71 replies to this topic

[DLibrasnow]

Actually, security-tight press screenings allow only invited guests.

Usually press screenings are an invited member of the media - plus one.

So presumably the journalists in question are so sad that they couldn't get a date for the night of the screening?

[NVT]

There is nothing more pathetic in this world then people displaying poor character, as well as wasting time on something at the end of the day is just entertainment.

Imagine if these people put all that negative passion into doing something positive like getting a life, helping someone out, creating a great day for themselve and others.
To think that one person has a correct version of what should be in this world with such energy is a very sick feeling.

[Bon-san]

Well, I will always defend the right of citizens to peaceably assemble. And to voice their dissention. But at this stage of world development, there are so many things that are so much more worthy of addressing than the issue of whom the lead actor is in the new James Bond movie.

Priorities askew, indeed.

[Publius]

This seems like it will end up as a non-story though. I just can't imagine the Craig Not Bond crowd being all that large.

Yeah's it gonna go something like this:

http://k1bond007.sha...ond/protest.jpg

I'd been missing that picture.

[MattofSteel]

The problem is, they're getting more press (still...ridiculous) than those of us who support and are excited for the film. Those of us FANS, I mean.

So when Joe Q. Public reads about the film, and sees all this "even Bond fans are upset," they think "Oh, the movie must be bad" and they don't go and see it.

If the franchise dies, it will be because of these <explitive><EDIT: I'm sorry, I just assumed the censors would catch that..I've taken it out...apologies>

But it won't, so I'm not worried;). Just a little appalled at the fact that people can actually behave this way. I thought it was bad for Superman, Bond has had a dose MUCH much healthier. Being "fans," they should be the ones who remotely understand how a film is made, why producers cast Bond the way they do, and the fact that it makes no sense to JUDGE something until you've seen it. Would you say a piece of grandma's pie tastes horrible before you eat it? No, you wouldn't. Although chances are, if it's grandma, and she's baking a pie, the odds of good taste are high;).

This is the last time I'm going to say anything about this bullsh$+. I agree with the people who say let's move on. The best way for us to HELP them is to keep talking about them.

The only thing that will always irk me, if this is true, is that these bastards saw the film before I did. That's the world for you.

Edited by MattofSteel, 04 November 2006 - 01:56 AM.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

Why are we even discussing this still, still, still on here? All people are doing are giving them more publicity.

God.

Honestly, let them make of themselves if they want. This movie will do fine without them.

That said, I'm bored, anyone want to go to the press screening with me and crack some heads?


Edit: Just read MattofSteel's post

Yeah, they are getting more press than us, but that's kind of the essence of the media these days. What was once a watchdog is now an attack dog that snaps at any little weakness they can just to get some scraps.

[MattofSteel]

Why are we even discussing this still, still, still on here? All people are doing are giving them more publicity.

God.

Honestly, let them make of themselves if they want. This movie will do fine without them.

That said, I'm bored, anyone want to go to the press screening with me and crack some heads?

ME!!!!

Uh, does the invitation include return trip fare, Canada to London;)

Ironically...I am from London, Ontario, Canada....

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

ME!!!!

Uh, does the invitation include return trip fare, Canada to London;)

Ironically...I am from London, Ontario, Canada....

My mom used to be a flight attendant before US Airways went bankrupt...so if you say you are my brother I can get you a pretty nice discount....

[00Twelve]

I mean, I know I have a desk job and so I post here for most of the day, but crashing the premiere?! GET A LIFE!

[Fro]

I expect to see 5-6 people actually showing up, if that.

[MattofSteel]

ME!!!!

Uh, does the invitation include return trip fare, Canada to London;)

Ironically...I am from London, Ontario, Canada....

My mom used to be a flight attendant before US Airways went bankrupt...so if you say you are my brother I can get you a pretty nice discount....

I have just enough sick days saved up at the moment (on 4 month internship from school) if the flight is a quick turnaround:). When I say I've got the flu", I just won't add "to England."

[MooreisMore]

XD

If only I lived nearby or I'd run out in a Craig mask and beat them all up, CR-Bond style.

[erniecureo]

i probably wouldnt heisitate to knock them out, stamp their heads into a kerb and put them in a coma. DC style. these tragic dweebs need a breadknife through the ribs.

