49 replies to this topic

[Stax]

Blurb from Drudge Report front page:

"007 actor Daniel Craig has agreed to be the first nude Bond in upcoming feature film CASINO ROYALE..."

I imagine this is for the torture scene and it's probably just his they're talking about.

[Gobi-1]

Darth Vader "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

[Diabolik]

Blurb from Drudge Report front page:

"007 actor Daniel Craig has agreed to be the first nude Bond in upcoming feature film CASINO ROYALE..."

I imagine this is for the torture scene and it's probably just his they're talking about.

He may be "nude" in CR, but they aren't going to show anything. This will be a PG-13 film. When they spend 100 million plus, they are not going to restrict (and alienate) half of their audience.

[MrDraco]

But what if they did? LOL

[BlackFelix]

Maybe they'll show his "j-lo", lol. eh, @ any rate wasn't Connery nude briefly in "Dr.no" and in "Never Say Never Again"?

[Diabolik]

And com'on, Drudge, Bond "appears" nude in every 007 film. Making love in bed, in the shower, etc.

My guess is they are going to pull a NYPD Blue and show a quick shot of his bare buttocks -- well, BFD!

I'm sure Chubby is rolling over in his grave. (Babs probably just wanted to see Craig's , so she had it written into the script).

[Doctor No]

The camera went pretty low(too low for me ) on Connery in DAF.

[Gobi-1]

Maybe it will be a side shot of Craig strapped to the chair. He'll be sitting down so you won't see anything.

Edited by Gobi-1, 05 March 2006 - 05:09 PM.

[Kara Milovy]

I'm sure Chubby is rolling over in his grave.

Under the circumstances, that's a rather funny typo!

[K1Bond007]

...PG-13 nudity that is.

[Qwerty]

...PG-13 nudity that is.

Quite.

[dinovelvet]

...PG-13 nudity that is.

Quite.

Yes I don't think we need to worry about 'Little Daniel' putting in an appearance At best (or worst) it'll be a brief shot of his as he is shoved into the chair.

[Blofeld]

Speaking of "nudity" in Bond filmdom, correct me if I'm wrong, I realize it's not an OFFICIAL film, but didn't actress Barbara Carerra have a brief nude shot wearing a g-string while waterskiing in Never Say Never Again?

[TerminalLon3some]

This will just be a wide angle shot to establish that Bond is in fact nude and is in for a damn violent beating, or like someone else suggested, some sort of side angle shot of him in the chair. No big deal, in fact I perfer it this way, the more realistic the better. If the audience get's a glimpse from the backside to show that he is in fact VERY vulnerable, it will make the beating even more disturbing.


Take 'er easy
-matt

[JimmyBond]

Not sure about that but a few russian bare butts were shown in The Living Daylights. During the airfield fight a bulldozer knocks over a structure that has showering russians.

[Double-Oh Agent]

This will just be a wide angle shot to establish that Bond is in fact nude and is in for a damn violent beating, or like someone else suggested, some sort of side angle shot of him in the chair. No big deal, in fact I perfer it this way, the more realistic the better. If the audience get's a glimpse from the backside to show that he is in fact VERY vulnerable, it will make the beating even more disturbing.

I agree, and if that is the case, I'm fine with that. However, if it's much more than that, then I might have a problem.

[cvheady007]

He certainly will not be nude on screen. To suggest he will be is absolutely ridiculous. The thought may be transposed to film, however nothing near it will come to fruition. I am sure that the aforementioned scene will be alluded to in that way, but he won't be nude.

Shouldn't this be in the spoilers section since it mentions that part of the plot?

I know it's tough to keep it all separate, but...

[stamper]

OK, I must be crazy, but if the director and producers had the balls (sorry the pun), to actually let the scene be shot in it's true reality, with some hints of nudeness (hey, didn't Binder feature full frontal nudes in his opening credits for SWLM ?), and make it R, then damnit, this MOVIE WOULD EXPLOSE ALL BOX OFFICE EXPECTATIONS because people are tired of the safe Bond, they want some damn AUDACITY ON SCREEN !
The early ones had audacity, controversy (Bond shooting people from behind), that is the essence of Bond, provocation, not safe family entertainment, let them BREAK NEW GROUND (again, sorry for the not intended pun) !!!

[level007]

I agree with you Stamper.

if the movies were made by frenchs or some other europeans, we would have had real Fleming nude scene. Here it's no big deal.

I'm sure if Dr No was amde today by french people, we would have the Honey Rider introduction nude as in the book..... :-)

[Tim007]

With the last film it was the girl that agreed to be seen nude, British tabloids reported. And wow, I really liked how naked Halle Berry was

[Shrublands]

This story has made the front page of today

Edited by Shrublands, 04 March 2006 - 11:40 AM.

