454 replies to this topic

[tdalton]

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?

I just checked their website and couldn't find anything about it.

[Slaezenger]

Tabloid nonsense or have we got our man?

...He's your man, not mine. If true, what a grotesque casting choice for Bond. Ugh...

[Alessandra]

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.

I agree, of course one has to use good sense and judgement! but to decide what thing is more important in a press release, and not whether it's true or false. it is taken for granted that a press release states only facts, and if it doesn't, well then not the journalist but the company issuing it will get in trouble! and anyway, it will come out. (example, Parmalat. well that was not press releases, that was false accounting.. but still.. ). But the moment you get it, a press release is facts. I think we have a pretty good example with all the central bank mess here in Italy. Man, I am ashamed everytime the world looks at us because of that. The press releases didn't state false things, only, it then came out after an inquiry that the central bank hadn't chosen the best candidate in a completely transparent and fair way (to put it a politically correct way.. it's far worse than this, but i have no intention of being sued! lol )
man, if we don't consider facts official press releases then we shouldn't even be starting this!
official press releases are facts. what is speculated around them is not. but those are the only things you can officially quote as facts. If they are after inquiries or something like it proved wrong, then that's another problem.
Elkann said the Panda would be THE Bond car. not one of the cars. THE car.
Which is the reason for the story.
As I said, doesn't mean they weren't talking to Aston Martin too, and doesn't mean they don't have an agreement with them too.
Elkann knew that the Panda was THE car and not A car when they signed the agreement. So what, doesn't mean that they weren't talking to someone else? they provide cars for free for the movie, and what he said was true and accurate the moment he said it, but doesn't at all mean it will stay like that forever.

[tonymascia1]

Ditto, tdalton.

Nothing to be found on et's website...

[Shrublands]

I find it interesting to note that Variety are reporting on the fact that this story was in the Mail this morning.

Blighty abuzz with Blond Bond rumor - Variety

[Spoon]

That seems to just be Variety re-reporting that the Daily Mail reported it.

Look, everyone from Dougray Scott to Eric Bana to Heath Ledger has gotten the "it's him -- expect an announcement very soon" article written about them. Just because this one happens to be written at a time when we're expecting the choice to be made, doesn't make it any more valid. Take this no more seriously than you took those others, IMO.

[Qwerty]

Wow, this is becoming intolerable.

Don't mean to pick and shove or anything like that, but...is it really? All it is is a decision. Granted, yes, a new Bond, but the decision will come.

[Alessandra]

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?

I see your point spy, but I do not express judgements when I write. I report.
People who know Bond can think for themselves whatever they want (like: well I don't believe it since Bond has elegant cars), my job is not to say "hey this guy said this and that, but it can't be true because Bond uses different cars". My job is to say "the guy said this and that". and "Bond movies normally have this and this car" (which is in my story, and the replacing part makes it even more evident). whoever reads is free to draw their own conclusions. in fact, what we say about the differences in the cars and the panda replacing those is actually bordering on the side of "hey... think about it.. is it possible/likely?" because the reader can see the striking differences among the two.
AAnyway, We did ask how it was possible that Panda would replace posh cars and Lapo said:
"well, maybe now Bond will settle down, have a family, and he'll need.. A PANDA!" Clearly he couldn't say "well the new storyline is this and that so he needs a panda".. (or the deal would've been OFF at that very minute!) so he joked on it and hinted this. We did ask though of course, and got our reply.
the final judgements are up to the reader.

[tdalton]

That seems to just be Variety re-reporting that the Daily Mail reported it.

Look, everyone from Dougray Scott to Eric Bana to Heath Ledger has gotten the "it's him -- expect an announcement very soon" article written about them.  Just because this one happens to be written at a time when we're expecting the choice to be made, doesn't make it any more valid.  Take this no more seriously than you took those others, IMO.

You're right. I don't see this as any more than just a rumor either. I've been burned before by Pierce-B's "Clive Owen has signed" and the subsequent mind games that Clive played with the media and reports of his "being signed", and then we went through the same thing with Craig once already, also with several others, only to come up with nothing. As much as I'd like Craig to be Bond, it's not going to happen.

[Shrublands]

That seems to just be Variety re-reporting that the Daily Mail reported it.

