›

what should have happened instead of die another day

13

Comments

  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    edited October 2011 Posts: 2,782
    Bond didn't retire at the end of QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
    He walks off - and it was just an idea that Mendes and co might develop his character with this treatment. He does walk off into the cold...symbolic?
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    edited October 2011 Posts: 1,894
    Maybe symbolic of his understanding that he has to keep his emotions out of the job, because they threaten to destroy him otherwise. Although he starts the film looking for answers relating to Vesper's death, he clearly contemplates taking revenge (he does, after all, instruct Camille before the assault on the hotel) before coming to the conclusion that taking revenge will not bring Vesper back. He walks off into the cold, but his final line - "I never left" - makes it pretty clear that he is ready to move on and start being an agent. After all, the point of the CASINO ROYALE/QUANTUM OF SOLACE story arc was to take Bond from being a new agent, rough around the edges, and shape him into being the James Bond we know from the old timeline.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    He could be duplicate and lie to M, who knows, all I want his a Bond movie not revenger's tragedy.
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    edited October 2011 Posts: 1,894
    He's not lying to M. That would just contradict the internal logic of the film. Like I said, the point of the two film was to take a wet-behind-the-ears Bond and transform him into the refined agent that we knohttp://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/vanilla/post/editcomment/41542w and love. Why would EON work up to that point and say "Okay, he retired"?

    Besides, Bond having been employed by MI6 between the end of QUANTUM OF SOLACE and BOND 23 does not guarantee that BOND 23 would be a "revenger's tragedy" (of which there is no such thing). In fact, your suggestion that Bond would come out of retirement after M is killed would actually be more likely to result in a revenge film than if Bond had stayed employed.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    no such thing as revenger's tragedy - have you heard of Thomas Middleton? dear shadow you have a revenger's way about you towards me, i love it.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    In the end we got a Bond that didn't get the role properly or rightfully. He bought his way to the role. Frankfully, IMO, he is the only Bond that doesn't deserve getting the role. I'm waiting for B23 to see if he his any good in the role, I'll forgive him a bit if the film is good. But IMO his first 2 outings are not Bond films, thus have no part in the franchise. And even if his last 2 outings are great, he will still be, for me, the only Bond to have bought his way to the role in a unrightful and insulting way for the Bond legacy.
    EON wanted to change course so how on Earth does that mean Craig "bought his way to the role in a unrightful and insulting way for the Bond legacy"?

    I really don't get this - one bit.

    Think about it, he wasn't even on the radar at the time it was decided something different needed to be done. Blame EON, they gave us Die Another Day which in turn lead to Casino Royale. Daniel Craig had no part in it.
    when i heard craig was cast as bond i couldn't believe it, i thought "no way, not that guy of our friends in the north" then he turned out awesome. although i liked casino royale i didn't like QOS and now i really want a classic bond film
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    no such thing as revenger's tragedy - have you heard of Thomas Middleton?
    The Revenger's Tragedy is the title of a text. It is not a genre, as you implied.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited October 2011 Posts: 15,718
    Craig bought his way to the role using his friendship with Barbara. There is no other way Craig could have gotten the role, since he didn't fit the role in the slightest for CR. This is unworthy and insulting to Bond's legacy.

    And I don't care if the 'majority' loves Craig - the 'minority' who doesn't like Craig are also correct about him and his movies and are entitled to their opinion. No one is right or wrong about Craig. Craig is bad, Craig is good... There is no truth or correct answeres, just opinions. Someone's opinion is that Craig is great, well my opinion is that Craig is bad. Doesn't mean he's right and I'm wrong. We are both right.

    If we always followed the majority's opinion on Bond, well OHMSS could only be loved, so would TLD, FRWL, GF, TB. And YOLT, DAF, TMWTGG, MR, DAD would always be hated. And no majority can ever say that the minority who hates TB or loves TMWTGG are wrong. There would be no need of a forums like this, as everyone would love the same outings and hate the same outings.
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    Craig bought his way to the role using his friendship with Barbara. There is no other way Craig could have gotten the role, since he didn't fit the role in the slightest for CR. This is unworthy and insulting to Bond's legacy.
    image

    That's a wonderful theory. It has the twin advantages of being outrageous, and completely unprovable. Call me a cynic, but I'd like to see some evidence of what you're claiming.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    While there is hate for Craig, it is coming from the absolute minority. There are only one or two people who believe Craig is absolutely unworthy for the role - almost everyone else would agree that Daniel Craig is one of the best things that happened to the James Bond franchise.
    And I don't care if the 'majority' loves Craig - the 'minority' who doesn't like Craig are also correct about him and his movies and are entitled to their opinion. No one is right or wrong about Craig. Craig is bad, Craig is good... There is no truth or correct answeres, just opinions. Someone's opinion is that Craig is great, well my opinion is that Craig is bad. Doesn't mean he's right and I'm wrong. We are both right.

