The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[Kristatos]

As for the Bond look, I'd have to dig to find them, but there are some photos of him that remind me of that famous sketch that Fleming commissioned.

[Alessandra]

As for the Bond look, I'd have to dig to find them, but there are some photos of him that remind me of that famous sketch that Fleming commissioned.

I think with the right hairstyle and proper attitude, he CAN DEFINITELY be much better than Craig. As I said, for me Bond is Henry Cavill and him only. The fact his franchise is doing great makes it difficult though: BUT seen as he's still there among contenders, I wouldn't exclude it. PLUS... all depends on the distributor situation, too. Depending on that, Cavill may still be a very viable option. Now aside from that... that Turner dude looks like Fred Flintstone to me. There is something about him that is vulgar. Although... I will watch "And Then There Were None" in a bit and hopefully like him fine. Still, he wouldn't be as strong a choice as Hiddleston, and Hiddleston instead DEFINITELY has that Sir Roger and Pierce Brosnan attitude. The suave and charming that Bond should always have. That said, either is a definite improvement from Craig.

[bjmdds]

Where the heck have you been Ms. Bouvier, AWOL? Can it FINALLY be that Broccoli is dumping Cr-egg? This guy is not Bond material. There is more "new" Q than Bond in him. By the way, Cavill's franchise is NOT doing well at all. ECH-TRE will top B v S at the box office. It was a 3 week front loaded mess. Have you seen the RT reviews? The studio wanted over $1 billion now and got nowhere near that. Affleck will ruin it going further and don't expect another free standing Superman film for a long time, if ever now. Marvel slaughters these DC flicks. TOMATOMETER 27%
Average Rating: 4.9/10
Reviews Counted: 331
Fresh: 91
"Rotten" to the core: 240

[Blowfeld]

As for the Bond look, I'd have to dig to find them, but there are some photos of him that remind me of that famous sketch that Fleming commissioned.

I think with the right hairstyle and proper attitude, he CAN DEFINITELY be much better than Craig. As I said, for me Bond is Henry Cavill and him only. The fact his franchise is doing great makes it difficult though: BUT seen as he's still there among contenders, I wouldn't exclude it. PLUS... all depends on the distributor situation, too. Depending on that, Cavill may still be a very viable option. Now aside from that... that Turner dude looks like Fred Flintstone to me. There is something about him that is vulgar. Although... I will watch "And Then There Were None" in a bit and hopefully like him fine. Still, he wouldn't be as strong a choice as Hiddleston, and Hiddleston instead DEFINITELY has that Sir Roger and Pierce Brosnan attitude. The suave and charming that Bond should always have. That said, either is a definite improvement from Craig.

I do not immediately dislike Hiddleston, however he does not have a traditional Bond look. I know, I know 'what does it matter now?'. He could with the right touches more suitably look the part. He is another bloke seeing interviews on Top Gear changed my view of him, he got a certain charisma and sense of humour notably lacking from the role for a very long time now (2005).

If he were doing a retro Bond I think he'd work better, althou this is all speculation who knows maybe Ms Broccoli is planning another venture not Bond related with Hiddleston. If these meetings happened at all. This is not the first time an actors name has risen to the top of the betting pools and go back to nothingness shortly after. Cheap publicity stunt if it is one.

For me the biggest problem is the direction the series went after Dana, odd ball casting seems to be a problem after Cubby his daughter appears to like the favour of the week. Whomever is being critically praised at the moment.
If they stop this Bond-of-our-Lives soap opera I am game for just about anything.

[dirtybenny]

If they stop this Bond-of-our-Lives soap opera I am game for just about anything.

That, I can definitely drink to sir!

[FormerBondFan]

Another one:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rq5HkAIV584[/video]

[John Drake]

I think with the right hairstyle and proper attitude, he CAN DEFINITELY be much better than Craig. As I said, for me Bond is Henry Cavill and him only. The fact his franchise is doing great makes it difficult though: BUT seen as he's still there among contenders, I wouldn't exclude it. PLUS... all depends on the distributor situation, too. Depending on that, Cavill may still be a very viable option. Now aside from that... that Turner dude looks like Fred Flintstone to me. There is something about him that is vulgar. Although... I will watch "And Then There Were None" in a bit and hopefully like him fine. Still, he wouldn't be as strong a choice as Hiddleston, and Hiddleston instead DEFINITELY has that Sir Roger and Pierce Brosnan attitude. The suave and charming that Bond should always have. That said, either is a definite improvement from Craig.

I've got to take issue with you on Aidan Turner. Out of the supposed candidates floating around he's the only one who can be made to LOOK like James Bond. I don't know if you've ever seen him interviewed but he's very charming and down to earth and I think people would love him. I quite like Cavill and would have picked him over Craig in 2005 but at this stage he doesn't seem to be a contender anymore.

