181 replies to this topic

[Vauxhall]

I would say that most would elongate the 'a' to make a longer vowel sound at the end of the word. The Chicken Royale meal at Burger King has clearly introduced the word into popular British culture...

[DaveBond21]

I would say that most would elongate the 'a' to make a longer vowel sound at the end of the word. The Chicken Royale meal at Burger King has clearly introduced the word into popular British culture...

Yes but a Quarter Pounder at McDonalds, is a Quarter Pounder in England. Not a Royale with Cheese.

[Righty007]

Everybody, please stay on the topic of this bogus rumor or go play in the CBn Forum Games section. Thanks.

[DaveBond21]

I wonder when we will hear the official title? I hope it is announced when they begin filming on 4th January.

[kneelbeforezod]

I know its only a bit of fun, but trying to work out what the title will be is futile. It so obviously won't be "Property of a Lady", or the AWFUL "Risico" and the EVEN WORSE "Quantum of Solace". Haggis probably came up with it, chatted to Eon about it, maybe Craig got involved... And the first we will know of it is when they tell us.

Star Wars fans wasted so much time predicting the prequel titles, and then out of the blue came "The Phantom Menace" and "Attack of the Clones". Ditto Indiana Jones.

Whatever the title is, I'm sure it will sound considerably more exciting than "The Property of a Lady".

[DaveBond21]

I think Risico is an OK title.

[blueman]

The Property of a Lady would seem to be a reasonable title for Bond 22, considering the bits we know of the plot. No worse than TSWLM, FRWL, DAF, etc. IMHO.

[Qwerty]

Would hardly call this confirmation.

[Jim]

It may be the title, but it isn't the title yet. The genesis of and intention behind this thread are under review.

It's a perfectly decent title. On the assertion that many people won't ask for tickets for this title, but for "James Bond" instead, that's not an unknown quantity - that's how I've always asked for my cinema ticket. Equally valid is the assertion that "most people", most real people out there in the real world, probably wouldn't be able to name all the Bond films anyway.

[stamper]

Property of a Lady have a 80% chance to be the title, just because it allows a double 0 to be aligned with the 7 logo added just like CR. Graphics for the title are ultra important for Bond, and they need to etablish, just by looking at the title, that this is a follow up to CR, or in the same vein. Plus it's relevant to CR story, as we know it's a continuation. Anyone looking at the poster who will have seen CR will get the message right away, and anyone having missed CR in the theaters will give this one a chance, based on the poster sending the message that it's in the same league.

The other Fleming titles suggested doesn't mean anything. One has to understand a title should at least mean something, or evoke images to the viewers. Casino Royale evoked images of money, class, power etc. Risico and Quantum of Solace are obtuse titles who are incomprehensible to anyone not having read the novels. Property of a Lady at least evoke something close to CR, ie money, class etc, so thus far, it's the likiest title that we are aware of to be for this movie, save of them coming up with another title using "DIE" "dead" "death" "never" "ever" and "day", "yesterday" or "tomorrow" (which is thus far the extend of the EON original titles team inspiration).

It's funny titles suggestions come and go, but are poorly argumented in the titles thread. For example, many think POAL will not be just because parts of the plot of the novel were used in OP. Frankly, do you think that the producers care about this 1983 movie at this point ? Do you think the general public who attend Bond movies cares ? It's not an argument, it inconsequential.

In my opinion, it will be Property of a Lady. I mean Barbara Brocolli is at the helm. We all know she have been tried to deconstruct the myth and appeal to the feminine audience ever since she got in charge. So far, it's the likiest condidate.

[Felix Heavier]

They could always go with the very Fleming "007 in New York." Or, if you prefer...

___BOND IN
NEW YORK
_______7

I'm kidding. I like "Property of a Lady."

[Beretta]

Bond 22 is..."Whisper of my cornflakes"!
(just a joke, Mharkin! )

The initiation of this thread is a joke.

Yes, thanks. But I prefere handle "humour" carrefuly.

[Jim]

It's funny titles suggestions come and go, but are poorly argumented in the titles thread. For example, many think POAL will not be just because parts of the plot of the novel were used in OP. Frankly, do you think that the producers care about this 1983 movie at this point ? Do you think the general public who attend Bond movies cares ? It's not an argument, it inconsequential.

It's not even evident that the producers cared that much about that plot point whilst they were making Octopussy. So 25 years down the line (blinkin' flip that makes me feel old) I doubt it would be of any greater concern. And I would agree - the people who will make up most of the half a billion dollar haul of cash will neither know nor care.

This title, if used, lends itself to many promotional pieces about Barbara Broccoli; James Bond is now the property of a lady etc...

Still, it hasn't been confirmed.

[Zorin Industries]

CASINO ROYALER...no?

Has anyone round these shores pondered the ELLIPSIS connection...?

Plain and simple....

THE ELLIPSIS MEMORANDUM

THE ELLIPSIS LADY

SUSPENSION POINT

Okay - I need a cup of tea.

Edited by Zorin Industries, 30 November 2007 - 09:32 AM.

[Simon]

It's not even evident that the producers cared that much about that plot point whilst they were making Octopussy. So 25 years down the line (blinkin' flip that makes me feel old) I doubt it would be of any greater concern. And I would agree - the people who will make up most of the half a billion dollar haul of cash will neither know nor care.

Indeed.

