130 replies to this topic

[Frankie]

Agreed. The Cheerleaders are so blindly optimistic, even if Craig is soundly rejected AFTER CR hits theaters, they will likely still be singing his praises. If CR bombs, they will say it was great, that the fact it failed is just the public's problem.

I don't think so.

I guarantee you the vast majority of the "cheer leaders" are the fickle type who are always given to the emotion of the moment. They probably were just as disappointed as you and I when EON picked Craig. Then they saw the carefully arranged and photograohed publicity still photo of Craig as Bond (pointing a gun) and never allowed themselves the thought that he wont look like that still photo throughout. Now they look at every photo of him ina ragged T-shirt and slobber over his "manliness," and how Brosnan "lacked it!" They look at every photo of him in a suit and whereas you and I see a very average guy in a suit, they ooh and aah over how suave and "Bondian" he looks. Or post comments like "Sean who?"

Again, most (not all) in the Craig crowd are fence sitters ready to be pushed over either side by someone else's thoughts and opinions. They will be the first to jump ship if CR is a diappointment.

Edited by Frankie, 04 March 2006 - 08:39 PM.

[avl]

Again, most (not all) in the Craig crowd are fence sitters ready to be pushed over either side by someone else's thoughts and opinions. They will be the first to jump ship if CR is a diappointment.

How do you know this? Of course, if CR is a disappointment to them, it would be fair enough.

Maybe the Craig crowd are just prepared to give the guy the benefit of the doubt and judge him on his merits when they have actually seen the film?

Ever occur to you that you might be getting the wish in your signature in CR Frankie?

[Frankie]

Again, most (not all) in the Craig crowd are fence sitters ready to be pushed over either side by someone else's thoughts and opinions. They will be the first to jump ship if CR is a diappointment.

How do you know this? Maybe the Craig crowd are just prepared to give the guy the benefit of the doubt and judge him on his merits when they have actually seen the film?

I did say not all. You may not be one. But don't you agree there are threads after threads with posts after posts of oohing and aahing over every ordinary picture of Craig. In my life's experience people of such extreme swings are the one's who never have their own solid opinion. I have recognized some posters who have made the extreme swing and cannot explain why.

Ever occur to you that you might be getting the wish in your signature in CR Frankie?

I was happy about it for a while as there was serious talk of getting more realistic with the stories. But then they had to go and ruin it all by re-starting Bond's career.

[JimmyBond]

How is that ruining it? We're still getting 007 in a down to Earth adventure. The only difference is we're seeing him starting out, big deal. Should prove to be interesting.

[avl]

Ever occur to you that you might be getting the wish in your signature in CR Frankie?

I was happy about it for a while as there was serious talk of getting more realistic with the stories. But then they had to go and ruin it all by re-starting Bond's career.

I understand that: a reboot is definitely contentious, and runs the risk of being thought of as purely ripping off Batman Begins...

And yet...

they are filming CR here. The first book, and commonly held to be one of the best. The unique selling point of CR is that it is early in Bond's career - he makes mistakes, he has a character arc.

How could any of this have been done if the film had not started from the same point (albeit updated).

If they had done it any differently - wouldn't they just have been guilty once more of taking a Fleming title and a few character names and throwing the rest of it out?

[Santa]

I'm not the slightest bit worried about negative publicity or even positive publicity as the 'normal' people I know are not aware of either. They know there's a new Bond film coming out, they know DC will be JB, and most of them will go to see it when it arrives. Apart from that, they don't give a flying . Sometimes they'll talk about just to humour me, but mostly the other aspects go way over their heads.
I on the other hand give many flying because I am a Bond lover and am looking forward to it hugely. It looks very promising from what I've seen and I expect it to be fantastic but I am not a blind cheerleader or a fence-sitter, I've come to a conclusion from the evidence I've seen - is there room on this forum for a reasonable human being or maybe I don't belong here?!!!
All of our views are so subjective - when I hear people calling Julian McMahon sexy for example or extolling Hugh Jackman's Bondian virtues, I have to ask myself what planet these people are on because I so don't see it that way. So while these people are so convinced of their view, I am equally convinced of mine because, thank God, we are all different, and it's not because I'm a blind cheerleading whatever, nor does it mean I'll be easily pushed off a fence on either side.
I can't wait to see it no matter how much the media bashes away. Sorry, but I'm clearly far too intellectual to be interested in anything 'The Mirror' has to say.

