what happened yesterday, they may as well say "forget about it" and cancel the deal, but as of now, it is on.
and if Aston Martin has officially announced they have a deal for the Bond movie, well they may as well have an agreement with Aston Martin too! with all the cars Bond destroys, can't he have a fully armored Panda and a fully armored Aston Martin??
I do not know what producers decide, I am not one of them! I just report facts.

Yes, Alessandra, but you reported it like this:

"The Fiat Panda, one of Fiat SpA's cheapest models, will make its screen debut in the next James Bond film due in 2006, replacing the luxury cars typically used by the secret agent such as Aston Martin's V12 Vanquish."

Note the word 'replacing' in the first sentence of your piece. Very catchy little hook, that. But also note that your story came a full 17 months after this interview with Aston Martin's design director, in which he revealed that the new Vantage would be in the next Bond film.

Also featured in your story were the following quotes from Fiat's Elkann:

'"I don't know how the Panda will be armed for Bond,'' Elkann said. "Movie producers will make all the decisions on that.''

And:

"We've seen James Bond always with beautiful women and luxury cars,'' Elkann said. "But maybe now he will get married, have children, and will need a Panda!'''

From those quotes, my *judgement* is that Elkann had absolutely no idea how the Panda would be used in the film - or frankly, if it would even be used by Bond. Going by the other story, it seems far more likely that the Vantage will be Bond's car and that the Panda will probably only be used in some peripheral way. Which is what Mark is talking about. Elkann had a clear motive to suggest that his company's car would be the main vehicle used by Bond - it's more prestigious than being something Bond uses for one scene, or Le Chiffre's henchmen use. Similarly, you and your editors had a motive for suggesting that the humble little Panda would be the main car in the film, replacing Bond's usual luxury cars - which is precisely what you did claim, and it was picked up by newspapers and sites all over the world as a result.

Where's your evidence for your claim that the Panda will *replace* Bond's usual luxury cars, though? That was the hook of your story. Was it in the press release? Because Elkann, from your own quotes, clearly had no idea.

Reporting is also about using your judgement.

[Alessandra]

the fact she was the first one to report something on Brosnan A)doesn't at all make her right on everything she does subsequently and hasn't been yet proved because until the next Bond is announced nobody can say for sure Brosnan is out!

Agreed. But the fact that major news agencies haven't reported this doesn't mean she's wrong, either.

What if they put an actor to play young Bond and another one to play older Bond at the end of the movie, for example (man... no, TWO actors to guess is just too much!! lol , forget about this!)

Yes, let's!

The fact she was the first to report about Brosnan doesn't at all mean that she was the only one to have it. Newspapers have priorities and different means to run stories. Even when we're at a press conference some people report facts a minute later and others report them HOURS later, and others do it the day after, and others don't do it at all, because of different technical means and different priorities of each news organization.

No, that's just nonsense. You'd have to be a very badly run organisation not to recognise that the guy who plays James Bond being axed because he's too old isn't a major scoop. Seriously. Her story was from an 'EON insider' - every subsequent story was a rehash of hers, simply paraphrasing her story. The insider, if they existed, just told her.

I didn't say at all that she had to quote the source that gave her the piece of news but that if she has a scoop she'd have quotes (FROM UNIDENTIFIED SOURCES) that other people don't have. and details, and times, and facts that others don't have.

Well, okay, having read the piece again, that's true - she doesn't have any quotes (apart from a very old one from Craig, in which he seems to suggest casting himself would be insanity). She did have quotes from an unidentified EON source in her Brosnan story.

I tend to agree that this is a bogus story - but your reasoning seems mighty odd. I can buy the quotes stuff - but the fact that other agencies don't have it? Nah. Insiders do exist. Someone broke that Brosnan story to her - admit that that is looking very likely, at least.

