654 replies to this topic

[PrinceKamalKhan]

Makes me wonder if earlier script versions meant for Miranda f.k.a. Gala to be the good girl and Jinx to be the bad girl. There were rumors that this was changed and rewritten after Halle Berry won the Oscar during filming.

So... the way Jinx is played at the beginning; i.e., killing the geneticist, yadda-yadda, is a way of covering Graves' tracks?

Hmmm...interesting. I remember when the story got out that Berry had been approached by EON or MGM to star in the film that she was being hired to play "the villainess Jinx". At the time I stated that there was no way she was going to be hired to play a villainess; that she was being hired to complement Brosnan and to have an active, lead role in the film. I never believed for one second she was going to take a smaller role and let an unknown actress be the lead Bond Girl, and this was *BEFORE* filming started or the rest of the cast was announced. Berry was integral to the marketing of Die Another Day, and in some of the print ads she got above the title billing with Brosnan, and she also got top-billing in the tv spots and the final trailer here in the U.S.

I think the press simply got carried away with the idea of Berry playing a "villainess" and they phrased her role incorrectly.

But in TWINE, Sophie Marceau(deservedly) got higher billing and more screentime than Denise Richards so it's not a complete impossibility that EON might have repeated(or considered repeating) that formula again for DAD.

Going into the film I pretty much knew Frost was the double-agent, but I still enjoyed the movie and her performance. I wondered, though, whether casual film goers would figure it out before the big reveal that she had betrayed Bond. Same with Elektra in TWINE. Was anyone surprised that these two women betrayed Bond?

Not me. With Denise Richards doing all the publicity and talk shows as the "new Bond girl" in 1999 to ensure all the teenage boys showed up, Elektra's betrayal and villainy wasn't too surprising. What was perplexing to me was her character's name since the Electra of Greek mythology was a woman who loved her father and hated her mother, the reverse of the Elektra of TWINE.

I'm still looking for a DAD script, or any information that would tell us what action scenes were removed or rewritten after 9/11. Even as it stands, the film was somewhat controversial in South Korea. I remember people picketing the film, and it might have even been seen as being an extension of U.S. propaganda from George W. Bush, because he'd earlier mentioned North Korea as part of the "Axis of Evil", although I felt the film portrayed the North Koreans even-handedly.

That's what I loved about DAD. It returned to the Cold War-type atmosphere and international intrigue of Bond films like TLD, OP and FRWL with North Korean basically serving the same purpose the former USSR did in the earlier Bond films. I think that's why I considered DAD(despite the very poor CGI in the 2nd half) the best of the Brosnans.

[HildebrandRarity]

I enjoyed DAD in the theatres.

I also enjoyed Moonraker in the theatres way back when.

[Gravity's Silhouette]

So, d'you think the film is basically a bizarre amalgamam of realism (for the Brosnan era, being the South Korean portion of the film) and over-the-top Moore-ian hyperbole (everything after Bond jumps out of the hospital ship)?

Yeah, pretty much. Like I said earlier, the film is bizarre because of the direction it took after TWINE. TWINE was a solid reaction to the problems that occured on the set of TND. We all know that. You look at TWINE and you see character pieces, you see real actors (Dench, Carlyle, Marceau) chewing the scenery, you see a de-emphasis on wall-to-wall, non-stop action in favor of a much more complicated plot driving the action (rather than the reverse).

Brosnan had been vocal about wanting changes after what happened on TND. And TWINE was a hit, made the same amount as the two before it, so I don't get why the series suddenly changed course unless, as I theorize, that the studio and film makers misread the sentiment immediately after 9/11 and assumed they'd need to deliver a more fantasy-oriented film instead of a topical, political film that had dealt with current issues like GE (the fall of the Soviet Empire and the British trying to find their place in the new world order) or TWINE (think of how timely that film would be today if it were set in Alaska instead of Southwest Asia).