That said, I'm bored, anyone want to go to the press screening with me and crack some heads?

Anyone going to the early screenings (I have tickets for the 11.30pm screening after the World Premiere)and witnesses any off these pathetic trying to spoil it for everyone else should photograph them - so that they can be identified.

You're--um--overreacting a bit, don't you think?
You wanna kick somebody's ? There's about a million more deserving candidates than a bunch of whiny anti-Craig dorks. Relax, have a beer, and enjoy the film.

Sheesh.

[jake speed]

I just took a stroll through central London and it's bedlam. There are riot Police everywhere. Latest news is that Martin Campbell has been taken hostage by a radical group calling themselves 'Real CraignotBond'..

[JimmyBond]

I just took a stroll through central London and it's bedlam. There are riot Police everywhere. Latest news is that Martin Campbell has been taken hostage by a radical group calling themselves 'Real CraignotBond'..

Good, maybe now they'll hire Matthew Vaugn for the next one.

[Bon-san]

I just took a stroll through central London and it's bedlam. There are riot Police everywhere. Latest news is that Martin Campbell has been taken hostage by a radical group calling themselves 'Real CraignotBond'..

Good, maybe now they'll hire Matthew Vaugn for the next one.

So that he can pour Christopher Nolan's tea?

[Johnboy007]

I'll be blunt:

This is stupid.

[luciusgore]

I doubt this is the real deal. I mean, disrupt a press screening? Press screenings are not packed with reviewers. They usually take place in the afternoon, and there are very few viewers. Most of the other reviewers would be annoyed. They are actually there to try to do their job.

[Moore Baby Moore]

The problem is, they're getting more press (still...ridiculous) than those of us who support and are excited for the film. Those of us FANS, I mean.

So when Joe Q. Public reads about the film, and sees all this "even Bond fans are upset," they think "Oh, the movie must be bad" and they don't go and see it.

If the franchise dies, it will be because of these <explitive><EDIT: I'm sorry, I just assumed the censors would catch that..I've taken it out...apologies>

But it won't, so I'm not worried;). Just a little appalled at the fact that people can actually behave this way. I thought it was bad for Superman, Bond has had a dose MUCH much healthier. Being "fans," they should be the ones who remotely understand how a film is made, why producers cast Bond the way they do, and the fact that it makes no sense to JUDGE something until you've seen it.

Actually, I am worried. This quote from earlier in the thread said it all:

when this film comes out these little, deeply unfunny, wretches are going to look stupid. however ..such was the lame vitriol and sickening amount of trash DC had to cope with at the start..i actually am beginning to fear the same again. the mindless, heartless, ruthless UK press don't miss a trick or a chance to shine their ignorance and spit their venom at any particular target. screw em.
this film needs to rock otherwise these brat scum will be all over it. they love distress, percieved failure, the loud ignorant minority. It's wrong i know -but i fear the stupid.

As you said, the fan venom against Superman Returns was beyond the pale, and it killed that film. (Pirates was just a MacGuffin the fans used to that end.) CR, in my eyes, is in the same boat. All that's missing is a strong competitor that can be used by the naysayers as a weapon against it, which is the only advantage it has over Returns. But what if the bad buzz torpedoes this film, too? Good reviews didn't save Returns. If anything, they only made the fans more determined to sink it. Good reviews won't help CR if the fans are bent on destroying Craig. Bad publicity will win out every single time. It has in the past, whether it's been deserved or not (and there've been times where it wasn't deserved at all).

I do fear for the Bond franchise because I saw what happened to Superman. If the fans succeed in killing this movie out of the belief that they can force Sony to cater to them from now on, the series will be either fatally compromised or killed outright. For all WB's talk of sequels (which I don't believe for a second), Superman is dead. Only Smallville is accepted by the fans, much like Brosnan is the only Bond the naysayers will acknowledge. If Bond goes down the same path as Superman, it'll be the end of him. But I honestly wonder if the naysayers care about this.

Edited by Moore Baby Moore, 03 November 2006 - 09:20 PM.

[Publius]

MBM, I understand your worry, but I don't think these clowns have remotely enough clout to sink Bond. This is not only an entirely different animal (international franchise, cinematic icon, etc.), but from what I'm seeing CR will also be way bigger than Superman Returns (which I heard okay things about, but nothing great, contrary to the radically awesome kick-in-the-nuts approach Casino is promising). Even if it somehow tanks, something tells me having this movie made has been victory enough for me and I can rest easy knowing it'll be released, come hell or high water. The battle has already been won in that regard.

