The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[FormerBondFan]

The Amazing Spider-Man: Even with 3D ticket pricing, the Spider-Man reboot is the first in the franchise to wind up below $300 million at the domestic box office. Still, it's on pace to earn over $750 million worldwide, which is more than enough to justify the sequel that's currently scheduled for May 2014.

Now I'm worried. If the Death Star III ends up following Andy's arachnid's example, then we'll have no choice but to go for freak whether you like it or not.

Sorry to say it FBF......throw in the towel...............Eon is hell bent on the platypus remaining as Bond......no matter what

EON keeping DC for 2 more film is not the only thing to worry about? What if Chris Nolan got sucked into directing one of the two?

Unless Bond 23 crashes and burns down (critically and financially) this November and ends up forgotten in the America movie awards department (meaning NO nominations other than the Razzies), the age of traditional tall dark-haired Bond is over, and the age of freaks shall begin.



Bond 23 making less than both CR and QOS both worldwide and here in the US may not guarantee DC will be done, but at least it would mean that this corrupted Bond movie has failed to join the three times the charm Bond movie club, which consists of the third entries of Sean, Rog and Pierce that surpassed their respective predecessors and became the highest Bond movie at their respective time. If Bond 23 enters this club (even surpassing CR worldwide and/or QOS in the US by one bit), send in the freaks as Bond.

[shaken not stirred]

The Amazing Spider-Man: Even with 3D ticket pricing, the Spider-Man reboot is the first in the franchise to wind up below $300 million at the domestic box office. Still, it's on pace to earn over $750 million worldwide, which is more than enough to justify the sequel that's currently scheduled for May 2014.

Now I'm worried. If the Death Star III ends up following Andy's arachnid's example, then we'll have no choice but to go for freak whether you like it or not.

Sorry to say it FBF......throw in the towel...............Eon is hell bent on the platypus remaining as Bond......no matter what

Well it's been fun, I'm not waiting another 4 years to see this turdmonkey, crapstain play bond any longer, let the sheep who want him have him, all the real fans (us) know that the real bond died after Brosnan, eon will never again replicate the successful 40 year formula they're too stuck in their ways to make bond bend any way they want him and don't care what it does, we all know it's a bourne wannabe today artsy fartsy arthouse production, just like the times today (mostly humourless) that's the result a very humourless, dry, gollum, pouty, botex, wax work model.

RIP James Bond: Killed by an horny green vegetable who believes you should be everything you're not, here's to a successful 40 years, f**k the last 10, this ain't your grandads bond, your uncles bond or your fathers bond...this just isn't bond, here's to Cubby for brining us such a successful memorable character, it was fun whilst it lasted, you gave us the last official bond & brought a bond to a whole new generation, shame I can't say the same about whatever the hell it is today.

This franchise now has a license to kill....itself & you know what craig you don't give a d**n and guess what why should I, an actor who keeps playing a role that's supposedly beneath him is nothing but a hypocrite but what's a rant gonna do anymore.

Sorry about My language guys I've had enough of the s**t I'm constantly spoonfed today, from reality tv, crap music, celebs and this dross, there's little to nothing to like anymore, we live in such a s**t generation today we may as well off ourselves (not literlally but that's how I feel), nothing but grim reality, gritty this, gritty that and we're in a recession as well....what fun times , avengers was the only real bloody escapism I've had in a longtime and like the ironman films remidns Me I'm here to watch a film, be entertained and escape reality, not remind Me of how unbloody fair it is and how difficult it is to find work and the rest, it's nothing but doom and gloom today with only a few small things to remain hopeful about.

