›

The James Bond Debate Thread - 336 Craig looks positively younger in SP than he does in SF.

1…89111314…190

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,254
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 015</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7> <b>There's nothing wrong with product placement in the Bond films or even in the novels.</b></font>
  • karatemanchan37karatemanchan37
    Posts: 584
    Nothing wrong at all with product placement. In fact, I'd argue it makes things more realistic - how the real spy world uses gadgets and technology that's hidden right before our eyes.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Yes I think it is okay if not shoved in our face in an obviously "selling" it way.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    I agree. It depends how it's done.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I agree with the thesis, I've never really had a problem with the whole Product Placement thing in Bond - even if it is blatant at times.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    I'm OK with it, as long as we never have 'Rolex ?' 'Omega.' lines again.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,331
    As long as it isn't a running commercial, I'm fine with it. There are too many people who want to know which products Bond chooses anyway.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    I agree, though the novels feature products, it's not 'product placement', Fleming wasn't paid for it! In the films I don't mind it either as long as it's subtle and not too in-your-face.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited January 2012 Posts: 28,694
    Like most of you gents have said, it is fine by me unless Bond is totally jamming the product or logo into our faces. Like if Bond was sitting in the debriefing room, and Bond says to M:

    "Well M, that sure is a Tiffany neckpiece you've got there. I'm not too much for neckpieces, but I sure do love my Rolex. It compliments my Turnbull and Asser suit quite well, woudn't you say. After a nice drive in the Aston Martin, and I've stopped using the Lark cigarettes. I'm on to drinking Dom Perignon singly. The cigarette ruins the taste. So...ah...what was that mission you have for me?"
    (Bond grins mischievously )

    Other than that, it is an effective way to break even on the cost of the filmmaking process, and gives exposure to some good products. Let's face it, if Bond uses, wouldn't you want to use it?
  • VirageVirage
    Posts: 1,856
    To a extent it's fine like Aston and Sony? In TSWLM. It's only when Bond waves a bottle of coke at the camera and calls coke a refreshing drink and that >blank< it's to much.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    I'm ok with it in moderation. Close ups of BluRay discs, close ups of Bonds watch face (is it a Casio... no it's an Omega), mention of Bonds watch Brand etc... I could really do without.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    I have no problem with product placement as it obviously raises revenue towards the making of the movie! However? Like other people here? I don't want it blatantley shoved in my face!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,254
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 016</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7> <b>Sean Bean would have been a better Bond for GE than Pierce Brosnan.</b></font>
  • karatemanchan37karatemanchan37
    Posts: 584
    Absolutely not. Sean Bean is not suave at all.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited January 2012 Posts: 1,778
    I absolutly agree. Not only can Sean Bean act circles around Pierce Brosnan but perhaps his casting would've avoided the backwards transition of the Brosnan era. It was the Moore era only with weaker scripts. Plus Bean could've played the role for longer and was more convincing in an action scene.
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    edited January 2012 Posts: 5,745
    Agreed. Bean would've been a continuation of Dalton/the perfect predecessor to Craig's Bond. Not to mention his haircut fits better -_-

    Hey Ethan Hunt, hey Goldeneye Bond, SPIES WHO DO WHAT YOU DO DON'T HAVE LONG HAIR.

    And yes, in the heat of the action, he fits much better.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    Agreed. Bean would've been a continuation of Dalton/the perfect predecessor to Craig's Bond. Not to mention his haircut fits better -_-

    Hey Ethan Hunt, hey Goldeneye Bond, SPIES WHO DO WHAT YOU DO DON'T HAVE LONG HAIR.

    And yes, in the heat of the action, he fits much better.

    Lol in regards to the hair comment. Yeah it'd be pretty impractical in the heat of battle. I don't know how Brosnan's 80s Remington Steele haircut made it into the mid 90s. His style in TND, TWINE, and DAD was much better.

    And I never thought about how well Bean would've fit as Craig's predecessor. He would've been the perfect bridge between Dalton and Craig. Keep the grittiness but change the look alittle.
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    Posts: 5,745
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    Lol in regards to the hair comment. Yeah it'd be pretty impractical in the heat of battle. I don't know how Brosnan's 80s Remington Steele haircut made it into the mid 90s. His style in TND, TWINE, and DAD was much better.

