The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

Post by **bjmdds** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:09 pm

The Craig fanatics would say Moonraker is a mockery of a Bond film, as it related to the Star Wars movie release. I say, Moonraker is 'Moore' Bond than Casino Royale is. I know Skywalker would agree 100000%!

Post by **bjmdds** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:13 pm

The Sweeney wrote:
bjmdds wrote:http://www.express.co.uk/news/view/14352/Bond It seems the fight will continue through 2010 since Eon caved in and doubled Craig's salary for the next TWO films! He will now earn a total of $26 million US dollars for Bond 22 and 23. I for one, am NOT pleased, but I know the Sweeney has a HUGE smile on his face. This charade will now encompass at least 3 films over a 4 year time frame, assuming Bond 23 gets released in the summer of 2010 as they mentioned. After this pay day, I doubt Eon will fork over the numbers Craig will demand and will then be "Brosnaned"(shown the door out classlessly).
Thanks for the message on the `other' forum, bj.

And yes, I have a big smile on my face with this news......

You can imagine my reaction....

I guess the battle will continue until at least 2010 when Skywalker and others will restore 'order' to the Bond force. Dalton twice was only tolerable for me, but Craig three times?!

Eye Of The Tiger · Post by **Eye Of The Tiger** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:51 am

Just because Daniel Craig might have a contract for 3 films doesn't automatically mean that he will do all 3 films.

CR did well at the box office because everybody was currious to see what the new Bond would be like, and because EON bought off different critics to give favorable reviews of the film. The overwhelming majority of the people that I have spoken to that have seen Casino Royale say that they either hated it or at best thought it was just fair.

Craig's second Bond film will not come even close to the box office numbers that CR did. And it's not out of the question that Sony will presure EON to dump Craig after that. After all that's what MGM did with Tim Dalton when they demanded that Pierce Brosnan take over as the new Bond.

And it's always possible that Craig will say that he wants out of his contract after Bond-22. He does think that the role is bellow his standards.

Post by **The Sweeney** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:43 am

Eye Of The Tiger wrote:Just because Daniel Craig might have a contract for 3 films doesn't automatically mean that he will do all 3 films.

CR did well at the box office because everybody was currious to see what the new Bond would be like, and because EON bought off different critics to give favorable reviews of the film. The overwhelming majority of the people that I have spoken to that have seen Casino Royale say that they either hated it or at best thought it was just fair.

Craig's second Bond film will not come even close to the box office numbers that CR did. And it's not out of the question that Sony will presure EON to dump Craig after that. After all that's what MGM did with Tim Dalton when they demanded that Pierce Brosnan take over as the new Bond.

And it's always possible that Craig will say that he wants out of his contract after Bond-22. He does think that the role is bellow his standards.

I guess we all see things differently. I am sure many of the doubters never in their wildest dreams would have thought CR would have done so well. Now they live in hope that Bond 22 will fail.

I on the other hand, predicted CR would do wonders at the BO, and I predict Bond 22 will be even more successful than CR.

This is down to the amount of people I have spoken to who think CR is one (if not the) best Bond film ever.

Couple this with the massive positive critical acclaim, the overwhelming majority of Bond fans on other forums who also think like this, Rotten Tomato's 94%, IMDB's rating, BAFTA nominations, DVD sales, etc. and it starts to paint a picture of how well Bond 22 will fare up.

It could just be possible that on the internet, the negative opinions mainly reside on this website. And there aren't that many on here when you compare it to the likes of MI6, AJB, CBn etc.

stockslivevan · Post by **stockslivevan** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:19 am

Eye Of The Tiger wrote:Just because Daniel Craig might have a contract for 3 films doesn't automatically mean that he will do all 3 films.

CR did well at the box office because everybody was currious to see what the new Bond would be like, and because EON bought off different critics to give favorable reviews of the film. The overwhelming majority of the people that I have spoken to that have seen Casino Royale say that they either hated it or at best thought it was just fair.

Craig's second Bond film will not come even close to the box office numbers that CR did. And it's not out of the question that Sony will presure EON to dump Craig after that. After all that's what MGM did with Tim Dalton when they demanded that Pierce Brosnan take over as the new Bond.

And it's always possible that Craig will say that he wants out of his contract after Bond-22. He does think that the role is bellow his standards.

Keep dreaming.

Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:18 pm

CR did well at the box office because everybody was currious to see what the new Bond would be like, and because EON bought off different critics to give favorable reviews of the film. The overwhelming majority of the people that I have spoken to that have seen Casino Royale say that they either hated it or at best thought it was just fair.

