The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[Kristatos]

Yes, a very predictable response.

I recognise Tom Z's name from alt.fan.james-bond, where that was the standard response to anyone who criticised Craig when CR first came out. There's more diversity of opinion there now (in the few remaining posts that aren't spam), but some still cling to the old ways.

[James]

Yes, a very predictable response.

I recognise Tom Z's name from alt.fan.james-bond, where that was the standard response to anyone who criticised Craig when CR first came out. There's more diversity of opinion there now (in the few remaining posts that aren't spam), but some still cling to the old ways.

Someone is doing quite a number on that group in terms of spam. The one thread I did find had a bit of dissent with that chap saying he didn't consider the two Craig entries to be Bond films. There does seem to be a slightly more realistic view on the whole DC/reboot thing now, especially after QOS, on places like MI6 - though not CommanderBond which is the most pompous and fanboyish forum you'll find anywhere. You would think Daniel Craig was Cary Grant if you visited these places a few years ago. People are slowly starting to realise that (1) Eon had no real plan or story beyond Casino Royale despite pretending otherwise and talking up a trilogy and (2) Daniel Craig's dull/worthy/minimalist interpretation of 007 lacks the charm and fun of previous incarnations and doesn't give the series a huge amount of options in terms of directions to go in.

[Mazer Rackham]

Yes, a very predictable response.

I recognise Tom Z's name from alt.fan.james-bond, where that was the standard response to anyone who criticised Craig when CR first came out. There's more diversity of opinion there now (in the few remaining posts that aren't spam), but some still cling to the old ways.

Someone is doing quite a number on that group in terms of spam. The one thread I did find had a bit of dissent with that chap saying he didn't consider the two Craig entries to be Bond films. There does seem to be a slightly more realistic view on the whole DC/reboot thing now, especially after QOS, on places like MI6 - though not CommanderBond which is the most pompous and fanboyish forum you'll find anywhere. You would think Daniel Craig was Cary Grant if you visited these places a few years ago. People are slowly starting to realise that (1) Eon had no real plan or story beyond Casino Royale despite pretending otherwise and talking up a trilogy and (2) Daniel Craig's dull/worthy/minimalist interpretation of 007 lacks the charm and fun of previous incarnations and doesn't give the series a huge amount of options in terms of directions to go in.

Curious how the winds are changing.
What most of you do not know is the insider talk that went on about Craig behind closed doors. He was supposed to be a draw for a younger click and grow the franchise beyond constraints found in the 70s and 80s, all of the vitriol aimed at dissenters and pro franchise PR spin arguments never came up in meetings. There was however concern over rebooting and where the future would lead after this supposed trilogy. There was also concern over what the image would be after Craig. This really upset a few, changing the Bond image, it was a stable reliable icon and moving away from it as drastically as they wanted to it might not be possible to make the move back.

With MGM in death throws, a new owner will emerge although probably not in to time straiten things out for a 2011 filming.
A new owner will bring a new order, Eon had an easy ride and didn't make many concession to their partners, a new own may want a different star they think could bring more money. Eon may get to make more Craig films but their new partner may want some freedom to make their own films. In others words use their half of the franchise name and image.

Unlike as that may seem, nobody disputes Eon has mismanaged the franchise to the determent of their partners.

MGM being chopped up means the accountants are look at the Bond income, which as we established MGM takes is not that great after everyone gets theirs. A new owner will likely makes demands to change this. Some demands would be outrageous to get them to agree to other demands less so.

[katied]

Yes, a very predictable response.

I recognise Tom Z's name from alt.fan.james-bond, where that was the standard response to anyone who criticised Craig when CR first came out. There's more diversity of opinion there now (in the few remaining posts that aren't spam), but some still cling to the old ways.

Someone is doing quite a number on that group in terms of spam. The one thread I did find had a bit of dissent with that chap saying he didn't consider the two Craig entries to be Bond films. There does seem to be a slightly more realistic view on the whole DC/reboot thing now, especially after QOS, on places like MI6 - though not CommanderBond which is the most pompous and fanboyish forum you'll find anywhere. You would think Daniel Craig was Cary Grant if you visited these places a few years ago. People are slowly starting to realise that (1) Eon had no real plan or story beyond Casino Royale despite pretending otherwise and talking up a trilogy and (2) Daniel Craig's dull/worthy/minimalist interpretation of 007 lacks the charm and fun of previous incarnations and doesn't give the series a huge amount of options in terms of directions to go in.

[Kanye West] Ima let you finish, but I gotta disagree with you about MI6[/Kanye West]

[Kristatos]

What most of you do not know is the insider talk that went on about Craig behind closed doors. He was supposed to be a draw for a younger click and grow the franchise beyond constraints found in the 70s and 80s, all of the vitriol aimed at dissenters and pro franchise PR spin arguments never came up in meetings. There was however concern over rebooting and where the future would lead after this supposed trilogy. There was also concern over what the image would be after Craig. This really upset a few, changing the Bond image, it was a stable reliable icon and moving away from it as drastically as they wanted to it might not be possible to make the move back.

That was my concern about the reboot too. I said all along that they should have made CR (or CR/QOS if they still wanted to go down the two-parter route) a direct prequel to Dr. No, but set in the present day - a reboot of sorts, but one that doesn't mess with existing continuity. That way, they could set the next film after DAD without having to explain to a confused audience why Q and Moneypenny are now back.