I think if you remove a few of the sci-fi elements from the film it would immediately command more respect. Remove the Icarus and the bodysuit and have some other McGuffin and I think it works better. There's just too much futuristic, sci-fi in the film.

[DaveBond21]

Iceland: Don�t get me wrong, I love the location,


An underused location to be sure. Not even an establishing shot of Bond flying into Reykjavik.

Indeed. That is one of the major changes between the Brosnan era and the Craig era. If Iceland were to feature in a Craig Bond movie, then Reykjavik would be the location of a foot chase, or car chase. We would get a flavour of the place and culture, certainly.

[JimmyBond]

That is a good point, and one of my major criticisms I have of the Brosnan films. Too often the action sequences were located indoors or on (very obvious) backlots, Tank Chase I'm looking at you!

Even the TND car park chase, which I love btw, could have been so much better if it involved Bond being chased around Hamburg rather than in a car park that could have been located anywhere (and it was).

[Publius]

Yes, oddly enough the Brosnan Bond movies were often very Bourne-like in that regard: generic, interchangeable European settings for action to take place.

CR, meanwhile, came much closer to the classic Bond movies in soaking up local flavor, although I still think they can do a lot more.

[BoogieBond]

Agreed. When I watch the Connery and Moore films, the locations were one of the real highlights. I am thinking Moonraker with Rio and Venice and particularly Thunderball(Nassau) and Japan in YOLT, you really soaked up the beauty of the locations. I am sorry, but I found DAD's locations forgettable, hardly Rio in Moonraker or the Iguazu falls.

[Stephen Spotswood]

I absolutely loved the book Moonraker, and loathed the movie. That's when I gave up on Roger Moore.

I mean what the hell were they thinking creating a character like Jaws?

[Safari Suit]

Probably the same kind of thought process that led you to post that in an irrelevant thread, frankly.

[Stephen Spotswood]

I enjoyed DAD in the theatres.

I also enjoyed Moonraker in the theatres way back when.

That's what I was referring to.

[Safari Suit]

Fairy nuff.

[DaveBond21]

I absolutely loved the book Moonraker, and loathed the movie. That's when I gave up on Roger Moore.

I mean what the hell were they thinking creating a character like Jaws?

Well, the character of Jaws was created for the movie Silver Streak (1976) and also I think a TV show at the time. He made his Bond debut in The Spy who Loved Me, not Moonraker.

He reappeared in Moonraker because the character was overwhelmingly popular with fans. The 2 big news stories around Moonraker's release was "Bond goes into space" and "Jaws is back". While the purists hated these ideas, the general movie-going public loved it and helped make Moonraker the huge success it was.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

I know we�ve had too many reviews already, but hey, after 2587 posts, I�ve earned this! So here goes. (Obviously, this is SPOILER filled.)


THE BEST JAMES BOND MOVIE EVER?
A review of DIE ANOTHER DAY
By John Cox aka zencat

Halfway through DIE ANOTHER DAY, as Bond is traveling into Iceland, I turned to my companion sitting beside me in the Director�s Hall of The Bridge Theater--our very own Bryce (more on the amazing evening Bryce organized here)--and I asked him in all seriousness, �Is it possible we are watching the BEST James Bond movie EVER?"

Better than FRWL? Better than Goldfinger? Better than OHMSS? Better than TSWLM?

Is it possible for #20 to be #1?

I held my breath for the rest of the movie as scene after scene worked a Bond magic I haven�t felt in years. I got a little nervous when I felt the narrative getting overwhelmed by the action in Iceland, and yes, it went a bit OTT with the much maligned CGI stunt (but it wasn�t that bad, relax). Then that amazing climax kicked in and I'm breathless again. Then the Moneypenny beat at the end hits like an unexpected grand slam home run and when DIE ANOTHER DAY is over I�m sitting in my seat absolutely stunned. I decide then and there it was, indeed, the BEST James Bond movie I had ever seen!!