Do you consider it normal for an organ like Variety to take time out to inform it's readers what a British tabloid is saying about such things?

[marktmurphy]

I see your point spy, but I do not express judgements when I write. I report.

I didn't ask you to- but your presentation, the words you select have an effect on the reader. You rephrased the Fiat's guys words to make his statement that it would effectively be taking over from the Aston.
Also, if you choose to present facts and the truth, surely it's your duty to ensure that you are actually printing the truth and not just what you have been told? I'm not asking for your opinion, but your assurance that what you are saying is true and not simply what a man with ulterior motives wants you to print.
If I told you that I was an Eon insider and that Di Caprio was the new Bond would you blindly print it without checking me or stopping to think that I may not be telling the whole truth? It's common sense, surely?

[Spoon]

Well, I can't read the full article (if anyone wants to reproduce it, it'd be much appreciated); I'm going on the assumption that it simply consists of "The Daily Mail reports that...", which right now is an assumption since I haven't read it. It's perfectly possible that Variety also jumped on the Mail article prematurely simply because they're expecting a choice at this time, or just wanted to run a Bond article since it hadn't for a while, or is giving a little nudge since the editor likes the idea of Craig as Bond, or who knows what. If you're saying that Variety knows that Craig is Bond and that's why they ran the article, well, it could be but I can't read their minds. All I can say is, 1) merely saying that the Mail reported it would provide no new information, and 2) if Variety does have independent verification that he is the choice, why not say that?

Don't get me wrong, Craig does appear to be the frontrunner and anyone reporting that it's him has an excellent chance to end up correct. But, we don't know what the reporters know, and the articles from people who are truly privy to inside info and people who are completely clueless look pretty much the same from our very "outside" vantage point.

[Alessandra]

That seems to just be Variety re-reporting that the Daily Mail reported it.

Do you consider it normal for an organ like Variety to take time out to inform it's readers what a British tabloid is saying about such things?

it's absolutely normal when a story is speculative and you cannot report it because of sourcing rules you have or because it's simply too speculative for you to publich, to cite somebody else's story. I was just explaining this in a previous post. Serious magazines or newspapers don't report certain types of speculation, even if they have the same sources of tabloids, because of credibility and sourcing rules they have. So, since it's still something which sounds like a scoop, they cite the tabloid which had it. This way, credibility of the newspaper doesn't take any risks, and the readers of the newspaper are anyway informed.

[Frostyak]

Sorry if this has been seen, but it has made the Yahoo! frontpage:

http://news.yahoo.co...leisure_bond_dc

- Chris

[Forever007]

If Craig is who we get then I'll support him in the interest of the Bond series continuing. With Gerard Butler and Jack Daveport stilll available I can't see why Craig would best them. It looks like EON wants to depart from the pretty boy image of Bond to minimize direct comparison to Brosnan.

Edited by Forever007, 11 October 2005 - 05:19 PM.

[Shrublands]

That seems to just be Variety re-reporting that the Daily Mail reported it.

Do you consider it normal for an organ like Variety to take time out to inform it's readers what a British tabloid is saying about such things?

it's absolutely normal when a story is speculative and you cannot report it because of sourcing rules you have or because it's simply too speculative for you to publich, to cite somebody else's story. I was just explaining this in a previous post. Serious magazines or newspapers don't report certain types of speculation, even if they have the same sources of tabloids, because of credibility and sourcing rules they have. So, since it's still something which sounds like a scoop, they cite the tabloid which had it. This way, credibility of the newspaper doesn't take any risks, and the readers of the newspaper are anyway informed.

Regardless of that: what

[Alessandra]

I see your point spy, but I do not express judgements when I write. I report.

I didn't ask you to- but your presentation, the words you select have an effect on the reader. You rephrased the Fiat's guys words to make his statement that it would effectively be taking over from the Aston.
Also, if you choose to present facts and the truth, surely it's your duty to ensure that you are actually printing the truth and not just what you have been told? I'm not asking for your opinion, but your assurance that what you are saying is true and not simply what a man with ulterior motives wants you to print.
If I told you that I was an Eon insider and that Di Caprio was the new Bond would you blindly print it without checking me or stopping to think that I may not be telling the whole truth? It's common sense, surely?