Some people are suggesting that 99% of people who watched Casino Royale unambiguously loved it.

Surely many people hated it.

If they cast a monkey as James Bond and it would be popular, and those who didn't enjoy Craig that much will see his next one just because it's a James Bond movie.

It seems that people wanted the next Bond movie to have a short, boring, ugly guy with a red-haired crewcut and an Arnie style physique playing a "young" Bond. Call me fussy, but that's not Bond.

Post by **bjmdds** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:46 pm

Eye Of The Tiger wrote:Just because Daniel Craig might have a contract for 3 films doesn't automatically mean that he will do all 3 films.

CR did well at the box office because everybody was currious to see what the new Bond would be like, and because EON bought off different critics to give favorable reviews of the film. The overwhelming majority of the people that I have spoken to that have seen Casino Royale say that they either hated it or at best thought it was just fair.

Craig's second Bond film will not come even close to the box office numbers that CR did. And it's not out of the question that Sony will presure EON to dump Craig after that. After all that's what MGM did with Tim Dalton when they demanded that Pierce Brosnan take over as the new Bond.

And it's always possible that Craig will say that he wants out of his contract after Bond-22. He does think that the role is bellow his standards.

The Tiger brings up a point I too have thought about. How did Daniel Craig, a relatively unknown entity, who NEVER made it to the tabloid pages, suddenly get voted best dressed male, one of the sexiest actors in the world, best this, best that, etc., even BEFORE CR was released? I too feel payouts to magazines were made by EON to SPIN their cheaply priced Bond boy. After all, Craig earned ZERO acclaim in this department prior to being cast as Bond. I guess this was all part of the unexplained $120 million to promote the film, in addition to the $150 million to make it. The fanfare is over, and if the Sweeney is correct and Bond 22 outdoes CR, that would be some feat by EON.

Post by **bjmdds** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:49 pm

Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry wrote:
CR did well at the box office because everybody was currious to see what the new Bond would be like, and because EON bought off different critics to give favorable reviews of the film. The overwhelming majority of the people that I have spoken to that have seen Casino Royale say that they either hated it or at best thought it was just fair.
Some people are suggesting that 99% of people who watched Casino Royale unambiguously loved it.

Surely many people hated it.

If they cast a monkey as James Bond and it would be popular, and those who didn't enjoy Craig that much will see his next one just because it's a James Bond movie.

It seems that people wanted the next Bond movie to have a short, boring, ugly guy with a red-haired crewcut and an Arnie style physique playing a "young" Bond. Call me fussy, but that's not Bond.

It's NOT Bond, but people went to see it anyway, and that is the puzzling factor.

agent english · Post by **agent english** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:13 pm

HI guys

Reading your latest posts, you say you find it puzzling why DC and CR
was a success..................but dont you think you could be missing the fact
that it was a Bond film and that you havnt got the gist of that............I
mean apart from yourselves there are millions of intelligent people
who have grown up with the Bond novels and films, and they were pleased.

As the saying goes you can fool some people some of the time but not all the people all the time.

ps: HAVE YOU HEARD THAT AUSTRIA HAS BEEN RUMOURED FOR A POSSIBLE LOCATION FOR BOND 22, AS LOCATION SCOUTS HAVE RECENTLY VISITED THERE INCLUDING BARBARA BROCCOLI!!

Post by **bjmdds** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:35 pm

Perhaps we can ALL enjoy these two videos found and sent to me by Missouri's own Mr. Babits. A little levity to break the tension, and quite amusing to say the least! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zygt_nGBGb0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ-RnM63is8

agent english · Post by **agent english** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:44 pm

Interesting YOU tube VIDEOS BJ'

Its always amazed me that despite the high quality production values
of the Bond films.............they have some of the most glaring continuity
errors in film history.

There were a few new ones i hadn't seen before in the first video.

Post by **bjmdds** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:02 pm

English,you have to wonder what the directors and editors from Eon were thinking, or were they just brain dead?

Post by **007** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:51 pm

How did Daniel Craig, a relatively unknown entity, who NEVER made it to the tabloid pages, suddenly get voted best dressed male, one of the sexiest actors in the world, best this, best that, etc., even BEFORE CR was released? I too feel payouts to magazines were made bt EON to SPIN their cheaply priced Bond boy. After all, Craig earned ZERO acclaim in this department prior to being cast as Bond. I guess this was all part of the unexplained $120 million to promote the film, in addition to the $150 million to make it.

I'm actually convinced that with enough money and bulls**t they can make anyone James Bond now. You don't even have to be good looking, tall or refined anymore.

