Classic Bond Forum

I like FBF, but he's not going to be happy with a 7 actor replacing Craig and there's a point to that with how Craig is only part of the current bond problem.

FBF might be happy if they gave Brosnan his never say never movie. I think the could do a story for Brosnan as a old 007 who survived everything and it'd be a good story. No reason they can't use other bonds and make Craig movies. Watch nobody will think of this until Craig is a former bond and his fanboy and fan girl Babs think why not make more craig any way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Omega wrote:I like FBF, but he's not going to be happy with a 7 actor replacing Craig and there's a point to that with how Craig is only part of the current bond problem.

Basically, it's best that Pierce remains the last classic Bond actor. Who the hell needs James Bond? Sure he's special and all, but not everything special stay on screen all the time.

FBF might be happy if they gave Brosnan his never say never movie. I think the could do a story for Brosnan as a old 007 who survived everything and it'd be a good story. No reason they can't use other bonds and make Craig movies. Watch nobody will think of this until Craig is a former bond and his fanboy and fan girl Babs think why not make more craig any way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Pierce is too good for NSNA type Bond films. I prefer Pierce's Bond looking the way he was from 1995 to 2002. We already have two classic Bonds (Sean and Rog) that looked aged up at the end, and we don't need another. Besides, Pierce needs something like The Foreigner.

The Foreigner does look good .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

We all need(and want) James Bond,otherwise we wouldn't be here. If we didn't care then there would be no this site.
If you don't care anymore then what's the point in posting here anyway?

Veronica wrote:We all need(and want) James Bond,otherwise we wouldn't be here. If we didn't care then there would be no this site.
If you don't care anymore then what's the point in posting here anyway?

I've been asking the same thing for years.

Veronica wrote:We all need(and want) James Bond,otherwise we wouldn't be here. If we didn't care then there would be no this site.
If you don't care anymore then what's the point in posting here anyway?

We could still honor the 1st 40 years with 20 films (23 if you include CR '54, CR '67 and NSNA). If Bond is needed, then looks is no relevant. To answer your question, I'm here to wake you up that the traditional Bond actor is long gone as long as that psychotic dictator remains in the producer's chair. If I want James Bond, I want that b1tch out of the picture, and I wouldn't mind if Bond goes back to the 1950s/1960s setting.

And you really don't think there will ever be another classic Bond? Like,ever? Or at least who would be a good improvement over Craig?

Veronica wrote:And you really don't think there will ever be another classic Bond? Like,ever? Or at least who would be a good improvement over Craig?

You can hire black Bond, and he can still do better than Craig. As for a classic Bond actor himself, I wouldn't hold your breath.

I get where FBF is but I'd like the real James bond to make a come back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Omega wrote:I get where FBF is but I'd like the real James bond to make a come back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

If that's the case, that b1tch herself needs to step down. Otherwise, you know the answer.

FormerBondFan wrote:

Omega wrote:I get where FBF is but I'd like the real James bond to make a come back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

If that's the case, that b1tch herself needs to step down. Otherwise, you know the answer.

I think she's proven she is no cubby to even fans who say they like Craig
No consistency in her movies and a break in between so long you forget this is supposed to be a series.

Who knows what will happen if Amazon or Apple gets involved. Hell Apple might wanted to buy Bond from MGM and eon as simple advertising vehicle. They got the money to do it.
If the dynamic changes for what partners will accept from bond changes her days may be numbered along with with Craig.

This could happen because studios make very little off the movies aside from the hype it not a big money maker. Waiting 4-5 years each movie is too long for too little profit.

I'm excited by the possibility of real change happening in the foreseeable future. It even could be when a new partner like Apple gets involved they will not want another Craig movie and force a new reboot now,
AFAIK eon has not officially announced anything. But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Craig to be fired like Brosnan was.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

A little discussion fuel:


As much vitriol we fling at Babz (and deservedly so), She represents the only hope we have for Bond to get back to business as usual. I know a positively shocking statement to be sure, but if one thinks about it, a very true one.

While Babz has fractured the fan base and is responsible for allowing some of the worst writing in the series, only she can reel it all in and give us back a classic Bond, as she is the only one who could feel nostalgic for her father’s interpretation of Bond. We saw a glimmer of it in SPECTRE, ridiculous storyline and wooden acting aside there was an attempt, ham fisted as it was, to return to form.

