The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

Post by **bjmdds** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:16 pm

Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
paco chaos wrote:one thing pro-Casino Royale that I will say is that we are fortunate that EON decided to imitate Bourne instead of Mission Impossible, although I believe that may have been the idea behnd the last couple of Brosnan films. MI really blows.
MI:2 is not watchable Paco, horrid spy film, poorly directed.
Agreed, although MI3 was a return to form.

What was John Woo thinking with MI2 Skywalker? I literally find it difficult to watch, it's plot, Cruise's look, the background music, all just dreadful.

stockslivevan · Post by **stockslivevan** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:00 am

bjmdds wrote:But Campbell should never have denegrated the prior 5 Bonds inferring Craig was superior to them as an actor. That is the difference.

Why not? He's just being honest. And I agree with him, I think Craig is the best James Bond actor. Best Bond? Nope. He needs a few more films to top Connery. But besides Bond, he really is a better actor than most of his predecessors. He is a character actor afterall.

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:54 am

stockslivevan wrote:
bjmdds wrote:But Campbell should never have denegrated the prior 5 Bonds inferring Craig was superior to them as an actor. That is the difference.
Why not? He's just being honest. And I agree with him, I think Craig is the best James Bond actor. Best Bond? Nope. He needs a few more films to top Connery. But besides Bond, he really is a better actor than most of his predecessors. He is a character actor afterall.

Saying that the prior 5 Bond actors would agree with him too, Stockslivevan?

paco chaos · Post by **paco chaos** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 3:12 am

bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
paco chaos wrote:one thing pro-Casino Royale that I will say is that we are fortunate that EON decided to imitate Bourne instead of Mission Impossible, although I believe that may have been the idea behnd the last couple of Brosnan films. MI really blows.
MI:2 is not watchable Paco, horrid spy film, poorly directed.
Agreed, although MI3 was a return to form.
What was John Woo thinking with MI2 Skywalker? I literally find it difficult to watch, it's plot, Cruise's look, the background music, all just dreadful.

to be honest, i've not seen part 3. 2 was sooooo bad, that I avoided 3. the first one was a decent movie, but it irritated me in the way that it set the series up to be a showcase for Tom Cruise's character. The idea of Mission Impossible is that there is a team of experts, not some super spy and his lackeys. at least on the t.v. series, which I love.

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 4:05 am

Phelps should never have been a bad guy.That just deviated too much from the television concept, in MI:I. Interesting that Emilio Estevez's name is absent from the credits, I believe. I too have yet to see MI:3, but from what I have read, it is far better than II, at least I hope it is, whenever I decide to watch it.

stockslivevan · Post by **stockslivevan** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 4:52 am

bjmdds wrote:
stockslivevan wrote:
bjmdds wrote:But Campbell should never have denegrated the prior 5 Bonds inferring Craig was superior to them as an actor. That is the difference.
Why not? He's just being honest. And I agree with him, I think Craig is the best James Bond actor. Best Bond? Nope. He needs a few more films to top Connery. But besides Bond, he really is a better actor than most of his predecessors. He is a character actor afterall.
Saying that the prior 5 Bond actors would agree with him too, Stockslivevan?

I wasn't saying that but Dalton and Brosnan have expressed their opinions after actually watching the film. Dalton thought he was wonderful and Brosnan went as far to say that Craig is the best Bond. As for Connery and Moore, they supported Craig for the role, but like always, they never watched any Bond after they left. Lazenby, as always, rarely pops up in the news and so far he hasn't said anything about Craig before and after CR was released.

Post by **Skywalker** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:55 am

bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
paco chaos wrote:one thing pro-Casino Royale that I will say is that we are fortunate that EON decided to imitate Bourne instead of Mission Impossible, although I believe that may have been the idea behnd the last couple of Brosnan films. MI really blows.
MI:2 is not watchable Paco, horrid spy film, poorly directed.
Agreed, although MI3 was a return to form.
What was John Woo thinking with MI2 Skywalker? I literally find it difficult to watch, it's plot, Cruise's look, the background music, all just dreadful.

MI2 is awful, but MI3 was really enjoyable. I actually watched the film on the plane last year when I went on holiday. The film did not disappoint and PSH was a great villain.

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:14 pm

Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
paco chaos wrote:one thing pro-Casino Royale that I will say is that we are fortunate that EON decided to imitate Bourne instead of Mission Impossible, although I believe that may have been the idea behnd the last couple of Brosnan films. MI really blows.
MI:2 is not watchable Paco, horrid spy film, poorly directed.
Agreed, although MI3 was a return to form.
What was John Woo thinking with MI2 Skywalker? I literally find it difficult to watch, it's plot, Cruise's look, the background music, all just dreadful.
MI2 is awful, but MI3 was really enjoyable. I actually watched the film on the plane last year when I went on holiday. The film did not disappoint and PSH was a great villain.

Did you prefer Cruise's Hunt in MI:3 to Craig's Bond in CR, for I have yet to see MI:3 yet Skywalker?

Post by **James** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:36 pm

What did you think of Dougray Scott BJ? 007 material?

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:43 pm

James wrote:What did you think of Dougray Scott BJ? 007 material?

Maybe, but something about him rubs me the wrong way for Bond, but maybe. Have you seen the new photos of Buzz-cut Craig? He looks stranger every time I see him. He looks terrible and even older than he looked in CR. For me, Bale would have been a GREAT choice as Bond for CR,for a 'true' origin film about Bond, even though he also played Batman, in one film to date.

