The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[Captain Nash]

Once Cr-egg is gone all will return to normalcy. I guess Broccoli still is meeting with Danny on occasion to DISCUSS the upcoming film. They guy is a putrid Bond specimen and the farther she goes with him as Bond the worse it will get.

I think the idea is to get all the naysayers to get so fed up with Bond that they ditch him altogether.
That way the loyal fans of the series can enjoy the future of Bond.
http://www.examiner.com/film-industry-i ... wn-on-bond

Here's a STORY from the examiner that I'm sure you'll all go head over heels with.
Yes it IS true.
The press nowadays. They'll print anything.
Many of them should be ashamed to call themselves journalists.

[Captain Nash]

There's a huge difference between "posting the truth" once and spamming it on every post on Bond 23.

Can you show evidence of this?
I may have posted more than once that Craig IS BACK, but not to the lengths I'm accused of.

[oscartheman]

Time to hang it up Nash you've gone over the bend.Can't remember what you just posted one of the first signs of dementia.So sad.

[katied]

Time to hang it up Nash you've gone over the bend.Can't remember what you just posted one of the first signs of dementia.So sad.

This. You know what, I actually have been making an effort to get along with Nash. But the news that Craig is going to be in Bond 23 has caused him to lose it. I don't mean it in a mean way, but there you go.

[The Sweeney]

Once Cr-egg is gone all will return to normalcy. I guess Broccoli still is meeting with Danny on occasion to DISCUSS the upcoming film. The guy is a putrid Bond specimen and the farther he goes as Bond the worse it will get.

Hey BJ. Belated Happy New Year.

How many years have you been beating this drum now. This must be a never-ending nightmare for you.
I actually dread to think how you will cope if Craig does Bond 24 too.....

PS. I'm hoping to leave India in the next few weeks, and move back to the UK - get my life back on track!

[The Sweeney]

Time to hang it up Nash you've gone over the bend.Can't remember what you just posted one of the first signs of dementia.So sad.

This. You know what, I actually have been making an effort to get along with Nash. But the news that Craig is going to be in Bond 23 has caused him to lose it. I don't mean it in a mean way, but there you go.

Allow Nash a little bit of gloating. For us pro-Craig fans, as friendly as this forum is, sometimes its difficult reading the same old negativity day-in-day-out, especially when we don't share the same opinion, so I think Nash is just bouncing back with over optimisim after the months of doom-and gloom regarding the news of Bond 23. Even I am very happy right now that another Bond film has been greenlit.....I just don't want to rub it in too much on here.

And at least we'll have plenty of things to debate about now. Bring it on......

[katied]

Craig staying on is rather dependent on Bond 23 doing well. Someone will have have to talk Babs into giving Craig the boot if that doesn't happen and you *know* that's a job that nobody wants!

[carl stromberg]

Being only a fan of Bond I don't follow other fandoms. Do any other sites exist for other forums Star Trek , Star Wars , Batman etc etc that have been so divided by the casting or changes made to a long running franchise that have almost cause a fan war?
We seem to have a Bond fan war with the casting of Craig.
It's sad really.

What do you mean "almost" caused a fan war? It has as Daniel Craig has ruined Bond for many. It would be nice to have a new Bond film to watch one day .

From reading some of the comments on places like AICN I get the impressions that many people are bored with Craig's Bond and were hoping for a change. Where can he go with Bond 23 after the QOS shambles?

[Kristatos]

Here's a STORY from the examiner that I'm sure you'll all go head over heels with.
Yes it IS true.
The press nowadays. They'll print anything.
Many of them should be ashamed to call themselves journalists.

That article lost me at "{Clive} Owen has coveted the role for some time". He has said repeatedly that he doesn't want it.

[English Agent]

Hi

Good to see the same forum posters of old are still going strong here!

Its good to be back, and its been interesting to see nothing's changed here , though its good to see some new posters.

In regards to HP.........the first Deathly Hallows film has done pretty good at the BO, but i expect part two of the film to do even better (being the swansong for the franchise).

Back to Bond..........it still annoys me that QOS was such a dire film, considering i thought that CR was very good. In my opinion i thought that the producers got carried away with the praise for CR, and thought they could do no wrong with QOS, but they did.
The trouble with QOS is that the producers dicthed a lot of the regular Bond crew, and hired some talented, but very mismatched teams of people to make the film, even though these people were very good in their own fields, the final result was that they seemed to undo a lot of each others work.

e.g.

