The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[JackWade CIA]

I think the producers and Craig are aware of the complete opposite reaction Quark got to CR. Rumours are Craig was not happy at all with the reviews of QoS, and so I think they will be very careful with Bond 23. I'm predicting a return to CR territory, with bits of the old formula thrown in for good measure - Q, Moneypenny, gadgets an' all.

I sincerely hope you are right but I just can't see it happening. IMO hey made their rut with Craig and are stuck there I doubt they can get it unstuck. Also adding the missing elements from formula might not work with the tone set by CR and QoS. If they discard the tone set in CR and QoS then I absolutely can not see the point in Craig's time as Bond. I can hope they do get back to CR but also can not see how they might be able to do it.

In a way it might be best to restart the series again with a fresh face and retell CR under them name The Double-O Agent, The Deadly Gamble, or You Asked For It, then go from there with a fresh take on the Fleming's stories.

[katied]

Too right about the Bond films getting in a rut!

[The Sweeney]

I sincerely hope you are right but I just can't see it happening. IMO hey made their rut with Craig and are stuck there I doubt they can get it unstuck. Also adding the missing elements from formula might not work with the tone set by CR and QoS. If they discard the tone set in CR and QoS then I absolutely can not see the point in Craig's time as Bond. I can hope they do get back to CR but also can not see how they might be able to do it.

What do you mean you cannot see how they can get back to the tone set with CR?? It's not rocket science. Decent script, (we have a decent writer on board now), decent director (let's hope it's someone like Sam Mendes), and also QoS as a guide of what not to do - and hey presto! A decent Bond 23.

You make it sound like they are trying to find the cure for cancer, or trying to fly men to Jupiter. It's only a film being made.

As for your suggestion to remake CR again, and reboot the franchise again.....what are you smoking? Can I have some..?

[katied]

What do you mean you cannot see how they can get back to the tone set with CR?? It's not rocket science. Decent script, (we have a decent writer on board now), decent director (let's hope it's someone like Sam Mendes), and also QoS as a guide of what not to do - and hey presto! A decent Bond 23.

Not exactly. The "shocking plot twist" can mean only one thing: The Austin Powers-ization of the Bond films is probably happening.And a small but vocal majority of Bond fans will love it and bully anyone else who doesn't.

[The Sweeney]

Not exactly. The "shocking plot twist" can mean only one thing: The Austin Powers-ization of the Bond films is probably happening.And a small but vocal majority of Bond fans will love it and bully anyone else who doesn't.

How do you reach that conclusion by `shocking plot twist'?

Fisrtly, it is the standard cliche any new scriptwriter will say when working on a new film.

Secondly, there is no evidence of Austin Powers-ization whatsoever in that statement. If anything, the opposite. There would be nothing shocking about sending Bond back to DAD territory again (which is Austin Powers-ization).

Shocking is probably more along the lines of M being killed, or Bond brainwashed to kill her - but that is not Austin Powers territory at all.

[Kristatos]

Not exactly. The "shocking plot twist" can mean only one thing: The Austin Powers-ization of the Bond films is probably happening.

It could mean almost anything. As evidenced by the fact that only the other day, you were saying that it definitely meant that M was going to be killed off, which doesn't sound very Austin Powers like. It's just a vague statement tossed out to get the audience guessing, which is why nobody else here is obssessing over it the way you are.

[The Sweeney]

Not exactly. The "shocking plot twist" can mean only one thing: The Austin Powers-ization of the Bond films is probably happening.

It could mean almost anything. As evidenced by the fact that only the other day, you were saying that it definitely meant that M was going to be killed off, which doesn't sound very Austin Powers like. It's just a vague statement tossed out to get the audience guessing, which is why nobody else here is obssessing over it the way you are.

well said, Kris. Give that man a beer.....

[katied]

Eh,I don't think I'm as set off by statements like "There is going to be a shocking plot twist" as some fans are. As soon as that was said there were people that were pretty doggone sure that M being killed off was what it was,and *demanding* that that be what it was. I mean,what else the hell could it be? Unless it's something completely lame(which killing Dame Judi's M is).

