Where does Bond go after Craig?

1510511513515516523

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    No!
  • edited March 29 Posts: 2,897
    Lewis Gilbert's films seem paced too fast. YOLT jumps about from tangent tangent and Moonraker also has the feeling of rotating settings. TSWLM has elements of this: Bond to Hosein to Fekkesh to Kalba. Similar to the lines of Aki-Dikko-assassin-Tiger in YOLT, and Drax-Venice-Rio-Amazon jumping in Moonraker.
    None of these characters and lines really have room to breathe: feels as if they exist just to go down the next step of the pipeline. In this film, stuff happens, and one of the many consequences just happens to be important, so let's go to where this points and etc. A more concise, more focused directorial style I think is better for Bond 26

    I mean, that's essentially plot to be fair.

    But I get what you're saying. I know a criticism of TSWLM's first act is that Bond goes from random person to random person, most of whom get killed, and one of whom - Hosein - may as well have been written out. Not unfair. It's more a script issue if anything, but I do like how the fast pace gives the feel of Bond having to scramble to achieve his mission, with things constantly changing and him having to face different obstacles. If anything I'd like them to lean into that idea for a future film as it could be interesting.
  • edited March 29 Posts: 9,770
    talos7 wrote: »
    No!

    Well thats fine but you have to tell him no

    The last guy was in the hospital for a week…


    Good luck
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,928
    talos7 wrote: »
    No!
    :D Although ATJ is playing a cartoon-level comedy Cocker-nee in Bullet Train, tbf.
  • edited March 29 Posts: 86
    007HallY wrote: »
    Lewis Gilbert's films seem paced too fast. YOLT jumps about from tangent tangent and Moonraker also has the feeling of rotating settings. TSWLM has elements of this: Bond to Hosein to Fekkesh to Kalba. Similar to the lines of Aki-Dikko-assassin-Tiger in YOLT, and Drax-Venice-Rio-Amazon jumping in Moonraker.
    None of these characters and lines really have room to breathe: feels as if they exist just to go down the next step of the pipeline. In this film, stuff happens, and one of the many consequences just happens to be important, so let's go to where this points and etc. A more concise, more focused directorial style I think is better for Bond 26

    I mean, that's essentially plot to be fair.

    But I get what you're saying. I know a criticism of TSWLM's first act is that Bond goes from random person to random person, most of whom get killed, and one of whom - Hosein - may as well have been written out. Not unfair. It's more a script issue if anything, but I do like how the fast pace gives the feel of Bond having to scramble to achieve his mission, with things constantly changing and him having to face different obstacles. If anything I'd like them to lean into that idea for a future film as it could be interesting.

    What I guess I'm trying to say is that Gilbert's direction doesn't give us comfort in setting or in character much of the time. We move from setting to setting drastically with little reason (normally because of some exposition fed by a side character, giving the feeling that others do the dirty work). It doesn't feel like Bond spent more than the minutes on screen on set at the story's setting. This is at its worst in YOLT, because Bond is mostly in the same country but it feels like setting changes often. All three Gilbert efforts have the disjointed feel that comes with most the plot-driving elements done by others off-screen and Bond continually following up.

    I suppose, to wrap it all up I believe that Gilbert's direction doesn't take much of plot into consideration and the fast pace is because the plot falls thin between action sequences
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 29 Posts: 8,087
    007HallY wrote: »
    Lewis Gilbert's films seem paced too fast. YOLT jumps about from tangent tangent and Moonraker also has the feeling of rotating settings. TSWLM has elements of this: Bond to Hosein to Fekkesh to Kalba. Similar to the lines of Aki-Dikko-assassin-Tiger in YOLT, and Drax-Venice-Rio-Amazon jumping in Moonraker.
    None of these characters and lines really have room to breathe: feels as if they exist just to go down the next step of the pipeline. In this film, stuff happens, and one of the many consequences just happens to be important, so let's go to where this points and etc. A more concise, more focused directorial style I think is better for Bond 26

    I mean, that's essentially plot to be fair.

    But I get what you're saying. I know a criticism of TSWLM's first act is that Bond goes from random person to random person, most of whom get killed, and one of whom - Hosein - may as well have been written out. Not unfair. It's more a script issue if anything, but I do like how the fast pace gives the feel of Bond having to scramble to achieve his mission, with things constantly changing and him having to face different obstacles. If anything I'd like them to lean into that idea for a future film as it could be interesting.

    What I guess I'm trying to say is that Gilbert's direction doesn't give us comfort in setting or in character much of the time. We move from setting to setting drastically with little reason (normally because of some exposition fed by a side character, giving the feeling that others do the dirty work). It doesn't feel like Bond spent more than the minutes on screen on set at the story's setting. This is at its worst in YOLT, because Bond is mostly in the same country but it feels like setting changes often. All three Gilbert efforts have the disjointed feel that comes with most the plot-driving elements done by others off-screen and Bond continually following up.