The producers wanted a more gritty personal action feel so they hired Dan Bradley and his team of action people from the Bourne series, unfortunately this was matched to a director who had no or little expereince as an action director, this director in turn used his own editors who appeared to not know how to cut action sequences, who instead fast cut the action scenes to be a blur of images from all camera angles, but not giving the viewer time enough to register what was going on.

Mind you all this wouldn't of seemed to bad if the film had a good story, and characterisations, but no the story was weak, and had no depth to it.

Oh yeah.......... that title song was abysmal!

Plus points, the acting was on the whole pretty good, and i know this is a DCINB site, but considering that the film was a mess i thought DC did a very good job.
David Arnold's score was pretty good as well, plus some of the non action scenes from the director.

QOS was a big missed opportunity, the film if it had been a cracker could of seen it easily surpass CR at the BO, as was hinted by the opening weekend figures. With a weekend BO opening of some $67+ mil in North America, you would expect a film to end up with at least $200 mil, not $168 mil.
Even in the UK a record opening weekend was not good enough to see it beat CR, which ended up with somewhere in the region of $106 mil. QOS just got north of $80 mil.

I know i've mentioned these things in the past, but i think QOS has done some damage to the Bond franchise, and it will be interesting to see how the worldwide public responds to Bond 23 on the opening weekend, as this will give us an indication to how well the Bond franchise is still supported, before the impact of the film and word of mouth of its viewing reaches the rest of the masses.

Bond 23 has got to be very good indeed to restore the goodwill to the franchise, which was somewhat reduced by the turkey QOS

Personally, i think it will (mind you i thought QOS was going to be good )

EON, need to ditch the Bourne thing, and influences of other franchises, and get back to making Bond as it should be.

Its interesting to note that alledgely the studio is only prepared to spend $150 mil on Bond 23, but that wouldn't surprise me, after the excesses of QOS.
I mean $200 mil + production costs on a film that barely lasted over 1 and half hours. At least Martin Campbell gave us a 2 and a half hour film with CR on a reported budget of $150 MIL.

EA

Hi BJ ......see you still going strong here, its a right pain when u have computer problems at home, and its expensive.

Sweeney .......... blimey, can't believe u r in India, there's no hiding place that these DCINB agents won't find you!

[The Sweeney]

In a way, Bond 23 will either redeem Craig to the fans who liked his first outing but not the second, and possibly could win over a few anti fans too in the process (maybe even on here...... ).

Or it could be a disaster, and bring more of the same we had with QoS, which will ultimately cement Craig's tenure as an experiment in the franchise that failed miserably, a nasty blip to try and forget about about, far worse than the short tenures of Lazenby and Dalton, which could be argued as blips.

Bond 23 needs to deliver like never before in a lot of ways, for the sake of the franchise, and not just for Craig's tenure alone. 23 needs to be Craig's Goldfinger and TSWLM all rolled into one. It needs to please the new-formed fans who like Craig, to appeal to the cinematic Bond fans who prefer the more light-hearted films, and the die-hard Fleming fans who prefer the grittier, more realistic approach. It has to tick a lot of boxes, without compromsing or looking muddled and messy (something which has happened with every Bond film since 1989).

GF is where all the elements came together, yet still retained enough of the Fleming spirit throughout - the gadgets were not too OTT, and aided the storyline, Connery hit his peak with a more casual performance, without losing his edge, the humour was increased yet still subtle enough, the villain was outlandish but still plausible.

GF created the cinematic Bond. Now the producers have to look towards that again to have any hope of sustaining the franchise at the level it has been for the past 40 years. Combine hard edged Fleming with the lighter hearted cinematic values seemlessly. They can no longer afford to have a film of two halves - one which focuses on the action element for instance, and then another half which focuses on some other element (both DAD and CR suffer from this, as do many Bond films).

Mistakes were made with QoS. It will be interesting to see which way Bond 23 will now go.

[English Agent]

oops ............ i was a bit negative in my last post, but as always i'am looking forward to the next Bond instalment, and will enjoy discussing here all the news on the film during pre-production, production and post-production.

EA

[Thunderpussy]

Hi English Agent,I agree with your Points,I could of put up with the shaky camera work and frantic editing if ther was something of a story to drive it along,But what story ! .I too hope Bond 23 is Good,But fear as you said the turkey of QOS might hurt it, I work for a uk cinema chain and made a Point of noting audiance reaction to it,And believe me there weren't any happy customers as far as I could see.Stunned silence infact as people left the theater,when normally you get a buzz from people discussing scenes and parts of a movie that impressed them.Many people missed the gunbarrel at the end because they couldn't wait to get out of the cinema.
Apart from people on other forums and some here, I haven't heard one non Bond fan/General public praising QOS,all I hear is how Bad it was compared to the others.I know this is just a personal experience but I don't think where I live is going to be very diffrent from anyone eles.
The main Thing I've heard listining to feedback from audiances was It was too much like J Bourne. I believe there is an audiance for the likes of the J Bourne movies ( I like them too ) But People have an expectation of Bond, they know what to expect,and rather like when Coca Cola changed they formula, EON might just have to very quickly get Back to a more traditional approach.