After the movie, I, and 55 other formally attired Bond fans, recovered from the experience over pints of Guinness and fish and chips at an English pub (the whole place reserved for us and all was on the house, thank you again Bryce!). I decided maybe DAD wasn�t the �best� Bond film of them all�but it was damn close! And it�s very possible when I see it again (which I MUST do ASAP) I�ll come out saying it is indeed #1.

Yes, I liked this movie that much!

Okay, breathe, breathe� For those of you interested, I�m going to briefly bullet point my thoughts and reactions to the major sections and elements of the movie. Here we go.

Pre-titles: A surprise here. Despite was what others have been saying, I thought the pre-titles was nothing special. I feared a re-hash of the TND pre-titles, and it was (but the hovercrafts were cool). I also didn�t care for that washed-out overly saturated look the DP gave the whole sequence. Bond movies are not supposed to look that way. Stop trying so hard, I thought. But then there was something about Bond hanging on the bell after the hovercraft goes over the waterfall that made me sit up and say, hmmm, nice Bond moment there. Then�

Titles: Amazing, breathtaking, inventive, interesting, incredible! Even the Madonna song with that annoying audio drop out couldn�t ruin it. Here I realized DAD was boldly experimenting with the formula without betraying it. This was Bond, but not the same old Bond and it worked beautifully. Oh, Scorpion Girl�I love you, you little savage cutie-pie.

Bearded Bond/Hong Kong stuff: This was so bold, so unexpected, so unBond, and so overtly dramatic, I should have hated it. But I didn�t. I loved it. Loved it! Bond goes into cardiac arrest and dies on the table? I was stunned. The audience was stunned. The movie had us all by the throats. We�re not just watching a great Bond movie here�we�re watching a great movie, period. Amazing. And then Bond walks into the Hong Kong hotel in his ragged condition but still with full Bond aplomb and, hey, this movie is working!

Cuba: Okay, for everyone who says Dalton was the book Bond...no, you�re wrong. Pierce is the book Bond here, Pierce is Connery�s Bond here, Pierce IS James Bond here! This is the best part of the film, in my opinion. Classic Bond. I love, LOVE, that Bond and Jinx hit the sheets right off the bat. Of course this is how it should be. I realized I�ve gotten very tired with the Bond-has-sex-with-the-main-girl only-at-the-end formula. I think it works much better that Bond and the main girl START their relationship with pure, animal lust, then arc to respect one another. It�s Bond and Tracy. Sex first...love later. Nice.

London calling: All the London stuff is fabulous. I loved the Blades swordfight, classic Bond and villain duel turned up to the maximum. (Re Madonna�s cameo--can someone say, �Vaseline on the camera lense.� How vain...and sad. Madonna has become Barbara Walters.) I wish I didn�t know about the VR training sequence because that would have blown me out of my socks (curse the internet!). John Cleese IS Q. �Nuff said. And the invisible Vanquish...yes, yes! It�s about time we got more than rockets behind headlights. (Shame we didn�t see Bond�s flat in all this.)

Iceland: Don�t get me wrong, I love the location, the ice palace, the Icarus demonstration, the dragster, Miranda, etc...but I did feel the wall-to-wall action in this part of the film started overwhelming what up until then had been a very clean narrative. Jinx is captured and saved twice in the same location? Overkill. Seemed like a hard choice should have been made here and a major set-piece should have been sacrificed to lighten the load on the storyline (and the audience). In my opinion, the big glacier surfing stunt could have been lost, cool as it was. My objection to this scene wasn�t with the cheesy CGI, it�s with the fact that it was SO big it played like a sequence ending climax and took away from the ice ballet car chase that followed. The audience was exhausted. But the ice ballet was so well done that it still worked beautifully and Bond saving Jinx brought the narrative back to emotional clarity. Still, I got a bit lost amid all the action in Iceland, but this is my ONLY complaint.

