The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[stockslivevan]

It's a shame Dalton didn't return in GoldenEye. The film was made for him and I think people would have given him another chance like they did with Roger Moore in The Spy Who Loved Me (at that point The Man with the Golden Gun was the lowest selling Bond), esspecially after the long wait for another Bond film. GoldenEye was the perfect balance for Dalton's Bond and the fantasy elements. Everytime I watch that movie, I can't help but picture Dalton in it, esspecially with Sean Bean.

[stockslivevan]

By the way, your own graph PROVES beyond the shadow of a doubt what Brosnan meant to the franchise, despite your fellow MI6-ers hatred of him.

It sure does but they don't care for that. For the record, I like Brosnan yet acknowledge his shortcomings. He's more edgy than Moore on my book, but a far cry from Dalton, Connery and Craig as far as being cool and tough are concerned.

[bjmdds]

It's a shame Dalton didn't return in GoldenEye. The film was made for him and I think people would have given him another chance like they did with Roger Moore in The Spy Who Loved Me (at that point The Man with the Golden Gun was the lowest selling Bond), esspecially after the long wait for another Bond film. GoldenEye was the perfect balance for Dalton's Bond and the fantasy elements. Everytime I watch that movie, I can't help but picture Dalton in it, esspecially with Sean Bean.

That we have detente with, for who knows how Dalton would have been in Goldeneye? Do you think 6 years would pass and Eon would use the same Bond?

[bjmdds]

By the way, your own graph PROVES beyond the shadow of a doubt what Brosnan meant to the franchise, despite your fellow MI6-ers hatred of him.

It sure does but they don't care for that. For the record, I like Brosnan yet acknowledge his shortcomings. He's more edgy than Moore on my book, but a far cry from Dalton, Connery and Craig as far as being cool and tough are concerned.

Tough and cool describes Craig to you, vs. Brosnan? Bond is a suave spy, who happens to be licensed to kill. Craig comes off as a pure uncontrolled thug,more Bourne-like in demeanor, even though CR is an origin film.

[stockslivevan]

It's a shame Dalton didn't return in GoldenEye. The film was made for him and I think people would have given him another chance like they did with Roger Moore in The Spy Who Loved Me (at that point The Man with the Golden Gun was the lowest selling Bond), esspecially after the long wait for another Bond film. GoldenEye was the perfect balance for Dalton's Bond and the fantasy elements. Everytime I watch that movie, I can't help but picture Dalton in it, esspecially with Sean Bean.

That we have detente with, for who knows how Dalton would have been in Goldeneye? Do you think 6 years would pass and Eon would use the same Bond?

Yes. Cubby asked for Dalton back but he declined. Before quitting, GoldenEye was being written in '93 and Dalton knew the development of the script thinking a release in 94 would be done but once it was that year and nothing was filmed and his contract expired by that point, he wasn't interested anymore. Even Cubby came up to him in person and asked him to come back but he didn't so they went with a quick casting with Brosnan.

I don't really think it mattered who was cast in the role, the film was going to be big because of the demand for a Bond film. If Roger Moore was able to gain the audience's acceptance as Bond in his third film, I'm certain Dalton would have been as well with GoldenEye. But we'll truly never know.

[stockslivevan]

Tough and cool describes Craig to you, vs. Brosnan? Bond is a suave spy, who happens to be licensed to kill. Craig comes off as a pure uncontrolled thug,more Bourne-like in demeanor, even though CR is an origin film.

That is because he DEVELOPS into the sophisticated secret agent. He was suppose to be a trigger finger in the beginning and as the film progressed he learned; developed. Like M said "Now you've learned your lesson". The ending of CR showed that with Bond well dressed with a sense of confidence when he spoke "The name's Bond... James Bond". That's what you will see in future releases.

[bjmdds]

Tough and cool describes Craig to you, vs. Brosnan? Bond is a suave spy, who happens to be licensed to kill. Craig comes off as a pure uncontrolled thug,more Bourne-like in demeanor, even though CR is an origin film.