[marktmurphy]

Cool- very Fleming.

[Loomis]

I imagine we'll see a brief shot (with the camera at a suitably polite distance) of Craig nude from behind, with his bare bottom visible, as he's pushed into the chair. That should keep things within the boundaries of the 12 (or is it 12A?) certificate (the UK equivalent of PG-13, and the same rating as for DIE ANOTHER DAY, Bourne, T3 and so on), and if it doesn't then expect it to be cut.

On the other hand, it may be that the filmmakers are prepared to go with a 15 certificate for CASINO ROYALE (same as MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II and, of course, LICENCE TO KILL), although I doubt it. If so, LAYER CAKE shows you can get away with a heck of a lot with a 15 certificate (I'm very surprised that it's a 15 rather than an 18, but then I'm also surprised that T3 is a 12 and not a 15, and I don't understand why M:I-2's a 15 and not a 12 - still, I'm hardly the only one who finds some of the British Board of Film Classification's decisions questionable in the extreme).

[marktmurphy]

Are people actually worried about how much we'll see? I'm surprised anyone's mind works like that. It's a bleedin' Bond film; not Caligula.

[Gabriel]

A lot of BBFC classifications relate to the political/social climate at the time and they often don't seem to be bothered with changing earlier decisions. Look at the first two Batman movies: both received cuts to get a 12-certificate in the cinema, but there was no 12-certificate on video, so they were released on a 15-certificate with further cuts. After all these years, they still have a 15-certificate and I presume they are still cut.

But when you think of the amount of swearing and violence we saw in Terminator 3 and the amount of coldly-executed violence that was in the Bourne films, I think Casino Royale can push the envelope quite comfortably. The Brosnan films were, after all, 'safe' 12s for the most part.

I'm still holding out hope that there might be a 'harder' unrated-style cut of Casino Royale issued on DVD alongside the theatrical version!

[Loomis]

A lot of BBFC classifications relate to the political/social climate at the time and they often don't seem to be bothered with changing earlier decisions.

True. Besides, I don't think they change decisions just like that - I believe filmmakers pay to have their work classified by the BBFC, so if Warners wanted to change the rating for Burton's BATMAN they'd have to stump up first.

It's hard to believe that some of the Bonds, which are all PG in the UK apart from LICENCE TO KILL and the Brosnans, would get the same rating today. For instance, I don't think the scene with Bond strangling Marie with her own bra in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER, with Marie looking like she's really suffering (unsurprisingly enough) and Bond looking like he's really enjoying it, would be considered suitable for PG fare.

Look at the first two Batman movies: both received cuts to get a 12-certificate in the cinema, but there was no 12-certificate on video, so they were released on a 15-certificate with further cuts. After all these years, they still have a 15-certificate and I presume they are still cut.

Something similar happened with LETHAL WEAPON 2. The UK cinema version was edited in order to get a 15, but the same cut version got an 18 when released on video a few months later. But the thinking of the day seemed to be: we're stricter with home entertainment than with cinema releases, because people can replay scenes again and again at home, and minors who'd be refused entry to cinemas have easier access to videos, etc. Nowadays, though, LW2 (which is still an 18) doesn't seem any nastier than LETHAL WEAPON 4, which is a 15 on DVD and video.

Funny to think that, until a few years ago, the likes of THE EXORCIST and THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE were banned on video in the UK (and the latter was banned even in cinemas).

[Gabriel]

At least Licence to Kill will apparently have the missing VHS footage restored for its new DVD release. I think they should issue the slightly tougher US release of GoldenEye on DVD now, as well.

[JameswpBond]

This film is going to be amazing!

[Loomis]

At least Licence to Kill will apparently have the missing VHS footage restored for its new DVD release. I think they should issue the slightly tougher US release of GoldenEye on DVD now, as well.

Yes, and yes.

I saw the full-length LTK and the full-length GOLDENEYE on video in Japan, having seen both films dozens of times, and although we're only talking about a few seconds of missing footage (which isn't even that graphic, and in any case has no bearing on the plot), it did make a difference. LTK, in particular, seemed much more powerful and less of the halfhearted compromise of a (TV) movie it's often slammed as in fandom - "the film it was supposed to be", you might say.

[WC]

Blurb from Drudge Report front page:

"007 actor Daniel Craig has agreed to be the first nude Bond in upcoming feature film CASINO ROYALE..."

I imagine this is for the torture scene and it's probably just his they're talking about.

Well it will definitely be torture for us. But what about the carpet beater scene?