Re: oh bondage up yours.

by **Patrick** Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:58 pm

Nick Barlow wrote:
Spoiler:

Spoiler:

On another subject, remember the fight in the hotel room in Haiti? Is it just me, or did that guy look like Marc Warren? I kept thinking- hey, that's Elton. LINDA has invaded the Bond Franchise.

by **Nick Barlow** Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:25 pm

Patrick wrote:
Spoiler:

I don't think this needs to be in spoiler text as it is just speculation, and I guess anyone reading this far will have seen QoS, so...

The rights to use Blofeld and SPECTRE are pretty complex, and it all goes back to the film of Thunderball. That was co-produced by Kevin McClory, who'd arranged a deal with Fleming that gave him certain film rights, separate from Broccoli and EON Productions, which somehow included Blofeld and SPECTRE. This didn't seem to be a problem until the 70s, when he realised that he could use these rights to make his own Bond movie - as long as it was based on Thunderball - and so he stopped EON from using Blofeld and SPECTRE (hence why the only Blofeld appearance after Diamonds are Forever is the scene at the start of For Your Eyes Only when he's not named).

McClory then made Never Say Never Again, and was continually promising throughout the 90s that he was just about to start on another version of it (usually called Warhead, IIRC) but while he was exercising his rights, EON couldn't use Blofeld and SPECTRE.

I don't know what the situation is now, but it gets extraordinarily complex when you realise that McClory's production partners were Sony, and EON's are MGM/UA - and MGM/UA is now a part of Sony...

by delgadofan Sat Nov 15, 2008 9:24 am

Affirmation wrote:"Quantum of Solace" is one of the more outlandish, escapist and fantastical outings for James Bond; it has a distinctive look and feel to it which pushes it out of reality and into fantasyland, courtesy of a director who allows his art team to really go to town, and instructs his cinematographer to make everything beautiful -- particularly his leading man. This is a shrewd move, because the Paul Haggis dialogue is pared-down, minimalistic and clever, and the storytelling is oblique and demanding. And everything moves at the speed of violence. Violence is (nearly) always fast. A typical fight lasts two seconds. Bond races through this movie, pausing only to punch someone's lights out, or blow up a hotel, or stab someone to death, and the great thing--no, the BRILLIANT thing--is that he's always right; his moral compass, splattered with blood, points true north. Whilst everyone around him is in the dark, or untrustworthy, or in the game for personal reasons, Bond just follows a train of evidence to get to the Bad Guys, leaving a pile of corpses behind him, and doing it all with considerable elan. And in the process, he finds a bit of peace, matures as a secret agent, and *earns* the gunbarrel icon and the signature tune.

Magnificent, viscious, compelling, and the perfect Act 2 for the perfect James Bond.

Or simply a film that was rushed, severely damaged by the writers strike (with even Craig chipping in on the script), overshadowed by a 2nd unit action "Bourne" director (presumably because Mark Forster is an action newbie) and thus allowing little plot coherence, soul, depth or empathy?

But wait! Hold yer horses because I have yet to see it...but this is the vibe I'm getting from a lot of quarters. Has any Bond ever divided people in this fashion before? Intriguing, and I do look forward to making my own mind up.

by Graymalkin Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:51 pm

Well, I've just got back from the flicks, and I thoroughly enjoyed ~~Question of Sport~~ Quantum of Solace*. I can't possibly break the evening's conversation down into a sentence or two but, basically, it boils down to the fact that when I was fourteen and reading the Fleming novels (as opposed to the non-canon remakes) this is exactly how they looked in my head.

And Craig is the book-Bond.

Roll on the next one, say I (at least until I've sobered up...)!

*With all the nonsense I've read (elsewhere), I'm now probably of the opinion that you shouldn't be allowed to comment on the title unless you've read the story. And I look forward to The Hildebrand Rarity** in 2010...

**Yes, I know it'll be The Property of a Lady, but...

by John Winterton Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:16 am

Frank wrote: It's like that old cliche - women want to have hm and men want to be him.

Are you sure it's not the other way around? Laughing

To be honest, I'm not a major Bond fan, and will probably await the DVD of this one. I have to say that even Casino Royale didn't do a lot for me - 40 years ago, the Bond ethos seemed OK, but now, to me at least, feels rather passe. I'm more of a Jason Bourne man, myself - still, each to their own! Smile

John

by 72lf Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:17 am

Well, its officicial , QOS is the biggest Bond ever so far....$70.4 mil opening stateside and €252 foreign markets...so in 2 weeks it has taken $322 mil dollars.