So if a middle-aged Midwestern housewife, some European teenage girls, and a New York politico are determined to crash the party, let them. It'll only backfire, and I can assure you the rest of their little "movement" either doesn't have the gumption to go through with their threats (and many will probably cave in), or won't be an issue regardless. Casual moviegoers will still decide the fate of this film. Meanwhile, we'll be taking breaks out of analyzing and discussing CR to amuse ourselves when their mugshots are ironically made publicly available on the same sensationalist media outlets that made them infamous in the first place.

[dinovelvet]

As you said, the fan venom against Superman Returns was beyond the pale, and it killed that film. (Pirates was just a MacGuffin the fans used to that end.) CR, in my eyes, is in the same boat. All that's missing is a strong competitor that can be used by the naysayers as a weapon against it, which is the only advantage it has over Returns. But what if the bad buzz torpedoes this film, too? Good reviews didn't save Returns. If anything, they only made the fans more determined to sink it. Good reviews won't help CR if the fans are bent on destroying Craig. Bad publicity will win out every single time. It has in the past, whether it's been deserved or not (and there've been times where it wasn't deserved at all).

I do fear for the Bond franchise because I saw what happened to Superman. If the fans succeed in killing this movie out of the belief that they can force Sony to cater to them from now on, the series will be either fatally compromised or killed outright. For all WB's talk of sequels (which I don't believe for a second), Superman is dead. Only Smallville is accepted by the fans, much like Brosnan is the only Bond the naysayers will acknowledge. If Bond goes down the same path as Superman, it'll be the end of him. But I honestly wonder if the naysayers care about this.

Well its interesting that you say this. Personally I didn't know there was fan hate for Superman Returns, I didn't follow the movie and didn't see it so I never picked up on any of that. But in terms of end results, the movie made $200,081,192 at the North American box office. Compare this to Batman Begins, which fanboys absolutely loved - it made $205,343,774. Pretty much the same as Superman. (Superman has the edge in total worldwide grosses). Yet if you listen to what whiny AICN fanboys tell you, Batman was a smash hit and Superman was a disaster.
What does this tell us? That the rantings of fanboys on the net mean absolutely nothing. One loved superhero movie vs one hated superhero movie, they both make pretty much the same at the box office. (I'll throw Fantastic Four into the mix too, I know that one was disliked by the "hip" crowd; it made $330 million worldwide.) The people out there who don't listen to buzz and don't check movie web sites religiously every morning are the kind of people who know what they like, and they go to see whatever looks good to them. They don't watch internet-buzzed movies like Snakes on a plane, Serenity, or any Kevin Smith movies (and I suspect BORAT might be the next one to join this club).
Bottom line - People likee Bond. People watchee Casino Royale. Fanboys will continue to whine on, convincing themselves its a disaster no matter what.

[DLibrasnow]

I heard from some highly placed Hollywood types that most critics are told what kind of review to write by their editors. Some are paid to write only good reviews, some paid to write bad.

Your highly placed Hollywood type was talking out of his a*s.

I've worked in this business for a some time and in several newsrooms and I've never seen that.
I've reviewed many movies over the years and also never been told to give it a spin one way or another.

[Publius]

Well its interesting that you say this. Personally I didn't know there was fan hate for Superman Returns, I didn't follow the movie and didn't see it so I never picked up on any of that. But in terms of end results, the movie made $200,081,192 at the North American box office. Compare this to Batman Begins, which fanboys absolutely loved - it made $205,343,774. Pretty much the same as Superman. (Superman has the edge in total worldwide grosses). Yet if you listen to what whiny AICN fanboys tell you, Batman was a smash hit and Superman was a disaster.

...I love it when a theoretical dissertation, even one of my own, is rendered unnecessary by someone laying down cold, hard facts. Thanks for that info, dinovelvet.