[Santa]

Now they look at every photo of him ina ragged T-shirt and slobber over his "manliness," and how Brosnan "lacked it!" They look at every photo of him in a suit and whereas you and I see a very average guy in a suit, they ooh and aah over how suave and "Bondian" he looks.

By the way, can you please tell me where you hang out that the 'average guy' looks like that in his swimming shorts! They certainly don't around here. Please, because that's obviously where I need to be, although I can't guarantee my good behaviour when I get there....

[DaveBond21]

Kara Milovy:

Excellent point on all counts! However, I do not think "this controversial choice" will be the absolute end of the Bond films.

Daniel Craig is certainly fighting an uphill battle, with little or no support in the media. Granted, a lot is tabloid journalism at its worst, but when CNN (with whom I personally have problems with on the basis of political bias) into the act, given that it is a "respected" media outlet, there are definitely issues. I respect Pierce Brosnan, Roger Moore and the other Bond luminaries for saying good things in the press about Craig. However, I cannot remember when any of the previous Bonds ever had to be defended by anyone associated with the series. Roger Moore may have had a tough time at the beginning getting out of Sean Connery's shadow, but that seems to have come mostly from the reviewers of the films themselves, and not the press in general. (This may be off topic, but I have always been impressed with what a true class act that Roger Moore is, and am looking forward to the rerelease of the DVDs just for his commentary alone)

What will matter, as you said, Kara, is public acceptance. I remember the day that Craig was announced I went out to dinner with a friend, and brought the still photo of Craig released that day with me. My friend simply said that he did not look like Bond at all and instead had a sinister look to him. We showed the picture to the waitress who did not think he looked good in the photo, and for the female perspective, did not find him attractive. Since that day I have discussed Craig with many members of my family and friends, and not one person has thought his casting was a wise choice.

That acceptance will not be just regarding Craig, but whether or not the public will still see this as a James Bond film. Despite the postings in other threads on this site which hail the Bond Begins approach jettisoning all continuity as a bold start, it is doubtful that the average movie goer will think that. Most likely they will be puzzled, thinking that they had just seen Judi Dench in the last film, knowing that she had replaced someone else as M, so how the hell can she be there when Bond is just embarking on his initial assignment? Now, that alone may not matter in terms of overall box office, but I think it will. People expect to see an M in a certain context, look forward to Q giving him his gadgets and for a flirtation scene with Moneypenny. They will also expect Bond himself to behave a certain way and from what I have read so far, I do not think that will be happening.

As I said Kara, I do not think the failure of CR will end the series forever. Instead, should CR fail, I predict that:

1. Bond 22 will go into production almost immediately. Either they will bring back Pierce for whatever vast sum he will (justifiably at that point) command, with or without a public acknowledgement that mistakes have been made or simply a statement from Brosnan that "The past is behind us. Let's just get on with the job." Bronsnan will not criticize Craig in any way, and he will not get the full blame from EON or Sony/MGM--instead he will be thanked and just some vague statement that the approach was wrong. The entire Bond Begins nonsense will be scrapped--and Brosnan's presence will be enough without any other acknolwedgement that that is done. It may be another action adventure spectacle like DAD or a toned down thriller. Judi Dench will be back as M and John Cleese as Q and Samantha Bond or someone else as Moneypenny. This will probably be Brosnan's last peformance and will be made largely to ensure the viability of Bond continuing with another actor in Bond 23.

2. Bond 22 will go into production, again, almost immediately. No Brosnan but one of the other candidates as Bond--I saw The Pink Panther last week and would have absolutely no problem with Clive Owen as 007. Most likely another action spectacle. Again, Judi Dench and John Cleese, with a new Moneypenny. Absolutely no references to CR, and perhaps a continuity reference or two to the old films--maybe one to Tracy. Should the film succeed, the lead will be back as Bond in Bond 23.

