Trailer is released!!!!!

[stockslivevan]

But Roger Moore did not turn Bond into Shaft, you poltroon.

More's the pity. C'mon, tell me you wouldn't like to hear Roger Moore talking jive

Or at least giving a lecture about his six shooter. I mean all the promos had him with a six shooter instead of the Bondian PPK, an obvious influence from Dirty Harry.

[Kristatos]

QOS will do far less business than CR.

Such certainty. Care to give me next week's lottery numbers, Mazer?

[stockslivevan]

QOS will do far less business than CR.

Such certainty. Care to give me next week's lottery numbers, Mazer?

I think he and BJ go to the same place for predictions.

[Mazer Rackham]

IF you believe it is a sure thing you are in a fantasy. Last time there was a Indy film and a Bond film out what happened?
If SAG strikes who knows what the finished product will be. Don't count the eggs before they are hatched and Don't be an ass assuming that people who don't agree with are delusional.
Look at Prince Caspian. That was a big sequel a guaranteed success. Right? It certainly is a bigger name and bigger draw then Quark, Quantum, whatever.

"the nightmare Brozza years" now I know you're full of ...it. Er, in denial.
Let me put it like this if you thought Brozza was bad then you must have thought Connery , Moore, Dalton, and Lazenby were complete jerkoffs. All of them did the same thing and all of them featured innovative cutting edge technology and themes and yes action. Brozza compared to the others except for a few of the early Connerys was more refined and controlled. Better finished production values.
I'm not going to be a complete ass an assume to know what you think, however if Brozza bothered you so then you couldn't have been a fan of much of the series.
What it seem to be coming down to is we got Bourne/Matt Helm fans polluting the Bond pool, condemning what worked and was right for over 50 years, praising the desecration of the standard, and attacking the tried and true fans of the books and the movies.

[Mazer Rackham]

QOS will do far less business than CR.

Such certainty. Care to give me next week's lottery numbers, Mazer?

Your lucky numbers are
7, 11, 14, 36, 42, 49

[stockslivevan]

Mazer Rackham, I extremely disagree with those claims. There are differences between every Bond portrayal. You can't convince anyone that Moore and Dalton played the character the exact same way, that's total denial.

[Mazer Rackham]

I never said the played the character the exact same way. Quick to disagree slow to read? Maybe understanding is where the disconnect is.

I said All of them did the same thing. No 2 people on TWC can read the weather the same and no 2 people can be expected to mimic each other. Unless its Craig and Bourne
The fact the classic series holds together so well shows how well each actor filled in for each other and how they kept part the same while adding their own style.
Brosnan did a Dalton Script, Dalton did a Moore Script, Moore did a Connery script as did Lazenby.
They did they same thing, not played the character the same way.

Give Craig's Bourne wannabe TLD, LALD, GE, OHMSS script to work with and the difference will be clear and very understandable.

[stockslivevan]

Every script was doctored for each actor to suit their strengths. Scripts for Moore were more comical, Connery was straightforward, Dalton for serious/vulnerable, Brosnan for aping Moore, ect. I recall that when writing TLD they had to write differently from the scripts made for Moore. It wasn't simply "played differently with the same script" that you claim. They even had to alter the GE script to suit Brosnan with cheesy lines like "when one rises to meet a challenge" and so on.

[Mazer Rackham]

Brosnan for aping Moore and here you smear the old series. While trying to belittle Brosnan.
Why? because a few of Brosnan's fans made life a little difficult for the Brocs.
It seems to be standard trick in 2005-6-7-8 to attack and smear the previous actors and if that dosen't make the yesbots feel like big man then to do the same to their fans.

I recall that when writing TLD
You were there??
they played differently with the same script Again you have an understanding gap here. I never said the scripts weren't retooled or tweaked for the new actor.
Early drafts of OHMSS had Lazenby getting plastic surgery to explain the change in appearance.
Dalton, Brosnan, Moore, Lazenby all worked with a script intended for their predecessors. Doctored, retooled, maybe but not completely rewritten.
They kept part the same while adding their own style to it. The essence of the character remained intact through out the 20 film history.

Craig has to have a script intentionally crafted to work with his weaknesses as an actor. That is what his portrayal comes down to, his weaknesses. His Inability to portray the character as it had been since 1962. His in ability to capture the class and dignity Fleming wanted Bond to have in his [Fleming's] fantasy world.

The sum of the changes in bond 21 are a damning list of inadequacies of Craig as an actor. Not an amazing reinvention, it is a degeneration of a character because the lead actors inability to pull off the role as it had been played before. A bum Bond, a Bond unkempt and uncouth.