[Kristatos]

As for the Bond look, I'd have to dig to find them, but there are some photos of him that remind me of that famous sketch that Fleming commissioned.

I may have been thinking of the Jaguar advert:

[bjmdds]

I think with the right hairstyle and proper attitude, he CAN DEFINITELY be much better than Craig. As I said, for me Bond is Henry Cavill and him only. The fact his franchise is doing great makes it difficult though: BUT seen as he's still there among contenders, I wouldn't exclude it. PLUS... all depends on the distributor situation, too. Depending on that, Cavill may still be a very viable option. Now aside from that... that Turner dude looks like Fred Flintstone to me. There is something about him that is vulgar. Although... I will watch "And Then There Were None" in a bit and hopefully like him fine. Still, he wouldn't be as strong a choice as Hiddleston, and Hiddleston instead DEFINITELY has that Sir Roger and Pierce Brosnan attitude. The suave and charming that Bond should always have. That said, either is a definite improvement from Craig.

I've got to take issue with you on Aidan Turner. Out of the supposed candidates floating around he's the only one who can be made to LOOK like James Bond. I don't know if you've ever seen him interviewed but he's very charming and down to earth and I think people would love him. I quite like Cavill and would have picked him over Craig in 2005 but at this stage he doesn't seem to be a contender anymore.

Agree Drakester. Turner would be

[Veronica]

I think with the right hairstyle and proper attitude, he CAN DEFINITELY be much better than Craig. As I said, for me Bond is Henry Cavill and him only. The fact his franchise is doing great makes it difficult though: BUT seen as he's still there among contenders, I wouldn't exclude it. PLUS... all depends on the distributor situation, too. Depending on that, Cavill may still be a very viable option. Now aside from that... that Turner dude looks like Fred Flintstone to me. There is something about him that is vulgar. Although... I will watch "And Then There Were None" in a bit and hopefully like him fine. Still, he wouldn't be as strong a choice as Hiddleston, and Hiddleston instead DEFINITELY has that Sir Roger and Pierce Brosnan attitude. The suave and charming that Bond should always have. That said, either is a definite improvement from Craig.

I've got to take issue with you on Aidan Turner. Out of the supposed candidates floating around he's the only one who can be made to LOOK like James Bond. I don't know if you've ever seen him interviewed but he's very charming and down to earth and I think people would love him. I quite like Cavill and would have picked him over Craig in 2005 but at this stage he doesn't seem to be a contender anymore.

He definitely looks like Bond on these pictures. On the second he reminds me of Jude Law.
While Hiddleston has the charm he doesn't exactly have the look. But even without the look he would be a MAJOR improvement over Craig. He has the charm and class,something Craig desperately lacks.

[bjmdds]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... h63Hc9R23w[/video] [video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... QshpJxvgAI[/video] [video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... wNbstTE_9Y[/video] On social media women comment about him more than men do. That's NOT Bond's target core audience. This has Broccoli's Layer Cake fascination written all over it His hair is obviously thinning. His 'forehead is high' and there are signs of male pattern baldness beginning to show. He would be the most effeminate Bond to date, which is where Broccoli is going with this franchise.

[bjmdds]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... -TalVHo-U0[/video] THIS guy is the Hugh Jackman type for NOW Maybe Broccoli wants Hiddleston as the next Dr. No? If Broccoli goes rogue again, and picks anyone else as Bond, it's over Comment section below video: Wendy Scott 1 month ago: My reaction to this video was PERFECT! I see looking down at the comments, I wasn't alone. Great job putting this together. I rarely go to Bond films, but I would to see Aidan. I wouldn't have watched And Then There Were None if it weren't for him. As long as he can still be Ross Poldark, I'm happy to see him in other roles. Hard to imagine anyone else as Bond after this!

[Alessandra]

Where the heck have you been Ms. Bouvier, AWOL? Can it FINALLY be that Broccoli is dumping Cr-egg? This guy is not Bond material. There is more "new" Q than Bond in him. By the way, Cavill's franchise is NOT doing well at all. ECH-TRE will top B v S at the box office. It was a 3 week front loaded mess. Have you seen the RT reviews? The studio wanted over $1 billion now and got nowhere near that. Affleck will ruin it going further and don't expect another free standing Superman film for a long time, if ever now. Marvel slaughters these DC flicks. TOMATOMETER 27%
Average Rating: 4.9/10
Reviews Counted: 331
Fresh: 91
"Rotten" to the core: 240

BJ darling, always a pleasure! Now, much as you love to hate on Superman vs Batman, and much as the reviewers did? THEY ALL ATE CROW and they wrote about it because the movie, and this is MONETARY FACT, was a BIG success. There is NO if or BUT about it. It's fact. I spoke with execs, too. They made a hell of a lot of money with the movie, and still are. I, in fact, enjoyed it immensely and thought Affleck was the best Batman in a VERY long time. Which is exactly what all the fans of the actual comics thought, too, and the reason why the film did SO well at the box office, in spite of the ridiculous reviews.
I can link you to Variety, EW, Hollywood Reporter, ALL the main magazines that actually matter eating crow on reviews. And saying "so do reviews even matter anymore? Because reviewers spat on it, and yet it's huge at the box office". Facts are facts. The franchise is doing very well.

