100 replies to this topic

[tdalton]

Well, the originality of this plot idea is simply amazing. After the casting of Daniel Craig and Mathieu Amalric (two very respected actors) and the addition of a brilliant director like Marc Forster, and what we're getting is a slightly more realistic take on the plot of many of the previous Bond films, world domination (this time via the economy). Quite simply the most excellent and original direction they could have gone with this one.

As original as this idea is, maybe Bond 23 will be a remake of Casino Royale.

[delfloria]

Sounds more like a Thrush scheme to me. Which isn't a bad thing. (SPECTRE was more interested in turning a profit than ruling the world)

[Judo chop]

Well, the originality of this plot idea is simply amazing. After the casting of Daniel Craig and Mathieu Amalric (two very respected actors) and the addition of a brilliant director like Marc Forster, and what we're getting is a slightly more realistic take on the plot of many of the previous Bond films, world domination (this time via the economny). Quite simply the most excellent and original direction they could have gone with this one.

As original as this idea is, maybe Bond 23 will be a remake of Casino Royale.

TD. I

[Harry Fawkes]

Anyone want to make a bet that the 'Organisation' Craig is talking about is in fact SPECTRE?

[Loomis]

Clever move, though: why blow a story on a single film when you can spin it out over three?

Well it worked for the first five Connery flicks, right?

Since the 60s the flicks haven't made much of being a 'saga'. A few recurring characters - Gogol, Robinson - but that's it. Which made sense at the time, when audiences weren't going for multi-film stories.

But with the advent of DVD and the internet the shape of cinema has changed, and audiences will now support a Lord of the Rings or a Harry Potter (an 8-film story, apparently; with the last book likely to be split in two!). Even the Spider-Man flicks had stronger connected threads (pun unintended) than those kinds of movies used to have.

Using the reboot to create a genuine beat-by-beat saga is a timely move, and a rewarding one. I'm really glad it's being done this way. It's unlikely to go on forever, but for Craig's era, it should work just fine.

Excellent points, sorking.

[tdalton]

What kind of villainy would you like this organization to be involved in (while staying relevant to this age)? Personally I wouldn’t mind seeing human trafficking as a backdrop as it is an interesting, hugely relevant, but overlooked issue these days, but even still… there is no reason to think (based on this anemic report) that human trafficking WON’T be a part of the story.

I fear you’re getting yourself all worked up over nothing. You may be denying yourself the pleasure of a great Bond film at the premiere with all this needless despair now. One thing you do seem to have clear vision with is the talent pool that is coalescing on this film. A large amount of talent, combined with vague plot reports should be leaving you very optimistic. Easy brother… neither Bond nor I want to lose you over this. Breeeeathe.

I think that they missed the chance to really use the human trafficking crime in an interesting way by not using it as the backdrop for Casino Royale. It would have fit the basic idea of the novel a lot better than the storyline that the film used, and would have been a much better way of updating the novel as well. As far as other villainous schemes, perhaps an organization putting a price out on Bond (like we've seen in one of the continuation novels) and Bond having to go on the run, or maybe just some more low-key schemes that don't involve taking over the world's economy or taking over the world by force. I can't imagine that James Bond, or any other government agent, would just spend all day sitting around waiting for his boss to call him into his/her office to say, "some evil person is trying to take over the world again, go out and stop him". There's bound to be other, more low-key, more smaller-scale villainous plots that could be employed in a James Bond film that are more interesting than world domination.

I do feel, however, that with the talent that has been assembled for this film, that it should both be significantly better than Casino Royale (which shouldn't be too hard to do), but it should be a great film in general. Haggis is a multiple Oscar winner and Forster will have a chance to take home a few of those awards as well during his career. But, with that, the best that they can come up with is a world domination plot by an organization that may or may not end up being SPECTRE. There has to be other ideas out there for villainous schemes, because I don't think that the entire spy genre is defined by world domination and drug smuggling. But, the world domination through economics has been done before (GF, AVTAK, TWINE, GE, etc.), and I'd like to see something different, especially given the talent that has been assembled for this film.

[stamper]

Unless they're al-qaeda

Al quaeda doesn't exist. This name was created by american politicians to design some random, crazed guys as if they were an organisation, in order to declare war for other reasons than fighting terrorism.

[00Twelve]

Unless they're al-qaeda

Al quaeda doesn't exist. This name was created by american politicians to design some random, crazed guys as if they were an organisation, in order to declare war for other reasons than fighting terrorism.

Rrrright.

Well, either way, then, um, Islamic terrorism. That does exist.

[One-Ten]

Unless they're al-qaeda

Al quaeda doesn't exist. This name was created by american politicians to design some random, crazed guys as if they were an organisation, in order to declare war for other reasons than fighting terrorism.

Al-Qaida exists. It's an Wahabite Islamist movement, which was founded by Osama bin Laden in 1987. Although Al-Qaida spoke in 2003 under the name of Qaedat al-jih

Edited by One-Ten, 14 January 2008 - 07:22 PM.