[The Saint 007]

I agree with you, shaken not stirred. I've said that the only real way of getting the producers to go back to the classic Bond formula, is if the series suffers a steady decline. Barbara and Michael are just having so much fun with recreating the series in their own vision, that I doubt they're going back to the classic formula willingly. I believe that the classic Bond films are more difficult to make than these new rebooted films. It's much easier and fun to focus on tons character exploration and copy from other film series (Bourne), and pretend that you're some sort of artistically creative genius. After GoldenEye and Albert Broccoli's death, it just seemed that Barbara and Michael couldn't get their act together. I like Brosnan, but I feel that he had more potential as Bond than what was shown, because of the mistakes of the producers, writers, etc. In another thread, I also gave my thoughts as to why I think Die Another Day was an intentional farewell party film for Brosnan and classic Bond. The producers were having problems with the classic formula, and were also running out of ideas. Plus, they already had the rights to Casino Royale in 1999. Instead of taking a little more time to make the films, or getting different writers, they simply just reboot the series and throw away a beloved formula.

The reboot was completely unnecessary, in my opinion. The complaints about Die Another Day were about the overall quality of the film, not the classic Bond formula. If the classic formula was really the problem, then why are there so many people wanting it to be brought back? Why are there people getting excited for the return of certain classic Bond elements in Skyfall? No, there was nothing wrong with the formula, the producers just simply couldn't do the math. And I hate the the fact that Craig is so overrated and pampered by the producers, critics, and fans, that he can stay in the role of Bond forever. But for some reason it wasn't good for Roger Moore or Sean Connery to be old when they were playing Bond. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Well, thankfully I have various classic spy television shows on DVD that are much better and closer to classic Bond than this rebooted nonsense, so I can always use that as an alternative. As a long-time Bond fan, I never thought I'd find myself wishing bad upon the series, but I really hope audiences lose interest in Bond, and the series suffers from a steady decline. Or perhaps another series may come along that gives audiences a similar type of entertainment to classic Bond that they crave, and will disrupt the rebooted Bond series. I still love Bond, the classic Bond, and it's my love for those films that keeps me clinging to this series with the hope that it may return to what made it so great.

[Kristatos]

Or perhaps another series may come along that gives audiences a similar type of entertainment to classic Bond that they crave, and will disrupt the rebooted Bond series. I still love Bond, the classic Bond, and it's my love for those films that keeps me clinging to this series with the hope that it may return to what made it so great.

I do believe that the success of The Avengers, way exceeding all expectations, was precisely because it offered a return to escapism after years of everyone trying to copy the doom-laden tone of Chris Nolan's Bat-films, with varying degrees of success.

[The Saint 007]

Or perhaps another series may come along that gives audiences a similar type of entertainment to classic Bond that they crave, and will disrupt the rebooted Bond series. I still love Bond, the classic Bond, and it's my love for those films that keeps me clinging to this series with the hope that it may return to what made it so great.

I do believe that the success of The Avengers, way exceeding all expectations, was precisely because it offered a return to escapism after years of everyone trying to copy the doom-laden tone of Chris Nolan's Bat-films, with varying degrees of success.

There really needs to be a balance struck with the Bond films, similar to GoldenEye. Grim and gritty isn't appealing for everyone, especially when everyone else is doing the same thing. I think it's even better to be a little more light-hearted than too dark, since it's still more entertaining and has a wider appeal. The Dalton films were serious too, but they still had some humorous moments, and they also still had the James Bond feel or vibe to them.

What Craig is doing isn't really anything new. Bond falling in love, Bond showing more emotion, Bond seeking revenge, etc., are all things that have either been criticized, or did poorly in the past. Now Barbara and Michael are trying to make all those things work years later with a new feel to the series. While these things I mentioned might be a little more acceptable now than it was before, there's still many people that don't agree with it. Goldfinger set the template for the Bond films, and the series became extremely popular for the various elements it had. There are so many movies and television shows inspired by Bond, and it's the classic formula that made the character such a pop-culture icon worldwide. But now the producers took that all away because they rather make films for themselves.