Now, for me Bond is HENRY CAVILL and HENRY CAVILL ONLY. That said, I have watched all of "And Then There Were None" with Aidan Turner, and I can see why people think he'd be a choice for Bond. Me? Not convinced at all and yes DESPITE the looks I am much more convinced by Hiddleston. You can go search the bad photos, BJ darling. LOL. But the fact remains he has a class and style and humor at handling himself that would GREATLY help the Bond franchise and that have been sorely missing.

Aidan Turner sure LOOKS the part more but he doesn't have the class or style for it. At all. So... it's between actor who doesn't really look the part but who can PLAY IT and SELL the franchise, and actor who LOOKS the part, but can he play CLASSY? I have doubts but I'm open to it. AND he certainly lacks the charisma and experience to sell the franchise...which is sorely needed in this day and age of communication.

In short: I don't care who does it between the two of them, I'd prefer Hiddleston BUT I have nothing against Turner. And EITHER is a MAJOR improvement from Craig. So yes I will GLADLY take Hiddleston as I said MAAAANY months ago on here before any of this became actual speculation.

[Omega]

I like cavill. But BvS sucks and it's in a money pit hell like Spectre and qos. They needed a billion to break even, might do it with toys and home video but it's a repudiation of zack Snyder's dark vision for DC universe.
They might salvage it with wonder woman and suicide squad, because that have less to do with Snyder.

Afleck I think is all about his ego, justice league producer and write and direct his own batman movie, his ego is they only thing he is thinking of.

BvS laid a Craig bond movie sized turd in the middle of the silver screen. I disagree with spinning it as a great success for fans because WB cashed In on the hype.
I'm hoping cavill might have a shot as bond because WB I might distribute and partner. And guy Ritchie who supposedly eon wants made man from uncle with them and worked with cavill before


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bjmdds]

B v S a monetary success? How? Where is the profit with that massive budget and P & A costs added on? Big O, you have it nailed correctly. To believe Affleck is better than Bale IMO is laughable as well. There won't be a stand alone Cavill Superman film for a LONG time now, based on 2 films that underwhelmed at the box office. Ale is part of the 27% on RT that loved that garbage in an alternate reality from the majority worldwide. It is the WORST casting EVER in a superhero film I ever saw. It was done after 3 weekends. If Harry Potter, with the same budget, supposedly lost money, yet did more at the box office than B V S, how the heck did B v S do so great? It makes no sense........as far as Hiddleston as Bond, this is EXACTLY what he would look like as Bond:

[Alessandra]

As for the Bond look, I'd have to dig to find them, but there are some photos of him that remind me of that famous sketch that Fleming commissioned.

I may have been thinking of the Jaguar advert:

Yes, Kristatos.

And HI John Drake and I HAVE said that I watched all of "and then there were none" and I see why people want TURNER for the part. He does look the part and I have said he looks the part more than Hiddleston does BUT I am very unconvinced he can ACT certain parts of it. I don't find him classy, stylish or capable of charm at all.- Hiddleston is great at that. So as I said, I will take either and have nothing against Turner, but I'd prefer Hiddleston.

Also, it seems like you guys have VERY wrong figures on the Batman vs Superman budget. And BJ, much as you dislike it, numbers are numbers. The film was and IS a financial success, and I have seen the actual figures. A film is not supposed to last over a month and that film broke records on opening weekend, which is when films make most of their money. That's fact again, much do the dismay of the haters. Sorry, just live with it and move on. These are facts, not disputable. I've seen what I needed to see and talked directly with execs. They are extremely satisfied. As were the vast majority of actual COMIC BOOKS fans, not those who only watch the movies. They're the ones how made critics eat crow, and as I said the most important magazines had to make amends publicly and say that critics don't matter at all anymore since despite butchering it, the film did very well.

Whether one likes it or not is a different matter, and that's opinion, but the figures and the box office success are not up for opinion. Those are facts. The entirety of my friends who are comic and film fans very much enjoyed the film, and so did I. And we're not in the minority at ALL, we're the big numbers that made the film make all that money. It's that simple. Again, doesn't matter whether one likes it or not, figures are figures and budget is budget.

All that said, what matters here is that 1) WB may distribute Bond and they have Cavill under contract 2) EON seems to want Guy Ritchie who did The Man from U.N.C.L.E. which to me was absolutely great (goes to show how box office means little to nothing, it can be good with a bad film, bad with a good film, bad with a bad film or good with a good film, it just depends). He'd certainly push for Cavill.