Climactic battle: Awesome, incredible, one of the most exciting Bond climaxes ever filmed! I love the Icarus satellite burning it�s way through Korea as the plane disintegrates. Loved that Miranda took the time during all this chaos to change into that sexy fencing outfit for her battle with Jinx. Miranda�s death was a bit shocking, but effective. And Graves died the way a Bond villain should die�big! The audience cheered.

Then there was the final Moneypenny scene that had the audience almost on their feet with cheers and laughs and, yes, DAD in my mind at that moment was the BEST JAMES BOND MOVIE EVER!

Now to address a few of the elements of controversy I had heard before going in.

DAD goes OTT with the sci-fi element: What? How? I think DAD did what all the �spectacular� Bond films do and that�s bring it right to the line without crossing it. Nothing in DAD is impossible�it�s improbable, yes, but it�s not impossible and that�s the Cubby Broccoli edict. No probs. I welcome the return the BIG fun Bond film, and DAD is certainly that.

Jinx/Berry: Come on, she was awesome! Like it or not, Halle Berry as Jinx enters the pantheon of great Bond girls. She was also flippin� hot! It�s been a long time since I�ve had a sexual fantasy about a Bond Girl and, well, Jinx delivered.

Gunbarrel CGI bullet: What's the big deal? It's fine. I like it.

Too much CGI: Nah, it was fine. Even the much-maligned glacier surfing stunt didn�t bother me. Hey, I didn�t let the Tarzan yell ruin Octopussy, I�m not going to let one bad special effect ruin DAD. I�m there to have fun, and I did. So should you.

Congrats Eon, MGM, and everyone involved with DIE ANOTHER DAY. Even if�when I come down from my high�I decide it�s not the best James Bond movie of them all, it�s still the best Bond movie in over a decade and one that reinvigorates the series and that�s an amazing accomplishment.

So good to read this enthusiastic review from 2002, zencat.

I watched it for the first time in probably 5 years this week. I didn't know what to expect since I kept reading how terrible it was. Much to my happy surprise, I thoroughly enjoyed the experience and was happily reminded of how much I enjoyed it circa 2002-2003. I won't go as far as saying it's the best Bond movie ever but I will join you(assuming this is still your opinion) in saying it's the best Brosnan Bond film, CGI tsunami-Madonna-dumb Jinx lines-Graves' Robocop suit warts and all.

[Mr_Wint]

So, d'you think the film is basically a bizarre amalgamam of realism (for the Brosnan era, being the South Korean portion of the film) and over-the-top Moore-ian hyperbole (everything after Bond jumps out of the hospital ship)?

Yeah, pretty much. Like I said earlier, the film is bizarre because of the direction it took after TWINE. TWINE was a solid reaction to the problems that occured on the set of TND. We all know that. You look at TWINE and you see character pieces, you see real actors (Dench, Carlyle, Marceau) chewing the scenery, you see a de-emphasis on wall-to-wall, non-stop action in favor of a much more complicated plot driving the action (rather than the reverse).

I would say that TWINE was a solid reaction to both GE and TND. They clearly moved away a little bit from the Hollywoood-Bond with that film.

The strange thing with DAD, for me, is the weak plot. It is hard to belive that it is the same writers. For example, the villains scheme in DAD is really fuzzy. In TWINE they explain details like how the villains got the parahawks... in DAD they don't even care explaining how Graves got a gigantic satellite out in space!

[DaveBond21]

I would say that TWINE was a solid reaction to both GE and TND. They clearly moved away a little bit from the Hollywoood-Bond with that film.

True, but TWINE is still a Bond action movie. It features a boat chase on the Thames, bungee jump from a window, parahawk attack on skis, underground shoot-out, helicopter attack on a caviar factory, battle to defuse an atomic bomb hurtling through an oil pipeline, and fight on a submarine.

[Mr_Wint]

I would say that TWINE was a solid reaction to both GE and TND. They clearly moved away a little bit from the Hollywoood-Bond with that film.

