992 replies to this topic

[DaveBond21]

Found some great fan art over at Mi6 Forums....
http://www.barehands...oubleOTitle.jpg

That logo is pretty awesome. Don't know how I feel about that version of the title, but if it looked like that, I might come to like it.

I agree, it looked pretty good, didn't it?

[Agent Ostlund]

How about "Of what remains" I think it fits in well with whats to happen in Bond 22, and it is also the name of a song that my band made

Edited by Agent Ostlund, 16 December 2007 - 10:59 PM.

[Johnboy007]

Even I can't muster enthusiasm for it. 007 as the title would be both profoundly disappointing and lazy. I have been delighted by just about everything about Bond 22, but "007" is just stupid.

[Mr. Somerset]

Even I can't muster enthusiasm for it. 007 as the title would be both profoundly disappointing and lazy. I have been delighted by just about everything about Bond 22, but "007" is just stupid.

Well said. I can almost see the studio urging Eon to go with a title like that though as it seems to be the current trend. I find these unimaginative titles to be such a boring trend. I didn't see the interview, but it sounds like Craig was refering to the title being a number as Bond22.

[Agent Ostlund]

James Bond 007 in "Of what Remains".

[Mr. Du Pont]

The film will be called "Aquator."
We're all so tired of that title being bounced around over the last decade, that they're finally caving and using it.
It revolves around Sir Devon Aquator, who is a secret member of SPECTRE - and yes, it will be SPECTRE after all - but also a well-known and respected businessman in the same vain as Sir Hugo Drax from Fleming's Moonraker.
Gala Brand will be the heroine's name, and her character will be true to Fleming's heroine, though her exact involvement hasn't been made clear yet.
As for Aquator, he's some sort of shipping magnate/ marine scientist who earned his knighthood by using his company and technology to clean up a massive oil spill in British waters (which, we learn, he staged).
The rest of the plot involves Bond investigating the organisation we learn is SPECTRE and discovering Aquator's involvement. Aquator, in a meeting reminiscent of the meeting from Fleming's TB, has been instructed by Blofeld to regain the loss finances and reputation Le Chiffre caused the organisation in CR. So Aquator devises a way to earn extraordinary profits for his company which will be embezzled into SPECTRE's coffers. This has something to do with destroying the Panama Canal, which, as we all know, is a major shipping channel.
Other details:
Aquator resides at a massive Alpine estate in Austira called "Diamond Pool."
His mistress is a Latino beauty who has an even more important role in SPECTRE than he does.
Blofeld will be the more realistic criminal character of Fleming's books. No bald head, no white cat.
A lot of aquatic action will thread the movie, including a massive speed boat chase.
Scuba diving will be featured, including a scene where Bond, believing he's penetrated Aquator's ranks and earned his trust, will be in a sabotaged shark cage that sinks to the ocean bottom while bait is thrown into the water around it. Bond will have to escape the cage amidst a flurry of hungry sharks.
Like CR, the movie will be divided in two, with the first half, including the pre-titles, featuring Bond gaining information about SPECTRE (the PTS is where we first hear the name) from Mr. White. Bond will then set off to track down another SPECTRE agent, which will lead to the horse scenes and car chase in Italy.
Aquator's involvement will make up the bulk of the second half in much the same way Le Chiffre became prominent in the second half of CR.
The climax will feature the canal, but the film will still end with a cliffhanger the way CR did as Bond learns of the name Blofeld and begins his manhunt.
Exciting stuff!

Vivid imagination?

[Mr. Blofeld]

Devil May Care...

... but I sure don't.

[Vauxhall]

I usually dismiss fan art as too amateurish, but that is a pretty good effort.

Well, IMO, if there is one thing that sounds amateurish, it's to name a Bond film after the current year... Hell, "2008"!!!!

Totally agree...it makes no sense whatsoever! I dont know where that one came from.

I believe it was a joke! Everyone was speculating about how a number could possibly be in the title, and someone suggested 2008. I really think that there is zero chance of that realistically being a possible title

[DaveBond21]

Double O

or

Double O7

or

Double Agent?

[Mr. Blofeld]

Even I can't muster enthusiasm for it. 007 as the title would be both profoundly disappointing and lazy. I have been delighted by just about everything about Bond 22, but "007" is just stupid.

Well said. I can almost see the studio urging Eon to go with a title like that though as it seems to be the current trend. I find these unimaginative titles to be such a boring trend. I didn't see the interview, but it sounds like Craig was refering to the title being a number as Bond22.

Perhaps ELLIPSIS -- which is a sideways 8.

[Gobi-1]

Found some great fan art over at Mi6 Forums....
http://www.barehands...oubleOTitle.jpg

"Double-O"... I like it.

[Garth007]

I like Living On THe Edge. it's catchy and it can work because well Bond lives on the edge of life. lol.

[Red Barchetta]

I actually like Gobi-1's...

"Nothing Lasts Forever"

Edited by Red Barchetta, 17 December 2007 - 03:52 AM.