The suits and Variety reckon it will do the $700 mil worldwide.
Great news and Im delighted.

Of course , one does wonder that considering they took a similar approach back in 89 with Daltons Licience to Kill and that was a (comparitive ) failure box office wise....
Ok they released it in the summer agaimst Batman, Indy 3 , Abyss etc rather that the more normal winter date.....
But I stand behind Dalton and that movie , waaaay ahead of its time.

by Sid Seadevil Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:46 pm

72lf wrote:Well, its officicial , QOS is the biggest Bond ever so far....$70.4 mil opening stateside and €252 foreign markets...so in 2 weeks it has taken $322 mil dollars.

The suits and Variety reckon it will do the $700 mil worldwide.
Great news and Im delighted.

Of course , one does wonder that considering they took a similar approach back in 89 with Daltons Licience to Kill and that was a (comparitive ) failure box office wise....
Ok they released it in the summer agaimst Batman, Indy 3 , Abyss etc rather that the more normal winter date.....
But I stand behind Dalton and that movie , waaaay ahead of its time.

Dalton was way ahead of his time. If he had any fault, and it's a damned small one, he was clearly uncomfortable with having to deliver some of the standard Bondian quips. But there's much of Dalton's Bond in Craig's portrayal.

by 72lf Mon Nov 24, 2008 4:57 am

Better news regarding Bonds Box office..
End of the first week in the US and A it has coffered appx 110 Mil Dollars and a further 420 Mil in total for its worldwide in 10 days....
Its gonna be the biggest Bond ever...heres hoping it keeps th ehard earned dollars rolling in.

by delgadofan Mon Nov 24, 2008 5:48 am

Sid Seadevil wrote:Dalton was way ahead of his time. If he had any fault, and it's a damned small one, he was clearly uncomfortable with having to deliver some of the standard Bondian quips. But there's much of Dalton's Bond in Craig's portrayal.

Dalton even seemed sheepish when blurting "Must have scared the living daylights out of her". He was a bit 'soft' for my taste, which also applies to Lazenby, Moore and tailor's dummy Brosnan.

Craig has singlehandedly carried on from where Connery left off in Goldfinger (1964) as far as 100% convincing Bonds go IMO - it only took 42 years to get there... Basketball

(Mind you, I rather liked Connery's Ultra-Hard-Bastard take on the role during his first comeback cheque for Diamonds Are Forever (1971))

by delgadofan Mon Nov 24, 2008 5:52 am

72lf wrote:Better news regarding Bonds Box office..
End of the first week in the US and A it has coffered appx 110 Mil Dollars and a further 420 Mil in total for its worldwide in 10 days....
Its gonna be the biggest Bond ever...heres hoping it keeps th ehard earned dollars rolling in.

Good news for the next movie, then, when at least they'll have a proper script prepared and ready from the off.

by Sid Seadevil Mon Nov 24, 2008 6:40 am

delgadofan wrote:Dalton even seemed sheepish when blurting "Must have scared the living daylights out of her". He was a bit 'soft' for my taste, which also applies to Lazenby, Moore and tailor's dummy Brosnan.

Craig has singlehandedly carried on from where Connery left off in Goldfinger (1964) as far as 100% convincing Bonds go IMO - it only took 42 years to get there...

(Mind you, I rather liked Connery's Ultra-Hard-Bastard take on the role during his first comeback cheque for Diamonds Are Forever (1971))

Dalton was a definite forerunner in the getting Bond back to Fleming's original take on the character. But I absolutely agree that what Craig has managed to pull off spectacularly well is the fusion of the novel Bond with the early Connery "blunt instrument" thug in a way no other actor has managed.

by 72lf Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:54 am

delgadofan wrote:
72lf wrote:Better news regarding Bonds Box office..
End of the first week in the US and A it has coffered appx 110 Mil Dollars and a further 420 Mil in total for its worldwide in 10 days....
Its gonna be the biggest Bond ever...heres hoping it keeps th ehard earned dollars rolling in.

Good news for the next movie, then, when at least they'll have a proper script prepared and ready from the off.

Youd think that but they never seem to.......
Then shooting starta and hey ho in 8 months finished hurried product hits the screens..of course they were so tied into Quantums release date, as impractical as it is, they spent nearly 200 mil dollars on it.....
and the Broccollis and Eon are notoriously tight

by Sponsored content