The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 4:21 am

Meghan Markle was shortlisted as Daniel Craig’s next Bond Girl – before romance with Harry made her ‘unattainable’---The actress, 36, caught the eye of 007 producers in her role as Rachel Zane in US legal drama Suits last year - but Meghan’s then-fledgling relationship with Prince Harry, 33, ruled her out of the role. ---------Barbara Broccoli, who is in charge of the highly lucrative spy series, has dropped a big hint that 007 could next be played by a black or female actor. Barbara, 57, whose father Albert 'Cubby' Broccoli turned Ian Fleming's espionage novels into the world's biggest spy film franchise, was asked if we could expect to see a female Bond or a black 007. 'These films tend to reflect the times so we always try to push the envelope a little bit,' she replied. 'Anything is possible. Right now it's Daniel Craig, and I'm very happy with Daniel Craig, but who knows what the future will bring?'

Post by **Kristatos** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 1:02 pm

Omega wrote: Disney majorly panders to the Christian community, I don’t think they are being too political. Maybe more SJW than they were but if they lose the family friendly (Christian friendly) image they know all of their enterprises will suffer.

But at the same time, if their TV shows aimed at kids and young adults appear to be preaching the values of their grandparents' generation, they will alienate their target audience. The churches are already losing the younger generation, not only because of the so-called New Atheism, but also because for a lot of millennials, Christianity is associated in their minds with racism, homophobia and other forms of bigotry.

Post by **Omega** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 4:04 pm

Kristatos wrote:
Omega wrote: Disney majorly panders to the Christian community, I don’t think they are being too political. Maybe more SJW than they were but if they lose the family friendly (Christian friendly) image they know all of their enterprises will suffer.
But at the same time, if their TV shows aimed at kids and young adults appear to be preaching the values of their grandparents' generation, they will alienate their target audience. The churches are already losing the younger generation, not only because of the so-called New Atheism, but also because for a lot of millennials, Christianity is associated in their minds with racism, homophobia and other forms of bigotry.

But their grandparents (great grandparents for some) were hippies then yuppies.
My nieces and nephews watch a lot of Disney channel it’s not the classic cartoons any more it’s new Mickey mouse club which is about counting and shapes recognition with stories that are about being nice to one another, even the princess stories aimed at girls it’s not real preachy still I associate it with Christian values of being nice to each other, telling the truth, not judging by appearance, stuff like that. HBO has their fairy tails aimed at “alternate life”styles values, which are without a doubt anti-Christian in some cases. Even PBS has shows and Sesame Street (also on HBO) strongly preaching leftist elite values for kids in blue state hubs like Denver, Seattle, LA, New York City.
PBS does have shows like mr Rogers neighborhood spin off Daniel Tiger’s neighborhood which are very family values friendly while being inclusive of others, which was my experience with Christianity although I know there are fundamentalist sects out there that are eye for an eye over turn the other cheek and do unto others.
I may be completely wrong about what Disney is doing, just in my experience with Christianity and limited exposure to the new Disney Chanel & Disney Jr I don’t get they impression they are trying to undercut core traditional values. Maybe I’m blind to it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Post by **Omega** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 4:35 pm

The narrative is already turning on Last Jedi, some people who claim they loved the movie are finding big faults in the Rian Johnson story on their second or third viewing. (While still championing many of the things I hate about it)
IMHO after New Years the BO for TLJ is going to stagnate and not find the legs TFA had. My brother took his family to TFA up until the very last weekend of IMAX showing which they had to drive a ways to bigger cites to find, his family is not on board with this movie. Anecdotal evidence true but IMHO they are indicative of a lot of core star wars families.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Post by **Kristatos** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:34 pm

Omega wrote: PBS does have shows like mr Rogers neighborhood spin off Daniel Tiger’s neighborhood which are very family values friendly while being inclusive of others, which was my experience with Christianity although I know there are fundamentalist sects out there that are eye for an eye over turn the other cheek and do unto others.

