The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 10:04 pm

Bond WAS defined as a 'cultured' gentleman who also happened to be licensed to kill by the British government. Craig's portrayal and look is the least of the 6 actors in this regard.

Post by **Skywalker** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 10:28 pm

bjmdds wrote:Bond WAS defined as a 'cultured' gentleman who also happened to be licensed to kill by the British government. Craig's portrayal and look is the least of the 6 actors in this regard.

The 'cultured' gentleman is what makes Bond..... Bond. To disregard this critical element is the reason Craig did not appeal to me in CR.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 2:38 am

Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:Bond WAS defined as a 'cultured' gentleman who also happened to be licensed to kill by the British government. Craig's portrayal and look is the least of the 6 actors in this regard.
The 'cultured' gentleman is what makes Bond..... Bond. To disregard this critical element is the reason Craig did not appeal to me in CR.

Agree 1000% young Skywalker. That is it, in a nutshell, as well as the reboot concept.

Post by **Skywalker** » Sun Aug 12, 2007 9:31 pm

bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:Bond WAS defined as a 'cultured' gentleman who also happened to be licensed to kill by the British government. Craig's portrayal and look is the least of the 6 actors in this regard.
The 'cultured' gentleman is what makes Bond..... Bond. To disregard this critical element is the reason Craig did not appeal to me in CR.
Agree 1000% young Skywalker. That is it, in a nutshell, as well as the reboot concept.

I guess the big question is 'Can Craig deliver the cultured gentleman Bond'.

Jedi007 · Post by **Jedi007** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:57 am

And who ever said people like Paris Hilton had class?

That's the point.

Post by **bjmdds** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:23 am

Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:Bond WAS defined as a 'cultured' gentleman who also happened to be licensed to kill by the British government. Craig's portrayal and look is the least of the 6 actors in this regard.
The 'cultured' gentleman is what makes Bond..... Bond. To disregard this critical element is the reason Craig did not appeal to me in CR.
Agree 1000% young Skywalker. That is it, in a nutshell, as well as the reboot concept.
I guess the big question is 'Can Craig deliver the cultured gentleman Bond'.

To me, once that concept is approached, Craig is replaced. Don't look now but TBU has passed $132 million at the USA box office in just 2 weekends of release! CR did $167 million it's ENTIRE run in the USA. Eon/Craig will be hard pressed to regain, or even come close, to surpassing the USA's NOW number 1 spy franchise in popularity. It will be curious to see what happens internationally with this film.

Post by **Skywalker** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:59 am

bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote: I guess the big question is 'Can Craig deliver the cultured gentleman Bond'.
To me, once that concept is approached, Craig is replaced. Don't look now but TBU has passed $132 million at the USA box office in just 2 weekends of release! CR did $167 million it's ENTIRE run in the USA. Eon/Craig will be hard pressed to regain, or even come close, to surpassing the USA's NOW number 1 spy franchise in popularity. It will be curious to see what happens internationally with this film.

TBU has certainly done well. That could mean that the style of Bond film we saw in CR still seems popular with Joe public.

Post by **bjmdds** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:23 pm

Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote: I guess the big question is 'Can Craig deliver the cultured gentleman Bond'.
To me, once that concept is approached, Craig is replaced. Don't look now but TBU has passed $132 million at the USA box office in just 2 weekends of release! CR did $167 million it's ENTIRE run in the USA. Eon/Craig will be hard pressed to regain, or even come close, to surpassing the USA's NOW number 1 spy franchise in popularity. It will be curious to see what happens internationally with this film.
TBU has certainly done well. That could mean that the style of Bond film we saw in CR still seems popular with Joe public.

The new formula seems to be follow the leader for EON so I would think Broccoli and MGW sat through TBU several times conspicuously with the public to judge their reactions and see what else they could copy, such as more hand held cameras for more action. This Bourne film is less character driven and more action oriented than the first two, so expect Bond 22 to follow suit.

Post by **English Agent** » Wed Aug 15, 2007 7:07 pm

bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote:
bjmdds wrote:
Skywalker wrote: I guess the big question is 'Can Craig deliver the cultured gentleman Bond'.
To me, once that concept is approached, Craig is replaced. Don't look now but TBU has passed $132 million at the USA box office in just 2 weekends of release! CR did $167 million it's ENTIRE run in the USA. Eon/Craig will be hard pressed to regain, or even come close, to surpassing the USA's NOW number 1 spy franchise in popularity. It will be curious to see what happens internationally with this film.
TBU has certainly done well. That could mean that the style of Bond film we saw in CR still seems popular with Joe public.
The new formula seems to be follow the leader for EON so I would think Broccoli and MGW sat through TBU several times conspicuously with the public to judge their reactions and see what else they could copy, such as more hand held cameras for more action. This Bourne film is less character driven and more action oriented than the first two, so expect Bond 22 to follow suit.