Post by **James** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 11:47 pm

Have you seen the new photos of Buzz-cut Craig? He looks stranger every time I see him.

I thought Craig looked better before the extensive body-building and fake-tan operation although he still looked nothing like James Bond. Heaven knows what he'll look like in the next one.

This Christian Bale picture is very James Bondish.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:44 am

Eon would have scored a coup utilizing Bale instead of Craig. He could have approached Roger Moore's total of 7 Bond films as well, if he had the chance. Craig will most likely be 2 or 3 and done.

Captain Nash · Post by **Captain Nash** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:55 am

bjmdds wrote:Eon would have scored a coup utilizing Bale instead of Craig. He could have approached Roger Moore's total of 7 Bond films as well, if he had the chance. Craig will most likely be 2 or 3 and done.

Bale would've made a great Bond, but where is there any evidence he would want to stay in the role for so long???
As for Craig, what's wrong with making 3 films? Brosnan only managed 4.
I'd rather have 3 great Bond films from a good actor who is making Bond his own. Rather than a guy who made 4 films all of which were mediocre at best, and has to copy from the guys before him. Creating a mish mash of styles, none of which worked.
But then that's just my opinion.

paco chaos · Post by **paco chaos** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:46 am

the problem with using Bale is that he's already tied down to Batman, and would have had to schedule Bond around Batman. He would have been a great James Bond, but I'm glad he's Batman, since he's the best actor to play that part. even better than Michael G. Wilson's dad.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:57 pm

It seems there is UNIVERSAL agreement on all of the forum sites I have been on that Bale would have been an excellent choice as a young, novice Bond. Eon could have explored the true history of Bond utilizing him. Craig,at 38 in CR, looks older than Brosnan's youthful 42, in Goldeneye. That is why this 'reboot' concept does not have credibility when looking at Craig. His character was thrown into a pre-Connery supposed storyline, yet his presence in the film has little to do with a true reboot. Eon went to ground zero with Bond,where we are to forget the past, for it has been deemed NULL AND VOID! Remember Barbara Broccoli's statement in her earlier interview,"Doing Book 1 as film 21 makes no sense, but it is fun".

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:10 pm

James wrote:
Have you seen the new photos of Buzz-cut Craig? He looks stranger every time I see him.
I thought Craig looked better before the extensive body-building and fake-tan operation although he still looked nothing like James Bond. Heaven knows what he'll look like in the next one.

This Christian Bale picture is very James Bondish.

Compare that picture to ANY one of Craig's, and tell me who looks more like the traditional, not off-beat, James Bond.

ID · Post by ID » Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:52 pm

It seems there is UNIVERSAL agreement on all of the forum sites I have been on that Bale would have been an excellent choice as a young, novice Bond. Eon could have explored the true history of Bond utilizing him. Craig,at 38 in CR, looks older than Brosnan's youthful 42, in Goldeneye.

Even the most ardent pro-Craigers who went out of their way to disparage the acting skills of all the alternative choices to Craig had to admit that Bale is an excellent actor who could have done Casino Royale very nicely. He was very James Bondian in Batman Begins and also portrayed Bruce Wayne at younger ages. I suspect Eon's failure to move for him or Gerry Butler had a lot to do with Barbara's desire not to stack up too much opposition against Craig.

Captain Nash · Post by **Captain Nash** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:22 am

As I've said before Bale could've been a brilliant Bond. Just one small, no large problem.
Batman!
Other than that, I'd be most happy to see him strap on the shoulder holster. As for Butler, of the two I'd take Craig. I think Dan's a better actor myself.
So as much as Bale could be Bond, I like to live in reality. The one where Daniel Craig is Bond, Christian Bale is Batman...but could have the potential to oneday become OO7 #7.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:13 am

Captain Nash wrote:As I've said before Bale could've been a brilliant Bond. Just one small, no large problem.
Batman!
Other than that, I'd be most happy to see him strap on the shoulder holster. As for Butler, of the two I'd take Craig. I think Dan's a better actor myself.
So as much as Bale could be Bond, I like to live in reality. The one where Daniel Craig is Bond, Christian Bale is Batman...but could have the potential to oneday become OO7 #7.

Bale Bond number 7 in 2010, or 2012? OK by me Nash, detente achieved.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:16 am

ID wrote:
It seems there is UNIVERSAL agreement on all of the forum sites I have been on that Bale would have been an excellent choice as a young, novice Bond. Eon could have explored the true history of Bond utilizing him. Craig,at 38 in CR, looks older than Brosnan's youthful 42, in Goldeneye.
Even the most ardent pro-Craigers who went out of their way to disparage the acting skills of all the alternative choices to Craig had to admit that Bale is an excellent actor who could have done Casino Royale very nicely. He was very James Bondian in Batman Begins and also portrayed Bruce Wayne at younger ages. I suspect Eon's failure to move for him or Gerry Butler had a lot to do with Barbara's desire not to stack up too much opposition against Craig.

Broccoli's desire for Craig seemed too contrived. You are correct, for if Visnjic was truly screen tested, why not consider Bale? I think he would make a better Bond than Batman, and if he was given the choice, I wonder which road he would have chosen, Batman or Bond?