    I suppose, to wrap it all up I believe that Gilbert's direction doesn't take much of plot into consideration and the fast pace is because the plot falls thin between action sequences

    I haven't seen this perspective expressed before always great to have fresh ideas about the films. :-bd

    Having said that, I'm not sure what Gilbert could've done as a director about Bond getting most of his information from other people, that really does seem like a script problem. On the whole, I like the fact that bond films zip around a lot, it gives a feeling of breathlessness, and if Bond is supposed to be a top super spy we SHOULD find it a little difficult keeping up with him. But I'd still say that Gilbert gives the locations the correct time to breathe, I feel like I get properly immersed in Egypt in TSWLM, or Rio in MR.
  • Posts: 3,279
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Honestly i looked at my 8 ball and it said asked again

    My tea leaves were dry
    And my fortune teller was out of town

    But my gut says Michael Fassbender is 007

    No way henry cavill

    No wait its the sandwich i had i will be in the restroom if you need me

    No way Fassbender. Too old now.
  • Posts: 3,279
    Risico007 wrote: »
    https://screenrant.com/christopher-nolan-james-bond-movie-characters-actors-casting/

    I still dont get why the 3 biggest names in bond fandom are excited by ATJ he is ok i guess was his performance in bullet train that amazing



    He is ok i guess

    It's not Bullet Train that people are judging his performance by. Apparently Nocturnal Animals is the one to watch in terms of how good an actor he is (playing a serial killer), which he won a Golden Globe for.

    I haven't seen the film yet, but I will watch it if ATJ is chosen, just to check out what the new Bond actor has in store for us.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 29 Posts: 8,087
    My ideal schedule for the future would be:

    Villeneuve or someone else directs bond 26 for a Oct/Nov 2026 release.

    Edgar Wright directs bond 27 for a Oct/Nov 2028 release.

    I'm convinced Edgar Wright will direct a Bond film at some point in the future, and I have a theory that an actor's second film is usually their least consequential, usually bond is just chasing a maguffin around. I think edgar fits perfectly for an actor's second film, because he's not dry enough the helm the first film where the audience hasn't been won over yet, and the third film is usually where it goes grand and epic, which isn't really Edgar's wheelhouse either. But a breezy, throwaway adventure where they camp things up a bit and just have a jolly good romp would fit him perfectly. It would also keep happy the side of the fandom that wants bond to return to his roots.
  • edited March 29 Posts: 486
    People have often said that one of the reasons Nolan likely won't direct Bond 26 is that he co-produces his movies with his wife Emma Thomas, and that probably neither he would want to direct a film without her involvement nor EON would want her involved.

    What people have not been considering is that Denis Villeneuve's wife Tanya Lapointe has become a producer, too. She executive produced Dune Part One and is one of the producers of Dune Part Two. Would Villeneuve direct Bond 26 without her involvement? Would EON be okay with her being on board?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,087
    People have often said that one of the reasons Nolan likely won't direct Bond 26 is that he co-produces his movies with his wife Emma Thomas, and that probably neither he would want to direct a film without her involvement nor EON would want her involved.

    What people have not been considering is that Denis Villeneuve's wife Tanya Lapointe has become a producer, too. She executive produced Dune Part One and is one of the producers of Dune Part Two. Would Villeneuve direct Bond 26 without her involvement? Would EON be okay with her being on board?

    I imagine they would be fine giving her an executive producer credit and having her as another voice in the room. Ultimately I think there's only going to be one person making the majority of the decisions and that's Barbara broccoli, and ofcourse micheal to the extent his age and health allows.
  • Posts: 9,770
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Honestly i looked at my 8 ball and it said asked again

    My tea leaves were dry
    And my fortune teller was out of town

    But my gut says Michael Fassbender is 007

    No way henry cavill

    No wait its the sandwich i had i will be in the restroom if you need me

    No way Fassbender. Too old now.

    Well the sandwich i ate that caused my prophecies was a little old anyway i am fine now no prophecies for me
  • edited March 29 Posts: 703
    007HallY wrote: »
    Lewis Gilbert's films seem paced too fast. YOLT jumps about from tangent tangent and Moonraker also has the feeling of rotating settings. TSWLM has elements of this: Bond to Hosein to Fekkesh to Kalba. Similar to the lines of Aki-Dikko-assassin-Tiger in YOLT, and Drax-Venice-Rio-Amazon jumping in Moonraker.
    None of these characters and lines really have room to breathe: feels as if they exist just to go down the next step of the pipeline. In this film, stuff happens, and one of the many consequences just happens to be important, so let's go to where this points and etc. A more concise, more focused directorial style I think is better for Bond 26

    I mean, that's essentially plot to be fair.

