70 replies to this topic

[Mr. Du Pont]

• Making any prop, dialogue or musical nods to the series' past. DIE ANOTHER DAY was the series THIS IS YOUR LIFE moment. We don't need any more.

That directly conradicts Casino Royale and its bountiful nods to past Bond music. The film was rich with music directly plucked from the past.

[dodge]

It's encouraging to see that I am not completely alone. And that others have drawn their own lines in the sand and are ready to scream, if need be, in '08:

'You (bleeps!) You just stole two years of my life!!!!!'

[Zorin Industries]

• Making any prop, dialogue or musical nods to the series' past. DIE ANOTHER DAY was the series THIS IS YOUR LIFE moment. We don't need any more.

That directly conradicts Casino Royale and its bountiful nods to past Bond music. The film was rich with music directly plucked from the past.

Yeah, that was the music. But we didn't have nearly every other Bond film referenced throughout ("Diamonds are for everyone, Mr Bond"...?!!). In fact, the music was in the style of early Barry, but it wasn't literally photocopying it onto the film. Apart from the use of the DB5 - which still doesn't make narrative sense - CASINO ROYALE was refreshingly free of nods to the series history. This is BOND. Not AIRPLANE.

[Bon-san]

If they re-hired Lee Tamahori

Eww...

and let him direct in drag

would put me off a bit.

It would put everyone off.

You do realize that every single English Rock Star who was famous (or even not so) from 1960 -1998 has donned drag here and there over the years, yes?

Sometimes it's part of the creative process.

[Jim]

You do realize that every single English Rock Star who was famous (or even not so) from 1960 -1998 has donned drag here and there over the years, yes?

Lemmy. In drag.

Excuse me a moment. I need to spend a penny.

[Santa]

I don't think there's any single thing that would turn me off that much. Of course there may be elements of the casting, for example, or the plot, that aren't how I would choose for them to be but happens, I'm not in charge at EON. Now a generally crappy film would be very annoying. That said, I hated DAD, but it's still Bond. I'll always go to the cinema to see it, buy the DVD and book, and I'll aways be wetting myself with anticipation for the next one.

[Bondesque]

Yes Bonsan, I do know that most of the glam rockers donned drag. But somehow I just can't take a Director in drag on the set....too confusing, being mistaken for a Bond girl...cat fights over wardrobe with the leading lady....although with further thought we might end up with an homage to the gypsy girl fight in FRWL!!!

[Bon-san]

Yes Bonsan, I do know that most of the glam rockers donned drag. But somehow I just can't take a Director in drag on the set....too confusing, being mistaken for a Bond girl...cat fights over wardrobe with the leading lady....although with further thought we might end up with an homage to the gypsy girl fight in FRWL!!!

There you go.

[00Twelve]

More "cunning linguist" fare would irritate the crap out of me. That's a joke on the level of a straight-to-video National Lampoon movie.

Also, adding more jokes and taking away the edge wouldn't make me turn renegade, but it would be enough to be extremely disappointing.

[Harmsway]

• Making any prop, dialogue or musical nods to the series' past. DIE ANOTHER DAY was the series THIS IS YOUR LIFE moment. We don't need any more.

That directly conradicts Casino Royale and its bountiful nods to past Bond music. The film was rich with music directly plucked from the past.

Well, not really. There weren't "bountiful nods" to past Bond music - I think you're confusing David Arnold's style with intentional references.

[Agent Carter]

That would be the main thing that would make me become uninterested in Bond 22 as well.

Nothing could make me "uninterested" in Bond 22.


Do some people only like two movies, or something?? OHMSS and CR. I thought Bond fans were supposed to like every minute of every movie??? Obviously not. Wow, it's a long time between drinks for some people. Brosnan-haters had a nightmare between 1995-2002, while I was loving it. CR is fantastic, but I loved it when Octopussy came on VHS, too.

Hey! OHMSS and CR are my faves!!

Kidding, Every movie? That's a bit strict for most.

I love Brosnan as Bond. Especially GE. Not so much DAD.

What would make me cringe and shake my head in grief would be:

Lasers. No no no. Especially laser coming out of space as a weapon.

I love Q too. Let's have him serve a purpose other than Q lab being a joke shop.

Double agents. Yawwn.

Past film references. This is a new start.

I like big sets. If they were more than eye candy, I say go for it.

Lasers. Did I say that already?

Craig, just keep doing what you are doing in new circumstances and I will continue to be a Bond fan boy.

[bill007]

You do realize that every single English Rock Star who was famous (or even not so) from 1960 -1998 has donned drag here and there over the years, yes?

Lemmy. In drag.
Excuse me a moment. I need to spend a penny.

This really does have me Rolling On The Floor Laughing My A** Off!! (ROTFLMAO) Take a close look at Led Zeppelin's cover art on Physical Graphitti.

Great thread dodge. Great thread, indeed.

As long as the lessons of Moonraker and the last 30 minutes of Die Another Day have been learned by the "Big Bosses," there is not much else that could turn me off for Bond 22.

You have the writers and producers with all their big ideas. But I hope that DC's artistic input will keep the next 007 films' happy feet well anchored on terra firma.