It's my experience that you can find both types even in the same church. I think it has more to do with personality types than what is preached from the pulpit. Someone who is naturally authoritarian will be more drawn to the "eye for an eye" type teachings, while someone who has more of a live and let live attitude will respond more to "turn the other cheek", whatever the priest or pastor may say. Of course, some churches are more fire and brimstone than others.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:56 pm

Neither box office analysts nor Disney expected "Last Jedi" to match the gross for "The Force Awakens," which had the advantage of being the first "Star Wars" movie in a decade to be released. The drop-off for "Star Wars" sequels was also the case for "The Empire Strikes Back," which made $98 million less than the first "Star Wars" did during its initial run in 1980. Analysts who spoke to TheWrap said a reasonable goal for "The Last Jedi" would be $1.4 billion, a worldwide total 30 percent less than "Force Awakens" that would put it in the top 10 highest grossing films of all-time and on the same level as "Avengers: Age of Ultron."

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:59 pm

FBF, get the wallet ready next year

"Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" (Nov. 16): Part two of five in this prequel series in the Harry Potter universe finds Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) teaming up with a young Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law) to battle the evil wizard Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp).

Post by **Kristatos** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:59 pm

That sounds about right. Failing to make as much as the biggest grossing film of all time domestically and the third biggest worldwide (unadjusted figures) is hardly going to get heads rolling.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 6:03 pm

[video]https://youtu.be/vn9mMeWcgoM[/video]

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 6:07 pm

[video]https://youtu.be/6ZfuNTqbHE8[/video] Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige is promising something for “Avengers 4” that fans have never seen before, and it won’t be something they will be expecting.

Feige told Vanity Fair that “Avengers 4” will “bring things you’ve never seen in superhero films: a finale.”

“There will be two distinct periods,” he continued. “Everything before ‘Avengers 4’ and everything after. I know it will not be in ways people are expecting.”

Post by **Kristatos** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 6:11 pm

bjmdds wrote:[video]https://youtu.be/vn9mMeWcgoM[/video]

That Irma Thomas song has featured in every season of Black Mirror. Wonder why they chose it for the Jurassic World trailer. I suppose both franchises deal with technology gone wrong, but that's about as far as the similarity goes.

Post by **Omega** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 7:01 pm

bjmdds wrote:Neither box office analysts nor Disney expected "Last Jedi" to match the gross for "The Force Awakens," which had the advantage of being the first "Star Wars" movie in a decade to be released. The drop-off for "Star Wars" sequels was also the case for "The Empire Strikes Back," which made $98 million less than the first "Star Wars" did during its initial run in 1980. Analysts who spoke to TheWrap said a reasonable goal for "The Last Jedi" would be $1.4 billion, a worldwide total 30 percent less than "Force Awakens" that would put it in the top 10 highest grossing films of all-time and on the same level as "Avengers: Age of Ultron."

age of ultron was also a huge disappointment to the fans of the marvel series. The rest of marvels brand grows each outing no reason to think Star Wars would be different, except for as in age of ultron a bad audience reaction to the story.

Kristatos wrote:That sounds about right. Failing to make as much as the biggest grossing film of all time domestically and the third biggest worldwide (unadjusted figures) is hardly going to get heads rolling.

Star Wars films do have a history of grossing less than the first in a trilogy, but the prequels were unique in the fans displeasure, so I’m not sure they should be considered normal for the franchise even though Revenge of the sith is consider the best of that series and the bo improved to so the support for that installment.

What I’m wondering about the original Star Wars run is what we talked about with bond is that these movies were rereleased each years for almost a decade, Star Wars from 77 to 80 was just Star Wars, 1981 is became new hope when it and empire were rereleased.
So what I’d like to know is in what were 1977 Star Wars only BO vs 1980 only Empire BO differences. They say $98 million which could be correct I’d just like to see it verified by a 1977 source

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 7:02 pm

James Norton: "I’m probably the most famous Bond actor in the world

, and I’ve not even played the role." "Enough is enough. I can’t talk about it any more." ---is this moron for real? He considers himself the most famous Bond actor in the world? These clowns are delusional

Speaking of delusional morons, one advocate of a female Bond is Prime Minister Theresa May.

Chatting to reporters on the plane, Mrs May hailed Doctor Who for choosing Jodie Whittaker as its first female star. She said: "I do like watching Doctor Who at Christmas. I think it’s a great move forward for girl power that there is going to be a female Doctor Who. And one day there should be a female James Bond."

