31 replies to this topic

[stamper]

OK, when I first saw that pic of Craig, I thought : "what the ???" but having let it sink in, I think it may be very promising for Bond.

A redefinition was really overdue IMHO, and I love the reboot idea. I wish they also recast M, but heard it won't happen.

I love Brozza, but I think his Bond, like most bond since 1973, missed the mark, thought imho DAD is his best, especially the first hour.

I'm hoping the script IS Bondian in the fleming spirit. You have to note 007 movies only work when they borrow heavily from the source material. DAD prisoners exchange, for example, is totally Bondian IMHO because it the location is also found in Fleming novels. That's "Bondian". I'm no purist, and not that huge fan of Fleming novels, but I understand well the potential they had, and still have.

I don't really care about the huge action scenes : it's something that came from the Moore area, and thought many think about that when they think 007, I just yawn. How many times did they shoot Brosnan trying to control a huge vehicle and sliding around ?

Goldfinger thank chase
TND the plane in the opening
WINE the water Q vehicle
DAD opening credits

YAWN YAWN YAWN I'm tired of seeing Brozza turning the wheel while the vehicle slides around himself. THAT IS UNLIKE BOND. Bond would gain control of the vehicle and MAKE IT !

Same when we see Bond in TND unable to read the chinese keyboard, BOND WOULD KNOW, he studied oriental languages in Cambridge !

OK, I shoot my wad, up to you guys

[Scottlee]

Best since OHMSS? That's a tough ask. However, CR will surely at least be better than DAD. And that achievement alone will mean the series is back on the up (albeit slowly).

[stamper]

OK, I maybe a little bit over enthusiastic, but hey, at last, it's different from any of the other Bond announcements since way back. So it's gonna be hit or miss, and I hope hit !

[stamper]

Strange paperback drawing from the fifties, Bond look likes Daniel Craig. Or maybe Clive Owen. They are dead ringers.

[Qwerty]

That's a very tall order for sure, but I can only applaud your enthusiasm for the film. Much too many fans are already writing off the film/series/Craig and the movie isn't even in full production yet.

I'm hoping for a great Bond film, but I'll be more than happy with a grand one.

[Number 6]

You must give me the name of your occulist, stamper...but I do hope you're right...

[Judo chop]

It would be grand if the movie doesn't "suck" as some youngster would phrase it.

They'll start filming in a few weeks and the whole known supporting cast = Lady Dench. Not that I disagree with her talent but she's not enough.

Campbell is a very avarage hack, Brocolli & Wilson are the same folks who produced DAD and they got some extra folks who did work on xXx & Alien vs predator. (now that makes me happy........NOT)

Quite a few big names in the leading ladies department have said NO to this great part, if I were to believe DC in a MTV interview.

Like I said if they did a half decent movie I'd be gratefull. (& surprised)

So far I've seen little or heard little to give me any big hopes.

Daniel Craig. Paul Haggis. There's hope yet.

[MarcAngeDraco]

Stamper, Glad to hear someone is getting enthused about the new film...

I hope you're right...

[Harmsway]

They'll start filming in a few weeks and the whole known supporting cast = Lady Dench. Not that I disagree with her talent but she's not enough.

Wait for the casting announcement at the start of filming to judge.

Campbell is a very avarage hack, Brocolli & Wilson are the same folks who produced DAD and they got some extra folks who did work on xXx & Alien vs predator. (now that makes me happy........NOT)

Campbell may be an average hack, but so have been most of the Bond directors. Most of the Bond directors had very disappointing careers outside of James Bond. And while Sony doesn't exactly inspire me, neither did MGM.

Quite a few big names in the leading ladies department have said NO to this great part, if I were to believe DC in a MTV interview.

In his MTV interview, Craig says nothing about ladies turning down the role. As far as we know, it's all been a lot of hogwash and tabloid reports about the big stars. Wouldn't be the first time with a Bond movie.

Like I said if they did a half decent movie I'd be gratefull. (& surprised)

Even with its current crew, it has me more hopeful than any of the movies in the Brosnan canon. Campbell can do okay directing (GOLDENEYE established that... he's not the finest ever, but he does have some flair here and there, and is still more interesting than the blandest Bond director of all time, John Glen).

Not to mention, we have Daniel Craig, which bodes well for the character's portrayal. And then there's Paul Haggis' supposedly outstanding script. Well, that's good - because guess what the number one problem with Brosnan's films was? Weak scripts. There wasn't a Brosnan Bond flick that had a really strong script, and a strong script with even a director as workmanlike as Martin Campbell can turn out a fine film.

[JameswpBond]

Strange paperback drawing from the fifties, Bond look likes Daniel Craig. Or maybe Clive Owen. They are dead ringers.

The illustrator based James Bond on Daniel Craig!

[Donovan]

Strange paperback drawing from the fifties, Bond look likes Daniel Craig. Or maybe Clive Owen. They are dead ringers.

The illustrator based James Bond on Daniel Craig!

Yet he used his artistic license to give him dark hair and eyebrows.

I hope it's a good film. If I don't like it, I can always watch a DVD of Goldfinger.

[Harmsway]

Strange paperback drawing from the fifties, Bond look likes Daniel Craig. Or maybe Clive Owen. They are dead ringers.

