The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[Bond77]

We had a black flag flying all day at DCINB headquarters.

And five years ago Brosnan was dumped like a worn out shoe. He deserved better for what he did to reinvigorate the franchise.

And we as loyal fans deserved better than some of the films his contribution gave us.
Aside from GoldenEye, were his films really that good. Certainly not alot of TND, and nearly all of TWINE. DAD was entertaining, and probably his second best portrayal of the character.
I liked Pierce as Bond, and would've welcomed a fifth from him. But it wasn't to be. Let's be honest he was starting to look old in DAD, and with the injury he sustained during filming, could EON risk it two or three years down the track? With the possibility of the star out of action, it can cost a film millions for delays like that.
It's just common sense.

Oh Captain Nash. Common sense would tell you that Brosnan was more than sufficient with his portrayal as Bond and it was silly scripts (Die Another Day), and lousy characters (examples: Christmas Jones, Eliot Carver) that plagued the Brosnan era. That is, if the Brosnan era is to labeled "plagued".

At the risk of digression, I must say that this brings me to what I don't get about criticism against Roger Moore. As if Roger Moore coordinated the "slide whistle" stunt sequence in The Man with the Golden Gun, created the Jaws character, or wrote the Moonraker script. Roger did nothing more than work with the materials given to him. Besides, Roger Moore showed that he was more than capable of playing a straight, heroic role in The Saint. It was the producers and the creative team of EON that made Bond silly in the 70's and 80's...

...which brings make to the Brosnan era. If the Brosnan era is to labeled "plagued", "silly", or what have you then the blame should be directed at Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson. They captain the Bond ship, and there are ultimately responsible for the direction of the franchise.

Now, the notion that Brosnan was beginning to look too old. I think he looked fine in his last outing as Bond, and he looked like he could have played the role as long as Moore had and it would have been fine. Besides, even if he was looking to old I'd rather have an "old looking Bond" then some one who has never looked or acted like James Bond.

An excellent post Bond 77, and one I wish more members here would recognise. I wasn't saying that Pierce Brosnan was the reason for his films being of a poorer quality, but as you've pointed out. With silly characters, poor casting choices, and over the top story lines.
I agree with you on the silly antics of the Roger Moore era, not being attributed to Moore. I wonder then why Craig gets ridiculed for scenes like running through a plasterboard wall in CR? Surely this is the same ?
At the end of the day EON must front the blame for the direction the series takes, and the decisions that they make. But as I said, Pierce Brosnan did sustain a knee injury during the filming of the hovercraft chase in DAD, which lead to filming being postponed. Knowing Pierce (then in his fifties) would be two years older at least before the next Bond film went into production, could EON risk using an actor that may injure himself again and hold up production on the film?
It's one of my beliefs as to why Pierce was dumped, and the reboot established. A younger Bond, a new direction for a tired looking series.
But as I said, I do agree with most of what you have to say.

It is nice we can agree that it's not the actor. Even though I don't like Craig as Bond I can't pin all of my disdain for the direction of the franchise on him. So cheers.

I understand your theory about Brosnan's knee injury, but production companies should be able to take injuries and illnesses in stride. I read Roger Moore's book and in it he describes how he was either injured or ill during the filming of almost each of his Bond films. In a physically demanding role like James Bond you have to expect injuries and mishaps and work around them. Craig experienced them too, and they didn't replace him.

I think the theory that has more validity is the one that has Broccoli, disliking the institution that her father helped create, wanting to remake the Bond franchise in her own image. Thus, resulting in the Daniel Craig era.

It would have been better that she continue making Bond films the way her father did. Even if she didn't like the Bond films they would have produced millions of dollars for her to make films she wanted with all the post-materialist themed drivel she could stuff in to celluloid. Instead, she has forced her ideology into the 007 franchise. We used to watch Bond fight against the evil schemes of Goldfinger, Blofeld, and Dr. No - evil foes whose intentions had worldwide implications. Now we have Bond racing against time...to provide drinking water to Bolivians?

