92 replies to this topic

[dodge]

Source: July 2007 Interview magazine.

There's a great shot of Craig on the cover, with cigar and header: "The Smokin'est Man Alive?" Also a fine interview that shows how well Dan comes across with an intelligent interviewer. The subject of Bond, naturally came up. And Dan made the following comment, among several others you really should check out (especially the positive one about Connery.) Anyway, the comment:

Viewers can expect a lot more humor and jokes this time around.

With Haggis on board, I'm sure the jokes and humor will be good. Any thoughts about a significant increase in humor and jokes? I want to see 22 lighten up and don't at all want to see Bond still moping after Vesper. But...how much humor is enough?

[DamnCoffee]

i hope not! Same old Bond then.

[00Twelve]

This news is a bit worrisome, IMO, but maybe I'm being oversensitive. Craig is certainly capable of great delivery, but I loved CR's script because Bond, for a change, didn't have a quip for every kill or near-miss. I just hope that the humor still avoids too much of this. It got so awful in the past couple of Bond films. Anything like "....these days," or "You/I/He/She always did...." would seriously mess up the high standard of what was achieved in Casino Royale. Still, as I said, Craig has the self-deprecating thing down, so I'm sure if he (God forbid) makes a quip like that, he at least won't take himself seriously. CR's humor was some of the best since I can remember.

I don't want to see TOO MUCH of Bond "moping" after Vesper, either, but it would be unfortunate and unrealistic if he was just fine and dandy. I do have faith in Haggis, Craig, and Forster, so I'm not losing sleep yet.

[Vauxhall]

i hope not! Same old Bond then.

I wouldn't worry Matt! I hope it will be intelligent humour, rather than the silly sort of things we came to expect in more recent movies. No lasers!

[tdalton]

i hope not! Same old Bond then.

I hope not as well. If they do significantly increase the humor, then we could be looking at another OHMSS/DAF situation. As much as I don't want to see another "this time, it's personal" Bond film, it really is necessary this time, and it has the potential to end up being the film that we should have gotten as a follow up to OHMSS. I sincerely hope that they don't make that same mistake a second time.

[Harmsway]

Viewers can expect a lot more humor and jokes this time around.

I have mixed feelings about this. I loved the sense of humor in CASINO ROYALE, but I really don't want BOND 22 to be a laughs-fest. I'd want the humor to stay in that FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE level, with the occaisional remark and some black humor.

Viewers I want to see 22 lighten up and don't at all want to see Bond still moping after Vesper. But...how much humor is enough?

The problem is that BOND 22 has to have a darker edge. I'm surprised we're getting this comment with Forster on board... Forster must have a specific vision for what he's doing with Bond this time around, and it includes more humor.

This news is a bit worrisome, IMO, but maybe I'm being oversensitive.

I don't think so. It really depends on how much increase in humor Craig means, and what quality of humor we're talking about.

I don't want to see TOO MUCH of Bond "moping" after Vesper, either, but it would be unfortunate and unrealistic if he was just fine and dandy. I do have faith in Haggis, Craig, and Forster, so I'm not losing sleep yet.

Agreed.

[tdalton]

Making Bond 22 into a film with a great amount of humor could prove to ruin the integrity of this new franchise of Bond films. I think that, for the most part, the general viewing audience enjoyed the story of CR, and going in a completely different direction would absolutely ruin this new "quality" direction that EON appears to be trying to go in because absolutely nobody would buy into James Bond being brought to the edge emotionally like he is in CR to being a happy-go-lucky guy who makes a wisecrack at every turn in the very next film.

[Harmsway]

I think that, for the most part, the general viewing audience enjoyed the story of CR, and going in a completely different direction would absolutely ruin this new "quality" direction that EON appears to be trying to go in because absolutely nobody would buy into James Bond being brought to the edge emotionally like he is in CR to being a happy-go-lucky guy who makes a wisecrack at every turn in the very next film.