    But I get what you're saying. I know a criticism of TSWLM's first act is that Bond goes from random person to random person, most of whom get killed, and one of whom - Hosein - may as well have been written out. Not unfair. It's more a script issue if anything, but I do like how the fast pace gives the feel of Bond having to scramble to achieve his mission, with things constantly changing and him having to face different obstacles. If anything I'd like them to lean into that idea for a future film as it could be interesting.

    What I guess I'm trying to say is that Gilbert's direction doesn't give us comfort in setting or in character much of the time. We move from setting to setting drastically with little reason (normally because of some exposition fed by a side character, giving the feeling that others do the dirty work). It doesn't feel like Bond spent more than the minutes on screen on set at the story's setting. This is at its worst in YOLT, because Bond is mostly in the same country but it feels like setting changes often. All three Gilbert efforts have the disjointed feel that comes with most the plot-driving elements done by others off-screen and Bond continually following up.

    I suppose, to wrap it all up I believe that Gilbert's direction doesn't take much of plot into consideration and the fast pace is because the plot falls thin between action sequences

    I haven't seen this perspective expressed before always great to have fresh ideas about the films. :-bd

    Having said that, I'm not sure what Gilbert could've done as a director about Bond getting most of his information from other people, that really does seem like a script problem. On the whole, I like the fact that bond films zip around a lot, it gives a feeling of breathlessness, and if Bond is supposed to be a top super spy we SHOULD find it a little difficult keeping up with him. But I'd still say that Gilbert gives the locations the correct time to breathe, I feel like I get properly immersed in Egypt in TSWLM, or Rio in MR.

    It's a script problem. They didn't use Fleming's novels.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited March 29 Posts: 2,928
    Didn't Nolan himself say that he wouldn't do a Bond film unless he had complete control of everything and if that wasn't forthcoming he'd prefer not to do it at all and just be first in line to see it instead? Something to that effect. EON aren't going to give away complete control to anyone, even Nolan, are they? Or is he the one man they might make a one-off exception for? Although, if they did, would they do it in a new Bond's first movie? Wouldn't they want to establish the new Bond before risking that kind of artistic experiment? On the other hand, if they established the new guy pretty strongly as 'Nolan's Bond', would they feel compelled to stick with the same tone throughout Bond 7's run or pull back and, to an extent, revert as they did with Dan? Dunno.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,876
    If Nolan wants complete control, then he isn’t going to direct any Bond film.
    That’s not how EON work.
  • There is a rumour going around that there will be another Bond film. Just speculation for now but I'm confident when the powers be discover a decent successor to Craig there will be news! Haven't a clue who that can possibly be but I don't believe any of the current gossip.If memory recalls no one outside of EON had any idea about Craig until just before the announcement but I may be wrong
  • Posts: 486
    Benny wrote: »
    If Nolan wants complete control, then he isn’t going to direct any Bond film.
    That’s not how EON work.

    Things change. Also, I remember when in 2011, the MI6 admins were absolutely convinced that EON would never ever let Sam Mendes pick Thomas Newman to compose the score of Skyfall. Then in 2014 they were convinced that Newman would not be allowed to compose the score of Spectre because he and EON apparently did not get along during the making of Skyfall.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,876
    Benny wrote: »
    If Nolan wants complete control, then he isn’t going to direct any Bond film.
    That’s not how EON work.

    Things change. Also, I remember when in 2011, the MI6 admins were absolutely convinced that EON would never ever let Sam Mendes pick Thomas Newman to compose the score of Skyfall. Then in 2014 they were convinced that Newman would not be allowed to compose the score of Spectre because he and EON apparently did not get along during the making of Skyfall.

    Things do change.
    I can’t see a time when EON give up total control of a Bond film.
    Why would they?
  • 007HallY wrote: »
    Lewis Gilbert's films seem paced too fast. YOLT jumps about from tangent tangent and Moonraker also has the feeling of rotating settings. TSWLM has elements of this: Bond to Hosein to Fekkesh to Kalba. Similar to the lines of Aki-Dikko-assassin-Tiger in YOLT, and Drax-Venice-Rio-Amazon jumping in Moonraker.
    None of these characters and lines really have room to breathe: feels as if they exist just to go down the next step of the pipeline. In this film, stuff happens, and one of the many consequences just happens to be important, so let's go to where this points and etc. A more concise, more focused directorial style I think is better for Bond 26

    I mean, that's essentially plot to be fair.