[supernova]

There seems to be a lot of Bond fans around that have been so brusied and disappointed by previous movies of the franchise, that now expect the worst after the satisfaction experienced from such a brilliant Daniel Craig debut in Casino Royale. BUT sometimes things just get better and I await Bond 22 with great optimism.

[Loomis]

Thing is, given that CASINO ROYALE, as far as most of us are concerned, has succeeded way beyond even our wildest expectations, it's almost inevitable that we're setting ourselves up for a disappointment with BOND 22.

If BOND 22 doesn't top a poll as the best-reviewed wide-release film of 2008, it'll be seen as not as good as CR and therefore a failure.

If Craig doesn't get a Bafta Best Actor nomination for BOND 22, his performance will be viewed as lazy and dull and a comedown from his phenomenal CR work. No nominations this time? He must be phoning it in, then.

If an Oscar winner like Paul Haggis isn't attached to the BOND 22 script, it'll be seen as a joke. If Campbell doesn't return, whoever's directing will be dismissed as a hack.

Without an unprecedented wave of critical acclaim and award nominations, BOND 22 will almost inevitably be seen as the GODFATHER III to CR's GODFATHER/GODFATHER II.

So high has the bar been set that, frankly, I don't see BOND 22 being perceived as anything other than a letdown.... however good it is.

[Bucky]

More "cunning linguist" fare would irritate the crap out of me. That's a joke on the level of a straight-to-video National Lampoon movie.

Also, adding more jokes and taking away the edge wouldn't make me turn renegade, but it would be enough to be extremely disappointing.

i actually kind of like the cunning linguist joke. its the stuff like "now there's a mouthful" and "big bang theory" that i didnt really care for. they may be the same but i thought cunning linguist was more clever

[Johnboy007]

Thing is, given that CASINO ROYALE, as far as most of us are concerned, has succeeded way beyond even our wildest expectations, it's almost inevitable that we're setting ourselves up for a disappointment with BOND 22.

If BOND 22 doesn't top a poll as the best-reviewed wide-release film of 2008, it'll be seen as not as good as CR and therefore a failure.

If Craig doesn't get a Bafta Best Actor nomination for BOND 22, his performance will be viewed as lazy and dull and a comedown from his phenomenal CR work. No nominations this time? He must be phoning it in, then.

If an Oscar winner like Paul Haggis isn't attached to the BOND 22 script, it'll be seen as a joke. If Campbell doesn't return, whoever's directing will be dismissed as a hack.

Without an unprecedented wave of critical acclaim and award nominations, BOND 22 will almost inevitably be seen as the GODFATHER III to CR's GODFATHER/GODFATHER II.

So high has the bar been set that, frankly, I don't see BOND 22 being perceived as anything other than a letdown.... however good it is.

Agreed. With Casino Royale I only expected a film that was better than The World is not Enough and Die Another Day (two huge turkeys). Even the most optimistic fans cannot expect anything close to Casino Royale.

But who knows. As they did with Casino Royale, Eon might just surprise us.

[Mr. Du Pont]

• Making any prop, dialogue or musical nods to the series' past. DIE ANOTHER DAY was the series THIS IS YOUR LIFE moment. We don't need any more.

That directly conradicts Casino Royale and its bountiful nods to past Bond music. The film was rich with music directly plucked from the past.

Well, not really. There weren't "bountiful nods" to past Bond music - I think you're confusing David Arnold's style with intentional references.

No, I'm thinking of several instances where music was taken note for note from Thunderball and On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

[Harmsway]

No, I'm thinking of several instances where music was taken note for note from Thunderball and On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

Which instances?

[Loomis]

In Arnold's CR score? Tell us more.

[deth]

In Arnold's CR score? Tell us more.

indeed, considering Arnold clearly said there was nothing lifted from past scores....

[HildebrandRarity]

So high has the bar been set that, frankly, I don't see BOND 22 being perceived as anything other than a letdown.... however good it is.

And?


?


And, so?


...

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 04 February 2007 - 01:35 AM.

[HildebrandRarity]

In my opinion the bar was set by Eon's desire to make the fans happy.

They lucked out that the London preview screening at the begining of November ended with a standing ovation which spilled over a couple of days later in New York thus making it a critic's darling.

Lucky too is the fact that the US Dollar has been pounded over the last 4 years to such an extent that the International box office (including Canada's) has inflated (let me suggest "masked") this film's overall gross in US Dollar terms...something I predicted in October. Add all the new screens in various new territories and you get a $550-odd million James Bond film.

Casino Royale is a 9 or 9.5 out of 10 as several other Bond movies are depending on your preference of 007 film type.

That means there is always a room for a 9.6 or a 9.9.

What if Rotten Tomatoes gives Bond 22 a 96% or 97% or 98% but the US Dollar makes a massive comeback by late 2008 and dawarfs International to such an extent that Bond 22 'only' grosses $500 mil worldwide?

Will we say 'ouch'?

No we won't.