I agree. Again, it really depends on how much they're increasing the humor and in what situations the humor comes into play. If it's a lot of darker humor (Bond joking around with a guy as he beats him up, or something like that), then it could be okay and fit the tone of the film. But if it's oodles of Moore-esque punnery, then it's not going to make me very happy.

I'm just confused because Forster said he came on board because of the exciting new Bond direction and all that jazz, and with EON bringing on an "actor's director." I have faith in Forster's sense of character, and this must be a very purposeful choice.

[tdalton]

I think that, for the most part, the general viewing audience enjoyed the story of CR, and going in a completely different direction would absolutely ruin this new "quality" direction that EON appears to be trying to go in because absolutely nobody would buy into James Bond being brought to the edge emotionally like he is in CR to being a happy-go-lucky guy who makes a wisecrack at every turn in the very next film.

I agree. Again, it really depends on how much they're increasing the humor and in what situations the humor comes into play. If it's a lot of darker humor (Bond joking around with a guy as he beats him up, or something like that), then it could be okay and fit the tone of the film. But if it's oodles of Moore-esque punnery, then it's not going to make me very happy.

I'm just confused because Forster said he came on board because of the exciting new Bond direction and all that jazz, so I wonder why he's going to be going for more humor. I have faith in Forster's sense of taste as a director, and this must be a very purposeful choice.

I guess more humor could work if it's done in a way to show that Bond, maybe, has become somewhat emotionally closed off. I think that there's a hint of that at the very end of CR, as he's delivering the "Bond, James Bond" line with the hint of a smile that he has on his face. I always thought that the way that Craig performed that scene was meant to show that Bond has become a little emotionally closed off to some degree. The previous scene shows Bond emotionally drained, and in the very next scene, we see him looking as though he's enjoying his encounter with Mr. White. Humor could work in Bond 22 if they use it as showing how Bond's character has changed into one that is rather emotionally closed off, and it would definitely have to be dark humor, in order to work. Anything else, though, I can't really see as being appropriate for a Bond character who is at the point he is at the conclusion of CR.

[Judo chop]

There

[sharpshooter]

I hope it is just a reflection of Bond aclimatising to his profession, using puns after a kill etc. I would expect smart humour in the vein of the Dryden kill.

Depends on the situation, I really like the classic Bond pun and humour but dont want it to overrun the film and the mood.

[MarcAngeDraco]

Source: July 2007 Interview magazine.

Viewers can expect a lot more humor and jokes this time around.

Hard to tell without the context, but I was wondering if the comment might be sarcastic..

[Mr_Wint]

I wouldn't mind if the witty one-liners came back again. It's a James Bond trademark.

[dodge]

Source: July 2007 Interview magazine.

Viewers can expect a lot more humor and jokes this time around.

Hard to tell without the context, but I was wondering if the comment might be sarcastic..

I didn't catch a bit of sarcasm in the words, or what I took for the tone: a friendly interview between Craig and somebody he knew. He was asked about the humor/jokes remark and went on at further length. Since the interview's worth checking out, I'll let you decide for yourself. I'm open to feedback. But, honestly, I took his remarks as straightforward. And he came across as being refreshingly free of sarcasm anywhere.

[00Twelve]

I wouldn't mind if the witty one-liners came back again. It's a James Bond trademark.

Seriously, they just can't go back to Broz era humor. That'd kill it for me, at least (not that my little opinion matters at all, of course... ).

[Harmsway]

He was asked about the humor/jokes remark and went on at further length.

And what did he say when he went on about it?

I'll check out the interview as soon as I can (if I can find it, that is... I've never heard of this magazine).

[Mr_Wint]

This may indicate that they have no plans of going into dull LTK-style with Craig's second film. And that's good... for some of us

[00Twelve]

Ah, true. True. Very good point.

[dodge]

He was asked about the humor/jokes remark and went on at further length.

And what did he say when he went on about it?

I'll check out the interview as soon as I can (if I can find it, that is... I've never heard of this magazine).

Do check the mag out. For the record, it was founded by Amdy Warhol in 1969 and has a good reputation.