True, but TWINE is still a Bond action movie. It features a boat chase on the Thames, bungee jump from a window, parahawk attack on skis, underground shoot-out, helicopter attack on a caviar factory, battle to defuse an atomic bomb hurtling through an oil pipeline, and fight on a submarine.

Of course... just like FYEO had more action than MR.

[Stephen Spotswood]

I absolutely loved the book Moonraker, and loathed the movie. That's when I gave up on Roger Moore.

I mean what the hell were they thinking creating a character like Jaws?

Well, the character of Jaws was created for the movie Silver Streak (1976) and also I think a TV show at the time. He made his Bond debut in The Spy who Loved Me, not Moonraker.

He reappeared in Moonraker because the character was overwhelmingly popular with fans. The 2 big news stories around Moonraker's release was "Bond goes into space" and "Jaws is back". While the purists hated these ideas, the general movie-going public loved it and helped make Moonraker the huge success it was.

I didn't know Jaws was in Silver Streak, but I did know he was introduced in the Spy Who Loved Me, but I was confining it to Moonraker because of the comment I was responding to, also because he became something of a good guy toward the end of Moonraker.

I always thought The Spy Who Loved Me should be remade as a TV movie faithful to
Fleming's original.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

I agree with a fair bit of Zencat's review ["runs for cover"].

[PrinceKamalKhan]

I agree with a fair bit of Zencat's review ["runs for cover"].

You're not alone, Fiona Volpe lover.(Cool name by the way. Luciana Paluzzi was by far the most beautiful of Connery's Bond girls).


I consider DAD the best of the Brosnans. And we got CR as a result, so that gives it one more plus in its favor.

DAD fans of the world unite!

[broadshoulder]

I consider DAD the best of the Brosnans. And we got CR as a result, so that gives it one more plus in its favor.

DAD fans of the world unite!

we got Casino Royale because of Die Antoher Day. They had to give it a reboot so strenuously it wiped out all memeories of DAD.If they had continued down the DAD route the franchise wouldnt have lasted much longer and would have become a laughting stock.

Did you read Roger Moore? He didnt like the cgi and invisible car. When a gentleman like Rog sticks the boot in you know somethings seriously wrong...

[PrinceKamalKhan]

I consider DAD the best of the Brosnans. And we got CR as a result, so that gives it one more plus in its favor.

DAD fans of the world unite!

we got Casino Royale because of Die Antoher Day.

Which is exactly what I wrote....

They had to give it a reboot so strenuously it wiped out all memeories of DAD.

Actually, it was because Michael Wilson had wanted to show the origins of Bond since 1986. When the rights for EON to film CR the novel came along to show an origin story, a younger actor was going to be needed for the origin story to work.

If they had continued down the DAD route the franchise wouldnt have lasted much longer and would have become a laughting stock.

I've read that before. The James Bond series is and was in no danger of dying. Hiatuses, yes. Death, no. The series has often had a more OTT entry followed by a more serious entry(YOLT/OHMSS, MR/FYEO, AVTAK/TLD, DAD/CR) as well as the reverse
(FRWL/GF, OHMSS/DAF, FYEO/OP, LTK/GE). If EON hadn't played out the fantasy elements in DAD, I have a feeling CR would've looked more like TWINE. And I would not have wanted that.

Did you read Roger Moore? He didnt like the cgi and invisible car. When a gentleman like Rog sticks the boot in you know somethings seriously wrong...

Did you read a few of my posts above? I too was quite critical of the CGI tsunami.
And the Jerry Bruckheimer on steroids style rip off of TLD's finale in DAD's finale. I agree with DAD's critics about the CGI overkill/videogamish final 1/3. That still didn't prevent me from enjoying the first 2/3 of DAD more than any other of Brosnan's Bond films.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

[quote

DAD fans of the world unite!
[/quote]

Yay, that makes two of us!!