[coco1997]

Unless they're al-qaeda

Al quaeda doesn't exist. This name was created by american politicians to design some random, crazed guys as if they were an organisation, in order to declare war for other reasons than fighting terrorism.

LOL.

Edited by coco1997, 14 January 2008 - 07:14 PM.

[Harry Fawkes]

Unless they're al-qaeda

Al quaeda doesn't exist. This name was created by american politicians to design some random, crazed guys as if they were an organisation, in order to declare war for other reasons than fighting terrorism.

Uh, could you reveal the source of your information with regards to, as you call them, Al quaeda? Are you talking from first hand experience in that you know for sure that this terrorist group doesn't exist or did you read it somewhere and have taken this to be fact? You see, as far as I know, all the major intelligence services in the world have undeniable proof that such a terrorist group exists! I will refrain from pointing out the actual number of British and American soldiers in Iraq who have been killed by men and women who have been trained by Al Qaeda or the number of terrorist attacks that took place even before the Iraqi war in their name. Oh, I forgot! Yeah, the terrorists aren't Al Qaeda! How foolish of me! Its the Yanks and the Brits and Iraq is not a better place than it was before Saddam. Oh, and now people can't vote freely in Iraq cause the yanks and Brits are terrorising them when they go to vote. Ah, sorry about this but I got mates out there who are being gunned down by who you say doesn't exist and at the risk of being banned from this site for ever I can not but refrain from saying: a big grow up to you and your theory!

Edited by Harry Fawkes, 14 January 2008 - 07:15 PM.

[Judo chop]

I think that they missed the chance to really use the human trafficking crime in an interesting way by not using it as the backdrop for Casino Royale. It would have fit the basic idea of the novel a lot better than the storyline that the film used, and would have been a much better way of updating the novel as well. As far as other villainous schemes, perhaps an organization putting a price out on Bond (like we've seen in one of the continuation novels) and Bond having to go on the run, or maybe just some more low-key schemes that don't involve taking over the world's economy or taking over the world by force.

Well, I

[HH007]

[quote name='One-Ten' post='822365' date='14 January 2008 - 19:05'][quote name='stamper' post='822357' date='14 January 2008 - 19:46'][quote]Unless they're al-qaeda[/quote]

Al quaeda doesn't exist. This name was created by american politicians to design some random, crazed guys as if they were an organisation, in order to declare war for other reasons than fighting terrorism.
[/quote]

Al-Qaida exists. It's an Wahabite Islamist movement, which was founded by Osama bin Laden in 1987. Although Al-Qaida spoke in 2003 under the name of Qaedat al-jih

[Judo chop]

[quote name='HH007' post='822375' date='14 January 2008 - 13:24'][quote name='One-Ten' post='822365' date='14 January 2008 - 19:05'][quote name='stamper' post='822357' date='14 January 2008 - 19:46'][quote]Unless they're al-qaeda[/quote]

Al quaeda doesn't exist. This name was created by american politicians to design some random, crazed guys as if they were an organisation, in order to declare war for other reasons than fighting terrorism.
[/quote]

Al-Qaida exists. It's an Wahabite Islamist movement, which was founded by Osama bin Laden in 1987. Although Al-Qaida spoke in 2003 under the name of Qaedat al-jih

[Harmsway]

I can't imagine that James Bond, or any other government agent, would just spend all day sitting around waiting for his boss to call him into his/her office to say, "some evil person is trying to take over the world again, go out and stop him". There's bound to be other, more low-key, more smaller-scale villainous plots that could be employed in a James Bond film that are more interesting than world domination.

I highly doubt BOND 22 will be structured about a doomsday, take-over-the-world plot. I think what motivates the entire organization is a goal for power over the economy, but that's just the guiding principle.

What we'll actually see in BOND 22, I imagine, is another area of their domain in which they're working to do that. In CASINO ROYALE, they were trying to do it through financing terrorism, and maybe in BOND 22 we'll see it through arms smuggling, or trying to pull the strings behind national movements ala Benson's DOUBLESHOT or other such smaller schemes befitting the Craig "more realistic" era.

[jaguar007]

I think Craig's comment shed alot of light on the plot of Bond 22. They are clearly going to explain how Bond changed from the 60s-00s and how he was hired by a female M in 2006 but had a male M in 1962. He head of Mr. White's evil orginazation is not Blofeld, but Dr. Evil. Bond will team up with Austin powers in 2008 and travel back in time to 1962 to stop Dr. Evil's plan before it starts. In 1962 he will of course work for Sir Miles Messervy's M.

Come on guys, its as clear as day

[00Twelve]

I can't imagine that James Bond, or any other government agent, would just spend all day sitting around waiting for his boss to call him into his/her office to say, "some evil person is trying to take over the world again, go out and stop him". There's bound to be other, more low-key, more smaller-scale villainous plots that could be employed in a James Bond film that are more interesting than world domination.

I highly doubt BOND 22 will be structured about a doomsday, take-over-the-world plot. I think what motivates the entire organization is a goal for power over the economy, but that's just the guiding principle.