    If we always followed the majority's opinion on Bond, well OHMSS could only be loved, so would TLD, FRWL, GF, TB. And YOLT, DAF, TMWTGG, MR, DAD would always be hated. And no majority can ever say that the minority who hates TB or loves TMWTGG are wrong. There would be no need of a forums like this, as everyone would love the same outings and hate the same outings.
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    That's not really evidence. That's not really anything. You've clearly formed this opinion that Craig "bought" the role using his friendship with The Powers That Be based on something. This is the first time that I've heard that particular theory, so I'm just wondering where you're getting it from.

    What evidence is there that Daniel Craig used his friendship with the producers to "buy" the role of James Bond?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    Hello ? My last post had nothing to do about that. I posted another comment unrelated to that. 8-|
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    Either way, I'd still like to see evidence of that supposed nepotism.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited October 2011 Posts: 13,355
    That's like saying Brosnan bought his way into the role because of him being the pick for The Living Daylights and not getting so he was the shoe-in for GoldenEye due to him using his friendship with Cubby. Or Dalton for The Living Daylights after On Her Majesty's Secret Service. As Craig said at the time in mid-2005 "everyone know's Barbara", that doesn't mean anything if they're not picked or good enough to be picked for Bond.
    But Craig is liked.
    Not by DC007 in his illogical argument, that was my point.
    Not illogical but logical - a 38 year old SAS best of the best recruit who acts like a 25 year old rookie - ummm makes perfect sense - as Spock would say that's....
    You misunderstand me. Illogical in the sense that Craig "bought his way to the role in a unrightful and insulting way for the Bond legacy". I thought that would have been clear by my posts but obviously not.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,264
    Craig bought his way to the role using his friendship with Barbara. There is no other way Craig could have gotten the role, since he didn't fit the role in the slightest for CR. This is unworthy and insulting to Bond's legacy.

    As far as I know and remember Daniel Craig's friendship with the producers stems from after he got the role. As far as I know they never met him before and as has been said, his name only came up rather late, after Layer Cake.

    So saying he got the role through his friendship with the producers is impossible through time, at least, as far as science telss us now (and to my knowledge Craig is still human, so I'll diregard any timetravel options).

    I don't mind people not liking him as Bond (hell, I don't like Roger Moore as Bond) but I dislike (put mildly) false accusations.

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Craig bought his way to the role using his friendship with Barbara. There is no other way Craig could have gotten the role, since he didn't fit the role in the slightest for CR. This is unworthy and insulting to Bond's legacy.

    And I don't care if the 'majority' loves Craig - the 'minority' who doesn't like Craig are also correct about him and his movies and are entitled to their opinion. No one is right or wrong about Craig. Craig is bad, Craig is good... There is no truth or correct answeres, just opinions. Someone's opinion is that Craig is great, well my opinion is that Craig is bad. Doesn't mean he's right and I'm wrong. We are both right.

    If we always followed the majority's opinion on Bond, well OHMSS could only be loved, so would TLD, FRWL, GF, TB. And YOLT, DAF, TMWTGG, MR, DAD would always be hated. And no majority can ever say that the minority who hates TB or loves TMWTGG are wrong. There would be no need of a forums like this, as everyone would love the same outings and hate the same outings.
    Y'know what I think is hilarious? Your pic by your name is Roger Moore, and your name combines Timothy Dalton's last name with - oh, wait a minute! DANIEL CRAIG'S! If you don't like that he's Bond, and have this weird belief that he doesn't deserve the role, why use his name?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited October 2011 Posts: 15,718
    Because I supported Craig when I chose the nick in 2006. I didn't watch any Bond films other than CR and QOS from 2006 to 2009. It was only when re-watching non-Craig outings that I saw the new factor had worn out, and I thought his take on Bond and his movies were rubbish.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    Because I supported Craig when I chose the nick in 2006. I didn't watch any Bond films other than CR and QOS from 2006 to 2009. It was only when re-watching non-Craig outings that I saw the new factor had worn out, and I thought his take on Bond and his movies were rubbish.