we're going over in circles again. My story is worded based on the fact that Fiat said the panda WOULD replace the other cars, being THE main Bond car and NOT A car. or are you trying even to say i'm dishonest when I write stories??
and it was not a man talking, it was the head of marketing of the company, who also is an owner of the company, making an official statement on it.
official statements are facts, and that is it.
if afterwards other things happen, that is another problem. but we reported accurately, and factually what was said as an official announcement, not as an opinion, not as a revelation. an official announcement. if you want to believe it's false, you're absolutely free to think so, but that doesn't change the accuracy of my story or the professionality with which I wrote it.
The fact the man has ulterior motives is just your assumption, it is not a fact.
he's the head of marketing making an official annoucement. that is the fact. the announcement was that the Panda would be THE car and not ONE OF THE CARS. the main car, the Bond car. Word it however you prefer, that's what was announced, otherwise I would've written "The Panda will be ONE OF THE CARS in the next Bond" and not "The Panda will replace".
I won't take for one second judgements on my integrity and honesty when I write stories. I wouldn't work where I work or be a serious journalist if I had no morals in my job. I'd go work for a gossip paper if I wanted to do dishonest, trash journalism.
What is in the story is absolutely accurate and not forced from facts. it's what Elkann announced. I don't think you spoke to him. I did, and other Italian journalists did. and what I reported was the story. That all the others ran the same exact way.

[Orion]

We have been hearing these "..... is bond:6!" things since it was first confirmed that no-one officially is James Bond so unless we hear "EON productions has today announced that ..... is James Bond i am not going to listen to a single word of the tabloid rubbish. Any way the only thing close to an official casting possibility was when Pierce Brosnan said Sony had asked him to come back and Sony said "It will probably be Pierce" so my money's on Pierce doing one final film for the simple reason that Sony want to make money ,something thats garanteed if they cast Pierce as he already has a massive fan base as Bond due to his excellent performences in previous films, even if the films themselves weren't brilliant (Tomorrow Never Dies please stand up)

Attached Files

•  brosnan_watch.jpg   22.54KB   40 downloads

[trumanlodge89]

Can everyone do me a quick favor and remind themselves the general disdain we share for the last 2 or 3 bond films? That Brosnan didn't bring anything new to the character? That Brosnan may photograph a fantastic James Bond, but when he opens his mouth, he brings nothing new to the character, nor is he particularly interesting to watch on screen?


Daniel Craig, however, is by all accounts a good actor, who is British (which, hard enough to believe, is a huge relief in my book), and who really doesn't photograph a great Bond. This is really the opposite of Brosnan, isn't it? Now, none of us have seen him as Bond, so why are we ready to boycott the series? (Or similar harsh talk.)

Let's be honest, some of us will never be happy regardless of who gets the job. I know I sound like a broken record, but can't we wait till we see the movie or at the VERY least a trailer.

We all, myself included, need to take a deep breath.

[Jack Bauer]

I'll wait until things are 100% confirmed to celebrate/throw my computer out the window.

[Seannery]

Can everyone do me a quick favor and remind themselves the general disdain we share for the last 2 or 3 bond films? That Brosnan didn't bring anything new to the character? That Brosnan may photograph a fantastic James Bond, but when he opens his mouth, he brings nothing new to the character, nor is he particularly interesting to watch on screen?


Daniel Craig, however, is by all accounts a good actor, who is British (which, hard enough to believe, is a huge relief in my book), and who really doesn't photograph a great Bond. This is really the opposite of Brosnan, isn't it? Now, none of us have seen him as Bond, so why are we ready to boycott the series? (Or similar harsh talk.)

Let's be honest, some of us will never be happy regardless of who gets the job. I know I sound like a broken record, but can't we wait till we see the movie or at the VERY least a trailer.

We all, myself included, need to take a deep breath.

I think Craig has possibilities to be a good Bond BUT not all share your disdain of the Brosnan films including myself.

[zencat]

Think you all are ahead of me, but I just updated Tim's main pager with this:

Update (10:50AM):

Variety.com is reporting Craig's publicist only offered a "no comment" and the PRs at Eon Productions, the producers of the Bond franchise, were said to be "in a meeting."

Craig's agents ICM in London said they couldn't comment until Eon made an announcement but expected that 007 producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson would let the cat out of the bag by the end of the week.