[Bondian]

How about "Everything of Nothing"?.

Or

"Luck Be a Lady". He doesn't usually have any luck, and the girls are not usually ladies.

Please draw your own conclusion on the aforementioned absurdities.

[Mr. Blofeld]

"Luck Be a Lady". He doesn't usually have any luck, and the girls are not usually ladies.

Hey, they could make it a musical!

[Bondian]

ROFL. It could be called "Live and Duck a Lady".

[Mr. Blofeld]

ROFL. It could be called "Live and Duck a Lady".

How about "The Bond of Music"?

[Gobi-1]

I had an idea that was a lyric to a Casino Royale title track I was working on, "Lady Luck Can Be A Bitch."

[WC]

ROFL. It could be called "Live and Duck a Lady".

How about "The Bond of Music"?

How about "You are 006 going on 007"?

[Righty007]

How about LOOSE CANON ON DECK?

[K1Bond007]

Found some great fan art over at Mi6 Forums....
http://www.barehands...oubleOTitle.jpg

That logo is pretty awesome. Don't know how I feel about that version of the title, but if it looked like that, I might come to like it.

I hate it for the simple fact that the author used Trajan. God forbid Hollywood etc pick a different font

[Icephoenix]

I had an idea that was a lyric to a Casino Royale title track I was working on, "Lady Luck Can Be A Bitch."

- "Hit me down there, I've got an itch!"

Sorry

[Loomis]

The idea of calling the film 007, and I don't know who came up with this rumour anyway, to put it bluntly...is just not going to happen.

The rumor came from an interview with Craig that pointed in the direction of this title. Craig may have been joking, but he indicated in another interview that the title would be something we wouldn't expect. The possibility that the title could be "OO7" seems like something we should at least consider.

I must admit it is rather ridiculous bordering on pathetic to read the optimism on these threads of such a title.....even though it is funny.

Because no-one can genuinely like the title? Let's not be so condescending.

I'd be quite happy with 007 as the title. It's been discussed in fandom before. stamper suggested it as the title of BOND 22 in August 2006:

http://debrief.comma...mp;#entry588076

At the time, I wrote:

Look at the title of the upcoming BATMAN BEGINS sequel - it's just THE DARK KNIGHT. Because in this one, right from the start, Bruce Wayne is The Dark Knight. Similarly, Craig's Bond will be 007 from the get-go in BOND BEGINS 2.

Yes, I can see this happening. Of course, some fans would riot (but then it'd be nothing compared to the fury over the casting of Craig), and many commentators would sniff "And they can't even come up with half-decent titles any more", but others - myself included - would see 007 as a very cool title indeed. It's kind of for this reason that I think (although I don't think many other fans agree) 007 IN NEW YORK would work brilliantly as a title.

If not 007 as the title of BOND 22/BOND BEGINS 2, then perhaps BOND would do (although, obviously, he's always been Bond). JAMES BOND 007 would be too much of a mouthful.

Anyway, good call, stamper. A cool, classy, minimalist and controversial title.

--------

And I still stand by that.

BTW, talking of, erm, eccentric or slightly unusual or brave titles, isn't it cool that RAMBO is a sequel to RAMBO III and not the other way round?

[HawkEye007]

No sir, I don't like it. To me it seems uninspired and bland. Besides, he actually obtained his double-oh status after the PTS of CR. The movie was his first mission as a full fledged 00, the movie was not the mission that got him that status. Due to that, IMO opinion 007 should not be the title.

[blueman]

Arguably, CR was about Bond becoming Bond, so "007" as the title of Bond 22 makes sense in that regard as the "becoming" part is done.

2 cents.

[stamper]

Hey, if this is the title, and I'm the earliest guy who suggested it... I want my own thread

[WC]

The idea of calling the film 007, and I don't know who came up with this rumour anyway, to put it bluntly...is just not going to happen.

The rumor came from an interview with Craig that pointed in the direction of this title. Craig may have been joking, but he indicated in another interview that the title would be something we wouldn't expect. The possibility that the title could be "OO7" seems like something we should at least consider.

I must admit it is rather ridiculous bordering on pathetic to read the optimism on these threads of such a title.....even though it is funny.

Because no-one can genuinely like the title? Let's not be so condescending.

I'd be quite happy with 007 as the title. It's been discussed in fandom before. stamper suggested it as the title of BOND 22 in August 2006:

http://debrief.comma...mp;#entry588076

At the time, I wrote:

Look at the title of the upcoming BATMAN BEGINS sequel - it's just THE DARK KNIGHT. Because in this one, right from the start, Bruce Wayne is The Dark Knight. Similarly, Craig's Bond will be 007 from the get-go in BOND BEGINS 2.

Yes, I can see this happening. Of course, some fans would riot (but then it'd be nothing compared to the fury over the casting of Craig), and many commentators would sniff "And they can't even come up with half-decent titles any more", but others - myself included - would see 007 as a very cool title indeed. It's kind of for this reason that I think (although I don't think many other fans agree) 007 IN NEW YORK would work brilliantly as a title.

