118 replies to this topic

[sharpshooter]

It’s from IMDB, enough said. As most informed people know, that is not a reliable source. Members have noted the inaccuracies, these are fabrications and nothing more. I know people would like them to be true, but that's just wishful thinking.

[Skudor]

Nice to have this all cleared up guys.

This is clearly bull - the guy has browsed the web, seen the trailer and made up a plot synopsis that ties the two together. Obviously that sounds plausible when you tie that in with what you know (which is exactly what he knows!). He then adds a couple of things of his own for a bit of spice.

[Captain Tightpants]

It’s from IMDB, enough said. As most informed people know, that is not a reliable source. Members have noted the inaccuracies, these are fabrications and nothing more. I know people would like them to be true, but that's just wishful thinking.

Stuff like this is the major problem with the rise of blogging. Trying to make yourself heard on the internet is like writing a message in a bottle and throwing it into a sea made entirely of messages in bottles. The odds that a lot of people are going to pick yours up is very slim. To many people, the only way to make themselves heard is to talk big - like the person who posted the "spoilers" - in an effort to get people to listen. People are social creatures, and they therefore crave attention. The internet has removed that interpersonal aspect - to me, all of you are just a series of coded zeroes and ones that appear on my screen - thus making the need to be heard much greater than before. People therefore have to do biggr and better things to make themselves heard even slightly. Posting "spoilers" and implying that they're in the know about these things is one of the ways people do it. Look at SuperShadow, the infamous Star Wars fan who claims to be a close personal friend of George Lucas as is a conduit between Lucas' mind and the fans. He makes plenty of claims, frequently contradicts himself and often posts information that is of his own creation and attributes it to Lucas' vision. In reality, he's a nobody from Virgina or somewhere named Mickey Suttle, but with his SuperShadow persona, he's a "real somebody".

It's obvious that the user who posted this stuff on IMdB is doing the same thing - though whether he's conscious of Suttle is moot point - as it's just an attention grab. When the film is released in October, no-one is going to remember a thread buried in the mire of the IMdB boards; they'll be too busy discussing the film to call him down on his falsehoods. But for now, it's instant gratification, and if you really read it, most of what he says is just a product of the trailer and what we already know from set reports and stills. He doesn't really tell us anything news, and when he does - like that incredibly lame-sounding martini gag - it's clear that he's maing these things up.

[belvedere]

Hate to throw cold water on the naysayers...

But why do some of you act as through you have the final shooting script in your hands?

Why do some of you act as though you actually have a clue as to what happens in this movie?

Your "facts" could be as equally false as some of the things that this poster has allegedly posted.

That is an awful lot of detailed information to come from the mind of one creative poster on a website, who, according to the naysayers here, decided to post this hoax just to mess with people on IMDb. Why? What is the motivation? Why would someone do this?

I don't know if it is true, or not. But I know this: this poster has as much access to information as the people on this board. Get off your high horses, people. None of us has substantial proof as to what happens in this film. It could be a hoax. It could be true. It's rumor and speculation - as is the rest of what you supposed experts are claiming.

[Skudor]

... like that incredibly lame-sounding martini gag ...

Gotta agree on that (and the rest really).

[Glockenspiel]

Regardless whether you believe this spoiler, and I am actually inclined to think its genuine, I LOVE the idea of how the pre-titles will continue on directly from Casino Royale.. i.e. Gunbarrel -- White gets shot and Bond introducing himself to White, throwing White into his Aston Martin and BANG we get the car chase. This sounds just how Peter Hunt had envisioned starting off Diamonds Are Forever, with them reshowing Bond and Tracy driving and her getting shot..In reality it wouldn't have worked just for the fact that Lazenby was out and Connery was back for Diamonds.. would have been to awkward.. However if Connery had starred in OHMSS, then it would have been do-able.

I would be very surprised if we see scenes (or even pictures) taken from CR in QoS.
Therefore, I don't think the trailer will begin like this, but a few minutes later.

Edited by Glockenspiel, 04 July 2008 - 12:51 PM.

[Skudor]

Regardless whether you believe this spoiler, and I am actually inclined to think its genuine, I LOVE the idea of how the pre-titles will continue on directly from Casino Royale.. i.e. Gunbarrel -- White gets shot and Bond introducing himself to White, throwing White into his Aston Martin and BANG we get the car chase. This sounds just how Peter Hunt had envisioned starting off Diamonds Are Forever, with them reshowing Bond and Tracy driving and her getting shot..In reality it wouldn't have worked just for the fact that Lazenby was out and Connery was back for Diamonds.. would have been to awkward.. However if Connery had starred in OHMSS, then it would have been do-able.

I would be very surprised if we see scenes (or even pictures) taken from CR in QoS.
Therefore, I don't think the trailer will begin like this, but a few minutes later.

That's a good point... Wilson, Forster, Craig etc. etc. have stated several times that QoS starts 1 minute, 5 minutes, 30 minutes, one hour, two hours (did I miss any) after CR. Never that there's a recap.

[DamnCoffee]

The guy has posted something else on IMDb saying that...