What we'll actually see in BOND 22, I imagine, is another area of their domain in which they're working to do that. In CASINO ROYALE, they were trying to do it through financing terrorism, and maybe in BOND 22 we'll see it through arms smuggling, or trying to pull the strings behind national movements ala Benson's DOUBLESHOT or other such smaller schemes befitting the Craig "more realistic" era.

Two points to add. In most cases where the domination of some aspect of the global population was previously done, it wasn't a case of "Bond, someone's taking over the world, we need you." That aspect of the villain's plan wasn't usually revealed until well into the investigation. Now when it happened the same way, with the same monologue about how the world is irrevocably decadent and the like, yes, it got OLD. I'm fairly sure that with the writing and directing talent on board this time, it's not going to be so generic. Call it faith.

Also, I don't see how the villainous organization hunting down Bond is an original idea. It's been done. By SPECTRE, no less. From Russia With Love, I think it's called. The entire plot was focused on avenging Dr. No by humiliating and murdering James Bond (as well as playing Russia and Britain off against each other). Between that plot and the idea of Scaramanga out for Bond (which, of course, wasn't the actual case), "Bond being hunted" is just as original (or not) as some aspect of world domination, or drug/arms smuggling. Just me.

[LadySylvia]

World domination is world domination, no matter how one puts it. And what on earth does acting as a banker for terrorists have to do with dominating the world's economy? The organization behind Le Chiffre didn't seem that interested in using their clients for economic domination. Just acting like the usual greedy bankers.

I thought that EON Productions had put behind this nonsense . . . at least for the Craig films. Now, I have to sit back and watch them lower the quality of the remaining Craig films, just as they had done to Brosnan's films. Great!

"In CASINO ROYALE, they were trying to do it through financing terrorism . . ."

I don't recall the organization behind Le Chiffre and Mr. White trying to finance terrorism. All they seemed to be doing is acting as bankers and financial advisers for terrorists for their own profit. And I gathered that MI-6 and the CIA wanted to bring down this organization, so that the terrorists would be left in a bad situation.

[Mr Ashdown]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='822308' date='14 January 2008 - 16:09']The ultimate goal of any terrorist group is world domination, even if they don

[sorking]

I thought that EON Productions had put behind this nonsense . . . at least for the Craig films. Now, I have to sit back and watch them lower the quality of the remaining Craig films, just as they had done to Brosnan's films. Great!

Well at least we're not overreacting...

[blueman]

If Craig's "financing terrorism" comment is rubbish, why not his "take over the world" comment as well? Picking and choosing, picking and choosing...

[Simon]

Now, I have to sit back and watch them lower the quality of the remaining Craig films, just as they had done to Brosnan's films. Great!

Well at least we're not overreacting...

Quite the balanced point of view, indeed.

I daresay on the basis of this interview alone, her review is in.

[Judo chop]

[quote name='Mr Ashdown' post='822526' date='14 January 2008 - 16:26'][quote name='Judo chop' post='822308' date='14 January 2008 - 16:09']The ultimate goal of any terrorist group is world domination, even if they don

[LadySylvia]

Now, I have to sit back and watch them lower the quality of the remaining Craig films, just as they had done to Brosnan's films. Great!

Well at least we're not overreacting...

Quite the balanced point of view, indeed.

I daresay on the basis of this interview alone, her review is in.

Why not? Everyone else does it.

[Mr Ashdown]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='822823' date='15 January 2008 - 16:02']Fair enough. To be honest, I wasn

[Judo chop]

[quote name='Mr Ashdown' post='822846' date='15 January 2008 - 10:37'][quote name='Judo chop' post='822823' date='15 January 2008 - 16:02']Fair enough. To be honest, I wasn

[Emma]

The whole thing doesn't bother me. It all depends on the execution. As long as it's couched in reality (a-la-Batman-Begins). I'm fine with it. I am more interested in the level of quality than anything else.

[Mr Ashdown]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='822852' date='15 January 2008 - 16:56']Apology accepted and another one extended to you, Mr. Ashdown. I am snippy today. [My daughter is sick for the 4th time since Thanksgiving and I was up consoling her between the hours of 2 and 5 A.M. this morning. I

[Simon]

Now, I have to sit back and watch them lower the quality of the remaining Craig films, just as they had done to Brosnan's films. Great!

Well at least we're not overreacting...

Quite the balanced point of view, indeed.

I daresay on the basis of this interview alone, her review is in.

Why not? Everyone else does it.

Indeed. Bond 23 was quite the best thing I have ever seen.

[Judo chop]

Now, I have to sit back and watch them lower the quality of the remaining Craig films, just as they had done to Brosnan's films. Great!

Well at least we're not overreacting...

Quite the balanced point of view, indeed.

I daresay on the basis of this interview alone, her review is in.

Why not? Everyone else does it.

Indeed. Bond 23 was quite the best thing I have ever seen.

Really Simon? I thought Bond 23 was mediocre (though still an improvement over the vastly overrated and flawed Goldfinger). But the extras on the Extended Edition DVD well make up for it. FOUR commentary tracks, including one from Pierce Brosnan!? You can't beat that.