3. A cooling off period for a few years--Bond will be back in some form on screen within ten years--but I would not dare to speculate in what manner at this point.

Bill

Very interesting to read Bill's comments here. I wonder if he saw CR and if he liked it.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Kara Milovy:

Excellent point on all counts! However, I do not think "this controversial choice" will be the absolute end of the Bond films.

Daniel Craig is certainly fighting an uphill battle, with little or no support in the media. Granted, a lot is tabloid journalism at its worst, but when CNN (with whom I personally have problems with on the basis of political bias) into the act, given that it is a "respected" media outlet, there are definitely issues. I respect Pierce Brosnan, Roger Moore and the other Bond luminaries for saying good things in the press about Craig. However, I cannot remember when any of the previous Bonds ever had to be defended by anyone associated with the series. Roger Moore may have had a tough time at the beginning getting out of Sean Connery's shadow, but that seems to have come mostly from the reviewers of the films themselves, and not the press in general. (This may be off topic, but I have always been impressed with what a true class act that Roger Moore is, and am looking forward to the rerelease of the DVDs just for his commentary alone)

What will matter, as you said, Kara, is public acceptance. I remember the day that Craig was announced I went out to dinner with a friend, and brought the still photo of Craig released that day with me. My friend simply said that he did not look like Bond at all and instead had a sinister look to him. We showed the picture to the waitress who did not think he looked good in the photo, and for the female perspective, did not find him attractive. Since that day I have discussed Craig with many members of my family and friends, and not one person has thought his casting was a wise choice.

That acceptance will not be just regarding Craig, but whether or not the public will still see this as a James Bond film. Despite the postings in other threads on this site which hail the Bond Begins approach jettisoning all continuity as a bold start, it is doubtful that the average movie goer will think that. Most likely they will be puzzled, thinking that they had just seen Judi Dench in the last film, knowing that she had replaced someone else as M, so how the hell can she be there when Bond is just embarking on his initial assignment? Now, that alone may not matter in terms of overall box office, but I think it will. People expect to see an M in a certain context, look forward to Q giving him his gadgets and for a flirtation scene with Moneypenny. They will also expect Bond himself to behave a certain way and from what I have read so far, I do not think that will be happening.

As I said Kara, I do not think the failure of CR will end the series forever. Instead, should CR fail, I predict that:

1. Bond 22 will go into production almost immediately. Either they will bring back Pierce for whatever vast sum he will (justifiably at that point) command, with or without a public acknowledgement that mistakes have been made or simply a statement from Brosnan that "The past is behind us. Let's just get on with the job." Bronsnan will not criticize Craig in any way, and he will not get the full blame from EON or Sony/MGM--instead he will be thanked and just some vague statement that the approach was wrong. The entire Bond Begins nonsense will be scrapped--and Brosnan's presence will be enough without any other acknolwedgement that that is done. It may be another action adventure spectacle like DAD or a toned down thriller. Judi Dench will be back as M and John Cleese as Q and Samantha Bond or someone else as Moneypenny. This will probably be Brosnan's last peformance and will be made largely to ensure the viability of Bond continuing with another actor in Bond 23.

2. Bond 22 will go into production, again, almost immediately. No Brosnan but one of the other candidates as Bond--I saw The Pink Panther last week and would have absolutely no problem with Clive Owen as 007. Most likely another action spectacle. Again, Judi Dench and John Cleese, with a new Moneypenny. Absolutely no references to CR, and perhaps a continuity reference or two to the old films--maybe one to Tracy. Should the film succeed, the lead will be back as Bond in Bond 23.

3. A cooling off period for a few years--Bond will be back in some form on screen within ten years--but I would not dare to speculate in what manner at this point.

Bill

Very interesting to read Bill's comments here. I wonder if he saw CR and if he liked it.

Sounds like somebody slipped up...

[Jim]

What's this current obsession with resurrecting old threads?

[dinovelvet]

What's this current obsession with resurrecting old threads?

I think its Davebond's cry for help...we need to stage an intervention for him