on the part some people don't report it at all: many times there are people who have nothing to do with the thing that are invited to press conferences and they just don't report it. You'll never see a report on Bond on the tennis magazine you see what I mean? and yet at times they're there!
the point was: some report it immediately, some others don't because they give priority to something else. So the fact she had it first, doesn't at all mean she was the only one to have it.
I'll tell you a personal anecdote to explain: I could've reported the move of a soccer player (BIG one) to an italian team this summer at midnight the night before everyone ran the story, because I had spoken to the director general of the club who off the record told me he had concluded the deal. (I'm in very good terms with the guy). I didn't run the story, and ended up being one of the LAST to run it around 5 pm the day after because of sourcing rules we have, and because they don't allow us to move a story with unidentified sources. So we waited for the official statement to announce.
Don't think this is an exception, it happens often, and to lots of people.
The same way, while a tabloid doesn't have any problem publishing a story which may turn out to be completely false, other people just don't report it until there's something official about it, because of rules they have. And because they put credibility as a main priority. many others could've known about Brosnan but not reported it right away because they needed more verifying before doing it. Which is what makes the difference between tabloid journalism and serious journalism.
Now, it ends that serious papers quote the tabloid in order not to have trouble and not to lose their credibility if something is speculation. I know it is somewhat ridiculous, but it's how it works. You cite someone else's story if it's a huge scoop that you cannot run because you have far more restrictive rules than a tabloid.
the fact the lady was right about Brosnan (which as we said is yet to be seen) doesn't necessarily mean she was better sourced than others: she could afford to take the risk, and it turned out to be true (for now). But that doesn't make her better sourced than others, or smarter than others.

[luciusgore]

If Craig is named as 007, I will only go see the movie if it garners decent reviews. He does not look like Bond to me. It's not as good a choice as Brosnan, not as good a choice as Owen, of course.

I guess I had been holding out hope it would be Clive Owen.

[K1Bond007]

Out of the candidates I've seen reported, he's the best - so I'd be good with this. I'm willing to give him a shot. I don't believe the blonde bit though. They'll dye him like they did Moore, who had a kind of sandy brown going on...

[tdalton]

If Craig is named as 007, I will only go see the movie if it garners decent reviews. He does not look like Bond to me. It's not as good a choice as Brosnan, not as good a choice as Owen, of course.

I guess I had been holding out hope it would be Clive Owen.

All this story is is another internet rumor. Daniel Craig doesn't have the part yet, so I wouldn't worry about it until EON officially announces it. I honestly think that Craig has been out of contention for a while now and that this reporter is just trying to capitalize by naming the new Bond from a list of frontrunners. The way I see it, she's got a 1 in 8 or a 1 in 10 chance of being right, since Campbell confirmed that 8-10 actors were testing for the role.

[Stephenson]

so I wouldn't worry about it until EON officially announces it.

IMO, "celebrate it" ....

[tdalton]

so I wouldn't worry about it until EON officially announces it.

IMO, "celebrate it" ....

I'll definitely be celebrating if Craig is cast as Bond. Was just trying to offer encouragement to someone who doesn't want to see Craig as Bond just by stating the fact that he isn't Bond yet. I'm not going to get my hopes up until I hear the guy at the press conference say, "Ladies and gentlemen, the new James Bond, Daniel Craig". Until then, this is just a rumor.

[Alessandra]

Facts are when something is officially announced, and Elkann officially announced the deal for the Panda ok? it's nothing else, it's official stuff. It's not insider sourcing, it's not people familiar, it is an official announcement. A fact.
now as I said, because of what happened yesterday, they may as well say "forget about it" and cancel the deal, but as of now, it is on.
and if Aston Martin has officially announced they have a deal for the Bond movie, well they may as well have an agreement with Aston Martin too! with all the cars Bond destroys, can't he have a fully armored Panda and a fully armored Aston Martin??
I do not know what producers decide, I am not one of them! I just report facts.

Yes, Alessandra, but you reported it like this:

"The Fiat Panda, one of Fiat SpA's cheapest models, will make its screen debut in the next James Bond film due in 2006, replacing the luxury cars typically used by the secret agent such as Aston Martin's V12 Vanquish."

Note the word 'replacing'. Note that your story came a full 17 months after
this interview with Aston Martin's design director, in which he revealed that the new Vantage would be in the next Bond film.

Also from your story the following quotes from Fiat's Elkann:

'"I don't know how the Panda will be armed for Bond,'' Elkann said. "Movie producers will make all the decisions on that.''

And:

"We've seen James Bond always with beautiful women and luxury cars,'' Elkann said. "But maybe now he will get married, have children, and will need a Panda!'''

From thos quotes, my *judgement* is that Elkann had absolutely no idea how the Panda will be used in the film - or frankly, if it will even be used by Bond. Going by the other story, it seems clear that the Vantage will be Bond's car and that the Panda will probably only be used in some peripheral way. Which is what Mark is talking about. Elkann had a motive to suggest that the Panda will be the main car used by Bond - it's more prestigious than being something Bond uses for one scene, or Le Chiffre's henchmen use. Similarly, you and your editors had a motive for suggesting that the humble little Panda would be the main car in the film, replacing Bond's usual luxury cars - which is precisely what you did claim, and it was picked up by newspapers and sites all over the world as a result.