The Craig Bond films are attracting a whole new audience. Now while there's classic Bond fans that enjoy Craig's films, but there's also many others that either didn't care for Bond at all before Craig, or just got tired of the old Bond films. When I read the comments of some Craig fans on the forums, a lot of them don't speak too highly of the older films, and think the Craig films are more superior. And these are mostly the kinds of people the producers are attracting with these films. Sure, you're bringing in a new audience, but at the same time, you're also losing the older fans of the series. Therefore, you're not really expanding the audience, but just getting rid of the older fans and replacing them with new ones. The whole idea of expanding the series is to try to keep as many of the older fans as possible, while trying to gain new ones.

When visiting various sites, I've seen many comments from people who are getting tired of this direction, or just throwing in the towel on the series altogether. Now if that's on the internet, can you imagine what the mass market thinks? It may take some time, because the James Bond brand name is strong, but eventually the popularity of the series could start declining, forcing the producers to return to the classic formula. They can't keep using Casino Royale as a security blanket forever. The only reason why I think that film was so well received, is because Die Another Day wasn't that great, and therefore it seemed like an improvement.

[FormerBondFan]

Sorry about My language guys I've had enough of the s**t I'm constantly spoonfed today, from reality tv, crap music, celebs and this dross, there's little to nothing to like anymore, we live in such a s**t generation today we may as well off ourselves (not literlally but that's how I feel), nothing but grim reality, gritty this, gritty that and we're in a recession as well....what fun times , avengers was the only real bloody escapism I've had in a longtime and like the ironman films remidns Me I'm here to watch a film, be entertained and escape reality, not remind Me of how unbloody fair it is and how difficult it is to find work and the rest, it's nothing but doom and gloom today with only a few small things to remain hopeful about.

The Dark Knight Rises should be in your list of escapism even though it's realism.

[FormerBondFan]

As a long-time Bond fan, I never thought I'd find myself wishing bad upon the series, but I really hope audiences lose interest in Bond, and the series suffers from a steady decline. Or perhaps another series may come along that gives audiences a similar type of entertainment to classic Bond that they crave, and will disrupt the rebooted Bond series.

MI4, The Dark Knight trilogy, and Iron Man trilogy are the closest things we have to a classic Bond, and I'm sure there are plenty more out there. If Bond 23 grosses higher than both QOS and CR (especially here in the US) even one bit and/or getting some love by big American movie awards (as in getting nominated), it's time to give up on the traditional tall dark-haired Bond and instead go for the freaks.

[Napoleon Solo]

Sorry about My language guys I've had enough of the s**t I'm constantly spoonfed today (snip).

There's no need for you to apologize. Afterall, the current 007 constantly repeats the phrase "for f*ck's sake" in interviews and much of the fanbase objects if you even suggest that's less than classy. I once saw somebody argue on the MI6 message board that that showed the actor was honest and therefore it was classy in its own way.

[The Saint 007]

As a long-time Bond fan, I never thought I'd find myself wishing bad upon the series, but I really hope audiences lose interest in Bond, and the series suffers from a steady decline. Or perhaps another series may come along that gives audiences a similar type of entertainment to classic Bond that they crave, and will disrupt the rebooted Bond series.

MI4, The Dark Knight trilogy, and Iron Man trilogy are the closest things we have to a classic Bond, and I'm sure there are plenty more out there. If Bond 23 grosses higher than both QOS and CR (especially here in the US) even one bit and/or getting some love by big American movie awards (as in getting nominated), it's time to give up on the traditional tall dark-haired Bond and instead go for the freaks.

The Saint series is basically a watered-down version of James Bond with Roger Moore, and I have the complete series on DVD. I also have Danger Man with Patrick McGoohan, and other cool spy series from the 1960's and 1970's on DVD that are closer to classic Bond than these Craig films. Plus, I can order more of these types of television series online, so I have plenty of alternatives for Bond.

What we need is another really good spy film series that provides all the great elements and enjoyment of the classic Bond films, with its own unique twist of course. I really hope some other spy series does come around and seriously disrupts Barbara and Michael's rebooted nonsense.