And I will repeat, to me the PERFECT Bond is JUST AND ONLY Henry Cavill. BUT, I will take either between Turner and Hiddleston, with a preference for Hiddleston for the reasons I mentioned. And I also thought he was great in "The Night Manager". Where he is playing a spy who isn't even a spy to begin with. So, once in part for Bond? I can definitely see how he would look the part a LOT more. I am instead unconvinced that Turner, while LOOKING the part more, would be good at PLAYING the part. But again... given both have faults, it's just a matter of picking one of the two. And I'm fine with both. IF and only IF Cavill can't be it.

[Omega]

I have an immense amount amount of respect for you, but I cannot believe BvS is a smashing Financial success when dozens of reports show the cost and amount to break even was a billion at the bo. Now they have a lot of options like home video toys and shifting costs to planned movies in the series.
I can believe they WB executives think they are on good ground and can move forward with Afleck movies but there is a stench to BvS because of Snyder direction.

This is like the crap Craig says about qos being financially rewarding, or the spin to make spectre look like it cost $250 million when we know they were getting close to $400.

My god BvS had the same bloated budget they are trying to smooth away.
But BvS has a lot more going for it than spectre, by a long shot.

Btw comic book fans are my people there are a few pockets who love BvS generally it's not well thought of. Even torrent sights slag it and has a low count.
Maybe the extended edition will make it a better movie. I think it's fair to say WB knows they f'ed up but I think maybe they can fix it. Trying to do what marvel did over a decade in two movies is tough.
I wished they skipped BvS and did man of steel two, which the first movie made a lot more money for the studio.

I like cavill and his superman would like him as bond if WB can help swing it all the better.
I'm not upset with Loki as bond if that happens, I just want them to make bond movies again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FormerBondFan]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... -TalVHo-U0[/video] THIS guy is the Hugh Jackman type for NOW Maybe Broccoli wants Hiddleston as the next Dr. No? If Broccoli goes rogue again, and picks anyone else as Bond, it's over Comment section below video: Wendy Scott 1 month ago: My reaction to this video was PERFECT! I see looking down at the comments, I wasn't alone. Great job putting this together. I rarely go to Bond films, but I would to see Aidan. I wouldn't have watched And Then There Were None if it weren't for him. As long as he can still be Ross Poldark, I'm happy to see him in other roles. Hard to imagine anyone else as Bond after this!

Don't put your faith in Babs again. You know what she did.

[bjmdds]

I have an immense amount amount of respect for you, but I cannot believe BvS is a smashing Financial success when dozens of reports show the cost and amount to break even was a billion at the bo. Now they have a lot of options like home video toys and shifting costs to planned movies in the series.
I can believe they WB executives think they are on good ground and can move forward with Afleck movies but there is a stench to BvS because of Snyder direction.

This is like the crap Craig says about qos being financially rewarding, or the spin to make spectre look like it cost $250 million when we know they were getting close to $400.

My god BvS had the same bloated budget they are trying to smooth away.
But BvS has a lot more going for it than spectre, by a long shot.

Btw comic book fans are my people there are a few pockets who love BvS generally it's not well thought of. Even torrent sights slag it and has a low count.
Maybe the extended edition will make it a better movie. I think it's fair to say WB knows they f'ed up but I think maybe they can fix it. Trying to do what marvel did over a decade in two movies is tough.
I wished they skipped BvS and did man of steel two, which the first movie made a lot more money for the studio.

I like cavill and his superman would like him as bond if WB can help swing it all the better.
I'm not upset with Loki as bond if that happens, I just want them to make bond movies again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The "O" knows his onions and makes sense on all fronts here. The contrary arguments sound a bit illogical, based on what we know is required to turn a profit on a $250 million film plus P&A added on. If triple that amount is required, there is NO way this film turned any massive profit. As I said, just wait and see how long it will be before another STAND ALONE Cavill Superman film will be made, be it 4 years, or EVER.

[bjmdds]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... -TalVHo-U0[/video] THIS guy is the Hugh Jackman type for NOW Maybe Broccoli wants Hiddleston as the next Dr. No? If Broccoli goes rogue again, and picks anyone else as Bond, it's over Comment section below video: Wendy Scott 1 month ago: My reaction to this video was PERFECT! I see looking down at the comments, I wasn't alone. Great job putting this together. I rarely go to Bond films, but I would to see Aidan. I wouldn't have watched And Then There Were None if it weren't for him. As long as he can still be Ross Poldark, I'm happy to see him in other roles. Hard to imagine anyone else as Bond after this!

Don't put your faith in Babs again. You know what she did.

Do you believe Cr-egg is done FBF? Excited?