Theresa, the name is JAMES, not Jeanette

This is why the #metoo movement has now jumped the shark for good, in reference to the Happy Days episode where the Fonz suddenly became a water skier.

Post by **Omega** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 7:38 pm

Kristatos wrote:
Omega wrote: PBS does have shows like mr Rogers neighborhood spin off Daniel Tiger’s neighborhood which are very family values friendly while being inclusive of others, which was my experience with Christianity although I know there are fundamentalist sects out there that are eye for an eye over turn the other cheek and do unto others.
It's my experience that you can find both types even in the same church. I think it has more to do with personality types than what is preached from the pulpit. Someone who is naturally authoritarian will be more drawn to the "eye for an eye" type teachings, while someone who has more of a live and let live attitude will respond more to "turn the other cheek", whatever the priest or pastor may say. Of course, some churches are more fire and brimstone than others.

True you find both kinds, well all kinds of people at church. I’ve found there is a difference is the fire and brimstone taught at the pulpit and when tolerance is preached.
Same in Islamic culture from what I’ve seen.
I’ve seen bible thumpers do the meanest most vile things in the name of god thinking they are righteous. And of course those who kill innocents for allah.

Our parents took us to a non denominational kind of church, not a lot of judgement where somebody came from, religious back ground, race. One girl said she was a white witch and nobody tried to burn her at the stake. She was welcomed as long as she wanted to attend and she never did anything weird or could be taken as offensive and I never saw anybody do anything offensive towards her. Maybe it was an unusual hippie dippy church. But I kind of thought Jesus was a understanding guy who hung out with the worst society had to offer with a open heart.

I’m a neofight at understanding religion so I’ll concede the point. I do have a theory on how people act when they believe things(anything not just religion) but far as Disney goes I didn’t think they were being subversive to family values yet.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Post by **Omega** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 8:00 pm

Found the answer at BO Mojo, they are wrong Empire made more than Star Wars over the same time frame. Each of the original trilogy out grossed the previous movie by a lot, May release to third week in August .

Even if you give star wars the whole year of 1977 Star Wars is only 50 million ahead of the empire initial run.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

acid · Post by **acid** » Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:27 pm

bjmdds wrote:'These films tend to reflect the times so we always try to push the envelope a little bit,' she replied. 'Anything is possible. Right now it's Daniel Craig, and I'm very happy with Daniel Craig, but who knows what the future will bring?'

That's not a big hint, that's just avoiding answering the question. Actually hasn't "Anything is possible" almost become a polite way of saying no to someone? Still, I like to think if Cubby was asked he'd have said something about needing to remain true to the established character. And yeah, we all know how ecstatic she is and always will be with DC

Post by **dirtybenny** » Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:25 am

bjmdds wrote:Meghan Markle was shortlisted as Daniel Craig’s next Bond Girl – before romance with Harry made her ‘unattainable’---The actress, 36, caught the eye of 007 producers in her role as Rachel Zane in US legal drama Suits last year - but Meghan’s then-fledgling relationship with Prince Harry, 33, ruled her out of the role.

Suuuuuuuuure she was! I believe it don't you?

Of course this second tier actress from a third tier show airing on a fourth tier network was the right in line to play opposite the Craigster in the very next film. Remarkable especially when you consider no one outside of Hopkins Minnesota (the heart of USA network's demographic) knew who this gal was, until she hitched herself to the royal wagon! Yes, she became "unattainable" because she was spotted on a few dates with the Big H and so, no one could touch her, except for the powerhouse producers of Suits that is!

Post by **bjmdds** » Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:00 am

DB, you hit the nail on the head as usual

It's all EON spin trying to get into the news whenever possible. Nobody knows who Markle is and the media is playing her up as the next great contestant on the liberal's game show of life

What's even more pathetic is this Harry character. He has the maturity of a 6 year old and nobody gives a hoot about his life

Post by **bjmdds** » Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:19 am

Post by **Kristatos** » Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:48 am

acid wrote:
That's not a big hint, that's just avoiding answering the question. Actually hasn't "Anything is possible" almost become a polite way of saying no to someone?

I've heard it a few times at comic conventions with that meaning, when someone asks an editor or editor-in-chief whether we'll ever see x in y comic book. Or rather, it means "it *could* happen, but I wouldn't hold your breath."

Classic Bond Forum