They were confident to use Casino Royale again even though connections could be deemed a disastrous way forward.

The press will pick this up, but no one will give a damn.

[Byron]

[quote name='kneelbeforezod' date='30 November 2007 - 03:31' post='800749']
I know its only a bit of fun, but trying to work out what the title will be is futile. It so obviously won't be "Property of a Lady", or the AWFUL "Risico" and the EVEN WORSE "Quantum of Solace". Haggis probably came up with it, chatted to Eon about it, maybe Craig got involved... And the first we will know of it is when they tell us.

I disagree about QoS. I think it is a very clever and unique title that will grab public attention and generate publicity (maybe because few would know what it actually means).

It also ties in with CR and its continuation, in that with the small lead Vesper left behind, Bond has a small quantum of solace in pursuing the organisation and completing his mission.

If anything i hope they use the word SOLACE. It is a nice change from the usual Die(s), Kill, etc.

Maybe 007 in COLD SOLACE.........

[stamper]

Not bad, remember, there should be a double 0 in the titles... that's a certainty !

[tdalton]

I hope that they don't pick a title just so that they can use the same set-up for the "007" logo like they did with Casino Royale. What I'd really like to see with Bond 22 is to, if only once, have the title without any form of the 007 logo behind, next to, or made a part of the title (like with CR). I've always found it tacky when they did this. The public will know that the film is the new Bond film with or without the logo attached to the title, and if they don't, then the marketing team working on the film didn't do their job to begin with.

[Simon]

I know what you mean but I can almost guarantee it is never going to happen. The logo has become a very firm fixture in Bond marketing.

I recently bought a UK 1 Sheet of AVTAK and was amazed at the little or not attempt to enlargen the title and especially the 007 logo.

For my part, I like the logo inclusion. My pet dislike would be the floating heads form of marketing, most prominantly used in UK and US marketing for TND.

[Simon]

Craig was on BBC Breakfast TV, the presenter was hoping to get an idea of titles but if Jonathan Ross didn't get it, chances are he wouldn't.

I had to leave for work so didn't see what happened.

[Royal Dalton]

He didn't say much. Just that some "spectacular" sets are being built on the OO7 Stage.

[DamnCoffee]

How about Goldenflakes?.

Hey! Dont knock Cornflakes they're delicious

I'm starting to predict a
www.mharkinnotcornflakeconsumer.com
joke coming on

[Zorin Industries]

He didn't say much. Just that some "spectacular" sets are being built on the OO7 Stage.

Well if Dennis Gassner's work on THE GOLDEN COMPASS is anything to go by we could just - MAYBE - see a slight return to the accentuated set design of Ken Adam which is sorely missing in Bond now. I don't mean BIG! either. Adam's best sets were often smaller than people thought though they propelled and underlined the narrative in a way that we haven't seen for a while.

Gothic modernism for BOND 22...now there's a thought....

[Shrublands]

He didn't say much. Just that some "spectacular" sets are being built on the OO7 Stage.

Well if Dennis Gassner's work on THE GOLDEN COMPASS is anything to go by we could just - MAYBE - see a slight return to the accentuated set design of Ken Adam which is sorely missing in Bond now. I don't mean BIG! either. Adam's best sets were often smaller than people thought though they propelled and underlined the narrative in a way that we haven't seen for a while.

Gothic modernism for BOND 22...now there's a thought....

This is the second time Craig has described the sets as “spectacular”.

Then there was the rather melodramatic touch of inviting the Queen to look at them but brand them as “top secret” to the press and not permit any of the journalists to have a look.

I dare not hope that we will see a return to the “accentuated set design”, but if ever there was a chance it's now.

I am a big fan of Ken Adam and agree that often the world of Bond was expressed most eloquently in, not just the big headline grabbing, record breaking sets (though they are wonderful), but in the small stuff… offices, corridors, cells, hotel rooms, they were all dripping with expressionistic imagination when Ken was about, jumping out of the screen, telling you that James Bond’s world was like our own but amplified and exciting, thrilling stuff.

I think Craig’s Bond deserves a playground like Connery.

Edited by Shrublands, 30 November 2007 - 03:43 PM.

[Royal Dalton]

Here's that interview with Craig, if anyone wants to see it.

Daniel Craig BBC Breakfast interview

[Daddy Bond]

Well, we won't guess the title and it probably won't be any of the one's suggested here. Has anyone ever seen the title of ANYTHING guessed correctly beforehand? It's fun to think about it, but the fact is, the likelihood of coming up with a correct title is 1 in a trillion.

[Bondian]

I wonder if they'll feature the auction houses 'Rice Christie's' or 'Shredderby's?.

Here's that interview with Craig, if anyone wants to see it.

Daniel Craig BBC Breakfast interview

Does he mention 008?. Carol says Craig slipped this out on 'News 24'.

[MicroGlobeOne]

Does he mention 008?. Carol says Craig slipped this out on 'News 24'.

He did, indeed, say 008. I have to say, that wasn't a slip so much as it was Daniel Craig being his usual cheeky self! That's hardly a slip of the tongue one would make when refering to the 007 Stage. Either he's just told us something or he's messing with us. We'll just have to wait and see...

[zencat]

He didn't say much. Just that some "spectacular" sets are being built on the OO7 Stage.

Oooo...that's enough for me.

[Skudor]

I thought the French prono was Royal... not Royalee