Where's your evidence for your claim that the Vantage will be *replaced* by the Panda, though? That was the hook of your story. Was it in the press release? Because Elkann, from your own quotes, clearly had no idea.

Reporting is also about using your judgement.

Elkann said the Panda would be THE Bond car, not A Bond car. Elkann said Panda would be THE Bond car, which is why we used REPLACED.
He just said he had no idea how they would armor it since it was up to the producers, so what? of course producers don't tell "we are going to put this and that gadget on the car" the moment they land the deal with someone? Fiat provides the cars for free, that's it.
this said, the design director of a company (aston martin) and the brand and marketing director of a company (fiat) have a very different authority. An official announcement from a head of brand and marketing, who is also a member of the family owning the company, has to be taken very seriously. And since it came a year after the other one, usually the latest news is the most updated, right? but it doesn't at all mean that Aston Martin hasn't talked to Bond producers in the meantime!
The story we did is accurate and reports facts. but it doesn't at all mean that meantime the situation hasn't changed?? as I was saying, as far as this minute, the deal is on. But with what happened yesterday, they may as well cancel the deal. Or in any case, they may as well have been talking to Aston Martin, too, all of the time. I've seen no official announcement from Aston martin on the deal but it doesn't mean that they don't have one or cannot land one.

[tonymascia1]

Does this mean the price for the "Layer Cake" DVD will go up?

After making some snarky comments about the lack of worldwide viewership for Layer Cake, I'm now sufficiently intrigued by this latest rumor to get the DVD.
Reviewers of this movie imply Craig would make a fine Bond --- what do you out there who've seen "Layer Cake" think?

[doublenoughtspy]

While this woman's reporting has been accurate before - there are some things way off base in the article.

Jude Law, Ewan McGreggor, Colin Farrell, Orlando Bloom? They were never on the short list or screen tested.

I know we are hearing Craig's name from plenty of places, but I wouldn't put much faith in an article that gets basic facts like this wrong.

[K1Bond007]

All this story is is another internet rumor.  Daniel Craig doesn't have the part yet, so I wouldn't worry about it until EON officially announces it.  I honestly think that Craig has been out of contention for a while now and that this reporter is just trying to capitalize by naming the new Bond from a list of frontrunners.  The way I see it, she's got a 1 in 8 or a 1 in 10 chance of being right, since Campbell confirmed that 8-10 actors were testing for the role.

More like 1/4 since there are only 4 knowns, but regardless I don't think the reporter is guessing. Maybe basing this "confirmation" on faulty information or something, I don't know, but I'm thinking this outcome may end up being the actual reality.

[Sam Fisher]

This is the end, beautiful friends the end...


Dalton fans Rejoice. Craig will be the new rotten egg of the franchise.

Edited by Sam Fisher, 11 October 2005 - 04:08 PM.

[spynovelfan]

Alessandra, did you not consider the possibility that a luxury car might still be the main car in the next film and that Panda had signed a deal for Bond to use *at some point* in the film? Did Fiat say the Panda would be the *only* car Bond would use in the film?

I'll admit I have the benefit of hindsight, but I think it's very likely you were had. I don't think the word 'replaced' in your article was a fact, even when you reported it. It may have been suggested. It may not have been denied. But it wasn't quite a fact. Bond can use more than one car in a film, and unless Fiat's press release said specifically that the Panda was the only one he would use (and even then, one could always query their motives and accuracy), I can't see that your story's first sentence was reporting a fact.

On the other hand, it made for a better story, it went round the world - and now you're here.

I'm sure you could do a similarly brutal demolition of many of my stories. But judgement is *crucial* in journalism, surely you'd agree? Every press release purports to be facts. They aren't, necessarily, though.

Even from Italian companies.

[Alessandra]

I think the score stands at 30-all, with Spynovelfan to serve.

New balls, please.

LMAO Hitch!!
I love tennis!! I want Marat Safin for Bond, not Craig!! lol
And sorry yes, we've been occupying a lot of space with this. I apologize.

[Loeffelholz]

I truly hope this Craig rumour is false. The fellow is a fine actor, true, and would certainly inject a bit more grit and danger into Bond's character, but...a '28 year-old' Bond? Craig doesn't seem to fit that bill. But who knows?

Whomever gets the part, I'll hold my breath, hope for the best, and see the movie when it comes out...