Before the cruel aspect is brought up as a limp wrested defense rewatch Moore kicking Locque’s car off the cliff (FYEO).

Add together the sum of Craig inadequacies then stir in the latest fads, for DAD it was the Matrix, in this case it is Bourne, Batman, and The Princess Diaries. Well maybe The Princess Diaries is a bit too harsh, although it does sound like the script followed off camera for his needs and demands
Add it all together we get the Bourne Wannabe playing poker.

[stockslivevan]

So when it gets down to what you're say, when I say Brosnan sucks then it's somehow impossible for me to like Connery, Dalton or anything else pre-CR?

[Jermaine76]

Just got finish watching the trailer twice. I won't get my hopes up high this time like I did two years ago. The trailer wasn't that bad; however, I didn't like the way it ended with him walking towards the screen with a machine gun. I'm use to James Bond holding the PPK or now P99(or did they change that too during the reboot). I posted on this site a year ago...I agreed to give this man one more chance to convince me that he's James Bond material and so I will stick to my word. I see that people are comparing the fight scenes to the Bourne's fight sequences. I can see where they're coming from, but lets wait until November 7th to bring out the jury. So I'll do my best to bite my tongue for the next four months. I still have my hangups. If he doesn't deliver in the new film then I'll just have to realize that this is how Barbara and Michael want to protray him. Craig will be a great Bond.............version 2.

[Jermaine76]

Well, I finally got to watch this on my computer at home, and it looks like a lot of what I disliked in CR is going to carry over into the new film. Chief among them is that Craig still isn't Bond to me, even in long-shot. The Really Big Gun from the final scene of CR makes a reappearance and I find it fundamentally unBondlike. What happened to the Walther PPK and M telling him off for carrying such a girly gun?

Thats the problem...for us, not for them. I really believe they want to make Craig's SOOOO unlike the previous Bonds that these drastic changes are made to purposely put him in his own new category. Now the question I now have is will the traditional gun barrel sequence be placed back in the beginning of the movie, or will we have another thirty second-black and white scrimmage of a pre-title sequence?

[Mazer Rackham]

So when it gets down to what you're say, when I say Brosnan sucks then it's somehow impossible for me to like Connery, Dalton or anything else pre-CR?

So when it gets down to what you're saying, when I say Craig sucks and CR is a lame movie then it's somehow impossible for me to be a life long Bond fanatic?

So that's your tactic, the simplest and laziest, to try to twist what I clearly say to imply somethings not even mentioned or intended. Who do you work for? Mcain? Clinton?

Attacking past actors are attempt to bully anyone who disagrees with Craig. Repeated over and over again. Here comes stocks, and here comes his Brosnan is s**t post and Craig is great talking point.
The strategy/intention behind the whole talking point/attack is the assertion that Brosanan ,Moore, Dalton, Lazenby, and even Connery are inferior or inappropriate to the role, series, what Fleming wrote and Craig is the one and only to realize the true Bond. And that I do take issue with.

I'm not going to assume to know what your thoughts are or what you enjoy.
But I do recognize the pattern of attack and tactics used originally conceived of with an eye towards marketing.

Who knows you may even enjoy Brozza and warm bowl of popcorn but feel you have to say he sucks here becasue you're at this site.
Who knows I might have even enjoyed parts of Craig performance in CR. Not too damned likely but possible none the less.

[Jermaine76]

QOS will do far less business than CR. Inflation might help you out a little. By November inflation will quadruple. The cost of heating the theater, cost of shipping the movies out, Cost of gas and the cost of food are not going to be Quantum Quark's friends.

What are you talking about, man? They never heat the movie theaters. Thats why your feet get cold and from all the soda you drank, you have to piss 4 times and miss half the movie.

[Jermaine76]

Having said all that, QOS will be huge when it is released, whether you are a Craig fan or not. If you cannot see that happening, you really are in denial. I hated Indy 4 with a passion, but even I knew that was going to be huge. Its got nothing to do with whether you like the film or not.

I'll agree that QOS will be a successful because all the Craig-haters like myself will be at the first showing on the first day and I dare someone tell me any different. We're going to help feed the beast, basically.

James Bond is on a roll financially...thanks to Mr. Pierce Brosnan. Thats right, I said it. Time to keep it real around here. There wouldn't be a Craig if it wasn't for a Brosnan to give the series a jumpstart.

[Jermaine76]

IF you believe it is a sure thing you are in a fantasy. Last time there was a Indy film and a Bond film out what happened?
If SAG strikes who knows what the finished product will be. Don't count the eggs before they are hatched and Don't be an ass assuming that people who don't agree with are delusional.
Look at Prince Caspian. That was a big sequel a guaranteed success. Right? It certainly is a bigger name and bigger draw then Quark, Quantum, whatever.