[English Agent]

'Thunderpussy', i too also noticed these observations about QOS.

I remember when CR came out, many non Bond fans went to see the film due to good word of mouth. In fact everyone in my office went to see the film, and they all enjoyed the film.
But, that wasn't the same with QOS, the Bond fans were dissapointed, non Bond fans didn't go to see the film (from hearing comments from Bond fans and reviews in the media), those that did go complained of the skakey cam giving them a headache, and the general comment i get about QOS is that people say,
'Didn't like it, prefered CR'

Well things go only go upwards for Bond now?

EA

[Thunderpussy]

I have my Fingers crossed,Like The Sweeny said the'd better pull out a Goldfinger and give us another The spy who loved me or I think the series is on (like their Camera work ) shaky Ground. But as I said I travel In Hope

[Alessandra]

There's a huge difference between "posting the truth" once and spamming it on every post on Bond 23.

Can you show evidence of this?
I may have posted more than once that Craig IS BACK, but not to the lengths I'm accused of.

I'm not accusing, I am observing, very different. Observing after you have already posted "Craig is back" multiple times. And after you've even posted I couldn't talk about Bond #7 because I was getting ahead of myself for talking about Craig's replacement, seen as now that he's doing 23, he's going nowhere? Huh? He always said he didn't want to do more than 3, contracts or not. And he's way too old already. I expected him to do 23, and my outlook remains the exact same: new actor for Bond 24, because Bond 23 is the maximum he can do given not only the absurd direction of the movies but also his old looks. I said that before the release date, and I will keep on discussing Bond #7 just like you too and everyone else did before the release date for Bond 23. Not to mention you posted repeatedly that we can't say Mendes is a mistake as he is not an action movie director (a fact that is abundantly proven by his career) because we must wait and see. Stop going on with "Craig is back" in a DCINB forum and you'll see how nobody gets fed up with it.

I think the idea is to get all the naysayers to get so fed up with Bond that they ditch him altogether.
That way the loyal fans of the series can enjoy the future of Bond.

The true fans of the franchise aren't the Craig fans (or ACTOR fans in general) that's for sure. The true fans are the BOND fans. There are a lot of people who praise Craig who are HIS fans first and foremost rather than Bond fans. Actually the majority of the Craig fans only liked two-three movies in the entire franchise and kept on hating on the other ones until Daniel the savior came on board. Surely those aren't Bond fans.

As far as Bond 23, I am not seeing ANY sign that this is going to be any better than QoS. I see every sign pointing in the direction of this being EXACTLY like QoS instead. Same exact type of director, absurd suggestions for villains, and far from encouraging third writer of the script (Actually forth, who got on board after the third fell out with Purvis & Wade plus EON). Same exact thing all over again.

And instead it better be VERY different from QoS and not as in "Casino Royale-like" because that is not going to go down well now either. They need a traditional Bond movie, and have said so. Too bad they said it (well not of course Babs or Wilson, but others were quoted as saying it multiple times) but they aren't doing anything that indicates they're going to follow that mantra. No action director, no good action movie screenwriter for starters. And on top of it, Craig as non-Bond, which was anyway going to be the main problem on top of the bad recipe.

I don't see why as of now I should consider Bond 23 any different from QoS. The moment I actually see quotes and names associated with it that indicate a drastic departure from QoS I will certainly and happily note it, but considered director and screenwriters are appointed already, I have huge doubts that is ever going to happen. No actor could have saved the disaster that was QoS, not even Brosnan or Henry Cavill. No plot and shaky nonsensical action cam just defeats anyone. And I don't even blame Craig in general in the sense that it's Barbara Broccoli who is responsible for it. Craig is just miscast in the role, and he tries to do his job. Even with a Shakespearean performance he will never look and act like Bond, because that's just not who he is. It's not his fault at all, it's just the way he is and there's nothing wrong with it. He simply should never have been cast as Bond.

Bond 23 just better not tank, because we need an alive franchise to actually have a chance to see a new actor who looks and behaves like James Bond is supposed to in the role. Thing is, it's a Bond movie and 4 years will have passed since QoS. That means people will have forgotten about QoS and they will just see "NEW BOND MOVIE" out. They'll go see it. People go for Bond, certainly not for Daniel Craig. So as of now that is my hope, that enough people go see it regardless, so it doesn't tank. If we see encouraging signs of an actual Bond movie that is nothing like QoS being in the works, then I'll gladly adjust my thoughts accordingly.