And she has done all of this for what? To have no money for post-materialist drivel, and to have no financial footing to get Bond 23 off the ground? Who suffers at the end? The millions of moviegoers who look forward to seeing Bond save the world every two years.

[Mazer Rackham]

Craig's deserves the blame just as Burt Reynolds deserves credit for passing the role up. Part of an actors responsibility is to be diligent enough to pass on roles they are wrong for.

Ultimately it is Babs & Mikey who are responsible for the failings. But they went way off the reservation when they decided to (A.) attack Brozza, his era and 40 years of Bond. (B.) Completely abandon 40 years of history for a flash in the pan reboot with no plan behind it. They easily could have given Brozza his 5th and final movie and everyone would have been happy, Babs could have hired Danny boy the next year and got on with the business of making Jason Bourne with a constipated scowl. There still would be complaints over casting and the direction, but it might not have been the civil insurrection she took upon herself when she turned on the Fanbase her Daddy built. Then again maybe that was the point.

The current pablum about "Craig is just an actor doing a job" is bunk his interviews make it clear he is making demands and forcing things like name, plots, costars, writers and directors. Mendes for Christs sake!

Craig's responsibility comes into play again becuase he has taken a great deal of it on his shoulders, he is primarily responsible for the quagmire Quark became, he steered the franchise right into the ditch with that one. His input in Bond is unprecedented when he came on board he lectured them that "Bond has got to change". Babs was gagging for it even though as Mikey surly knows Craig's vision of Bond and his demands about the kind of movies he wants to make are completely incompatible with Bond. Right now the worst fears have been confirmed Babs divided their once stable fanbase while putting themselves under the microscope, they could afford it as long as they had a modicum of success although they were only postponing the inevitable grinding clunk when they have to change gears. The stall MGM forced is death form them. I am sure they are worried about the franchise, they have to restart it and try to build up momentum again. What cheering complacents they have for Craig will be disappointed by a return to true Bond fundamentals. A vulnerability because they themselves made the classic mode of Bond subject to attack, no doubt that petard will be hoisted up when the time comes.

Best outcome would be for Babs to step back Mikey bring in the next generation, recast and restart after the break leaving the new generation some room to work. The origins quagmire is one Cubby wisely avoided for over 30 years. He knew to keep moving forward and not to waste time looking back. His daughter was too caught up in herself to understand this one simple principle.

[Bond77]

Craig's deserves the blame just as Burt Reynolds deserves credit for passing the role up. Part of an actors responsibility is to be diligent enough to pass on roles they are wrong for.

Ultimately it is Babs & Mikey who are responsible for the failings. But they went way off the reservation when they decided to (A.) attack Brozza, his era and 40 years of Bond. (B.) Completely abandon 40 years of history for a flash in the pan reboot with no plan behind it. They easily could have given Brozza his 5th and final movie and everyone would have been happy, Babs could have hired Danny boy the next year and got on with the business of making Jason Bourne with a constipated scowl. There still would be complaints over casting and the direction, but it might not have been the civil insurrection she took upon herself when she turned on the Fanbase her Daddy built. Then again maybe that was the point.

The current pablum about "Craig is just an actor doing a job" is bunk his interviews make it clear he is making demands and forcing things like name, plots, costars, writers and directors. Mendes for Christs sake!

Craig's responsibility comes into play again becuase he has taken a great deal of it on his shoulders, he is primarily responsible for the quagmire Quark became, he steered the franchise right into the ditch with that one. His input in Bond is unprecedented when he came on board he lectured them that "Bond has got to change". Babs was gagging for it even though as Mikey surly knows Craig's vision of Bond and his demands about the kind of movies he wants to make are completely incompatible with Bond. Right now the worst fears have been confirmed Babs divided their once stable fanbase while putting themselves under the microscope, they could afford it as long as they had a modicum of success although they were only postponing the inevitable grinding clunk when they have to change gears. The stall MGM forced is death form them. I am sure they are worried about the franchise, they have to restart it and try to build up momentum again. What cheering complacents they have for Craig will be disappointed by a return to true Bond fundamentals. A vulnerability because they themselves made the classic mode of Bond subject to attack, no doubt that petard will be hoisted up when the time comes.