'BJ' I havnt seen TBU yet, but you mention that hand held cameras are used in the action sequences. Was this a plus point i.e. added more scope to the film or did the action just dart all over the place so you couldn't get
a full view of the scene.
Personally i like to be able to see the whole scene.........too many action sequences in modern films are ruined by ligntningly quick edit scenes where the action comes at you in a mass sequence of 1 or 2 second clips,
or is filmed in near darkness (which is real for the context of the scene),
but unviewable for cinema audiences.
Hand held camera action scenes could be good in a Bond film if edited well.

Post by **bjmdds** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:48 am

This was mentioned in the reviews of TBU. I personally do not like fast edited fight scenes ala Batman Begins, because you lose track of what actually happened. Craig seems complimentary of TBU and wants the gritty themes continued with Bond 22. They also mentioned the climax scene in Bond 22 may involve Craig's Bond chasing the new foe during a traditional wild horse stampede in a small town.

Post by **The Sweeney** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 6:16 am

I saw TBU last night, and thought it was brilliant! Edge-of-your-seat moments from start to finish. What I love about these films, is that Bourne is pretty resourceful, and relies on his wits to get out of situations, not clever gadgets.

The Greengrass camera wobbles are ocassionally annoying, but do work best during the action sequences. The fight scene and car chase scene are both spectacular - easily the best of the series.

I think if EON continue in the CR/Bourne path for 22, it is the right way to go. However, if they revert back to type for 22 (trashy gadgets, OTT action that is totally unrealistic, embarrassing one-liners, pathetic CGI, ridiculous pantomime villains, silly story, etc.) then EON deserve everything they get.

I just hope Babs has watched TBU, and realised they need to raise their game even more now for 22.

Post by **Kristatos** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:34 pm

The Sweeney wrote:However, if they revert back to type for 22 (trashy gadgets, OTT action that is totally unrealistic, embarrassing one-liners, pathetic CGI, ridiculous pantomime villains, silly story, etc.) then EON deserve everything they get.

What if "everything they get" turns out to be a big increase in box office revenues? I don't know that would be the case, but it seems unwise to assume that it wouldn't.

Jedi007 · Post by **Jedi007** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 1:59 pm

I don't mind if they go 'Bournish' rather than 'Bondish' style in making Bond 22. However if Craig's Bond remained 'uncultured' and 'unrefined' he will never be Bond to me.

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:02 pm

The Sweeney wrote:I saw TBU last night, and thought it was brilliant! Edge-of-your-seat moments from start to finish. What I love about these films, is that Bourne is pretty resourceful, and relies on his wits to get out of situations, not clever gadgets.

The Greengrass camera wobbles are ocassionally annoying, but do work best during the action sequences. The fight scene and car chase scene are both spectacular - easily the best of the series.

I think if EON continue in the CR/Bourne path for 22, it is the right way to go. However, if they revert back to type for 22 (trashy gadgets, OTT action that is totally unrealistic, embarrassing one-liners, pathetic CGI, ridiculous pantomime villains, silly story, etc.) then EON deserve everything they get.

I just hope Babs has watched TBU, and realised they need to raise their game even more now for 22.

Do not worry Sweeney. Babs and MGW had front row seats for TBU and probably sat through it 10 times with Forster to see what they can rip off from this film and utilize it for Bond 22. Do not consider the prior 20 films concepts silly, for you underestimate it's longevity. The franchise did not last over 4 decades without acceptance by the worldwide public.

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:03 pm

Jedi007 wrote:I don't mind if they go 'Bournish' rather than 'Bondish' style in making Bond 22. However if Craig's Bond remained 'uncultured' and 'unrefined' he will never be Bond to me.

I do not think Craig can EVER come across successfully as 'cultured' Jedi.

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:17 pm

I personally do not find Matt Damon believeable as Jason Bourne. They could have picked far better suited actors than him for the role. Politically speaking, the Bourne films are more Three Days Of The Condor than spy genre. Both portray the USA and the CIA as the 'bad guys'. This must make Damon feel good being the liberal minded thinker he is in Hollywood. Who do you think would have made Jason Bourne more believeable than Matt Damon?

Post by **Skywalker** » Sat Aug 18, 2007 8:29 am

bjmdds wrote:I personally do not find Matt Damon believeable as Jason Bourne. They could have picked far better suited actors than him for the role. Politically speaking, the Bourne films are more Three Days Of The Condor than spy genre. Both portray the USA and the CIA as the 'bad guys'. This must make Damon feel good being the liberal minded thinker he is in Hollywood. Who do you think would have made Jason Bourne more believeable than Matt Damon?

I've always felt Damon to be right for the role. Never thought about this question before BJ, I'll have to think some more on the subject and get back to you.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:05 pm

Do you find him believable as the outright killing machine he portrays?

Post by **Skywalker** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 8:55 am

bjmdds wrote:Do you find him believable as the outright killing machine he portrays?

I suppose I must have simply due to the fact I have never questioned it before.

Post by **bjmdds** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:16 pm

Did Skywalker see TBU this weekend? So far, it has done $163 million in just 3 weekends in the USA and the new international markets are up considerably as well over the second film.