Bond Announced....

[big screen satellite]

incidentally - those claiming that the Bourne Supremacy is the next big thing should look at the WW BO takes of the first two movies, with Identity taking £213m & Supremacy £288m, way below what DAD took...and with the former coming out in the same year as DAD....

its just interesting to note, that despite the Bourne Series coming out, it hasn't done anything finacially at the Box office to the Bond Franchise other than maybe give it a critically important kick up the ass....

[ffolkes]

I'm fully aware of just how succesful Brosnan's Bond movies have been. The whole "he's in, no he's out" marathon along with his allegedly high paycheck demands were pretty well covered in the biz.

But regarding DAD, i was simply complaining how crap it was as a movie, not how crap it did in the boxoffice... Arguing about the movie's merits is mostly just a matter of an opinion, but there's no denying Die Another Day's big commercial success.

Still, i have to say that even though Brosnan's movies were hits... i don't know how long that formula would've stayed fresh in the eyes of the masses. Things needed to change, and the critical backlash was the precursor of it IMO. The next Pierce Bond might have been a duff (it's 2005, you never know) if it had been like TWINE or DAD. Or then it would've made truckloads of money.
But then it would've been shit.

Bring on Casino Royale.

[big screen satellite]

Originally Posted by ffolkes

I'm fully aware of just how succesful Brosnan's Bond movies have been. The whole "he's in, no he's out" marathon along with his allegedly high paycheck demands were pretty well covered in the biz.

But regarding DAD, i was simply complaining how crap it was as a movie, not how crap it did in the boxoffice... Arguing about the movie's merits is mostly just a matter of an opinion, but there's no denying Die Another Day's big commercial success.

tbh this post was more aimed at the people over at the GS, not you or anyone here, it was they who were saying how poor Brosnan's movies did at the box office, and i think thats the general perception, which is plainly untrue...the movie may have not been the most popular in terms of everyones favourite Bond, but it was THE most successful ever, and despite being panned people still went to see it, and they will do again with Casino Royal, good bad or indifferent - i think it will outperform DAD in terms of $$$....

it did need a change and i hope that this is it...i like you can't wait, but would be willing to if it means a decent film...but until then

bring on Casino Royal

[ffolkes]

Originally Posted by big screen satellite

tbh this post was more aimed at the people over at the GS, not you or anyone here, it was they who were saying how poor Brosnan's movies did at the box office

Sorry, my bad...! Well still i find it odd that people in general even have that idea. Bizarre.

About Casino Royale tho, the word is that Q and Moneypenny are out of the picture as they didn't really make any big appearance in Fleming's novel. But what i'd like to know is what they're going to do with M? Having Dame Judi Dench along is going to be a bit difficult if this is supposed to be chronologically Bond's "first adventure". Will they have her or a new M? And will it be a lady?
(I'm guessing no as she was only introduced to Bond in Goldeneye)

Nevertheless the ever-so-trusty imdb states that she is in the film. But we all know that could be BS. Also i'm still unaware of whether the movie will be a throwback to the cold war era, or placed in a modern setting.