Best outcome would be for Babs to step back Mikey bring in the next generation, recast and restart after the break leaving the new generation some room to work. The origins quagmire is one Cubby wisely avoided for over 30 years. He knew to keep moving forward and not to waste time looking back. His daughter was too caught up in herself to understand this one simple principle.

Great post M.R. I agree with you about Craig. I've seen those interviews where he talks about changing Bond and making him "different" (ie. not entertaining). I still maintain that the majority of the blames falls on EON. When actors want to take things in the wrong direction it's up to the producers to say no. I remember seeing an interview of George Lazenby from 1970. He was basically whining that he wasn't allowed to change Bond and update the character. He said stuff like (paraphrasing) "I wanted Bond to be accompanied by pop music; not the old fashion stuff"(imagine the gall of Lazenby who is basically questioning the output of the legend John Barry!). Cubby and Broccoli could say no to actors, but Barbara says yes, and its because she agrees.

As far as the quandary EON finds itself in, and as you alluded to, I say that it would be fine to scrap the whole reboot altogether and have the next Bond film be a "regular" one with a "regular" lead. It's not like the majority of the audience are waiting with bated breath to see what becomes of Quantum, as if the cliffhanger is comparable to The Empire Strikes Back or "Who Shot J.R." What a ridiculous notion! No, more likely the majority of people who saw Quantum of Solace didn't really understand what was going on because it is so incoherent, and by forty-five minutes into the film could care less anyway. By the time EON gets around to making a new Bond film, most will have forgotten who or what Quantum is.

[Kristatos]

As far as the quandary EON finds itself in, and as you alluded to, I say that it would be fine to scrap the whole reboot altogether and have the next Bond film be a "regular" one with a "regular" lead. It's not like the majority of the audience are waiting with bated breath to see what becomes of Quantum, as if the cliffhanger is comparable to The Empire Strikes Back or "Who Shot J.R." What a ridiculous notion! No, more likely the majority of people who saw Quantum of Solace didn't really understand what was going on because it is so incoherent, and by forty-five minutes into the film could care less anyway. By the time EON gets around to making a new Bond film, most will have forgotten who or what Quantum is.

There was no cliffhanger. Quantum has been established, and can be used or not used in future films as the filmmakers see fit. It wouldn't bother me overmuch either way.

[bjmdds]

Broccoli's writing team now is DEVOID of substance and they need NEW blood in the scripts. More of the same trash will not suffice.

[katied]

Babs will either have to die or retire.And I don't think either of those things are going to happen any time soon.She probably drives around in something like the Popemobile, for her own safety[/sarcasm]

[bjmdds]

She is a DISGRACE the royal order of Broccoli/Saltzman.

[katied]

^It's *got* to piss Mikey Wilson that Babs was the one who was put in charge of EON, not him.

[Blowfeld]

Sylvester McCoy has been cast as Radagast the Brown in the upcoming film The Hobbit.

McCoy had meetings in Wellington with Jackson and co-producer and co-writer Philippa Boyens last week, where he was offered the role, but that no contracts have yet been signed.

The no contract thing has me thinking. MGM is still surrounded in confusion it seems.

[bjmdds]

Peter Morgan's recent statements about Eon and his storyline are disturbing. The guy is clueless about Bond it seems and it's time to get a writer who specializes in spy stories only to pen the story. No more politics, just action and suspense.

[The Sweeney]

Peter Morgan's recent statements about Eon and his storyline are disturbing. The guy is clueless about Bond it seems and it's time to get a writer who specializes in spy stories only to pen the story. No more politics, just action and suspense.

