Blowfeld wrote:Alessandra wrote:Veronica wrote:And yeah Ale I am of opinion that they go inspite of him because there is James Bond in the title. He is not a leading man material let's face it. It's actually hilarious how Babs goes on how he is "a unique mix of acting skills.and movie star charisma"...
that's an ACTUAL quote. That's a level of Denise Richards' statement that she liked the role because it was "brainy,athletic and had an actually depth that was missing in prior Bond girls."
GOOD LORD.
Sorry, I had to. The "realism" part just makes me laugh. James Bond was NEVER about realism, it was about having impossibly cool gadgets that no one could ever dream of and DOING THE IMPOSSIBLE. Just go open the door of your house or do a reality show on mafia hitmen if you want to see realism! For heaven's sake!
Now, as far as the rest...
The general opinion of the best Bond here, is the same as everywhere: SEAN CONNERY.
Other favorites vary, but Pierce Brosnan and Sir Roger are generally the other two faves. No, Craig is NOT popular around here and as I stated above, the only two people (men of course) I know who like Craig as Bond, do NOT like Bond movies because "it's too unrealistic". OK THEN. LOL
And as you said, SERIOUS and HUMORLESS does NOT mean realistic. Humor is a HUGE part of everyday life, and without it we would all be dead! Doesn't get more real than humor! Not even worth debating certain people.
There was a chemistry which made 007 movies work. The Broccoli family had worked out a formula and with mixed results produced movies one their own since 1974. For the last 9 years they have been trying to rediscover the formula, starting with a man however decent he may be in real life looks and acts nothing like 007 written or filmed. Putting him in stories which had little to nothing to do with Bond. All under the pretence of this is how "Bond become Bond",
All this in a vain attempt to remake the magic they never really lost, until they decided to reboot. Now those lambasted elements, like gadgets, humour and loyal secretary, are slowing making their come back in the series and the magic EON tossed away so causally were picked up by apparently more talented producers, writers and directors, some of whom were passed over by EON. I've seen more good movies, Bond in all but name in the last 6 years than EON every could have produced. James Bond will return, althou maybe not where we expect him to.
Exactly, and speaking of this... there was a full article on Corriere della Sera's fashion weekly today about Man from U.N.C.L.E. because they filmed in Italy too as you know (the article focused on Rome, because they filmed there).
Anyway the interesting parts are two. One, they specifically gave out the budget (not that it was a secret), from GUY RITCHIE'S own lips, given he is the interviewee, and do you know how much it is?
$75 mln. SEVENTY-FIVE million. A QUARTER of the (ridiculously high) budget for Spectre. A QUARTER!!! For MUCH better actors (cause Cavill, Hammer, Debicki, Vikander and even Hugh Grant are all MUCH better actors than the leads in the cast of Spectre), a supremely superior script AND director (cause Guy Ritchie has proven how he can do spy, humor and action d**n well), and waiting to see, but pretty surely an infinitely better movie overall, too.
SEVENTY-FIVE million dollars as opposed to 300 million dollars. PLEASE bear that in mind.
The other very VERY interesting thing is that
Guy Ritchie himself said in the interview, and I quote (translating from the magazine... hate translating what's already been translated, but whatever!)
"The actors (Cavill and Hammer) have understood what I want from them".
In this case, they need to be credible in the very glamorous shoes of secret agents in an era during which the benchmark, aesthetic and spectacular, was Sean Connery's 007.
"I have always been a huge fan of Sean Connery's Bond, so evocative, charismatic. When I took over this project, I immediately thought that I wanted it to have this Bondian idea of the '60s. Without wanting to make a copy of it, obviously, but with the intention to recreate that precise atmosphere."
The dynamic of the couple of enemies forced to work together is also familiar to Ritchie. "There is a correlation between the two of them and the Holmes-Watson couple. Constant friction, and the research of a balance between the humorous aspects (comic too, with a sharp sense of humor) and the other elements.
I want people to have fun with my movies, but without taking credibility away from the story."
In short: GUY RITCHIE IS MAKING A BOND MOVIE THE WAY THEY OUGHT TO BE MADE. And he is NOT afraid of embracing the humor and of making people HAVE FUN. Cause, like everyone who is SECURE in their artistic position, he doesn't need to be pretentious in his claims about any movie to show that it is good. He doesn't need to completely destroy a concept that includes humor and gadgets to sell a good story, because HE KNOWS that's not what people want AND he knows that it is NOT going to take anything away from his artistry.
THAT is the difference. Barbara Broccoli is a woman who doesn't have a tenth of her father's talent, so she constantly feels like she needs to prove something or leave a different mark... because she's aware she is a mediocre producer who will NEED to be pretentious in order to get the "ohh look, they're trying to make Bond serious so that must mean they are more artistic" type of comment from morons who don't understand a THING about what Bond actually is. Result? Now they have to go back to the original formula, but hey slowly, because they can't look like the fools they are for what they pulled so far, can't look like they're finally going back to what ACTUALLY works.
Guy Ritchie doesn't have that problem, he is neither insecure, nor trying to prove anything to anyone. And WB doesn't have that problem either, and so they just produce a great 60s themed spy movie the way it ought to be.
I can't even begin to explain how much I laughed when I read this interview, and I mean laughed because he says EXACTLY what every Bond director should say and EXACTLY what we want to hear.
Applause to Mr. Ritchie.
I would take Cavill, who is clean shaven, over this Mison any day as Bond. It's not even close IMO. Mison minus his beard is NO Bond whatsoever. If Bond had a beard, he's be passable at best.
The Weinstein Company said today that Quentin Tarantino and the cast of his Western shoot-’em-up The Hateful Eight will attend Comic-Con next month with a Hall H presentation set for Saturday, July 11 at 1:30 PM. The presentation will include a discussion with Tarantino and the cast about the film, its roadshow release in 70mm and a promise of new footage...........FBF, you and MP can go to this and discuss Pierce being cast into one of Tarantino's films. 
