120 replies to this topic

[Simon]

I'm not particularly happy about P&W's work being completely thrown out.
I have much more faith in P&W than I do in Haggis.
I'd rather have P&W remain with the franchise rather than bringing Haggis back on for Bond 22.
I'm also not sold on Forster either...

Well, at least you're original.

[dinovelvet]

Hmmm...He must have a real vision for this film if he knows exactly how long he wants it to be and filming hasn't even started yet!

Anyways, two hours is a solid length. I adore "CR" but I could see how some people could consider it a tad too lengthy. But let's hope Forster doesn't cut corners, either.

I wonder if the relatively short runtime of 22 is a reaction to any "negative" feedback about CR. I say "negative" because we all know most of the reaction was positive with critics and fans alike, but the most oft-heard complaint from the naysayers was that CR was too long. So who knows if Forster saying its going to be no more than two hours is actually an EON order that the film be no more than two hours.

[007forever]

I have not spoken since CR was released, although visiting CB.net is still a daily routine.

Today, I can not hold my voice any longer...

Who the hell he think he is trying to cut a Bond movie to 2 hours only???????

CR on 144min felt like 44mins....I want MORE!!!!!

CR was too long. ....

do YOU?

[dinovelvet]

I have not spoken since CR was released, although visiting CB.net is still a daily routine.

Today, I can not hold my voice any longer...

Who the hell he think he is trying to cut a Bond movie to 2 hours only???????

CR on 144min felt like 44mins....I want MORE!!!!!

CR was too long. ....

do YOU?

Do I what? What the hell are you talking about?

[Shrublands]

Who the hell he think he is trying to cut a Bond movie to 2 hours only???????

He thinks he

[blueman]

I have not spoken since CR was released, although visiting CB.net is still a daily routine.

Today, I can not hold my voice any longer...

Who the hell he think he is trying to cut a Bond movie to 2 hours only???????

CR on 144min felt like 44mins....I want MORE!!!!!

I hear ya, I was fine with the longer running time as it was such a good ride. Then again, GF was short and to the point, wouldn't be sad to see that kinda Bond film either. If Forster has this much specificity in mind, I'm okay with it, going by his track record of films (that I've seen). But also gotta say, this sounds like the kinda jokey comment Craig would make, so who knows?

[stamper]

OK, the bashing / doubt should start somewhere...

I think Joaquin Cosio is miscast, he looks like a cartoon straight out of a Moore Bond movie... Unless his character is short lived, it could mean they are going the Moore route...

Almaric might be good, if correctly groomed (the look is important), and if the character is written good, but he doesn't strike me yet in the same class as Mads Mikkelsen.

As for Anatole Taubman, as long as he is despatched fast, I don't care.

But the movie is already lacking a bit of a glamour in my opinion on the men's side.

[007forever]

I have not spoken since CR was released, although visiting CB.net is still a daily routine.

Today, I can not hold my voice any longer...

Who the hell he think he is trying to cut a Bond movie to 2 hours only???????

CR on 144min felt like 44mins....I want MORE!!!!!

CR was too long. ....

do YOU?

Do I what? What the hell are you talking about?

do YOU thinkn CR was too long? <- this is the hell a fan was talking about

[tdalton]

OK, the bashing / doubt should start somewhere...

I think Joaquin Cosio is miscast, he looks like a cartoon straight out of a Moore Bond movie... Unless his character is short lived, it could mean they are going the Moore route...

Almaric might be good, if correctly groomed (the look is important), and if the character is written good, but he doesn't strike me yet in the same class as Mads Mikkelsen.

As for Anatole Taubman, as long as he is despatched fast, I don't care.

But the movie is already lacking a bit of a glamour in my opinion on the men's side.

Completely agreed. The cast for the film so far is quite underwhelming, IMO. Hopefully they'll really get the casting of the Bond girl right, because so far there really hasn't been much to be excited about, except for the fact that the film won't be longer than 2 hours.

[doubler83]

I wonder if this 2 hour running time includes the end credits, because then you could be looking at 1 hour 50 minute movie.