The illustrator based James Bond on Daniel Craig!

Craig is better looking than that illustration.

[medrecess]

You cant blame Pierce.It is only he who looks like he could do it.PB looked Bond-The way he walked,Talked.Everything is Bondian.

But what you think-you want everything like the books which would make it an intersting story.I like your concept and that is what would probably will happen now.

[TheREAL008]

Set your hopes up way too high....

[Harmsway]

Set your hopes up way too high....

Yeah, I think those who think CR will be the best Bond since OHMSS are setting themselves up for a disappointment. I'm just hoping for the best Bond film of the past 15 years.

[tdalton]

Set your hopes up way too high....

Yeah, I think those who think CR will be the best Bond since OHMSS are setting themselves up for a disappointment. I'm just hoping for the best Bond film of the past 15 years.

I used to hope that it would be the best Bond since OHMSS, but recently, I've shifted my expectations. As long as it's better than Die Another Day, I'll be reasonably satisfied. And, honestly, that won't be very difficult to do. It could still end up being a lousy film and be infinitely better than DAD.

[TheREAL008]

It's really sad when your more expecting the release of another questionable Highlander sequel than a Bond movie.

But at the very least it HAS to be better than Die Another Day; it just has to be. They couldn't possibly muck it up worse than that correct?

I mean, Metallica released St. Anger and that was a WORLDWIDE SMASH with GREAT songs on that album right? A true return to form there

Young Bond, Daniel Craig, Bond Begins as a Bourne ripoff, I guess it's just me but I find the direction of this beloved series and franchise very questionable.

[tdalton]

Young Bond, Daniel Craig, Bond Begins as a Bourne ripoff, I guess it's just me but I find the direction of this beloved series and franchise very questionable.

You're not the only one who finds the direction of the franchise questionable. If it were any of the other contenders in the role of Bond except Craig or Clive Owen, and they were going about making this film the same way, I would have to seriously consider waiting for the DVD. At this point, unless EON shows me something that can get me excited about this film again (and that would take something major to get me excited about it again), the only reason that I'm going to see it is because of my excitement to see what Daniel Craig can do as Bond.

[GreggAllinson]

From what we've seen and heard, there will be very little fidelity to the book. To an extent, that's understandable- while personally I'd prefer a period piece, a case could be made for the '50s being box office poison, and the second half of the book would be very difficult to realise. But adding in a bunch of new characters, changing locales, etc....I just don't see the point of doing a movie called Casino Royale if you're not prepared to be faithful to the spirit and much of the particulars of the novel Casino Royale. Of course, this is nothing new for EON, but their efforts are almost always markedly inferior to Fleming's, so I'm not holding out hope...

Simply put, this may be a good enough film on its own terms, but there is no way it can match Fleming's masterpiece.

[Rolex]

I think its a catch 22 situation for the producers , I think they would love to make a Bond back to basics a la OHMSS which the producers in retrospect believe is probably the best Bond adaptation . But they also need to make bucket loads of money as per DAD , MR etc. I think they will go for the middle ground and have a bit of everything which will end being a type of TLD scenario.

[SecretAgentFan]

A movie as good as TLD would be great! Of course, nobody can predict anything. But my feeling is in line with the title of this very welcome thread. CR has every potential to be truly great. And there

[ACE]

[quote name='SecretAgentFan' date='14 January 2006 - 11:02']A movie as good as TLD would be great! Of course, nobody can predict anything. But my feeling is in line with the title of this very welcome thread. CR has every potential to be truly great. And there

[Agent 76]

[TheREAL008]

NOT James Bond

[Janus Assassin]

I think it will be a great movie. And for those that are pesimisstic about CR, you know will be at the front of the line, opening night waiting to see it. We're all gonna see it. I'm looking forward to seeing it as well. We'll see how the casting turns out and hopefully it'll stay faithful to the novel and hope for a great Bond movie.

[Andrew]

NOT James Bond  

Can you send the copy of Casino Royale that you've somehow obtained before the film starts shooting over here?

[ACE]

That photo of Dan and Nic is ripe for a caption competition.

[Bondian]

Well. Let's be honest. Daniel is not what we're expecting either facially, physically or otherwise. But, after reading Casino Royale my view of James Bond is either Dalton, or someone that you cannot quite describe. Someone who's almost 'indifferent', someone who you just do not know, or have known in the past. Fleming had never really described exactly how this guy should look. Is Daniel that person. Was Brosnan that guy. I would say that Daniel has torn himself out of the Fleming novels and has molded himself into that character that Fleming wrote all of those years ago. He's a kind of unfinished sketch that Fleming may of drawn after his impression of Hoagy Carmichael. A kind of sketch that he may of drawn for the movie Bond, not just the Bond in his books, but the Bond of 'today'.

Daniel Craig is now the new cinematic Bond. Deal with it, or join a Britney Spears forum.

Bollocks.

Cheers,


Ian

[TheREAL008]

[quote name='Andrew' date='18 January 2006 - 02:47'][quote name='TheREAL008' date='17 January 2006 - 23:46']NOT James Bond

[Double-Oh Agent]

Craig looks pretty good to me in that photo--one of the best ones I've seen of him actually. His hair looks about the right length to be James Bond and is styled good as well. Now all he needs to do is dye it.