The postmortem should be fascinating.

Edited by Loeffelholz, 11 October 2005 - 04:19 PM.

[marktmurphy]

Does this mean the price for the "Layer Cake" DVD will go up?

After making some snarky comments about the lack of worldwide viewership for Layer Cake, I'm now sufficiently intrigued by this latest rumor to get the DVD.
Reviewers of this movie imply Craig would make a fine Bond --- what do you out there who've seen "Layer Cake" think?

I've got to admit I bought it today out of interest! It's only

[morganhavoc]

Entertaiment Tonight will have the exclusive of the announcement. October 14th,2005, 7PM Easten time(USA). Then the flood gates will open. Hopefully it won't be Craig.

[Bon-san]

Entertaiment Tonight will have the exclusive of the announcement. October 14th,2005, 7PM Easten time(USA). Then the flood gates will open. Hopefully it won't be Craig.

Where was it reported that ET would have this announcement on Oct 17 at 7pm Eastern?

[marktmurphy]

Elkann said the Panda would be THE Bond car, not A Bond car. Elkann said Panda would be THE Bond car, which is why we used REPLACED.

But you have prior knowledge of Bond, no? You don't live in a vacuum- which do you think is more likely to be driven by Bond; a Fiat Panda or the new Aston Martin? And as you were told it would be a Fiat by a man whose job it is to promote Fiats and who said he didn't know what they would be doing with it, and that Aston Martin had already claimed they were being used; you really 100% believed that and didn't think that saying the Fiat was Bond's new car would get the story sold easier, even though it's unlikely to be true?

[Lord Kemsley]

Daniel Craig as Bond? The Eon controllers must be looking for a way to go out of business. :-) But we must admit that this bargain basement rumoured name would bring more comedy to the fiasco known as "Casino Royale."

In "Layer Cake," a film that was more amusingly stupid than entertaining, Craig (who is looking more and more like Vladamir Putin) is so bland that he made the props look animated--and now he gets to be directed by Martin Campbell, who can't seem to remember his name during a major press conference, essentially referring to the actor as Cray somebody. (There's obviously some big issues between these two characters.)

If this rumour is true, Cray-Craig would be the first Bond who looks 65 in his first film, but the filmmakers will try the impossible: that is, they'll pass him off as a 28 year-old for their looney "Bond Begins" story. It would be ridiculous: he'll end up looking like a mildly psychotic schoolboy who will need to wear a toupee right off the bat; hopefully, the Eon Controllers will film him with some soft lighting so he won't scare off maintream audiences. Still, a mighty wind blows through pre-production: gusts of self-importance in the Eon House. After getting spanked last year or so by MGM (when their Jinx project was cancelled) they seem to be hungry for self-assertion. Good luck Eon.

[Bon-san]

Daniel Craig as Bond? The Eon controllers must be looking for a way to go out of business. :-) But we must admit that this bargain basement rumoured name would bring more comedy to the fiasco known as "Casino Royale."

In "Layer Cake," a film that was more amusingly stupid than entertaining, Craig (who is looking more and more like Vladamir Putin) is so bland that he made the props look animated--and now he gets to be directed by Martin Campbell, who can't seem to remember his name during a major press conference, essentially referring to the actor as Cray somebody. (There's obviously some big issues between these two characters.)

If this rumour is true, Cray-Craig would be the first Bond who looks 65 in his first film, but the filmmakers will try the impossible: that is, they'll pass him off as a 28 year-old for their looney "Bond Begins" story. It would be ridiculous: he'll end up looking like a mildly psychotic schoolboy who will need to wear a toupee right off the bat; hopefully, the Eon Controllers will film him with some soft lighting so he won't scare off maintream audiences. Still, a mighty wind blows through pre-production: gusts of self-importance in the Eon House. After getting spanked last year or so by MGM (when their Jinx project was cancelled) they seem to be hungry for self-assertion. Good luck Eon.

I'm all for well-placed and well-executed sarcasm and hyperbole.

But I can't agree with your post. There are numerous valid critiques one could make in regards to Layer Cake. Calling Craig's performance bland is not one of them.

He would be a brave choice. Some would say a foolish choice. Time will tell. But if he is in fact chosen, no one can say Eon doesn't have balls.

[Seannery]

Entertaiment Tonight will have the exclusive of the announcement. October 14th,2005, 7PM Easten time(USA). Then the flood gates will open. Hopefully it won't be Craig.

This sounds bogus--Where's the proof?