We'll drive on and wait for Bond 23 just like we waited for TWINE during the Thames filming and for Die Another Day when it did not have a name as late as 2 months into production and for Casino Royale before Craig was cast and The Living Daylights after Roger retired and Moonraker in the wake of Star Wars, etcetera, etcetra...

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 04 February 2007 - 01:57 AM.

[Loomis]

Yes, good points. I probably came across as a bit of a prophet of doom back there. I still remember coming out of GOLDENEYE on opening Friday night at the Odeon Leicester Square, wondering how on earth they'd ever manage to top it. Ha!

[HildebrandRarity]

Yes, good points. I probably came across as a bit of a prophet of doom back there. I still remember coming out of GOLDENEYE on opening Friday night at the Odeon Leicester Square, wondering how on earth they'd ever manage to top it. Ha!

No...you're actully being too self-critical there...I actually think you echoed what a big slice of the Bond fans fear...the idea that Casino Royale punched through some lofty critical ceilings and some round numerical barrier and, as a result, it is unmatchable.

Well, give it a year and then (without bias and the extra 'weight' of being a recent critical darling) judge Casino Royale alongside what you think the other top 5 or 6 Bond films are...add to that fact that Casino Royale did not do Goldfinger/Thunderball/YOLT-type numbers (nor Harry Potter or Star Wars Prequel Trilogy-type numbers) and there is still "room" left, if you know what I mean.

Craig has yet to hit his stride as James Bond...so there's room there too.

Another thing is the challenge of making a truly great Eon Bond movie without the benifit of a Fleming original. No FRWL or OHMSS or CR or Thunderball left...let's see if Eon hits one out of the park for six or a grand slam with a clean and outright original.

It's obvious that Eon know how to make successful movies and even without the 'formula'...now they have a brand new challenge on their hand and i'm sure they're relishing the prospects.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 04 February 2007 - 02:20 AM.

[Thunderfinger]

If Q returns to provide Bond a time machine.
That would turn me somewhat off...

[yolt13]

There is NO way that I will be so incensed over the next film that I stop being a fan of the series or vow not to see the next entry, etc. That's just ludicrous.

However, I will be disappointed if the series does a full 180 and ends up back in DAD territory OR if the filmmakers get so caught up in the "vulnerable, dark" Bond that they drift too far from the formula and make the character unrecognizable. I can't disagree strongly enough with the contention of some that re-introducing Fleming-created characters like Q and Miss Moneypenny will somehow reduce 22 to a cartoonish spoof. To express that fear is to admit that you are suffering from a bit of tunnel vision and assume that no screenwriter or director on Earth will know how to properly handle such characters. At the same time, I would be just as upset as those folks if those characters did return with exactly the same comedic bent they displayed in the Brosnan films - especially if the rest of the film were played relatively straight.

I would also be pretty ticked if Craig suddenly, for some reason, walked out on his contract and Eon, in desperation, decided to go with some sort of gimmick casting (a female Bond, etc.) to keep the series afloat. I'd see it, but it would have to totally rock like no Bond film has before it to win me over.

[Tiin007]

There is NO way that I will be so incensed over the next film that I stop being a fan of the series or vow not to see the next entry, etc. That's just ludicrous.

Exactly. I'll always love Bond, even if some of the movies aren't as good as I would like them to be.

[Moore Baby Moore]

Simply stated, if Bond 22 becomes a "checklist" Bond movie, I'll be less interested.

What he said. If the movies go back to being faded copies of themselves, I'm going to be an unhappy camper.

[bond 16.05.72]

Now CR has done well their will be no need to take so called influence from Bauer & Bourne etc, CR showed Bond could be contemporary intelligent and damn right gripping..

It's formula has been a sucess, more of the same with character development and a continuation of CR.

I don't think Dan will let it be crap anyway, unlike PB & RM he will guide his entries to be something special, he's an actor and wants to stamp himself all over the role with class and as already given the series more depth than it's seen in years.

Call me over optimistic but i think 22 will be as good as if not better because the actor in control wants it that way, if Bond 22 turns into a joke and Craig has no control I believe he will walk.

This series is in position to be the innovator again like it was in the golden years, instead of taking influence from else where it should be setting the standard.

The Bond series with the guiding hand of Craig and a savvy EON should be the redefining of the genre it originally spearheaded, just like CR has already started to show.

The future's bright, the future's Daniel Craig.

[HildebrandRarity]

Now CR has done well their will be no need to take so called influence from Bauer & Bourne etc, CR showed Bond could be contemporary intelligent and damn right gripping..

It's formula has been a sucess, more of the same with character development and a continuation of CR.

I don't think Dan will let it be crap anyway, unlike PB & RM he will guide his entries to be something special, he's an actor and wants to stamp himself all over the role with class and as already given the series more depth than it's seen in years.

Call me over optimistic but i think 22 will be as good as if not better because the actor in control wants it that way, if Bond 22 turns into a joke and Craig has no control I believe he will walk.

This series is in position to be the innovator again like it was in the golden years, instead of taking influence from else where it should be setting the standard.

The Bond series with the guiding hand of Craig and a savvy EON should be the redefining of the genre it originally spearheaded, just like CR has already started to show.

The future's bright, the future's Daniel Craig.

Good show!