[luciusgore]

Well its interesting that you say this. Personally I didn't know there was fan hate for Superman Returns, I didn't follow the movie and didn't see it so I never picked up on any of that. But in terms of end results, the movie made $200,081,192 at the North American box office. Compare this to Batman Begins, which fanboys absolutely loved - it made $205,343,774. Pretty much the same as Superman. (Superman has the edge in total worldwide grosses). Yet if you listen to what whiny AICN fanboys tell you, Batman was a smash hit and Superman was a disaster.

...I love it when a theoretical dissertation, even one of my own, is rendered unnecessary by someone laying down cold, hard facts. Thanks for that info, dinovelvet.

SR was a box office disappointment because it cost so much more to make than BB. They were expecting greater numbers. It had been 20 years since the last Superman movie, wherehas only about 7 for Batman. ... Anyway, much of the anti-Craig passion seems reminiscent of New Coke. There were actually protests against New Coke. People, too busy to protest nuclear energy or famine, whatever, spending time protesting the new taste of Coke. The protesters won, by the way.

[triviachamp]

Yet if you listen to what whiny AICN fanboys tell you, Batman was a smash hit and Superman was a disaster.

Well to be fair Superman Returns had an insanely high budget ($260M or something) so limping to $200 Million is hardly an impressive feat.

[dinovelvet]

Well its interesting that you say this. Personally I didn't know there was fan hate for Superman Returns, I didn't follow the movie and didn't see it so I never picked up on any of that. But in terms of end results, the movie made $200,081,192 at the North American box office. Compare this to Batman Begins, which fanboys absolutely loved - it made $205,343,774. Pretty much the same as Superman. (Superman has the edge in total worldwide grosses). Yet if you listen to what whiny AICN fanboys tell you, Batman was a smash hit and Superman was a disaster.

...I love it when a theoretical dissertation, even one of my own, is rendered unnecessary by someone laying down cold, hard facts. Thanks for that info, dinovelvet.

SR was a box office disappointment because it cost so much more to make than BB. They were expecting greater numbers. It had been 20 years since the last Superman movie, wherehas only about 7 for Batman. ... Anyway, much of the anti-Craig passion seems reminiscent of New Coke. There were actually protests against New Coke. People, too busy to protest nuclear energy or famine, whatever, spending time protesting the new taste of Coke. The protesters won, by the way.

Well it wasn't anything to do with the protestors. The drink just wasn't selling, period. Protestors or not, if the drink was selling, it would not have been cancelled. Anyway, isn't this Gravity's Silhouette's old chestnut, irrelevantly trying to make ill-advised comparisons between New Coke and a movie?

[Publius]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought SR's high budget was largely because of failed start-ups and whatnot, not so much production costs for the actually released movie.

Anyway, that's still only a failure (if that) as far as profits go. The revenues were impressive, and those are what's indicative of audiences going to see the film. Besides which, Casino's budget will probably be half or less of Superman's anyway, so even on that criteria, it'll be quite the feat to prove less profitable (and let's not forget overseas, where Superman probably underperformed the Bond average).

The protesters just won't win here.

[dinovelvet]

Well to be fair Superman Returns had an insanely high budget ($260M or something) so limping to $200 Million is hardly an impressive feat.

But what does that have to do with it? Everybody pays the same ticket price, no matter if you're seeing a black and white Hungarian documentary about potato picking, or a $200 million Superman movie. ADMISSIONS for Superman Returns were higher than Batman Begins.

[Loeffelholz]

What a sad and flaccid lot these boycotters are. They should expend their energy doing something that might actually benefit mankind---like playing in traffic

[Mister Asterix]

Well to be fair Superman Returns had an insanely high budget ($260M or something) so limping to $200 Million is hardly an impressive feat.

But what does that have to do with it? Everybody pays the same ticket price, no matter if you're seeing a black and white Hungarian documentary about potato picking, or a $200 million Superman movie. ADMISSIONS for Superman Returns were higher than Batman Begins.

To be fair that insanely high budget for Superman Returns includes all costs of all failed attempts to make the film. The budget includes the $20 million that Nicolas Cage got paid to play Superman and the $5 million paid to Tim Burton to direct. Plus the cost of the 40 something other directors who were assigned to the project at one time or another, plus the cost of the endless rewrites. Et cetera, et cetera.

It’s hardly fair to Singer who maybe had half of the $260 million to make the film.

Edit: Oh God. See what you made me do. Post in a topic about something I don’t give a damn about and think should be ignored to have to defend Superman Returns.