Craig's further remarks included his/their opinion that humor in the past films had grown stale, etc. I'll leave it to interested members to check the magazine out. You can hit the website, interview + magazine, for a gander at the cover.

[Judo chop]

Craig's further remarks included his/their opinion that humor in the past films had grown stale

A-ha!!! (No, not the title song for TLD.)

This statement here is critical. For those of us who long for humor, but of a generally DN through TB nature, this I would say is a very good sign.

I am not against humor in Bond films. To the contrary, I ache for it to be as it once was.

Good stuff. Thanks Dodge!

[Royal Dalton]

"I'll be back!"

[dodge]

Ah, true. True. Very good point.

Indeed. In any case, it's far too soon for, er, a deep sense of foreboding.

I'll be a different part of town tonight but will see if I can find a copy of the magazine. If so, tomorrow I'll type up for y'all the exact quotes.

[Matt_13]

Well...if they bring back Moneypenny and Q then there will definately be some playful banter between the characters. I'm fine with an increase in humor so long as it isn't in the form of lame puns or used as throw aways to end a conversation. I do believe very strongly that the film should still be relatively dark, the violence should be brutal and the toll and stress on Bond in my opinion should be noticeable (he's still a rookie afterall). These elements are what should help balance the humor out, especially if there is an excessive amount.

[Santa]

Well...if they bring back Moneypenny and Q then there will definately be some playful banter between the characters. I'm fine with an increase in humor so long as it isn't in the form of lame puns or used as throw aways to end a conversation. I do believe very strongly that the film should still be relatively dark, the violence should be brutal and the toll and stress on Bond in my opinion should be noticeable (he's still a rookie afterall). These elements are what should help balance the humor out, especially if there is an excessive amount.

[dinovelvet]

Craig's further remarks included his/their opinion that humor in the past films had grown stale

A-ha!!! (No, not the title song for TLD.)

This statement here is critical. For those of us who long for humor, but of a generally DN through TB nature, this I would say is a very good sign.

I am not against humor in Bond films. To the contrary, I ache for it to be as it once was.

Good stuff. Thanks Dodge!

Yeah I think its a safe bet that the humor level is not going to be DAD meets MR at a party hosted by DAF. You can do Bond humor without it being an endless parade of schoolboy puns. Goldfinger for instance, its got nonstop jokes, but manages to avoid being an all-out campfest. And, ugh, Goldeneye I suppose, is done seriously, but with plenty of jokes. So, you know, having humor in a Bond film does not necessarily mean pigeons, raised eyebrows, winking fishes, and so on.

[Binyamin]

Two words: Paul Haggis.

Crash. Hilarious movie. Deadly serious at the same time. I think we're safe

[iexpectu2die]

"I'll be back!"

HA! Now there's a cameo in the making.

Edited by iexpectu2die, 27 June 2007 - 09:31 PM.

[plankattack]

Yeah I think its a safe bet that the humor level is not going to be DAD meets MR at a party hosted by DAF. You can do Bond humor without it being an endless parade of schoolboy puns. Goldfinger for instance, its got nonstop jokes, but manages to avoid being an all-out campfest. And, ugh, Goldeneye I suppose, is done seriously, but with plenty of jokes. So, you know, having humor in a Bond film does not necessarily mean pigeons, raised eyebrows, winking fishes, and so on.

Am I the only disturbed by this development? I have been aching for the return of the double-taking camel from Octopussy and I felt, that along with Q and Moneypenny, that Bond 22 would mark a return for many of our favourites......

If you feel the same way, please go to
www.bringbackcamelandvijay(andwhileyoureatitGogol).com and show your support.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

Thank goodness! I'm sure it won't be over the top humor though. But, let's please see some of the old Bond return. He has to evolve...remember CR was Bond just starting as a double 0.

Edited by mrsbonds_ppk, 27 June 2007 - 10:13 PM.

[Matt_13]

And he essentially needs to remain a rookie double-0 for the time being. He can't be smooth yet, he still has to be a heartless killer before he becomes a professional. It'll be interesting, thats for sure.