[Colonel Moon]

Im sure that P&W script is basic, Haggis is just doing polishes, and good

[DamnCoffee]

Im sure that P&W script is basic

As Always . If I could drop anyone from the crew list, it would be them two.

[# 11]

Meanwhile, producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli and the studios are on the verge of casting a female lead and will make a decision within two weeks.

This actually really surprises me. I thought a Bond girl was found, after Marc Forster hinted in the interview with the [url="http://www.sonntagszeitung.ch/kultur/artikel-detailseite/?newsid=4819""]SonntagsZeitung[/url] something like an end of the castings.

One of your prefered actors, Dustin Hoffman, characterized you two weeks ago as a "bald, thin, metrosexual man"...

That's what he told you?

Yes, and even, that the women are at your feet.

Such a jester. How did he hit on it?

Maybe by notice, you filmed with him two times after all.

I think rather, Dutsin Hoffman has simply a distinct sense of humor. The women aren't at my feet. I even had trouble with finding a Bond girl.

[Jack Spang]

Interesting news that. Perhaps that means we'll get less action scenes this go around? Still, it's rather intriguing to get the running time confirmed this early on, hopefully this means the script is pretty tight.

God I hope so! CR could have been better with one less big action scene. They could have spent more time developing Bond's character and the V/B relationship. The last third of the film didn't live up to my expectations. Seeing what was in Fleming's novel, if directed right, could have been very suspenceful and enjoyable. Instead it all has to go at break neck speed! Shame really, but that's the Bond films.

Edited by Jack Spang, 03 January 2008 - 02:54 PM.

[medrecess]

i think its cast great.All look the part.They look sinister.

[DLibrasnow]

Well, you (aside from CraigIsNotBond.com) appear to be one of the only Bond fans who disliked it.

That's a sweeping generalization. I know many members of the general public that disliked Casino Royale.

On the subject of Wright returning as Leiter, I think it's great news and bodes well for the film. But I am sure those that opposed Bernie Casey as Felix on the basis of his skin color will continue to point out that Felix of the books is a white blonde haired Texan . Personally I think Casey and Wright are two of the best Felix Leiter's.

I guess that this means that EON has finally once-and-for-all abandoned the notion Cubby and Harry held that Felix be played by a different actor each film so as to not upstage 007.

[00Twelve]

Well, this news looks to be about 8 shades of awesome. Welcome back, dear Felix. We're here with arms wide open.

And an intended runtime of 120 minutes exactly? Count me in. (Although, I'd be first in line for any proposed extended-cut DVDs as well. )

[HH007]

Well, you (aside from CraigIsNotBond.com) appear to be one of the only Bond fans who disliked it.

That's a sweeping generalization. I know many members of the general public that disliked Casino Royale.

Really? I don't. I'm not trying to be contrary, I'm just saying everyone I've spoken to about CR (in person, not online), have really liked it. These are casual fans, mind you (hence they're the general public), but they've said it's one of the best Bonds of recent history.

As for tdalton, we've discussed CR to the point where we've just agreed to disagree. (Though I will disagree one last time and say I thought Haggis' version of the ending was far superior to P&W's idea)

As for the news of Leiter's return, that's just another reason why I'm looking forward to Bond 22. I think all the news thus far has been very good, and I especially like that Wright's going to be back, because I thought he and Craig had great chemistry and that he was mucho underused in CR. This is definitely a good thing.

[Judo chop]

Wright's return is critical. Felix has always been used in the series, to one degree or another, to make Bond the hero; sometimes written as an absolute boob just to make Bond look indestructible.

Now, for the first time, Felix can be used to make Bond more human. Amen to that.

120 minutes? Perfect. So would 140 minutes be. 110 minutes wouldn't be terrible either. The only thing that worries me is that Forster has already declared a limit for the film. Obviously there are some limits - no Bond film is going to be an 88 minute flash, nor should one reach epic proportions of 3+ hours. But shouldn't we hope to hear Forster talking only about making a good movie and seeing where the chips fall in terms of total length?

[tdalton]

Well, you (aside from CraigIsNotBond.com) appear to be one of the only Bond fans who disliked it.

That's a sweeping generalization. I know many members of the general public that disliked Casino Royale.