That is because he DEVELOPS into the sophisticated secret agent. He was suppose to be a trigger finger in the beginning and as the film progressed he learned; developed. Like M said "Now you've learned your lesson". The ending of CR showed that with Bond well dressed with a sense of confidence when he spoke "The name's Bond... James Bond". That's what you will see in future releases.

Do you see Craig portraying Bond as a "suave" spy acceptable, as Moore, Connery,and Dalton tried to do?

[stockslivevan]

Tough and cool describes Craig to you, vs. Brosnan? Bond is a suave spy, who happens to be licensed to kill. Craig comes off as a pure uncontrolled thug,more Bourne-like in demeanor, even though CR is an origin film.

That is because he DEVELOPS into the sophisticated secret agent. He was suppose to be a trigger finger in the beginning and as the film progressed he learned; developed. Like M said "Now you've learned your lesson". The ending of CR showed that with Bond well dressed with a sense of confidence when he spoke "The name's Bond... James Bond". That's what you will see in future releases.

Do you see Craig portraying Bond as a "suave" spy acceptable, as Moore, Connery,and Dalton tried to do?

I say more between Dalton and Connery. Very rough and human but with a sense of cool. He has the same kind of humor as Connery with that wisecracking smartass quips "I've got a little itch, would you mind?"

Thankfully he won't get close to Roger Moore's Bond and remain staying true to Fleming Bond while at the same time adding a dose of Connery smartass humor.

[The Sweeney]

When Happy Feet and Night At The Museum approach $200 million at the box office and CR does not come close

There you go again with the Penguins and Museum. Two FAMILY movies that have absolutely nothing to do with Casino Royale.

even underperforms the prior 2002 Bond film,IN THE USA

Again, only using unreliable numbers to help your claims. Even if those numbers were used by everyone (which is not) it is still up there with the Brosnan films, not below them all. Why do you have to bring up only DAD when there were other films close it it consistently? Does that mean half of Brosnan's films are considered lukewarm as well?

with the money EON shelled out promoting CR, yes, it was luke-warm in 2006 expected revenues, especially when Sony spent $270 million total to produce and market CR, YES indeed.

Suddenly you bring up how much it cost to promote the film and rely on that to claim it wasn't a success? And how much money was spent on DAD promotions? I seriously doubt Sony was expecting over $200 million in the US since NO Bond film has ever crossed that line and the fact that this starred a new Bond actor. Besides, I seriously doubt they relied strictly on US figures since Bond is a worldwide figure. It's not like an american film relying on the domestic returns, this is a much bigger film and it got almost $600 million in returns, clearly they got their money back in a big way.

So what you are saying is that $167 million is not a success in the US? Is that correct BJ? Are you saying that crossing the 100 line wasn't a success. For crying out loud, you didn't even expect it to pass $100 million esspecially with unknown castmembers. Suddenly you call it underperforming? You're amazing. CR was a success in the US. Not as embracing as international figures but then again when was Bond more popular in the US than internationals? I don't think Bond has been as popular after Connery left as far as the US is concerned. CR remained consistent with the Brosnan grossings. It was below DAD but not too drastically. Just look at the chart.



Yeah, Craig's film dropped below considerably. And you say we exaggerate with praise but you sure act as if the US snubbed Craig like they did with Dalton.

Interesting graph. It proves the theory that overall, Craig is as popular as Brosnan was in the US, judging by the 4 films of Brozza's, and the new one with Craig. So bj, that graph does not support your argument at all that Craig has been a lukewarm hit in the US compared to Brosnan. They are on par, if you take the average of the 4 Brosnan films. Or are you saying Brosnan's films were lukewarm too in the US....

It's also interesting to know that Brozza/Craig's films are more popular overall than Moore's or Dalton's.

Of course, this is just one market, and does not reflect the worldwide audience, where the Bond franchise is much bigger than the US alone.

[Captain Nash]

Absolutely. Craig fanatics consider CR a success in the USA, and that is not the case, for EON probably hoped for a lot more revenue here. They got what they wanted internationally, not domestically, although it did OK in the USA, but by NO means, heroic revenue.