[The Sweeney]

Eh,I don't think I'm as set off by statements like "There is going to be a shocking plot twist" as some fans are. As soon as that was said there were people that were pretty doggone sure that M being killed off was what it was,and *demanding* that that be what it was. I mean,what else the hell could it be? Unless it's something completely lame(which killing Dame Judi's M is).

Whatever. But killing M is still not Austin Powers territory though....is it.

[katied]

Whatever. But killing M is still not Austin Powers territory though....is it.

It's getting there.

I don't care what anyone says, Bond fans can be obsessive,and a statement like "There will be a plot twist" is definitely something they will obsess about.

[Kristatos]

Eh,I don't think I'm as set off by statements like "There is going to be a shocking plot twist" as some fans are.

Well then, why do you keep going on and on and on and on about it?

[The Sweeney]

Whatever. But killing M is still not Austin Powers territory though....is it.

It's getting there.

I don't care what anyone says, Bond fans can be obsessive,and a statement like "There will be a plot twist" is definitely something they will obsess about.

And you obsessing over what fans have made of that statement makes you a bigger obsesser than they are....

[katied]

And you obsessing over what fans have made of that statement makes you a bigger obsesser than they are....

Bond fans can be obsessive given the right circumstances.I'm not even close to being obsessive. I just find it ridiculous how Morgan's statement has been seized upon and obssessed on-though I have to say it doesn't surprise me.

[The Sweeney]

And you obsessing over what fans have made of that statement makes you a bigger obsesser than they are....

Bond fans can be obsessive given the right circumstances.I'm not even close to being obsessive. I just find it ridiculous how Morgan's statement has been seized upon and obssessed on-though I have to say it doesn't surprise me.

And it doesn't suprise me that YOU are the Number 1 most obsessive fan who has seized upon Morgan's statement, and obsessed about it. Check back through this forum and see how many times YOU go on about Morgan's statement. I think you will find that is YOU who is obsessing about this more than anyone else here, or any other forum.

The bizarre thing is, you don't even realise it......

[katied]

Well, I am going to be totally unsurprised when a) the plot twist turns out to be LAME(will be spoiled in the movie trailer no doubt) and 2) Bond fans love it.

[The Sweeney]

Well, I am going to be totally unsurprised when a) the plot twist turns out to be LAME(will be spoiled in the movie trailer no doubt) and 2) Bond fans love it.

And yet again...you are STILL obsessing about it....

Here you go...a belated Christmas gift.

[JackWade CIA]

What do you mean you cannot see how they can get back to the tone set with CR?? It's not rocket science. Decent script, (we have a decent writer on board now), decent director (let's hope it's someone like Sam Mendes), and also QoS as a guide of what not to do - and hey presto! A decent Bond 23.

You make it sound like they are trying to find the cure for cancer, or trying to fly men to Jupiter. It's only a film being made.

As for your suggestion to remake CR again, and reboot the franchise again.....what are you smoking? Can I have some..?

You are right it is not rocket science it is infinitely more complicated. CR and QoS are at a dead end, to get back to what made CR good while ignoring and avoiding the pitfalls QoS had is more complicated than hiring a writer to rewrite a script by the guys doing mediocre work for the last 11 years and hiring a prestige director.

You already mentioned adding back Moneypenny and Q, two elements I can not see working with the ton set by Craig first movies. What they are publicly talking about now is not going back to CR it is more "starting from scratch" which is a complete waste of time to me.

You have an tremendous amount of faith in people who were botching Bond for years. I do not think they can do better than mediocre Bond 23 at best, it is not impossible to get back to the quality that made CR work but you must not know enough about writing, Hollywood, and actors not to see how daunting it is in the best conditions. If a writer were to site in a room for 3 years and try to successfully write a continuation of CR or a continuation of the spirit of that first film it would just be possible, and great deal of work. All of this is with out a cacophony of voices all egos commanding a change in ton or direction. It harder work than most assume.

What you blush at the thought of rebooting the reboot and retelling CR. Whatever for, they have used existing plot lines and story premises for generations now. Unfortunately even in CR because of QoS they have reused the framework of Blofeld trilogy. The Bottom line is they have dug themselves so deep they are stuck, even if Bond 23 has something more than mediocre where do they go after that? They dead ended the Connery through Brosnan Bond line story telling, they had got the cart stuck in the ditch after one film with the Craig. After Craig goes they have to restart all over again to have any future at all. The left too many elements of Bond sacrosanct and non revisable to have much of a future beyond one or two more films at best.