    Agree, DC is not Bond yet and I haven't seen him in Bond movie yet. Good action star and movies but not Bond. And I bet you Babs knows he's a great cunning linguist.
  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    Because I supported Craig when I chose the nick in 2006. I didn't watch any Bond films other than CR and QOS from 2006 to 2009. It was only when re-watching non-Craig outings that I saw the new factor had worn out, and I thought his take on Bond and his movies were rubbish.
    You still haven't shown us any evidence of this so-called nepotism. Like I said, the theory that Craig used his friendship with the producers to get the role is very unusual one, so I'd like to see something to substantiate it. Saying that "Craig was wrong for the role" or that "his take on the films were rubbish" is not evidence.
  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    edited October 2011 Posts: 2,629
    Because I supported Craig when I chose the nick in 2006. I didn't watch any Bond films other than CR and QOS from 2006 to 2009. It was only when re-watching non-Craig outings that I saw the new factor had worn out, and I thought his take on Bond and his movies were rubbish.

    Agree, DC is not Bond yet and I haven't seen him in Bond movie yet. Good action star and movies but not Bond. And I bet you Babs knows he's a great cunning linguist.
    re: forgotmyusername: If I'm reading this right, you're saying haven't seen a Daniel Craig Bond film. How can you criticize Craig's Bond, if you're claiming "I haven't seen him in Bond movie yet"?

    Secondly, that last sentence was completely uncalled for.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Yeah... Suggesting Daniel Craig [sexual act deleted] with Barbara Broccoli is just... just wrong. Perhaps you're suggesting you'd like to [sexual act deleted] with [person deleted] in some [location deleted] and then [sentence deleted].
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,304
    IMHO, Brosnan got the role because he was perceived to have been "snubbed" when Dalton got the role. Yes, yes, I know it was the Remington Steele contract and not Cubby that kept him from becoming Bond, but the perception with the general public here in the U.S. was that Brosnan was "robbed."

    This is nothing against Dalton--who I prefer an actor over Brosnan--but there was a public perception that he was the "second choice."

    When Brosnan got to become Bond, there was a sense of triumph. But then, slowly but surely, the directors and scripts let him down. He is well-suited for lighter fare--he handles the Hong Kong portion of DAD really well, for example--but they gave him darker stuff that didn't play to his strengths.

    I just wish that he were given better material by Eon. As it stands, his best spy performance is probably in The Tailor of Panama, when it really should have been in one of the Bonds.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    According to "Inside The Living Daylights" (on the DVD), Cubby said after Brosnan was required to film more episodes of Remington Steele that "Remington Steele will not be James Bond", which basically means that they wouldn't wait for Brosnan like they were willing to wait for Dalton, who wasn't really a "second choice", but considered because he was an old choice. Dalton was considered for Bond as far back as On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and probably considered for every "uncertain" period since until he was actually hired on The Living Daylights.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    According to "Inside The Living Daylights" (on the DVD), Cubby said after Brosnan was required to film more episodes of Remington Steele that "Remington Steele will not be James Bond", which basically means that they wouldn't wait for Brosnan.
    Also Cubby felt why would an audience see him as Bond in the cinema when you have the exact same thing on the TV for free. NBC even offered a schedule for Brosnan in which he could do both but Cubby was, rightfully, having none of it.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Yeah, and he had a point. Why WOULD anybody wanna watch in theaters what they could have on TV (*cough* Simpsons *cough*)?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited October 2011 Posts: 13,355
    Yeah, and he had a point. Why WOULD anybody wanna watch in theaters what they could have on TV (*cough* Simpsons *cough*)?
    Exactly. A bit like EON ditching India due to all the health and safety, brand ambassador nonsense. With them it's "our way or no way" and that should be expected really, with a James Bond film.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Please explain "Inida". I don't know what you're talking about.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Please explain "Inida". I don't know what you're talking about.
    The plans to film in India for Bond 23 which were recently cancelled.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I don't know Inida either. Anyway - I think we all have our likes and dislikes; the forums are good for discussion and to make interesting points. It makes me uncomfortable when I read some really strong and negative comments. I know we have our own things we passionately believe in or disagree with ... but I don't like the negative crap that comes up sometimes. And I certainly don't like implying sexual things. Just my 2 cents worth as I read our discussions, gents.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Here's everything India:

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_report_jul11c.php3?s=bond23&id=02914

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_report_aug11.php3?s=bond23&id=02933

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_report_aug11b.php3?s=bond23&id=02935

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_report_aug11c.php3?s=bond23&id=02938

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_report_aug11d.php3?s=bond23&id=02939

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_report_aug11e.php3?s=bond23&id=02941

    http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_23_report_sep11b.php3?s=bond23&id=02957
Sign In or Register to comment.