There's a useful four letter word. And you're full of it bj.
You base your so called facts on what Eon probably hoped for.

That's not a fact, that's made up. Like most of the inflated figures you seem to cling to.
Still living in the past I see.

[bjmdds]

Absolutely. Craig fanatics consider CR a success in the USA, and that is not the case, for EON probably hoped for a lot more revenue here. They got what they wanted internationally, not domestically, although it did OK in the USA, but by NO means, heroic revenue.

There's a useful four letter word. And you're full of it bj.
You base your so called facts on what Eon probably hoped for.

That's not a fact, that's made up. Like most of the inflated figures you seem to cling to.
Still living in the past I see.

Still nasty I see Nash, as was your avatar to Bond. If you consider CR's take in the USA in 2006 as compared to DAD's in the USA in 2002, a great success, good for you. Eon was probably pleased but when they saw other films go over $200 million in the USA they probably realized it did not meet their 'blow it out of the ballpark' hopeful expectations in the USA, as it did internationally, for which there is no debate on that.

[bjmdds]

When Happy Feet and Night At The Museum approach $200 million at the box office and CR does not come close

There you go again with the Penguins and Museum. Two FAMILY movies that have absolutely nothing to do with Casino Royale.

even underperforms the prior 2002 Bond film,IN THE USA

Again, only using unreliable numbers to help your claims. Even if those numbers were used by everyone (which is not) it is still up there with the Brosnan films, not below them all. Why do you have to bring up only DAD when there were other films close it it consistently? Does that mean half of Brosnan's films are considered lukewarm as well?

with the money EON shelled out promoting CR, yes, it was luke-warm in 2006 expected revenues, especially when Sony spent $270 million total to produce and market CR, YES indeed.

Suddenly you bring up how much it cost to promote the film and rely on that to claim it wasn't a success? And how much money was spent on DAD promotions? I seriously doubt Sony was expecting over $200 million in the US since NO Bond film has ever crossed that line and the fact that this starred a new Bond actor. Besides, I seriously doubt they relied strictly on US figures since Bond is a worldwide figure. It's not like an american film relying on the domestic returns, this is a much bigger film and it got almost $600 million in returns, clearly they got their money back in a big way.

So what you are saying is that $167 million is not a success in the US? Is that correct BJ? Are you saying that crossing the 100 line wasn't a success. For crying out loud, you didn't even expect it to pass $100 million esspecially with unknown castmembers. Suddenly you call it underperforming? You're amazing. CR was a success in the US. Not as embracing as international figures but then again when was Bond more popular in the US than internationals? I don't think Bond has been as popular after Connery left as far as the US is concerned. CR remained consistent with the Brosnan grossings. It was below DAD but not too drastically. Just look at the chart.



Yeah, Craig's film dropped below considerably. And you say we exaggerate with praise but you sure act as if the US snubbed Craig like they did with Dalton.

Interesting graph. It proves the theory that overall, Craig is as popular as Brosnan was in the US, judging by the 4 films of Brozza's, and the new one with Craig. So bj, that graph does not support your argument at all that Craig has been a lukewarm hit in the US compared to Brosnan. They are on par, if you take the average of the 4 Brosnan films. Or are you saying Brosnan's films were lukewarm too in the US....

It's also interesting to know that Brozza/Craig's films are more popular overall than Moore's or Dalton's.

Of course, this is just one market, and does not reflect the worldwide audience, where the Bond franchise is much bigger than the US alone.

Sweeney, with fewer admissions over DAD, factoring in curiosity and a new concept for Bond, you would have thought there would be a dramatic increase in ticket sales, not slightly less. Look at Dalton 2 to Brosnan 1, for example. In any case, I admit CR grossed more than the $100 million in the USA I thought it would, but it did not overwhelm the box office in the USA as it did in the UK, your home, as compared to DAD. We will see if the USA take exceeds CR's in 2008, for that will be a good judge. Bond 22 will be tough to top the international take of CR as well.