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 2:45 am

007 wrote:
How did Daniel Craig, a relatively unknown entity, who NEVER made it to the tabloid pages, suddenly get voted best dressed male, one of the sexiest actors in the world, best this, best that, etc., even BEFORE CR was released? I too feel payouts to magazines were made bt EON to SPIN their cheaply priced Bond boy. After all, Craig earned ZERO acclaim in this department prior to being cast as Bond. I guess this was all part of the unexplained $120 million to promote the film, in addition to the $150 million to make it.

I'm actually convinced that with enough money and bulls**t they can make anyone James Bond now. You don't even have to be good looking, tall or refined anymore.

They proved that one 007!

Eye Of The Tiger · Post by **Eye Of The Tiger** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:24 am

I'm being totally honest when I tell you that people that I have spoken with in person that have seen Casino Royale that the biggest majority have said that they either hated it or thought it was just a so-so Bond film.

I have this buddy that I had not spoken to since about 1992. He is also a huge Bond fan. I remember that back then his favorite Bond actors were Connery and Dalton. Since Pierce Brosnan had not yet been hired as Bond my friend had no idea what I thought about Brosnan as Bond. Anyway, we ran into each other at one of my gigs about 2 months ago, and after a few minutes of talking I asked him "Hey, what do you think of the new Bond and Casino Royale?" He said (still not having any idea what I thought about Craig/CR) that he thought that CR sucked and that Daniel Craig is by far the worst Bond ever.

That is just one of many examples of Bond fans who I have spoken to that hate Daniel Craig as Bond and thought that Casino Royale sucks.

I remember hearing a lot of buzz about Die Another Day well after it was out on DVD, and I'm NOT talking about on Bond forums. Since Casino Royale has come out on DVD I haven't heard anything about it other than on Bond forums and when I have brought up the film with friends of mine.

Post by **The Sweeney** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:46 am

Eye Of The Tiger wrote:I'm being totally honest when I tell you that people that I have spoken with in person that have seen Casino Royale that the biggest majority have said that they either hated it or thought it was just a so-so Bond film.

I have this buddy that I had not spoken to since about 1992. He is also a huge Bond fan. I remember that back then his favorite Bond actors were Connery and Dalton. Since Pierce Brosnan had not yet been hired as Bond my friend had no idea what I thought about Brosnan as Bond. Anyway, we ran into each other at one of my gigs about 2 months ago, and after a few minutes of talking I asked him "Hey, what do you think of the new Bond and Casino Royale?" He said (still not having any idea what I thought about Craig/CR) that he thought that CR sucked and that Daniel Craig is by far the worst Bond ever.

That is just one of many examples of Bond fans who I have spoken to that hate Daniel Craig as Bond and thought that Casino Royale sucks.

I remember hearing a lot of buzz about Die Another Day well after it was out on DVD, and I'm NOT talking about on Bond forums. Since Casino Royale has come out on DVD I haven't heard anything about it other than on Bond forums and when I have brought up the film with friends of mine.

If you compare reviews of CR and DAD when they were both released, you'll probably find a big difference.

With regards your pal hating CR, I too have countless stories from Bond fans on the complete other end of the spectrum - people who thought Craig was the best Bond ever!

Guess it's what makes the world a more interesting place, eh? If we all thought the same, what a boring place it would be.....

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:06 pm

There probably is 100% agreement on one thing about CR:It was 'different' from the other Bond films and it was 'supposedly' an 'origin' film. Plenty thought it was trash, plenty thought it was great. The next film, by Forster, will reveal the truth behind CR's success. If Bourne 3 soars at the box office, look for more of the same from Eon.

james stock · Post by **james stock** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:28 pm

I think you are right bjmdds, more colourless antics, does anyone feel that the fun of cinema is slowly disapearing? Bonds not Bond anymore, we have torture porn maskerading as Horror lets lighten up a little!

He got the boot!

agent english · Post by **agent english** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:40 pm

Yes things are different............but this applies to all films.

Don't forget Bonds be going for over 40 years now, but i do agree
that some of the magic has been lost over the decades...............
unfortunately with modern film making, i dont think it will return.

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:09 pm

james stock wrote:I think you are right bjmdds, more colourless antics, does anyone feel that the fun of cinema is slowly disapearing? Bonds not Bond anymore, we have torture porn maskerading as Horror lets lighten up a little!

He got the boot!

Craig's Bond is not recognizable to me Stock. More dreary psyche driven exploration of Bond with an explosion or two thrown in, for good measure?! Is that what Bond 22 will be?

Classic Bond Forum

The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

Re: Craig did some squawking...Eon caved...