No seriously I walked out of the cinema where I saw DAD pretty satisfied, it was a reasonable 40th [is that right?] anniversary movie that just set out to be fun, and I liked the switch from moody, serious Bond movie to silly fantastical Bond movie around half way through. I thoroughly enjoyed it except for the parasurfing scene.

On DVD the flaws seem more in evidence to me-i.e.some crap dialogue [such as when Bond first meets Jinx][ and the shoddy CG in the climax. But I think it's nowhere the disaster many people seem to think. Funny how general opinion changes, when DAD first came out most people I know seemed to like it, now everyone seems to hate it! Yes, Casino Royale is far better but I'm glad DAD exists.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

DAD fans of the world unite!

Yay, that makes two of us!!

3 of us. Shot Your Bolt's a DAD fan. And 4 of us if zencat still likes it.

No seriously I walked out of the cinema where I saw DAD pretty satisfied, it was a reasonable 40th [is that right?] anniversary movie that just set out to be fun, and I liked the switch from moody, serious Bond movie to silly fantastical Bond movie around half way through. I thoroughly enjoyed it except for the parasurfing scene.

My sentiments exactly. Up to Iceland, I thought I was watching the best Bond film since The Living Daylights, my favorite Bond film made between 1970-2005. I like the older, more haggard Brosnan getting involved in some genuine international espionage and intrigue reminiscent of the Cold War with North Korea filling in for the former Soviet Union. And when it turned into a return to the Lewis Gilbert-style OTT epic that we hadn't seen since Moonraker, my 2nd favorite Bond film made between 1970-2005, I enjoyed that as well.

On DVD the flaws seem more in evidence to me-i.e.some crap dialogue [such as when Bond first meets Jinx][ and the shoddy CG in the climax. But I think it's nowhere the disaster many people seem to think. Funny how general opinion changes, when DAD first came out most people I know seemed to like it, now everyone seems to hate it! Yes, Casino Royale is far better but I'm glad DAD exists.

Agree on every point you make here. In a way, DAD/CR are to the 2000s Bond what YOLT/OHMSS were to the 1960s Bond. In retrospect, it's too bad Halle Berry didn't play a character closer to her courageous stewardess she played in the very good 1996 action thriller Executive Decision with Kurt Russell but that was more Purvis and Wade's fault than hers.

HMSS.com(which includes CBN's very own Napoleon Solo, a fellow Luciana Paluzzi fan) have a good page discussing DAD here-

http://www.hmss.com/...urvey/20dad.HTM

[WhiteKnight2000]

I can't wait to watch this spectacle on Blu-ray this week.

[CM007]

I consider DAD the best of the Brosnans. And we got CR as a result, so that gives it one more plus in its favor.

DAD fans of the world unite!

we got Casino Royale because of Die Antoher Day. They had to give it a reboot so strenuously it wiped out all memeories of DAD.If they had continued down the DAD route the franchise wouldnt have lasted much longer and would have become a laughting stock.

Did you read Roger Moore? He didnt like the cgi and invisible car. When a gentleman like Rog sticks the boot in you know somethings seriously wrong...

Casino Royale was in response to the Bourne Franchise not Die Another Day.If Bourne never got made Casino Royale with Daniel Craig would never have gotten made.......

[Mr_Wint]

I consider DAD the best of the Brosnans. And we got CR as a result, so that gives it one more plus in its favor.

DAD fans of the world unite!

we got Casino Royale because of Die Antoher Day. They had to give it a reboot so strenuously it wiped out all memeories of DAD.If they had continued down the DAD route the franchise wouldnt have lasted much longer and would have become a laughting stock.

Did you read Roger Moore? He didnt like the cgi and invisible car. When a gentleman like Rog sticks the boot in you know somethings seriously wrong...

Casino Royale was in response to the Bourne Franchise not Die Another Day.If Bourne never got made Casino Royale with Daniel Craig would never have gotten made.......