[Captain Nash]

Theres that word you like to use bj.
Probably.
It means you don't know what you're talking about.
Infact all that hot air you seem to post could fill Q's hot air balloon.

[bjmdds]

Theres that word you like to use bj.
Probably.
It means you don't know what you're talking about.
Infact all that hot air you seem to post could fill Q's hot air balloon.

Sorry you feel that way Nash, but not all think like you.

[bjmdds]

Lukewarm? You call $167 million lukewarm? CR is on par with half of the Brosnan films concerning the unreliable adjusted numbers. Besides, it doesn't matter. CR will be referred to as the highest grossing Bond film by everything except DCNB.com and you BJ. At least until a future Bond film surpasses $167 million.

and 300 which stars Gerard Butler has already made $174 million in 3 weeks time. had Butler been chosen as Bond I wouldn't have complained.

Paco, do you feel Butler,now 37, could do it after Craig's 3 films end? He has the right look, correct height, and can act. All he would need in 2010 is Broccoli's interest.

[Kristatos]

It's a shame Dalton didn't return in GoldenEye. The film was made for him and I think people would have given him another chance like they did with Roger Moore in The Spy Who Loved Me (at that point The Man with the Golden Gun was the lowest selling Bond), esspecially after the long wait for another Bond film. GoldenEye was the perfect balance for Dalton's Bond and the fantasy elements. Everytime I watch that movie, I can't help but picture Dalton in it, esspecially with Sean Bean.

I liked Dalton's Bond a lot and I, too think it's a shame that he didn't get to make another film. But after the 6-year gap, it's probably for the best that Goldeneye was made with a new Bond. The whole film had the air of a reboot, albeit a less drastic one than CR, and if Dalton had returned, he might have brought too much baggage with him.

[paco chaos]

Lukewarm? You call $167 million lukewarm? CR is on par with half of the Brosnan films concerning the unreliable adjusted numbers. Besides, it doesn't matter. CR will be referred to as the highest grossing Bond film by everything except DCNB.com and you BJ. At least until a future Bond film surpasses $167 million.

and 300 which stars Gerard Butler has already made $174 million in 3 weeks time. had Butler been chosen as Bond I wouldn't have complained.

Paco, do you feel Butler,now 37, could do it after Craig's 3 films end? He has the right look, correct height, and can act. All he would need in 2010 is Broccoli's interest.

yeah, I do think Butler could do the role in 2010. that's only in 3 years. 40 isn't too old. but at this point I think Butler may be on to bigger pastures. I believe he may be starring in Zach Snyder's adaptation of the Watchmen, next. If that proves to be a hit, and believe me that's a big IF, he may be too expensive for the penny pinching Broccoli family. the point is 300 may well cross that 200 million mark that seems to be the bar for success in the US.

[Kristatos]

the point is 300 may well cross that 200 million mark that seems to be the bar for success in the US.

Starring in a blockbuster movie doesn't necessarily make a star bankable, though. Mark Hamill's career floundered after the Star Wars trilogy, and even Harrison Ford only became a star with Raiders of the Lost Ark.

[Captain Nash]

the point is 300 may well cross that 200 million mark that seems to be the bar for success in the US.

So any film that goes below that bar is a flop?
I wouldn't mind betting that any potential Craig replacement has either :
A). Already been screentested and earmarked for the role down the track.
B). Is a complete unknown and will be yet another surprise. But with even bigger shoes and more of an expectation than Daniel Craig.

I'll opt for A. I think Eon have someone in mind to replace Daniel Craig when he retires from the role. But it's not Butler. I'll put money on it.

[bjmdds]

the point is 300 may well cross that 200 million mark that seems to be the bar for success in the US.

Starring in a blockbuster movie doesn't necessarily make a star bankable, though. Mark Hamill's career floundered after the Star Wars trilogy, and even Harrison Ford only became a star with Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Ford had a lot of good roles after Star Wars, and Hamill was nothing great to begin with, IMO.