On the subject of Wright returning as Leiter, I think it's great news and bodes well for the film. But I am sure those that opposed Bernie Casey as Felix on the basis of his skin color will continue to point out that Felix of the books is a white blonde haired Texan . Personally I think Casey and Wright are two of the best Felix Leiter's.

I guess that this means that EON has finally once-and-for-all abandoned the notion Cubby and Harry held that Felix be played by a different actor each film so as to not upstage 007.

Agreed. I also know other people who dislike the movie. Personally, I find it to be just about tied with The Bourne Ultimatum for the most overrated film of the decade, and it's right there with DAD, TMWTGG, and DAF for the worst film in the Bond franchise.

I do, however, like the fact that Jeffrey Wright is returning as Leiter. He's easily the best actor in the cast, and to lose him would have been a shame. Hopefully he'll get more screen time.

[zencat]

So the Bond Girl hasn't been cast yet? Wonder if that means no Gemma Arterton after all...or maybe she's a secondary Bond Girl?

[HH007]

Agreed. I also know other people who dislike the movie. Personally, I find it to be just about tied with The Bourne Ultimatum for the most overrated film of the decade, and it's right there with DAD, TMWTGG, and DAF for the worst film in the Bond franchise.

Well, we do agree on Bourne Ultimatum. I think CR kicks the out of that movie. Anyway, moving on, do you think they'll announce the title along with the lead Bond girl?

So the Bond Girl hasn't been cast yet? Wonder if that means no Gemma Arterton after all...or maybe she's a secondary Bond Girl?

I think she's a secondary girl. That's just what I think, though.

[tdalton]

Agreed. I also know other people who dislike the movie. Personally, I find it to be just about tied with The Bourne Ultimatum for the most overrated film of the decade, and it's right there with DAD, TMWTGG, and DAF for the worst film in the Bond franchise.

Well, we do agree on Bourne Ultimatum. I think CR kicks the out of that movie. Anyway, moving on, do you think they'll announce the title along with the lead Bond girl?

No. I don't think that they'll announce the title along with the new Bond girl. I think all we'll get with the Bond girl is a press release saying that so and so has been cast the film. I have a feeling that we already know the title of the film (the awful 007 or Double-Oh-Seven).

Of course, this information is pure speculation on my part.

[HH007]

Agreed. I also know other people who dislike the movie. Personally, I find it to be just about tied with The Bourne Ultimatum for the most overrated film of the decade, and it's right there with DAD, TMWTGG, and DAF for the worst film in the Bond franchise.

Well, we do agree on Bourne Ultimatum. I think CR kicks the out of that movie. Anyway, moving on, do you think they'll announce the title along with the lead Bond girl?

No. I don't think that they'll announce the title along with the new Bond girl. I think all we'll get with the Bond girl is a press release saying that so and so has been cast the film. I have a feeling that we already know the title of the film (the awful 007 or Double-Oh-Seven).

Of course, this information is pure speculation on my part.

I don't think 007 is going to be the title. I've never believed that rumor. But I have been wrong before...

[Double-0-Seven]

I just added to the article, that

in related news, director Marc Forster has stated in an interview with Swiss online magazine "20min.ch" that he intends a running time for the finished film of exactly 120 minutes - and not a minute longer.

.

Interesting that he's aiming for exactly two hours. Of course, this could change as things are filmed and put into place. I think this is a good length though. As much as I love Casino Royale, I think it does feel slightly too long, so this film being only two hours should have a pretty good pace.

[killkenny kid]

I'm dying to get a look at what took place today. Just one photo, that's all I want.

[DamnCoffee]

I've never been this excited about Bond 22 since we got that video of Barbara, Michael and Daniel in LA, earlier on last year! .

[bond_girl_double07]

why put an exact time on it? it seems so limiting, unless this is a normal film practice

I'm so pleased Jeffrey Wright signed on again!

[DamnCoffee]

why put an exact time on it?

Maybe he was bored .

[Santa]

The timing thing does seem a little odd but I imagine it's down to one of two things: under instruction from Mickey and Babs, probably as a response to comments that CR was on the long side, or more likely because he's anal. I say that because it's the kind of thing I could see myself doing were I him, and I'm particularly anal.