If not 007 as the title of BOND 22/BOND BEGINS 2, then perhaps BOND would do (although, obviously, he's always been Bond). JAMES BOND 007 would be too much of a mouthful.

Anyway, good call, stamper. A cool, classy, minimalist and controversial title.

--------

And I still stand by that.

BTW, talking of, erm, eccentric or slightly unusual or brave titles, isn't it cool that RAMBO is a sequel to RAMBO III and not the other way round?

You know, people keep using the example of THE DARK KNIGHT to show the minimalist and merely descriptive title of Batman Begins 2, but the thing is that while it is certainly a description or subtitle for Batman, there are a couple of differences between that and say, Rocky Balboa or John Rambo:

1. There's already a Batman graphic novel called "The Dark Knight Returns" - I think the title of the new Batman film is probably partly an allusion to that. So it's like using an existing literary title like say "A View To A Kill" but dropping the "From".

2. "The Dark Knight" is certainly more of an exciting title than Rocky Balboa or John Rambo, and also 007. It has more of that sense of mystery and foreboding, as well as danger which has usually been encapsulated in previous Ian Fleming Bond titles.

Slightly off topic from TDK, but still related - I also noticed people mentioned "THE INCREDIBLE HULK" as an example of the sequel to the Ang Lee movie "HULK". But that doesn't hold true here, because THE INCREDIBLE HULK isn't a sequel - it's a reboot a la Batman Begins. So of course they're using a different title, and they're going with the more famous full title and adjective of the main character to show that it's a new adaptation, to show that it's being faithful to the source material, and to distinguish it from the previous Ang Lee movie.

[Mr. Somerset]

No sir, I don't like it. To me it seems uninspired and bland. Besides, he actually obtained his double-oh status after the PTS of CR. The movie was his first mission as a full fledged 00, the movie was not the mission that got him that status. Due to that, IMO opinion 007 should not be the title.

I quite agree. I'm still in awe of how excited fans seem to be on these threads by the prospect of the title, "007". Maybe I'm missing the boat. It stands to reason that if, say, Jim Carrey were cast as Bond for some reason, there would be support threads with similar optimism: "Well, he's tall, and has dark hair. Can do humour. Hey, Roger Moore had humour too so it might work. Go for it Jim."....okay now I'm being really sarcastic, for which I do apologize.
However, if the filmmakers were going to go the route of an extremely simplistic title as such, why something as obvious and, to put it bluntly, as trite as "007"?
Everyone who enters the theatre will know it's a James Bond movie, and if they no anything about James Bond, they will be aware that he is indeed, 007. Titling a movie "007" after 45 years shouts loud and clear that ideas are running thin. Who knows, audiences might feel it is time to retire the seies. I sincerely hope that does not happen.

[Harmsway]

Slightly off topic from TDK, but still related - I also noticed people mentioned "THE INCREDIBLE HULK" as an example of the sequel to the Ang Lee movie "HULK." But that doesn't hold true here, because THE INCREDIBLE HULK isn't a sequel - it's a reboot a la Batman Begins. So of course they're using a different title, and they're going with the more famous full title and adjective of the main character to show that it's a new adaptation, to show that it's being faithful to the source material, and to distinguish it from the previous Ang Lee movie.

THE INCREDIBLE HULK is being termed a reboot by some, but that's not true. It's not a reboot. It doesn't rewrite what happened in the last HULK. It's essentially a story set later in Bruce Banner's life that doesn't refer to the events of the first film, but never indicates that it's something separate, either. The audience gets to decide what it wants it to be (nobody expecting a sequel ends up confused, but those who hate the first film can take it entirely on its own). But it's certainly no BATMAN BEGINS-style reboot. Given the fact that they're not really taking the time to come out and advertise it as a reboot, I'm going with it as a sequel that's just trying to distance itself from the first film.

I quite agree. I'm still in awe of how excited fans seem to be on these threads by the prospect of the title, "007".

I don't see that many people excited at the prospect. There's a few, but the clear majority seem to be unimpressed.

Titling a movie "007" after 45 years shouts loud and clear that ideas are running thin. Who knows, audiences might feel it is time to retire the seies. I sincerely hope that does not happen.

Audiences won't care. They never care what a Bond movie is titled.

[Vauxhall]

Titling a movie "007" after 45 years shouts loud and clear that ideas are running thin. Who knows, audiences might feel it is time to retire the seies. I sincerely hope that does not happen.

Audiences won't care. They never care what a Bond movie is titled.

Very much agreed with this point. Whatever the title of BOND 22 turns out to be, there will be many who like it, and many who hate it. Pretty soon all will grow to accept it. I'm pretty sure that if it hadn't been a Fleming title, the idea of a movie called FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE would have displeased a large proportion of Bond fans. We are all fretting about the title at the moment because there isn't much to discuss. Once we have more concrete information, I'm sure discussion will turn to that!