[katied]

Time to hang it up Nash you've gone over the bend.Can't remember what you just posted one of the first signs of dementia.So sad.

This. You know what, I actually have been making an effort to get along with Nash. But the news that Craig is going to be in Bond 23 has caused him to lose it. I don't mean it in a mean way, but there you go.

Allow Nash a little bit of gloating. For us pro-Craig fans, as friendly as this forum is, sometimes its difficult reading the same old negativity day-in-day-out, especially when we don't share the same opinion, so I think Nash is just bouncing back with over optimisim after the months of doom-and gloom regarding the news of Bond 23. Even I am very happy right now that another Bond film has been greenlit.....I just don't want to rub it in too much on here.

And at least we'll have plenty of things to debate about now. Bring it on......

I don't really see what we're doing as being "doom and gloom".Obviously.

Nash is entitled to be happy.What he isn't entitled to is to get in our faces about it. Save it for elsewhere. If that comes off as rude, I'm sorry.But it's how I feel.

[The Sweeney]

Time to hang it up Nash you've gone over the bend.Can't remember what you just posted one of the first signs of dementia.So sad.

This. You know what, I actually have been making an effort to get along with Nash. But the news that Craig is going to be in Bond 23 has caused him to lose it. I don't mean it in a mean way, but there you go.

Allow Nash a little bit of gloating. For us pro-Craig fans, as friendly as this forum is, sometimes its difficult reading the same old negativity day-in-day-out, especially when we don't share the same opinion, so I think Nash is just bouncing back with over optimisim after the months of doom-and gloom regarding the news of Bond 23. Even I am very happy right now that another Bond film has been greenlit.....I just don't want to rub it in too much on here.

And at least we'll have plenty of things to debate about now. Bring it on......

I don't really see what we're doing as being "doom and gloom".Obviously.

Nash is entitled to be happy.What he isn't entitled to is to get in our faces about it. Save it for elsewhere. If that comes off as rude, I'm sorry.But it's how I feel.

I wasn't on about the doom and gloom on here specifically. I was on about the doom and gloom with Bond news in general (particularly on MI6 actually) for the past few months regarding the uncertainty of Bond 23, with MGM, bankruptcy, etc.

[The Sweeney]

The true fans of the franchise aren't the Craig fans (or ACTOR fans in general) that's for sure. The true fans are the BOND fans. There are a lot of people who praise Craig who are HIS fans first and foremost rather than Bond fans. Actually the majority of the Craig fans only liked two-three movies in the entire franchise and kept on hating on the other ones until Daniel the savior came on board. Surely those aren't Bond fans.

Actually I have to show objection to this one, Ale. I'm one who praises Craig for his performance and only really love a handful of Bond movies, and despise the Brozza films, but I'm as die-hard a Bond fan as they come. I own all the Fleming first edition novels, the Pan 60's novels, I have way too much Bond merchandise and memorabillia to list here (I even own a Philishaver from DAD, despite the fact that I hate the movie). I live and breathe Bond, have done for 30 odd years....long before Craig came on the scene. So yes, I would say I was a hardcore Bond fan, and not a Craig fan.

And I think there is a misconception regarding `Craig fans'. I doubt Craig had that many diehard fans before he did Bond. He only now has so many fans because of his role as Bond. But this will probably only last throughout his tenure as Bond. The fans who like him, I'm guessing are Bond fans (maybe quite a few new Bond fans) but they are Bond fans first and foremost. I doubt many of the so-called `Craig fans' have even seen many of his films outside of Bond. So I wouldn't class them as Craig fans, but Bond fans who like Craig in the role. There is a difference.

I know many people who thought Brozza was their favourite Bond, but I would never dismiss them as Brozza fans first and foremost, and state they couldn't be Bond fans, for liking a particular actor in the role.

Not to be too nasty to Daniel here, but I seriously doubt he would have that many fans if he never played Bond. Who would worship an actor that played such offbeat roles like Craig does. Right, I'm stopping myself now. I'm starting to catch the anti-Craig bug by being on here too frequently.....

[Kristatos]

And I think there is a misconception regarding `Craig fans'. (snip) So I wouldn't class them as Craig fans, but Bond fans who like Craig in the role. There is a difference.

I think that's understood, but it would get a bit tedious to type out "Bond fans who like Craig in the role" every time. "Craig fans" or "Pro-Craigers" is simply shorthand.