[mcbride007]

What most of you do not know is the insider talk that went on about Craig behind closed doors. He was supposed to be a draw for a younger click and grow the franchise beyond constraints found in the 70s and 80s, all of the vitriol aimed at dissenters and pro franchise PR spin arguments never came up in meetings. There was however concern over rebooting and where the future would lead after this supposed trilogy. There was also concern over what the image would be after Craig. This really upset a few, changing the Bond image, it was a stable reliable icon and moving away from it as drastically as they wanted to it might not be possible to make the move back.

That was my concern about the reboot too. I said all along that they should have made CR (or CR/QOS if they still wanted to go down the two-parter route) a direct prequel to Dr. No, but set in the present day - a reboot of sorts, but one that doesn't mess with existing continuity. That way, they could set the next film after DAD without having to explain to a confused audience why Q and Moneypenny are now back.

There will be a long break until Bond 23. So the next one can be set after DAD as Craig looks older. Many of my friends see Craigs Bond as a new spy so would be confused if it was set after DAD.

[bjmdds]

Craig may wear out his welcome. Moore had 3 years between his second and 3rd film, from 1974-1977, but Craig ain't no Moore and Craig is quite forgettable.

[The Sweeney]

Craig may wear out his welcome. Moore had 3 years between his second and 3rd film, from 1974-1977, but Craig ain't no Moore and Craig is quite forgettable.

Only in your opinion. The huge BO opening weekends of QoS told a story worldwide how audiences had taken to Craig's debut as Bond.

Has QoS damaged it? We will know once Bond 23 is released....

[Mazer Rackham]

Craig may wear out his welcome. Moore had 3 years between his second and 3rd film, from 1974-1977, but Craig ain't no Moore and Craig is quite forgettable.

Only in your opinion. The huge BO opening weekends of QoS told a story worldwide how audiences had taken to Craig's debut as Bond.

Has QoS damaged it? We will know once Bond 23 is released....

And then look at the record setting drop off on week from the next.

I spoke to a bloke going over some of the hard numbers involving MGM. One thing he said to me struck me, the worldwide market available to Bond is bigger than it ever has been. Simple deduction, sure. However to follow this through to a logical conclusion you come to the realization that Craig has not grown the franchise and certainly not to its potential.

In some markets like America he has lost millions of viewers. I can not be said a Brosnan or a Jackman couldn't do better with the same packaging and marketing.

I was also told the poor DVDs sale are hurting the value of the Bond Franchise. Some like to use it as a barometer for future ticket revenue.

[katied]

True enough about QOS not exactly a best seller- what's more,I have seen it for a cut price everywhere-even the grocery store!

[bjmdds]

I bet you could buy it for a quantum of change too MP.

[katied]

It seems to vary-I have seen it as cheap as 10 bucks at the grocery store!

[bjmdds]

Craig may wear out his welcome. Moore had 3 years between his second and 3rd film, from 1974-1977, but Craig ain't no Moore and Craig is quite forgettable.

Only in your opinion. The huge BO opening weekends of QoS told a story worldwide how audiences had taken to Craig's debut as Bond.

Has QoS damaged it? We will know once Bond 23 is released....

At this rate Sweene, you may be back living in the good ol' UK by the time it happens. There does not seem to be any urgency with this group to steam roll Bond but rather run off to Broadway in an attempt to buy a Tony award. Thankfully this mockery of a play will end in 2 1/2 weeks. Then I guess it's Tin Tin to the rescue for Craig as Broccoli ponders what next to do with Craig.

[bjmdds]

Craig may wear out his welcome. Moore had 3 years between his second and 3rd film, from 1974-1977, but Craig ain't no Moore and Craig is quite forgettable.

Only in your opinion. The huge BO opening weekends of QoS told a story worldwide how audiences had taken to Craig's debut as Bond.

Has QoS damaged it? We will know once Bond 23 is released....

And then look at the record setting drop off on week from the next.

I spoke to a bloke going over some of the hard numbers involving MGM. One thing he said to me struck me, the worldwide market available to Bond is bigger than it ever has been. Simple deduction, sure. However to follow this through to a logical conclusion you come to the realization that Craig has not grown the franchise and certainly not to its potential.

In some markets like America he has lost millions of viewers. I can not be said a Brosnan or a Jackman couldn't do better with the same packaging and marketing.

I was also told the poor DVDs sale are hurting the value of the Bond Franchise. Some like to use it as a barometer for future ticket revenue.

Correct Mazer. Sweeney just does not get the fact that people were TURNED OFF after what they saw opening weekend and abandoned ship, as did MANY critics.

[katied]

Then I guess it's Tin Tin to the rescue for Craig as Broccoli ponders what next to do with Craig.

I'll just say that I am interested to see how the Tin Tin movie does in the States and leave it at that.

[bjmdds]

Was it finished or never started yet?

[katied]

Was it finished or never started yet?

According to IMDB it's in post production.

[Kristatos]

Was it finished or never started yet?

According to IMDB it's in post production.

IMDb's not always the most reliable source, though. I have read conflicting reports.

[katied]

IMDb's not always the most reliable source, though. I have read conflicting reports.

Ooh.What have you read?

[Kristatos]

Ooh.What have you read?

Some say it's on, some say it's off. I don't know what to believe.