Reading this...I think this is real. I think the is coming down and it's coming down NOW. Either it is Craig (and I think it could be), or he's being used as cover for someone else. But my gut tells me we are going to find out who will be Bond in CR very very soon.

[Seannery]

Think you all are ahead of me, but I just updated Tim's main pager with this:

Update (10:50AM):

Variety.com is reporting Craig's publicist only offered a "no comment" and the PRs at Eon Productions, the producers of the Bond franchise, were said to be "in a meeting."

Craig's agents ICM in London said they couldn't comment until Eon made an announcement but expected that 007 producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson would let the cat out of the bag by the end of the week.

Reading this...I think this is real. I think the is coming down and it's coming down NOW. Either it is Craig (and I think it could be), or he's being used as cover for someone else. But my gut tells me we are going to find out who will be Bond in CR very very soon.

From the sound of that(if it's all kosher) Craig seems more likely than someone hidden.

[trumanlodge89]

Can everyone do me a quick favor and remind themselves the general disdain we share for the last 2 or 3 bond films? That Brosnan didn't bring anything new to the character? That Brosnan may photograph a fantastic James Bond, but when he opens his mouth, he brings nothing new to the character, nor is he particularly interesting to watch on screen?


Daniel Craig, however, is by all accounts a good actor, who is British (which, hard enough to believe, is a huge relief in my book), and who really doesn't photograph a great Bond. This is really the opposite of Brosnan, isn't it? Now, none of us have seen him as Bond, so why are we ready to boycott the series? (Or similar harsh talk.)

Let's be honest, some of us will never be happy regardless of who gets the job. I know I sound like a broken record, but can't we wait till we see the movie or at the VERY least a trailer.

We all, myself included, need to take a deep breath.

I think Craig has possibilities to be a good Bond BUT not all share your disdain of the Brosnan films including myself.

i understand, and i will also say that disdain was not the right word, and not with the films. frustration with his recent behavior paired with a lackluster last film is more like what i meant.

[Bon-san]

We are at DEFCON 1!

[Jack Bauer]

Think you all are ahead of me, but I just updated Tim's main pager with this:

Update (10:50AM):

Variety.com is reporting Craig's publicist only offered a "no comment" and the PRs at Eon Productions, the producers of the Bond franchise, were said to be "in a meeting."

Craig's agents ICM in London said they couldn't comment until Eon made an announcement but expected that 007 producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson would let the cat out of the bag by the end of the week.

Reading this...I think this is real. I think the is coming down and it's coming down NOW. Either it is Craig (and I think it could be), or he's being used as cover for someone else. But my gut tells me we are going to find out who will be Bond in CR very very soon.

And aren't you glad? Right now, I couldn't really care less who they choose as long as I know it's happening soon. It's too exciting of news to be picky.

[J.B.]

I just read everything about what everyone is talking about...

ThisisLondon.com is reporting it too...

I really cant believe this...I was hoping for anyone but him...I dont want to prejudge him so I guess it is off to the video store to get some of his other roles and check him out...but my gut is telling me it is a mistake to do this if it is indeed true...

And if it is true I guess is that it all boils down to egos and EON gets their way no matter what may be in the fans or Sony's best interest or desire...they have given me the impression that this is the way they are anyway...they are going to do what they want because they want to...I may be wrong but most people want someone else...if I am wrong on this then I will stand corrected and will just root him on to be good...but my heart wont be in it....

The question of the hour will be this...will he use "Just for Men" or Grecian Formula for that "Blond" hair to be black?

[spynovelfan]

Elkann said the Panda would be THE Bond car. not one of the cars. THE car.
Which is the reason for the story.

Fair enough, Alessandra.

Now, Daniel Craig as Bond...

[spynovelfan]

ThisisLondon.com is reporting it too...

It's precisely the same article, with the same byline. Part of the same group.

[spynovelfan]

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?

I see your point spy, but I do not express judgements when I write.

Alessandra, I see why you made this mistake, but that was marktmurphy you were replying to, not me. And apologies if I came down a bit harsh on you earlier - this place is getting to me a little. I should perhaps cut back on the benzedrine. It's a little stuffy in here.

Come on, EON! Make it Craig for CASINO ROYALE! He's got the shoulders for it.



'Satisifed that his room had not been searched while he was at the casino, Bond undressed and took a cold shower...'