    And I never thought about how well Bean would've fit as Craig's predecessor. He would've been the perfect bridge between Dalton and Craig. Keep the grittiness but change the look alittle.

    Exxxactly.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    The question is would the public accepted the harder edge Bond off Bean instead of Dalton seeing as Box office reciepts were not as some have said sucessful. I mean even now DC's Bond is accused of being too hard edged.

    I like his take but like other people i would like to see a little more humour. But not too parody levels.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited January 2012 Posts: 1,778
    RogueAgent wrote:
    The question is would the public accepted the harder edge Bond off Bean instead of Dalton seeing as Box office reciepts were not as some have said sucessful. I mean even now DC's Bond is accused of being too hard edged.

    I like his take but like other people i would like to see a little more humour. But not too parody levels.

    Honestly after 6 years I think the public would've accepted any Bond back with open arms. Plus he wouldn't have to be as gritty as Dalton in LTK but still not copy Roger Moore as Brosnan often did. Plus I believe audiences generally like Sean Bean more as an actor than Timothy Dalton. Afterall he's pretty popular. There's a big problem when Im watching GE and find myself more charmed by Trevelyn than my favorite movie character.

    And watching Brosnan try to "act" was often pretty cringe-inducing. Bean would've handled the more serious moments much better.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    Yep I think Bean as Bond would be tremendous - love him as actor. He is extremely talented, and that would have stopped him from playing bad guys all the time. Sean Bean as Bond? I am sold !!
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    Sean Bean is a great supporting actor, had he played 007 I do believe that the franchise would have had a hard time surviving it,
    There really was only one direction and actor to chose from after the responses to the "gritty" performance from that other surporting actor in a role that was too big for his shoes. ANd luckily EON chose well.
    Sean Bean made an excellent villain.
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,278
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <b>Sean Bean would have been a better Bond for GE than Pierce Brosnan.</b>

    Brosnan as the villain in GE and Bean as Bond? Hard for me to imagine.

    Bean is okay as a supporting actor (loved him in 'Ronin'), but as lead... no way!
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    I always have associated Sean Bean as "Sharpe" in the brilliant tv series of the same name! So i always had seen him as the hero! So when he went bad in GE and patriot games? I liked it!

    Just don't know whether i could picture him as Bond?
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    It never occured to me that Bean may have upstaged Brozza in GE until I joined MI6. I still think Brozza gets some of his best scenes with him.

    I think it was the right choice to have Bean as the bad guy in GE because, lets face it, its a meatier part. Its nothing new for an actor playing the bad guy to upstage the hero anyway, I still think Dalton is upstaged slightly by Davi in LTK for example.

    Whose to say that the Bean/Bond wouldn't also have been upstaged by whoever played Trevelyan.

    Brosnan as the villain in GE and Bean as Bond? Hard for me to imagine.

    [/quote]

    Brozza's also played a few bad guys in his time with mixed results. I thought he was good as the undercover agent in The Fourth Protocol but bad as the tough guy in Butterfly on a Wheel.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 016</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7> <b>Sean Bean would have been a better Bond for GE than Pierce Brosnan.</b></font>

    Agreed. Bean totally outacts Brosnan, especially in the graveyard of relics scene.

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2012 Posts: 11,189
    PrinceKamalKhan wrote:
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 016</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7> <b>Sean Bean would have been a better Bond for GE than Pierce Brosnan.</b></font>

    Agreed. Bean totally outacts Brosnan, especially in the graveyard of relics scene.

    I thought that was one of the better scenes with Brosnan. He looks subdued and awkward. Kind of like how you WOULD look if you saw a friend who you thought was long dead and who you witnessed being "killed".
  • bondbat007bondbat007
    Posts: 1,407
    Bean is a fine actor and would of done a good job, but Brosnan is what Bond needed in 1995.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I think I'd been interesting, and I wouldn't have complained. I think Sean's Bond would be more serious, and have more of a tough spy persona compared to Pierce. I get thoughts concerning what would've happened if Sean was Bond and Pierce was 006. But I guess we can't have two Seans in the Bond franchise after all...
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    I'd say so, yes. Brosnan as a villain would also have made for a great twist.
Sign In or Register to comment.