It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
That’s priceless :))
Haha fantastic. :D
If the presser is on Thursday.........the live broadcast of the GMA airs in sync with the Eastern Time Zone (ET) between 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m.
Jamaica is an hour behind of ET. Therefore, if the press conference starts at 9:00 local time in Jamaica, you miss the Thursday broadcast of GMA.
Therefore, if GMA wish to air segments on BOTH Thursday and Friday, the press conferences has to take place on Wednesday 24th April 2019.
Which is tomorrow.......
(However, there is a chance they start the conference before 9:00 am on Thursday and narrowly make the broadcast on Thursday)
If Jamaica's an hour ahead, doesn't that make 9am (local time) 8am EST? So wouldn't that be right in the middle of GMA's window?
My bad. I meant behind. Edited the post above.
Good question. One up your alley, I must admit ;), but a very good one at that.
Surely sooner is better?
Especially if the cast is full of unknown European actors that no one can care about. This move is about to get drowned by Endgame coverage. It needs to get out pronto
I don't think Rami Malek's name is enough to generate too much excitement prior to the Captain America/Iron Man-fest. Though he is cute.
No worries. You're right. Suggests that a PC livestream certainly isn't a possibility for GMA -- makes me think perhaps "Thursday" is more of a warmup with a reveal of Jamaica as a location (exclusive?).
Very interesting situation unfolding, indeed.
That's a great story, @ColonelSun Thanks for that!
Like this??
;)
Possibly, but how much difference does a day make? I could see where Thursday would be a retrospective of Bond, with the focus on Craig's tenure. This would be a tease for the press conference on Friday. It would give them a huge ratings boost.
Also , on a worldwide scale, announcing the press conference on Thursday would create a explosion of coverage; it would be everywhere.
I think you have to 'read the room'. The GMA tweet hasn't garnered a huge amount of attention on that platform.....we all care, but entertainment journalists are spending the week reporting on Endgame. After all, it's a genuine candidate at making $300m this week and beating Avatar.
The Bond announcement should ht before the first wave of reviews tomorrow night UK time.
Anyway.............................................one thing that has become very very very clear: we should not look at past press conferences for clues for the next one. Just because Eon tweeted with two days notice before the Spectre reveal, does NOT mean they will do the same here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1117770/James-Bond-25-death-last-Bond-movie-Daniel-Craig-Ian-Fleming/amp
That article is an insult
"A Bond studyer" what a joke maybe he should learn that Bond has been doubted 3 times before and he's always come back.
Yes, it does work rather nicely. Let's bring it to the titles thread ;)
Another one that says Bond is over, now under the guise of a "Bond expert".
Are these the same analysts who said GoldenEye couldn’t exist, who said the helicopter posed no immediate threat, and wasn’t worth following?!
Me likey
I wonder what they are teasing hmmm.....
I have worked with Kinane in the past, and I think people are missing his point. He's merely pointing some things we have been discussing on these boards for a long time. And upon careful reading, one sees that he isn't really predicting the end of Bond.
You're right, @ShakenNotStirred.
Haven't they been saying this since the late '60s? Hasn't Bond always proven them wrong?
I'd say the brilliance of Fleming is that he created a character not tied to a fixed point in time. The brilliance of Broccoli, Saltzman and others is that they added adaptability and flexibility to the Bond formula. The world continues to produce new villains, new conflicts and new complications. Even in a "modern world", traditional symbols of hope, security and testosterone-charged persistence are needed. Bond has been doing his part for over five decades, despite the world turning "modern" in the '70s, then again in the '80s, and once more in the '90s beyond the Iron Curtain. No-one thought it possible that Bond could survive into the 2000s but lo and behold, CR smashed every bit of criticism with a post 9/11 Bond that worked the Fleming magic and felt very modern at the same time.
But the world has been "ever-changing" since the early '60s. Cinema has been changing since the early '60s. As for #MeToo, that thing is almost dead and buried again. Even then, Bond doesn't have to smack a girl on the bottom to give us a fun ride. A good Bond film can been perfectly "safe-for-work". But that doesn't mean that art should be politically correct; in fact, I'd argue it shouldn't be. Bond can cross the line a bit here and there; he always has. We can take it. Those who crusade for #MeToo aren't going to make much of a difference BO wise anyways and they will find insult in everything, from Disney's princesses to Marvel's superheroes. James Bond films don't conform and we love them for that. In fact, that's one of many things that guarantee continued interest in them.
The geopolitical position of Britain surely isn't too big a deal either. Whatever Britain's real power, Bond films are part fantasy. Spies are still needed. And this one particular spy can still be a cool dude to follow around. Also, it's not like Britain has no influence at all anymore...
That's a personal comment made by this "expert". Many people obviously feel that those things work, judging by the recent films' popularity and BO performances. In fact, if the films decide to return to some of the crazier plots from long ago, the "expert" might get his wish. I do, however, have serious doubts that those would sit well with the majority of fans. That said, good screenwriters may be able to squeeze out something that's as innocent as the '60s' plots but also credible in today's world.
Wow, this is quite the acerbic comment and I resent it. I'm beginning to sense that this man is just a Fleming purist. He simply wants faithful Fleming adaptions, nothing too loose.
Hold on, now. Have we forgotten the constant tonal shifts in the '80s? From FYEO to OP to AVTAK to TLD and then to LTK... How about from FRWL to GF? Furthermore, I fail to see how attempts at "keeping in sync with the modern world's "woke" sensibilities" must lead to the franchise's impending demise. Once again, Bond was always as much "of the times" as he was "off the times". A balanced mix-up of old and new is what guarantees our enjoyment. Furthermore, the Bond films have always had a talent for self-correction. After MR, we got FYEO. After DAD came CR. Should B25 upset people for whatever reason, the next actor in the next Bond film will take a different turn with it. I'm still not convinced this must be the end of the story.
The stellar performances of CR, QOS and SF?
Too many cooks involved and somehow that means the series will end?
Clearly, this expert is not expert enough to realise that troubled productions have plagued the series since the '60s.
This I can somewhat agree with, except that I don't know where the second accusation comes from. A capitulation to the issues raised by #MeToo? Granted, the film will be careful with certain things and daring with others, but so was SF. To appease the #MeToo crowd isn't the same as to add previously unseen elements to the formula; rather it's about avoiding perhaps a naughty line or two. But I'm beginning to think that the power of #MeToo over movies is a little exaggerated here.
Once again, this is the one conclusion I fail to draw myself. Even if, in a worst-case scenario, the film flops and is buried under heavy criticism from whatever side, there's always that next film to set things right.
Anyone living by a "rule" of film curses is, to borrow a phrase, completely deluded.
Escape from political correctness and Me-too
Bring on Bond 25 and let’s have some fun.
I reckon a few Phoebe WB lines should serve us very well indeed. We should laugh with, and not at Bond, in this strange new world.