[bjmdds]

The Amazing Spider-Man: Even with 3D ticket pricing, the Spider-Man reboot is the first in the franchise to wind up below $300 million at the domestic box office. Still, it's on pace to earn over $750 million worldwide, which is more than enough to justify the sequel that's currently scheduled for May 2014.

Now I'm worried. If the Death Star III ends up following Andy's arachnid's example, then we'll have no choice but to go for freak whether you like it or not.

Sorry to say it FBF......throw in the towel...............Eon is hell bent on the platypus remaining as Bond......no matter what

Well it's been fun, I'm not waiting another 4 years to see this turdmonkey, crapstain play bond any longer, let the sheep who want him have him, all the real fans (us) know that the real bond died after Brosnan, eon will never again replicate the successful 40 year formula they're too stuck in their ways to make bond bend any way they want him and don't care what it does, we all know it's a bourne wannabe today artsy fartsy arthouse production, just like the times today (mostly humourless) that's the result a very humourless, dry, gollum, pouty, botex, wax work model.

RIP James Bond: Killed by an horny green vegetable who believes you should be everything you're not, here's to a successful 40 years, f**k the last 10, this ain't your grandads bond, your uncles bond or your fathers bond...this just isn't bond, here's to Cubby for brining us such a successful memorable character, it was fun whilst it lasted, you gave us the last official bond & brought a bond to a whole new generation, shame I can't say the same about whatever the hell it is today.

This franchise now has a license to kill....itself & you know what craig you don't give a d**n and guess what why should I, an actor who keeps playing a role that's supposedly beneath him is nothing but a hypocrite but what's a rant gonna do anymore.

Sorry about My language guys I've had enough of the s**t I'm constantly spoonfed today, from reality tv, crap music, celebs and this dross, there's little to nothing to like anymore, we live in such a s**t generation today we may as well off ourselves (not literlally but that's how I feel), nothing but grim reality, gritty this, gritty that and we're in a recession as well....what fun times , avengers was the only real bloody escapism I've had in a longtime and like the ironman films remidns Me I'm here to watch a film, be entertained and escape reality, not remind Me of how unbloody fair it is and how difficult it is to find work and the rest, it's nothing but doom and gloom today with only a few small things to remain hopeful about.

Shaken, you stirred me with this post Excellent take on this mad world we live in now. I agree 100000% with everything you said and I am sure FBF agrees as well. It's been a fun run though 2002......it's over..........UNLESS Bond 23 is a disaster at the box office................screw Eon.........they have screwed Bond fans and their late father royally

[bjmdds]

As a long-time Bond fan, I never thought I'd find myself wishing bad upon the series, but I really hope audiences lose interest in Bond, and the series suffers from a steady decline. Or perhaps another series may come along that gives audiences a similar type of entertainment to classic Bond that they crave, and will disrupt the rebooted Bond series.

MI4, The Dark Knight trilogy, and Iron Man trilogy are the closest things we have to a classic Bond, and I'm sure there are plenty more out there. If Bond 23 grosses higher than both QOS and CR (especially here in the US) even one bit and/or getting some love by big American movie awards (as in getting nominated), it's time to give up on the traditional tall dark-haired Bond and instead go for the freaks.

The Saint series is basically a watered-down version of James Bond with Roger Moore, and I have the complete series on DVD. I also have Danger Man with Patrick McGoohan, and other cool spy series from the 1960's and 1970's on DVD that are closer to classic Bond than these Craig films. Plus, I can order more of these types of television series online, so I have plenty of alternatives for Bond.

What we need is another really good spy film series that provides all the great elements and enjoyment of the classic Bond films, with its own unique twist of course. I really hope some other spy series does come around and seriously disrupts Barbara and Michael's rebooted nonsense.