"the nightmare Brozza years" now I know you're full of ...it. Er, in denial.
Let me put it like this if you thought Brozza was bad then you must have thought Connery , Moore, Dalton, and Lazenby were complete jerkoffs. All of them did the same thing and all of them featured innovative cutting edge technology and themes and yes action. Brozza compared to the others except for a few of the early Connerys was more refined and controlled. Better finished production values.
I'm not going to be a complete ass an assume to know what you think, however if Brozza bothered you so then you couldn't have been a fan of much of the series.
What it seem to be coming down to is we got Bourne/Matt Helm fans polluting the Bond pool, condemning what worked and was right for over 50 years, praising the desecration of the standard, and attacking the tried and true fans of the books and the movies.

Now that was hardcore...but correct.

[Jermaine76]

Craig has to have a script intentionally crafted to work with his weaknesses as an actor. That is what his portrayal comes down to, his weaknesses. His Inability to portray the character as it had been since 1962. His in ability to capture the class and dignity Fleming wanted Bond to have in his [Fleming's] fantasy world.

I made this argument a year ago when I first joined this site. I believe I used a "mediocre QB playing on a run-first oriented football team" analogy. To me, it felt like they were trying to find someone who was cheap and available to play Bond. I also felt that they probably were told no a few times by potential actors. I've heard Hugh Jackman was interested but wanted to take a look at the script....of course that didn't happen. Clive Owen said no....Ewan McGregor just got out of a contract with Star Wars and wasn't trying to be tied down with another multiple film commitment. Just like you, I felt that they dumbed down Bond to suit Craig.

The sum of the changes in bond 21 are a damning list of inadequacies of Craig as an actor. Not an amazing reinvention, it is a degeneration of a character because the lead actors inability to pull off the role as it had been played before. A bum Bond, a Bond unkempt and uncouth.

You gotta call it the way you see it, brother.

Add together the sum of Craig inadequacies then stir in the latest fads, for DAD it was the Matrix, in this case it is Bourne, Batman, and The Princess Diaries. Well maybe The Princess Diaries is a bit too harsh, although it does sound like the script followed off camera for his needs and demands
Add it all together we get the Bourne Wannabe playing poker.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Thats was a hardcore diss, but funny. Add in ESPN and Days of Our Lives. What bothered me was the fact that I was watching the world's famous secret agent argue with a bitch in a bathroom over a d**n tux. That sold it for me. That was a wrap.

[Jermaine76]

Before the cruel aspect is brought up as a limp wrested defense rewatch Moore kicking Locque’s car off the cliff (FYEO).

I agree with you on this. Pro-Craig people make it seem like Craig is hardcore while the previous actors were soft like cotton candy. Your example of Moore was good. What about Moore in The Man With The Golden Gun when he pinned Maud Adams' arm behind her back to get information? What about in The World Is Not Enough when Brosnan shot Electra King in the chest at point blank range? GoldenEye when he dropped Alec Trevelyan head first to his death. OHMSS when Lazenby pimpsmacked Tracy...the list goes on and on. I forgot to mention what Connery did....priceless and classic James Bond. It blows my mind when I hear people say that Craig is better than Connery. A 78-year-old Connery can play James Bond better than Craig....especially in the dramatic department.

[katied]

When I say Craig sucks and CR is a lame movie, then it's somehow impossible for me to be a lifelong Bond fanatic

And Stocks isn't the only person here who feels that way-Captain Nash , a.k.a. Benny said as much not too long ago. "I'm better than you because I have been part of a certain fandom longer than you have!". It's a common thing in fandoms.And excluding people because they don't like a certain aspect of the fandom is nothing new either,unfortunately

[stockslivevan]

So when it gets down to what you're say, when I say Brosnan sucks then it's somehow impossible for me to like Connery, Dalton or anything else pre-CR?

So when it gets down to what you're saying, when I say Craig sucks and CR is a lame movie then it's somehow impossible for me to be a life long Bond fanatic?

I never said that it was impossible to not like Craig and still like the rest of the actors, but I think the notion of liking all actors being an impossibility is 100% BS.

I'm not attacking all the actors to help Craig unless we're on a discussion of comparisons. I think Connery and Dalton are superior to Craig. Maybe Craig can take the #2 spot after QOS, we'll see on November. I'm not into Moore and Brosnan's take because for me they simply lack make a believable James Bond. I'm just not into their Saturday morning cartoon interpretation. As for Lazenby, I admire him for trying, but I can't say he made a good lead actor.