How can you be so sure about this? In my opinion: The follow-up to DAD had to be more low-key because there was no other way to go. Very similar to the situation they had with OHMSS and FYEO....


(but that does NOT mean that I think CR is, quality-wise, comparable with these two films!)

[WhiteKnight2000]

That's true as well, but when Bourne came out everybody was saying this is how Bond should be. I think the producers took that to heart, at the same time the Brosnan era was nearing a decade and it was maybe time to spice things up again.Lest we forget that Brosnan and Tarantino were saying the franchise needed to go back to basics and suggested making Casino Royale. The producers took the idea, without thanking Tarantino and sacked Brosnan at the same time, over the phone. Nice.

Edited by WhiteKnight2000, 19 October 2008 - 11:31 PM.

[Turn]

Lest we forget that Brosnan and Tarantino were saying the franchise needed to go back to basics and suggested making Casino Royale. The producers took the idea, without thanking Tarantino and sacked Brosnan at the same time, over the phone. Nice.

So Brosnan and Tarantino should be credited for saying they needed to go back to basics? People had been saying that for 30 years. Connery said that when he saw MR. Critics have said it after practically every Bond since YOLT. Dalton said it when he took over the role. Brosnan said it when he got the role.

As for doing CR, Tarantino had his own unsolicited idea for the film. Spielberg wanted to do a Bond film too. You've never seen him try to take credit for suggesting anything liked that. Brosnan liked CR and may have wanted to do it, that doesn't mean Eon took his or Tarantino's idea for this.

My own uncle said way back in the '80s CR should be remade as a serious film. He's not complaining they stole his idea.

[WhiteKnight2000]

Lest we forget that Brosnan and Tarantino were saying the franchise needed to go back to basics and suggested making Casino Royale. The producers took the idea, without thanking Tarantino and sacked Brosnan at the same time, over the phone. Nice.

So Brosnan and Tarantino should be credited for saying they needed to go back to basics?

Yes, he was quite vocal in his displeasure of the script quality of his movies.

Don't you remember all the press about Tarantino saying he wanted to make Casino Royale with Brosnan. This was long before the producers decided to make CR.

When it comes to Bond, I have a photographic memory for remembering facts.

Spielberg wanted to do a Bond film too. You've never seen him try to take credit for suggesting anything liked that.

Did Spielberg come up with any ideas that were then taken up? No.

My own uncle said way back in the '80s CR should be remade as a serious film. He's not complaining they stole his idea.

What's your uncle got to do with the Bond franchise?

Edited by WhiteKnight2000, 19 October 2008 - 11:50 PM.

[Turn]

Lest we forget that Brosnan and Tarantino were saying the franchise needed to go back to basics and suggested making Casino Royale. The producers took the idea, without thanking Tarantino and sacked Brosnan at the same time, over the phone. Nice.

So Brosnan and Tarantino should be credited for saying they needed to go back to basics?

Yes, he was quite vocal in his displeasure of the script quality of his movies.

Don't you remember all the press about Tarantino saying he wanted to make Casino Royale with Brosnan. This was long before the producers decided to make CR.

When it comes to Bond, I have a photographic memory for remembering facts.

My own uncle said way back in the '80s CR should be remade as a serious film. He's not complaining they stole his idea.

What's your uncle got to do with the Bond franchise?

Tarantino says a lot of things. That doesn't make it a FACT that his suggesting remaking CR meant he should be credited for Eon acquiring the rights to CR and doing it with Craig. From what I've heard, Eon had been trying to acquire the rights to it for years.

I'm a huge fan of QT's, but everybody knows that if the guy did as much writing and directing as he did running his mouth then we'd have a lot more work of his to enjoy. He's said he was going to make a Vega brothers movie for years. He said for years he was going to make Inglorious Bastards and is just now getting around to it. He talks more than does.

As for the comment on my uncle, I was making a comparison that he deserves as much credit as QT does for saying CR should have been remade.