MI: 4 was excellent. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Maybe FBF will get us all to push hard for a MI: 5 film and we can direct all our energies to that I enjoy Ethan Hunt over James Bond now by a wide margin. I want to compare box offices of Bond 23 vs. Mi:4. That will show Eon which spy franchise does it right. Cruise is 50 and looks 15 years younger than the walking dead Cr-egg

[bjmdds]

"Fan-site MI6 say they've confirmed Craig has upped his contract to stick around for two more films after "Skyfall," and that the actor will return for the 24th and 25th entries in the series, bringing him to five altogether (one more than predecessor in the role, Pierce Brosnan). Backers Sony are said to favor a return to the one-film-every-two-years template that was interrupted by MGM's financial difficulties, although production company EON and Craig are said to be keen on a longer break between pictures in order to crack the script and to give the actor a bit of a break.

Although the news should be taken with a 'slight pinch of salt until official word arrives', it's not a huge surprise that Craig wants to stay involved -- the actor's had some difficulties establishing his box office credentials elsewhere, with "Cowboys & Aliens" and "Dream House" both flopping, but a Bond film every few years means the actor stays bankable and gets the freedom to do more personal projects. And if they continue to attract talent like Sam Mendes and John Logan, the director and writer of "Skyfall," we're sure Craig will be keen to stick around for a little longer. We'll see the extent to which "Skyfall" shows the future of the 007 franchise when the film opens in Europe on October 26th and in the U.S. on November 9th." http://bestmoviesevernews.com/wp-conten ... s-2012.jpg

[FormerBondFan]

Maybe FBF will get us all to push hard for a MI: 5 film and we can direct all our energies to that I enjoy Ethan Hunt over James Bond now by a wide margin. I want to compare box offices of Bond 23 vs. Mi:4.

BJ, let's not forget that the freaks take over as Bond even if Bond 23 (even with IMAX and higher ticket prices) grosses higher than CR's worldwide $594 million and/or QOS' US $168 million by one bit.

[Goldeneye]

Hi Guys.

Our site was down briefly because our hosting company was attacked by hackers. You've probably seen it in the news.

Anyway the good news we just got back online. Bad news is I don't know if another waves of attacks are coming.

It's nothing to do with us in itself we're just a small fraction of the thousands experiencing service interruptions.

[katied]

The "Just because Craig uses language that would make sailors blush doesn't mean he's a yob" argument is reg@dd@m-diculous.

[Kristatos]

The Dark Knight Rises should be in your list of escapism even though it's realism.

It's too weighty to be considered escapism. Like its predecessor, it deals with heavyweight moral issues. Most of Nolan's imitators (and I include the last 2 Bond films and Skyfall in that category) just take away "dark and gritty" from the Bat-films without the moral weight of those films. It's the worst of both worlds. CS Lewis, when he was asked why a distinguished Oxford professor such as himself wasted his time reading pulp adventure novels by the likes of H Rider Haggard, replied something to the effect (I can't find the exact quote) that he likes brandy and he likes lemon squash, but some people get stuck between the two drinking creme de menthe. Nolan's Batman trilogy is the brandy in this metaphor, pre-reboot Bond the lemon squash and post-reboot Bond the creme de menthe.

[The Saint 007]

The "Just because Craig uses language that would make sailors blush doesn't mean he's a yob" argument is reg@dd@m-diculous.

Daniel Craig can do no wrong in the eyes of some people. On the Skyfall boards on IMDb, I recently saw another thread about what the worst Bond films are. It seems like every other week someone posts a thread about that topic there, where people will list the usual suspects that they listed in a similar thread a week or so before:

-Thunderball
-You Only Live Twice
-Diamonds Are Forever
-The Man With The Golden Gun
-Moonraker
-Octopussy
-A View To A Kill
-Tomorrow Never Dies
-The World Is Not Enough
-Die Another Day
-(The Dalton films and Never Say Never Again get occasionally listed for good measure)

Now here's what I find funny. As soon as someone mentions Quantum Of Solace, there's Craig fans that come in defending it saying that it doesn't deserve to be on the list, and how people just don't understand how great of a Bond film it is. It's interesting how it's fine to point out the other Bond actors so-called "bad Bond films," but yet Craig is the only Bond actor that has perfect Bond films. Not only do I, as well as many, consider Quantum Of Solace to be a horrible Bond film, it's not even passable as a standalone action film.