"When Bond and Cammille are on the bus, there is a brillaint shot of Bond resting his head on the window and looking EXTREMELY angry."

[Skudor]

The guy has posted something else on IMDb saying that...

"When Bond and Cammille are on the bus, there is a brillaint shot of Bond resting his head on the window and looking EXTREMELY angry."

Sounds like a nice shot. If only it were real.

[Harmsway]

But why do some of you act as through you have the final shooting script in your hands?

Some of us do have things that are pretty close to that.

That is an awful lot of detailed information to come from the mind of one creative poster on a website, who, according to the naysayers here, decided to post this hoax just to mess with people on IMDb.

It's not unusual. Different IMDb posters did about the same thing with THE DARK KNIGHT about three or four times. All with the same level of "detailed information."

The guy has posted something else on IMDb saying that...

"When Bond and Cammille are on the bus, there is a brillaint shot of Bond resting his head on the window and looking EXTREMELY angry."

Sounds like a nice shot. If only it were real.

[MajorB]

Regardless whether you believe this spoiler, and I am actually inclined to think its genuine, I LOVE the idea of how the pre-titles will continue on directly from Casino Royale.. i.e. Gunbarrel -- White gets shot and Bond introducing himself to White, throwing White into his Aston Martin and BANG we get the car chase. This sounds just how Peter Hunt had envisioned starting off Diamonds Are Forever, with them reshowing Bond and Tracy driving and her getting shot..In reality it wouldn't have worked just for the fact that Lazenby was out and Connery was back for Diamonds.. would have been to awkward.. However if Connery had starred in OHMSS, then it would have been do-able.

I would be very surprised if we see scenes (or even pictures) taken from CR in QoS.
Therefore, I don't think the trailer will begin like this, but a few minutes later.

That's a good point... Wilson, Forster, Craig etc. etc. have stated several times that QoS starts 1 minute, 5 minutes, 30 minutes, one hour, two hours (did I miss any) after CR. Never that there's a recap.

Maybe. If it did have the recap, then cut from "Bond, James Bond" to Bond dragging White to the car, then cut to him on the road somewhere, it would be natural for some folks on the production to think of the film as starting once he's on the road. (Presumably we "catch up" with Bond and White an indeterminate amount of time after leaving the villa.) They might not consider the couple of White-dragging shots as being part of the main action of the opening. Or some of them do and some don't, which might account for the different time spans we've heard about. Doesn't mean this guy's description is true, but at the same time I don't think we can disqualify him just on the basis of that one small detail.

[The Dove]

Good God is this discussion still going on? LOL Okay at this point I'm gonna take Harmsway and Vauxhall's words that the IMDB posting is not legit..

[DamnCoffee]

Ok here goes, I'm not going to get into an argument about this but these 'spoilers' may be true, they may not (probably not, I'm beginning to have my doubts) but the thing is. These 'spoilers' have received negative responses because we all have blown them off as lies, and havent even thought about them. Just, please think them through before you slam them, they arent OTT, some of them are plausable. I'm not defending this guy, I just think that from what we know so far, we can't rule these out. Who knows what material the producers have shot.

[Harmsway]

These 'spoilers' have received negative responses because we all have blown them off as lies, and havent even thought about them. Just, please think them through before you slam them, they arent OTT, some of them are plausable.

If they're lies (and they are), then it's pointless to even consider their validity or not. I'm not going to bother weighing spoilers that are untrue.

I'm not defending this guy, I just think that from what we know so far, we can't rule these out.

I think we can. We know more about this movie than is immediately obvious.

And we do know that no rough cut of this film exists due to Forster, so that's the final straw. This guy couldn't have seen a rough cut of QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

[DamnCoffee]

OK. Fair enough

[MR. BOND 93]

Never EVER believe something you read from IMDB.

[DamnCoffee]

This is interesting...

Spoiler

What I read was that scene was one of the final ones where Bond shoots or butchers one of Greene's legs, thus he's limping and falls of a cliff...(or similar to this), thus why Bond is with the machine gun.

^^^^^
This is from another member on IMDb.

[Jim]

This is interesting...

Spoiler

What I read was that scene was one of the final ones where Bond shoots or butchers one of Greene's legs, thus he's limping and falls of a cliff...(or similar to this), thus why Bond is with the machine gun.

^^^^^
This is from another member on IMDb.

This is also from another member on IMDb.

Spoiler

woooo danel craig is grate wooo is he gay he looks gay?

[DamnCoffee]

Whats your source?

[Captain Tightpants]

Hate to throw cold water on the naysayers...

But why do some of you act as through you have the final shooting script in your hands?

Why do some of you act as though you actually have a clue as to what happens in this movie?

Your "facts" could be as equally false as some of the things that this poster has allegedly posted.

That is an awful lot of detailed information to come from the mind of one creative poster on a website, who, according to the naysayers here, decided to post this hoax just to mess with people on IMDb. Why? What is the motivation? Why would someone do this?

I don't know if it is true, or not. But I know this: this poster has as much access to information as the people on this board. Get off your high horses, people. None of us has substantial proof as to what happens in this film. It could be a hoax. It could be true. It's rumor and speculation - as is the rest of what you supposed experts are claiming.

They're things we've discerned from the trailer, set photographs, reports and B-roll fotage.

Spoiler

For example, Medrano's supposed death during the boat chase:
(1) We know Medrano has scenes at the residencia, which is in Bolivia.
(2) We know the boat chase physically cannot be in Bolivia as it is a landlocked nation.
(3) We know the scenes at the residencia take place late in the film.
(4) We also know Greene and Medrano move around a lot, so there's likely not to be any residencia scenes early in the film. They've variously been sighted in Austria, at the docks, the party and the residencia.

So while Medrano may play a part in the boat chase - most likely ordering his lackeys to go after Bond and Camille - he's an important part in Quantum's plans. If Bond kills him early on in the film, the story is essentially over. In fact, Bond would haveto let him live because Medrano is just a pawn. Killing him gives him nothing because he won't be able to find Greene.

[Quantumofsolace007]

the snow shopt is just my idea I could be wrong dead wrong but to me the two most logical scenarios


Bond deals with Yusef (how I'm not sure)
see M talks with m

walks off looking angry

the end



or Bond talks with M

deals with yusef

and then walks off looking all angry.


Btw i'll post it here my imdb name is Macgyver12186 (and yes i called QOS as the title summer 07 right now I feel fleming title for bond 23 not sure which one I'll know by this time next year and will post as such and then I'll be proven right or wrong)


As for the current discusion. No he has an inside source alright BTW for those who believe him wanna buy a bridge

[Captain Tightpants]

I have an inside source at EON, too. I can't reveal their name, largely because I don't know it, but even if I did, I wouldn't because they aren't posting in an official capacity as an employee of EON. They're a member of another forum - you can probably guess which one - where they post as a James Bond fan who happens to work fr EON. If I told you their name, word would spread and they would likely lose their job for it because they're not officially sanctioned.

Of course, I could just be saying that. I could make up anything I want and attribute it to my "source" at EON and no-one would be any the wiser except for EON employees, and let's be honest, how many of them regularly post on the forums, be it these ones or another?

(However, for the record, I am wholly convinced my source is geunine; theyv'e told me things that have later proven to be true, such as the film's combined budget.)

[JackWade]

Some of you oblivious. These "spoilers" have been proven wrong numerous times in this thread with proof to back them up, yet for some reason people still want to believe them? C'mon...

[DamnCoffee]

Another spoiler from our favorite source... IMDb

Spoiler

Greene dies in the desert....He falls of a cliff, Bond has the machine gun because he kills Mr. White with it near the end.

[DavidSomerset]

How come no one has brought out our perennial favorite - Sean Connery may star as Bond's father/ villian of QoS organization rumor yet?

Spoiler

What I read was that scene was one of the final ones where Bond shoots or butchers one of Greene's legs, thus he's limping and falls of a cliff...(or similar to this), thus why Bond is with the machine gun.

But can't Bond just decide that he should have some target practice in the South American desert? And wear a suit and take his submachinegun... And then he runs into a megalomaniac who is out to destroy the world? Kind of how he stumbled into the plot in TB...

And pray tell me - Who is Yusef? Mustafa's (Austin Powers) cousin?

[Shrublands]

Another spoiler from our favorite source... IMDb

Spoiler

Greene dies in the desert....He falls of a cliff, Bond has the machine gun because he kills Mr. White with it near the end.

But as we have already established that it's a load of old nonsense, why are we prolonging this?

Latest news!!! Some fool on another forum continues to talk clap-trap, read all about it!!!

[DamnCoffee]

I think this thread should be renamed "Fake Spoilers" and just use it to post wiered spoilers like the Tabloid Trash depot. Since some people cant belive anything they read, even though they have no proof of it been untrue.

[Shrublands]

I think this thread should be renamed "Fake Spoilers" and just use it to post wiered spoilers like the Tabloid Trash depot. Since some people cant belive anything they read, even though they have no proof of it been untrue.

It’s just the application of common sense.

If you know something contradictory to be true…

[Mr Teddy Bear]

I think this thread should be renamed "Fake Spoilers" and just use it to post wiered spoilers like the Tabloid Trash depot. Since some people cant belive anything they read, even though they have no proof of it been untrue.

That's better than believing everything you read.

When posting unfounded claims from IMDB users with 'inside sources', the burden of proof isn't on us to disprove them. It would take a life time to disprove all the made up crap on the internet from anonymous joe's who work for EON... that doesn't make the crap any less made up.

However, ironically, in this particular instance it was proven to be untrue.

Edited by Mr Teddy Bear, 06 July 2008 - 04:39 PM.

[Vauxhall]

Since some people cant belive anything they read, even though they have no proof of it been untrue.

But Matt, it's not a matter of not being able to believe anything I read, but I know for a fact that most of it is wrong. I know we all want information on the movie, but we'll find out more about the film (from genuine sources) soon I'm sure.