Look do you really think the faceless bureaucrats at Apple or Amazon want a Bond who displays the old tongue in cheek bravura and elegance of a Moore or Connery? Remember the Sony hacks? The studio big wigs at MGM and Sony were lapping up the tripe spilled on that horrid script with no thought of legacy or taste. True Babz is just as guilty, but unlike those other flunkies she literally has “skin in the game” as they say. She is the only person in a position to chance things who gives a d**n about what her father created. While Babz has shown an unparalleled obedience to the PC crowd, including their anointed spokes people the film critics of the world, do you really think these overhyped studio heads would be any different? No, impossible as it sounds Babz suddenly coming to her senses is the only hope we have for classic Bond to return. Other than that I’m afraid James Bond really is dead.

Good points DB .
However given how Disney and even wb are trying to provide consistency and quality, it could be argued wb, Amazon, Apple might embrace the actual Fleming bond or cubbys than Babs is.
But the faceless company men could chicken out of following through on some of the aspects of what made Bond work from 1962-2002.

I could see Amazon wanting a 1953 bond series as classic and authentic retro as they can make them. Some series shows get more acclaim and make more of a point being un-pc as possible.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

dirtybenny wrote:A little discussion fuel:


As much vitriol we fling at Babz (and deservedly so), She represents the only hope we have for Bond to get back to business as usual. I know a positively shocking statement to be sure, but if one thinks about it, a very true one.

While Babz has fractured the fan base and is responsible for allowing some of the worst writing in the series, only she can reel it all in and give us back a classic Bond, as she is the only one who could feel nostalgic for her father’s interpretation of Bond. We saw a glimmer of it in SPECTRE, ridiculous storyline and wooden acting aside there was an attempt, ham fisted as it was, to return to form.

Look do you really think the faceless bureaucrats at Apple or Amazon want a Bond who displays the old tongue in cheek bravura and elegance of a Moore or Connery? Remember the Sony hacks? The studio big wigs at MGM and Sony were lapping up the tripe spilled on that horrid script with no thought of legacy or taste. True Babz is just as guilty, but unlike those other flunkies she literally has “skin in the game” as they say. She is the only person in a position to chance things who gives a d**n about what her father created. While Babz has shown an unparalleled obedience to the PC crowd, including their anointed spokes people the film critics of the world, do you really think these overhyped studio heads would be any different? No, impossible as it sounds Babz suddenly coming to her senses is the only hope we have for classic Bond to return. Other than that I’m afraid James Bond really is dead.

The b1tch herself can make a classic Bond and still cast non-convention type actors in the role. Think about it. From the very beginning, she attempts to claim the Bond franchise as though as it's her own. Plus, she doesn't listen. Sure Spectre may have been closer to the classic Bond we know, but that doesn't mean the return of the classic Bond actor himself. Look around. Dr. Who is now a woman so I wouldn't hold any breath on the return to the traditional dark-hair Bond we know and grew up with. The next Bond may be as well be a 6'6'' red-head.

FormerBondFan wrote:The b1tch herself can make a classic Bond and still cast non-convention type actors in the role. Think about it. From the very beginning, she attempts to claim the Bond franchise as though as it's her own. Plus, she doesn't listen. Sure Spectre may have been closer to the classic Bond we know, but that doesn't mean the return of the classic Bond actor himself. Look around. Dr. Who is now a woman so I wouldn't hold any breath on the return to the traditional dark-hair Bond we know and grew up with. The next Bond may be as well be a 6'6'' red-head.

Good point FBF, however I'm sure Amazon, Apple, MGM, Sony, Warner Bros. etc. would be just as happy to cast non traditional actors as anyone else, so anyone fighting that battle might as well wave the white flag as it has already been lost. And really, she is probably the only one who would turn back to a traditional actor as I said the studio honchos are just as hungry for PC cred as the next guy/gal.

dirtybenny wrote: Good point FBF, however I'm sure Amazon, Apple, MGM, Sony, Warner Bros. etc. would be just as happy to cast non traditional actors as anyone else, so anyone fighting that battle might as well wave the white flag as it has already been lost. And really, she is probably the only one who would turn back to a traditional actor as I said the studio honchos are just as hungry for PC cred as the next guy/gal.

