The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

stockslivevan · Post by **stockslivevan** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:14 am

bjmdds wrote:Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to watch this video and decide: How much better could have CR been with this actor as Bond, and would you be more enthusiastic about TBM as well? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJSKhGhB ... re=related

That's nice, but I'm fine with what we got and look forward to Bond 22 with him. Besides, he said if he were offered he would have turned it down, and thought Daniel Craig made a brilliant Bond. I agree with Owen.

Besides, given that you thought Daniel Craig was too old for a young Bond, why would you then go for an older actor who looks just as rugged as Craig?

Post by **Dr. No** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:04 am

stockslivevan wrote:Don't forget that Indiana Jones 4 didn't get a title until near the end of filming. So just keep your patience, I know you want to stop calling it The Bourne Mimicry.

The Bourne Mimicry I like that! Funny because its true

They have released a name of sorts, 007. Which seems lame. Imdb list Risico as a fake working title.

Shame I like the name Risico.

But these are also the pople who were ready to start producion on the sequel for CR back in May , you'd think they had a title already picked out.

Captain Nash · Post by **Captain Nash** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:17 am

stockslivevan wrote:
bjmdds wrote:Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to watch this video and decide: How much better could have CR been with this actor as Bond, and would you be more enthusiastic about TBM as well? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJSKhGhB ... re=related
That's nice, but I'm fine with what we got and look forward to Bond 22 with him. Besides, he said if he were offered he would have turned it down, and thought Daniel Craig made a brilliant Bond. I agree with Owen.

Besides, given that you thought Daniel Craig was too old for a young Bond, why would you then go for an older actor who looks just as rugged as Craig?

Agree 100% with what Stocks said.
Clive Owen would've made an excellent Bond. But he said he wouldn't do it.
Christian Bale also, great Bond material, again unable to do it.
Daniel Craig, great Bond...did it...greatly. Looking forward to Bond 22.
Like it or not bj, but you're stuck with Craig. Bond 22 will be huge. Bigger than you could ever imagine.

Post by **bjmdds** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:28 pm

stockslivevan wrote:
bjmdds wrote:Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to watch this video and decide: How much better could have CR been with this actor as Bond, and would you be more enthusiastic about TBM as well? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJSKhGhB ... re=related
That's nice, but I'm fine with what we got and look forward to Bond 22 with him. Besides, he said if he were offered he would have turned it down, and thought Daniel Craig made a brilliant Bond. I agree with Owen.

Besides, given that you thought Daniel Craig was too old for a young Bond, why would you then go for an older actor who looks just as rugged as Craig?

Going younger required a "Bale" type, not Craig;however,IF staying true to the timeline of the prior 20 films, Owen would be an excellent choice without a reboot concept, which I am totally against as well.

James1090 · Post by **James1090** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:18 pm

That makes two of us who are against the reboot BJ. If you think about it them rebooting the series leaves them open to redo things like Bond getting married again. I think that even if Craig was Bond they could have done what they did with Dalton. He was the same character but played him differently.

Post by **Kristatos** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:28 pm

James1090 wrote:That makes two of us who are against the reboot BJ.

Make that three.

James1090 · Post by **James1090** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:25 am

Kristatos wrote:
James1090 wrote:That makes two of us who are against the reboot BJ.
Make that three.

Why are you against the reboot?

Post by **bjmdds** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:30 am

Kristatos wrote:
James1090 wrote:That makes two of us who are against the reboot BJ.
Make that three.

We are on the same page with that. The reboot concept after 40 years conflicts with the franchise's rich history of storylines.

stockslivevan · Post by **stockslivevan** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:44 am

bjmdds wrote:
Kristatos wrote:
James1090 wrote:That makes two of us who are against the reboot BJ.
Make that three.
We are on the same page with that. The reboot concept after 40 years conflicts with the franchise's rich history of storylines.

The rich "history of storylines" was already a complicated mess so it wouldn't be much of a big deal if a reboot was made, especially since 75% of the previous films were basically episodic and had nothing to do with eachother.

From Russia with Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Diamonds Are Forever, For Your Eyes Only, and Licence to Kill are the only films that somewhat affect eachother while films like Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me, The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day merely referenced events but they had no effect on what was going on.

FRWL = SPECTRE wants revenge on Bond for the death of their operative Dr. No.
OHMSS = Bond is after a hiding Blofeld.
DAF = Bond spends his holiday seeking Blofeld for vengeance.
FYEO = Bond fights Blofeld after he visits his dead wife's grave.
LTK = Knowing what's it's like to lose a wife motivates Bond to avenge his friend.

So if you add it up, only 25% of all the films seem to have a profound impact on the series and most of it was Blofeld, a storyline that never got a proper conclusion unless you like that chimney nonsense.

Post by **carl stromberg** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:41 am

I think the reboot changed the look, essence and feel of the character. We were suddenly presented with a James Bond who looks like Daniel Craig, who became a 00 agent at the age of 40, and who seems to have a radically different personality from the other Bonds.