A restart with a fresh Bond actually retell all of the Bond adventures will work after Craig and may be the only way forward for the series.

[The Sweeney]

What do you mean you cannot see how they can get back to the tone set with CR?? It's not rocket science. Decent script, (we have a decent writer on board now), decent director (let's hope it's someone like Sam Mendes), and also QoS as a guide of what not to do - and hey presto! A decent Bond 23.

You make it sound like they are trying to find the cure for cancer, or trying to fly men to Jupiter. It's only a film being made.

As for your suggestion to remake CR again, and reboot the franchise again.....what are you smoking? Can I have some..?

You are right it is not rocket science it is infinitely more complicated. CR and QoS are at a dead end, to get back to what made CR good while ignoring and avoiding the pitfalls QoS had is more complicated than hiring a writer to rewrite a script by the guys doing mediocre work for the last 11 years and hiring a prestige director.

You already mentioned adding back Moneypenny and Q, two elements I can not see working with the ton set by Craig first movies. What they are publicly talking about now is not going back to CR it is more "starting from scratch" which is a complete waste of time to me.

You have an tremendous amount of faith in people who were botching Bond for years. I do not think they can do better than mediocre Bond 23 at best, it is not impossible to get back to the quality that made CR work but you must not know enough about writing, Hollywood, and actors not to see how daunting it is in the best conditions. If a writer were to site in a room for 3 years and try to successfully write a continuation of CR or a continuation of the spirit of that first film it would just be possible, and great deal of work. All of this is with out a cacophony of voices all egos commanding a change in ton or direction. It harder work than most assume.

What you blush at the thought of rebooting the reboot and retelling CR. Whatever for, they have used existing plot lines and story premises for generations now. Unfortunately even in CR because of QoS they have reused the framework of Blofeld trilogy. The Bottom line is they have dug themselves so deep they are stuck, even if Bond 23 has something more than mediocre where do they go after that? They dead ended the Connery through Brosnan Bond line story telling, they had got the cart stuck in the ditch after one film with the Craig. After Craig goes they have to restart all over again to have any future at all. The left too many elements of Bond sacrosanct and non revisable to have much of a future beyond one or two more films at best.

A restart with a fresh Bond actually retell all of the Bond adventures will work after Craig and may be the only way forward for the series.

Personally speaking, I would only really be happy with Bond 23 if the script relied heavily on exhausting the still unused Fleming material from MR, DAF, TSWLM, YOLT and TMWTGG.

Anything else would be a disappointment for me. One of the reasons why I loved CR so much is because it used the source material for large chunks of the movie. If EON have the balls to do the same with Bond 23, then I would have no problems at all with this new reboot direction we are in.

[JackWade CIA]

Not exactly. The "shocking plot twist" can mean only one thing: The Austin Powers-ization of the Bond films is probably happening.

It could mean almost anything. As evidenced by the fact that only the other day, you were saying that it definitely meant that M was going to be killed off, which doesn't sound very Austin Powers like. It's just a vague statement tossed out to get the audience guessing, which is why nobody else here is obssessing over it the way you are.

Well the writer saying it has a shocking twist holds a little more weight to me. Normally he would go with terms like new territory. Socking twist has connotations they have to live up to, most writers would avoid painting themselves in a corner.

We have a new word! Such fun! Austin Powers-ization
I understand the concerns but aside from the Moore era and the spoof spy films of that era the other Bond films are not the main source of fodder. I do not know why some any Bond fans are so sensitive to this. Anyway Craig has been lampooned more in other lesser comedies churned out by the dozen. It just doesn't matter

[JackWade CIA]

Personally speaking, I would only really be happy with Bond 23 if the script relied heavily on exhausting the still unused Fleming material from MR, DAF, TSWLM, YOLT and TMWTGG.

Anything else would be a disappointment for me. One of the reasons why I loved CR so much is because it used the source material for large chunks of the movie. If EON have the balls to do the same with Bond 23, then I would have no problems at all with this new reboot direction we are in.

I agree, but I just can not see it happening. I must be too jaded after QoS and too cynical of the producers who f-ed everything up.