I agree. I have long said that simply blaming Babbzy for everything is way too simplistic, as if she has complete control over the series. Yes, the big decisions are ultimately hers to make, but if audiences didn't go along with them, nobody would want to finance or distribute the films. The movie business is just that, a business. Whether it's Sony, Apple or Amazon distributing Bond, they will be doing so in the hope of making money. I think that the latter two will be more likely to confuse online opinion with public opinion. If Twitter demands that an African-American trans woman be cast as Bond, who do you think is more likely to give in to that demand, EON or Silicon Valley?

dirtybenny wrote:And really, she is probably the only one who would turn back to a traditional actor as I said the studio honchos are just as hungry for PC cred as the next guy/gal.

Actually MGW's sons are the only ones who can do that. Looking further with the b1tch herself, let's not forget that she wanted Sean Bean as Bond, not Pierce. Bean may look traditional in terms of facial features, but his height is another story. Plus, EON was impressed by Paul McGann that they wanted him as Bond. If you don't believe me, look here:

http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/ ... niel-Craig

Kristatos wrote:

dirtybenny wrote: Good point FBF, however I'm sure Amazon, Apple, MGM, Sony, Warner Bros. etc. would be just as happy to cast non traditional actors as anyone else, so anyone fighting that battle might as well wave the white flag as it has already been lost. And really, she is probably the only one who would turn back to a traditional actor as I said the studio honchos are just as hungry for PC cred as the next guy/gal.

I agree. I have long said that simply blaming Babbzy for everything is way too simplistic, as if she has complete control over the series. Yes, the big decisions are ultimately hers to make, but if audiences didn't go along with them, nobody would want to finance or distribute the films. The movie business is just that, a business. Whether it's Sony, Apple or Amazon distributing Bond, they will be doing so in the hope of making money. I think that the latter two will be more likely to confuse online opinion with public opinion. If Twitter demands that an African-American trans woman be cast as Bond, who do you think is more likely to give in to that demand, EON or Silicon Valley?

Both of you make good points. Hollywood movies run by committees is a recipe for disaster. But the broccoli family has always been given a pass as the "protectors" of the bond, I think Babs has proven she nothing more than a spoiled heiress who without the rights her daddy bought would be nothing. Without the clause giving her final say on casting Bond Craig would never have seen one minute on screen as bond. We never would have the emo bond and the brofeld saga.

I don't disagree the standard Hollywood thinking will give us gay bond, might have that already. But right now I would have more faith in the possibility of current Hollywood hung up on making sagas and series that never would of been made 15 years ago. Nobody through anybody but George Lucas could make Star Wars movies, nobody thought marvel comic worlds could be brought successfully to the big screen,
Starting with lord of the rings there's a few directors and producers who want to bring authenticity to the shows and movies, partly why Babs got away with CR claiming Craig was authentic Fleming. Nobody bothered to read the books so her PR stands. But with directors and producers talking about how bonds not fun any more and how eon gave away the place bond used to occupy and they moved to take it.
I have more faith that a new partnership might want to return to a traditional bond which is more in vogue than the experiment Babs is doing now. For those who think eon are the only ones to be trusted with safeguarding bond don't forget Babs and MGW are happy to talk about a black bond someday. In someway under Babs they are more susceptible to the winds of pc tends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I'm certainly not saying EON, Babz, et.al. are the "keepers of the Bond flame" and no other could do better. What I am saying is, the grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence. To think that Apple, Amazon etc. are some sort of panacea is a bit naive. They have no loyalties, so they have no reason to follow the template. Not to mention these are some very liberal companies steeped in the SJW lifestyle. If anyone were to deliver a Bond so far off track it would make Craig look like Moore these companies would be it.

dirtybenny wrote:I'm certainly not saying EON, Babz, et.al. are the "keepers of the Bond flame" and no other could do better. What I am saying is, the grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence. To think that Apple, Amazon etc. are some sort of panacea is a bit naive. They have no loyalties, so they have no reason to follow the template. Not to mention these are some very liberal companies steeped in the SJW lifestyle. If anyone were to deliver a Bond so far off track it would make Craig look like Moore these companies would be it.

I don't disagree. Especially Apple, Amazon makes some very un-pc themed shows.
But who knows maybe they think Craig the bond meant for people who never liked bond is too much and Connery is a no go so the only way forward is hermaphrodite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro