"James Bond 23" officially slated for 2012!

[Admiral_Young]

^ Agreed. I did think "Die Another Day" was over the top...but I always took that to be the point of the film.

[Rockman]

Samurai8472 wrote:

---

Blu-Ray box set



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Blu-ray trailer



As much as I would like the blu ray set there are some films that I would care to skip

-The Man with the golden gun
-A View to a kill
-Die Another Day
-Octopussy

I already have two of those from a Box set

So I can't wait till these are sold individually

From seeing that trailer:

Face-wise, Daniel Craig just doesn't come close to the smooth-skinned, refined handsomeness of the others. He has a rough, workmanlike look about him which standsout in contrast to the others.

Also, why wasn't George Lazenby's face featured much (If at all?) in this particular promo? Does he really not have that many fans to not warrant him much advertisement screen time?

[Starkers]

Well he's only in one film...ok it's a damn good one, but still he is the 007 with the least screen time.

[Warped9]

Broccoli wrote:

---

I liked Bronsan's films. They were loud, splashy, silly, and, most importantly, fun. They knew exactly what they were doing and were having a blast doing it.

Which is all very well if thats what you like. But they (and other films in the franchise) were totally divorced from the original source materiel. And if one cares about that then those films didn't work.

[Dimesdan]

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

^ Typical expected response from you.

It was late, I couldn't be arsed with writing more, nor reminding you to stop mini modding.

[Broccoli]

Warped9 wrote:

---

Which is all very well if thats what you like. But they (and other films in the franchise) were totally divorced from the original source materiel. And if one cares about that then those films didn't work.

I tend to judge a film on its own merits, and generally enjoy all the Bond movies for different reasons.

[Starkers]

Yeah I'm like that. Sometimes I want to watch a gritty spy drama, but other times I want Roger Moore...in space...with a "laser" pistol...

[Broccoli]

That's the awesomeness of the James Bond franchise. It has just about everything. It is also a franchise that, by now, it can go around and take a risk, such as Bond with laser gun or turning Bond into Jason Bourne. The cool thing is that if the risk fails, there will always be next film to correct the wrong.

[Captaindemotion]

Warped9 wrote:

---

Which is all very well if thats what you like. But they (and other films in the franchise) were totally divorced from the original source materiel. And if one cares about that then those films didn't work.

But they're an adaptation of the character from the books, not a slavish copy. And apart from anything else, Brosnan's movies weren't based on any of the Fleming books, so why shouldn't they differ from the source material?

Fleming was a racist snob so I have no difficulty with the movies not adopting his viewpoint. Though to be fair, while he originally opposed the casting of Connery as Bond, he later said that if he had the chance to re-write them, he'd make Bond more like Connery. His books were full of name-dropping and product placement, so the charge that Brosnan's movies consisted of too much product placement is also a little ill-founded, IMHO.

The 007 most like that of the books was arguably Dalton and while I like his performances, his tenure didn't set the world on fire.

[Broccoli]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

The 007 most like that of the books was arguably Dalton and while I like his performances, his tenure didn't set the world on fire.

I think that had more to do with poor timing than anything else. I'm a Dalton fan as well. I think he was a solid fusing of the Book-Bond and the Movie-Bond.

[Captaindemotion]

^ Yeah, he was unlucky, to be fair. But he insisted, particularly on LTK, on playing Bond exactly as per the books. So no wise-cracks etc. And the audience expected wisecracks and a more cinematic 007. While Batman didn't help, this was also part of the reason for its underperformance.

[Samurai8472]

Rockman wrote:

---

From seeing that trailer:

Face-wise, Daniel Craig just doesn't come close to the smooth-skinned, refined handsomeness of the others. He has a rough, workmanlike look about him which standsout in contrast to the others.

That's exactly what my mom thinks about him. He looks like a factory worker.

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

^ Agreed. I did think "Die Another Day" was over the top...but I always took that to be the point of the film.

Well then the first 30 minutes are a complete head scratch.

It's like a completely different movie.

It was great until Bond entered the ice palace.

[Captaindemotion]

^ Re Craig. I don't have a link, but once read that Fleming said that Bond should look like 'a navvy [roads construction worker, generally Irish) in a suit. So I actually think Craig fits that bill quite well.

[CorporalClegg]

Samurai8472 wrote:

---

Well then the first 30 minutes are a complete head scratch.

It's like a completely different movie.

It was great until Bond entered the ice palace.

It was great until Berry entered. But I think I may have said that up-thread.

If they would have dropped the corny and held onto the tone of the first chunk of scenes, I think it would have been a brilliant film.

The concept itself was interesting and had a lot of potential. They just decided to have their ham and cornball with it.

[Admiral_Young]

I love Craig's look and his attitude with the character and the take they've had with him so far. I just hope he has evolved and grown a bit in "SkyFall" as I'm sure he will.