If they wanted a Batman Begins style reboot portraying a Bond with a different personality then they should have had, IMO, a 25 year old (ish) actor.

Post by **Kristatos** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 1:37 pm

carl stromberg wrote:If they wanted a Batman Begins style reboot portraying a Bond with a different personality then they should have had, IMO, a 25 year old (ish) actor.

But BB didn't give Batman a different personality, that's the point. It changed his origin a bit, but Batman was still recognisably Batman.

The reason I'm against the reboot is that it is annoyingly short-term thinking. The "parliament" of the Iroquois nation never used to make a decision without first considering how it would affect their great-great-grandchildren, and I wish we could have seen some of that sort of vision from EON. A man is the sum of his experiences, and if you give Bond a different set of experiences, he becomes a different character. The long-term consequence of this is that there will eventually be two James Bonds out there: the one who married Tracy and battled Blofeld, and the one who loved Vesper and exacted revenge on The Organisation.

Of course, maybe I'm overreacting. All it would take to fix this problem would be to set Bond 23 several years after Bond 22 and insert a line in the script about how Bond has completed many missions since he offed Vesper's Algerian boyfriend. Then we could safely assume that Bond's history in the new timeline proceeded the same way it did in the old one; and the correct order to view the Bond films, if you wanted to watch them in sequence, would become CR, then Bond 22, then DN thru DAD, then Bond 23. But EON aren't as clever as me, so I doubt they'd think of that

Post by **bjmdds** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 10:41 pm

Correct Kris. Craig's Bond is a whole different genre of Bond. It has it's own origin, and goes off in another tangential direction. That alone separates it from the historical franchise.

Post by **Skywalker** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 10:54 pm

I ventured on to enemy turf (MI6) Oh the shame!!!! and found found this interesting post by Erica Ambler

http://www.mi6forums.com/viewtopic.php? ... c&start=45

I tend to agree.

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 5:40 am

Ambler is correct and the 'tone' on that page speaks volumes about MI6. Also, notice Vesper's cheap shot about this site at the bottom post.

Captain Nash · Post by **Captain Nash** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:58 am

bjmdds wrote:Ambler is correct and the 'tone' on that page speaks volumes about MI6. Also, notice Vesper's cheap shot about this site at the bottom post.

Vesper made a very valid and sensible comment.
Too many of you are so one-sided and fixed in your opinion, (especially bj), then it's your way or the highway. Many of you think that your correct, and that any fan of Craig is wrong and has no merit discussing Bond.
There are not two series, the Bond films have always changed and adapted with the times. If you can't see that or deny it, then you're more of a fool than I thought you were.

Post by **The Sweeney** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:34 pm

bjmdds wrote:Ambler is correct and the 'tone' on that page speaks volumes about MI6. Also, notice Vesper's cheap shot about this site at the bottom post.

I didn't really think it was a cheap shot. Vesper was slagging off both sides, and also happened to mention the original craignotbond, which was a bit of a silly site, and actually did this suprisingly friendly forum no favours.

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:27 pm

Out of that website came this, so it did serve it's purpose. Do you consider the MI6 website a 'friendly' forum Sweeney

Post by **Skywalker** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:57 pm

I think far too many members of MI6 are afraid to speak out about Craig for fear of non-inclusion. I know through PM's that several members are unwilling to state their true opinions of Daniel Craig as Bond as it would affect their status on the forum as at the moment it is not 'cool' to diss Craig.

Your generally well regarded on their if you dislike Sir Rog, Hate DAD and consider PB to be the worst Bond.

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:13 pm

If they do speak out, you know what occurs. As an aside, this thread has now surpassed over 100,000 web views since it's inception in March, 2007. It is quite an accomplishment considering we are less than 300 registered members. I guess quality of members rather than quantity is what makes this website successful.

stockslivevan · Post by **stockslivevan** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:54 am

Skywalker wrote:Your generally well regarded on their if you dislike Sir Rog, Hate DAD and consider PB to be the worst Bond.

I find that a false generalization of MI6. People who like Moore and Brosnan are well accepted as long as they don't pull a Thrice. That's a factor on why many internet fights ensue. People like Thrice keeps trying to put down Craig with poor taste while at the same time contradicts himself. He'll say "Craig sucks because his first scenes were in the restoom" while his favorite Bond, Brosnan, ALSO had his first scenes in the restroom and completely loses the argument, hence why everyone calls him stupid. And Brosnan007 displays ignorance by saying "I only saw the Brosnan Bonds because everything else before sucks."

Because these members get so much attention and cause a lot of flame wars, the generalization of every MI6 member not welcoming Brosnan fans has become generalized. That's the way it is, but you should open your eyes and realize that it's only five or less members, not every Brosnan fan.

MOO7RE and Chandler Bong have expressed their opinions on Moore and Brosnan being their favorites, and they don't get treated unfairly. Hell, Bong considers DAD his absolute favorite and no one gives him crap, and when they do, it's usually on a friendly note such as "Oh you and your crappy movies, we still like you though Bong".