Hear hear! This I am in complete agreement with.....

[Blowfeld]

It will be interesting to hear what Peter's ideas were. That is once we are past this crazy seasons and all of this realistic socially conscious nonsense is buried deep.

I got a feeling it will be shocking predictable tripe in line with the Vesper's child rubbish.

[katied]

Peter Morgan's written some great movies. If it were something along the lines of Vesper having a child nobody knew about(SO glad they decided not to do that!),then no.

[bjmdds]

Peter Morgan's recent statements about Eon and his storyline are disturbing. The guy is clueless about Bond it seems and it's time to get a writer who specializes in spy stories only to pen the story. No more politics, just action and suspense.

Hear hear! This I am in complete agreement with.....

You in agreement with moi over this? Detente Comrade.

[bjmdds]

Peter Morgan's written some great movies. If it were something along the lines of Vesper having a child nobody knew about(SO glad they decided not to do that!),then no.

You wonder why if all of us were writing a Bond script, we would get it right, taking all of our ideas and then doing one overall rewrite. FBF, MP, Sweeney, myself, all the rest here, would do a far better job than Broccoli and Wilson and we would get it right. Eon is a disgrace and void of ideas.

[katied]

If I were asked to write a Bond script, I guarandamntee you it wouldn't come off like bad fan fiction!

[Captain Nash]

Peter Morgan's recent statements about Eon and his storyline are disturbing. The guy is clueless about Bond it seems and it's time to get a writer who specializes in spy stories only to pen the story. No more politics, just action and suspense.

It doesn't happen very often, but here, I'm on full agreement with you bj.
It's something that has been sadly lacking from many Bond films, not only during the Craig era, but a long while before to.

[Captain Nash]

Peter Morgan's written some great movies. If it were something along the lines of Vesper having a child nobody knew about(SO glad they decided not to do that!),then no.

You wonder why if all of us were writing a Bond script, we would get it right, taking all of our ideas and then doing one overall rewrite. FBF, MP, Sweeney, myself, all the rest here, would do a far better job than Broccoli and Wilson and we would get it right. Eon is a disgrace and void of ideas.

I think / hope I'm right in saying many Bond fans are not confident in the writing of Purvis and Wade, and would welcome a change in the writing department. For a period during the 80's Michael G Wilson also took to writing the movies alongside Richard Maibaum. FYEO, OP , AVTAK , TLD and LTK have all benefited from Wilson's collaboration. They also represent to me, some of the films with story elements that most fans seem to want. Escapist fun, with a spy story. What you could call a typical Bond film. Nothing political. If some fresh blood were brought in to collaborate with Wilson on penning a script, then we could be moving in a direction that not only fans would like, but also general moviegoers. The biggest issue for me with QOS was the loss of an intriguing story that I cared about. And if I'm a Bond fan, then what do regular audience members feel?
Problem solved I think.
I'll volunteer to help him, seems to be the latest thing at the moment for forum members to put their hands up to offer to write the film.
Maybe if some of them wrote a full treatment, instead of penning a brief outline of what they could do, it would be better. I look forward to seeing it.

[katied]

Agreeing with Nash for the second time today...


Surely there's perfectly capable writers that *aren't* Perv and Wade or Morgan.


And agreed about just posting a outline as opposed to a whole treatment.

[James]

The tragic thing about Barbara and the servants she hires is that they think they are respected artists making Bond serious and relevant but, in their own miserable way, CR & QOS were just as daft as anything that went before. I'm fed up with these idiots talking about Bond as if it's Crime and Punishment and the thought of Daniel Craig playing Bond again in 2013 or something with pancake make-up and his one facial expression is too much to take. Hire some writers who love Bond, get a younger actor who looks like James Bond and reboot the reboot. Then we can watch the other forums say how great the new actor is and enjoy the traditional retrospective downgrading of the previous actor.