[Kristatos]

Now here's what I find funny. As soon as someone mentions Quantum Of Solace, there's Craig fans that come in defending it saying that it doesn't deserve to be on the list, and how people just don't understand how great of a Bond film it is.

The latter part is the key, liking (or possibly pretending to like) QOS makes them feel superior to those poor souls who only saw a confused, sloppily put together action movie with little visible connection to Bond beyond a few scenes rehashed from earlier, better Bond films. On the other hand, clever people like them who talk loudly in restaurants see it as a thrillingly audacious subversion of the Bond formula, worthy of Godard. The phrase "mise en scene" will probably also be in there somewhere, whether they know what it means or not.

[Napoleon Solo]

Now here's what I find funny. As soon as someone mentions Quantum Of Solace, there's Craig fans that come in defending it saying that it doesn't deserve to be on the list, and how people just don't understand how great of a Bond film it is.

The latter part is the key, liking (or possibly pretending to like) QOS makes them feel superior to those poor souls who only saw a confused, sloppily put together action movie with little visible connection to Bond beyond a few scenes rehashed from earlier, better Bond films. On the other hand, clever people like them who talk loudly in restaurants see it as a thrillingly audacious subversion of the Bond formula, worthy of Godard. The phrase "mise en scene" will probably also be in there somewhere, whether they know what it means or not.

I had an exchange about Quantum on another message board like this:

1. I point out the bad continuity between Quantum and Casino: Quantum takes place two minutes/two hours (the time frame always varied) yet M has a totall recorated office, Mathis (who was still being "sweated") has moved to a villa and has a live-in girlfriend, Bond has changed clothes, etc. Also, Casino took place in 2006, Quantum in 2008.

Response: It could have taken a long time for Bond to track down White. Counter-response: No, a cell phone acts like a GPS device, that was the whole point of Vesper giving Bond the number to Mr. White's cell phone. Drug gangs are smart enough to use disposable cell phones, surely Quantum was that smart, therefore Bond had to move fast.


Second response: How do you know Casino took place in 2006? Prove it.

Answer: time stamp on the survelliance recordings at the club.

Third response: How do you know Quantum took palce in 2008? Prove it.

My answer: date on invitations to Dominic Greene's party.

Final response: Well, you're just being picky, that's not even real criticism!

[Blowfeld]

There was a very good reason why the 007 franchise never did another movie as a direct follow up to a previous entry. However it should be no big deal for a modern production company to use the old sets instead of commissioning new CGI friendly ones.

I think they stated flat out QOS was a direct sequel, in fact if I remember right it was part of a trilogy. Trilogy idea has been laid to rest since then. I think it was the fall out from QOS BTW whose director was invited back for Bond 23.

QOS was a new low for the series the faithful to the franchise need a excuse so the writers strike and director are the culprits (BTW we asked the question here if the strike would hurt Bond 22). I can't imagine anyone feeling obligated to defend QOS, still, at this late date. Of our usual suspects I think only Stocks thought QOS was underrated.

It always mystified my who DAD went form being the biggest Bond movie ever to the worst, it was soooo bad Bond had to get away from it and back to what Ian Fleming intended Bond to be a Matt Helm knock off.

Of 20 moves it was not the absolute worst, of 22 movies it certainly is not in the top 3. Somehow the meme was started about the time Daniel was hired that DAD was rubbish and the worst possible movie, incidentally it was a movie EON took 3 years to carefully craft. I often lie awake at night wondering how many people have an original idea left in their heads and how many are happy to run their lives on themes dolled out by the social media outlet of their choice