    But I get what you're saying. I know a criticism of TSWLM's first act is that Bond goes from random person to random person, most of whom get killed, and one of whom - Hosein - may as well have been written out. Not unfair. It's more a script issue if anything, but I do like how the fast pace gives the feel of Bond having to scramble to achieve his mission, with things constantly changing and him having to face different obstacles. If anything I'd like them to lean into that idea for a future film as it could be interesting.

    What I guess I'm trying to say is that Gilbert's direction doesn't give us comfort in setting or in character much of the time. We move from setting to setting drastically with little reason (normally because of some exposition fed by a side character, giving the feeling that others do the dirty work). It doesn't feel like Bond spent more than the minutes on screen on set at the story's setting. This is at its worst in YOLT, because Bond is mostly in the same country but it feels like setting changes often. All three Gilbert efforts have the disjointed feel that comes with most the plot-driving elements done by others off-screen and Bond continually following up.

    I suppose, to wrap it all up I believe that Gilbert's direction doesn't take much of plot into consideration and the fast pace is because the plot falls thin between action sequences

    I haven't seen this perspective expressed before always great to have fresh ideas about the films. :-bd

    Having said that, I'm not sure what Gilbert could've done as a director about Bond getting most of his information from other people, that really does seem like a script problem. On the whole, I like the fact that bond films zip around a lot, it gives a feeling of breathlessness, and if Bond is supposed to be a top super spy we SHOULD find it a little difficult keeping up with him. But I'd still say that Gilbert gives the locations the correct time to breathe, I feel like I get properly immersed in Egypt in TSWLM, or Rio in MR.

    It's a script problem. They didn't use Fleming's novels.

    I suppose potentially it is a script problem: but on the surface I can see similar things bubbling in TMWTGG (Bond visits MI6 HQ 3-5 times in the film to get the plot driven), but there's a stronger feeling of consistency in the setting, and Bond feels more autonomous than the travel somewhere, get outside confirmation, keep travelling.

    All the points raised up are perfectly logical and I feel I've done a bad job of explaining what I mean. But anyway, Bond 26 I think should be a tense, espionage based adventure, with Bond mostly on his own, rather than a grandiose spectacle.
  • Posts: 6,677
    Bond 26 I think should be a tense, espionage based adventure, with Bond mostly on his own, rather than a grandiose spectacle.

    I’d love that. And maybe the grandiose spectacle could be left for the end of the third act, with a proper slow build up to it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 29 Posts: 8,087
    I think the problem is everyone is trying to think outside the box, expecting EON to pull another Craig, when if the past has taught us anything it's that EON don't work in a predictable pattern, they adapt. ATJ might well be exactly what they are looking for this time, and the rumours are on the money, but because we think EON are looking for the next Craig not the next Bond, if refuse to accept it. Either way, there's about as much evidence pointing to ATJ being Bond as there is to Villeneuve directing, and we have no trouble accepting the latter as a real possibility.
  • edited March 29 Posts: 6,677
    I, for one, don’t think they’re looking for the next Craig, as that would be offensive towards Craig himself. Most here don’t want ATJ for his voice and attitude and are adamant that those are their reasons for disliking him. Had the guy a deeper voice and less of a smug thing going on, and most would be cheering for him, whilst knowing, just the same, that the rumours are unfounded. @peter has, meanwhile, shown us that Villeneuve has good chances for being chosen, and there are some big clues coming from the horses mouth in that regard. I do understand your point, @Mendes4Lyfe. And I don’t actually disagree. But it’s all a bit murky nowadays. No real news. Just reactions and opinions. And well, as you put it, expectations. Many of those.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited March 29 Posts: 23,547
    I think the problem is everyone is trying to think outside the box, expecting EON to pull another Craig, when if the past has taught us anything it's that EON don't work in a predictable pattern, they adapt. ATJ might well be exactly what they are looking for this time, and the rumours are on the money, but because we think EON are looking for the next Craig not the next Bond, if refuse to accept it. Either way, there's about as much evidence pointing to ATJ being Bond as there is to Villeneuve directing, and we have no trouble accepting the latter as a real possibility.

    I do have trouble accepting that as a real possibility until I hear it from a reliable source. What do we know? That he has several projects lined up, one of which he's a little mysterious about. And that set some here on the path of OMG HE'S DOING BOND! Wait, what? A big-name director cannot wink-wink without us immediately thinking he's going to do a Bond film? Educational systems really are failing us...
  • edited March 29 Posts: 2,897
    007HallY wrote: »
    Lewis Gilbert's films seem paced too fast. YOLT jumps about from tangent tangent and Moonraker also has the feeling of rotating settings. TSWLM has elements of this: Bond to Hosein to Fekkesh to Kalba. Similar to the lines of Aki-Dikko-assassin-Tiger in YOLT, and Drax-Venice-Rio-Amazon jumping in Moonraker.
    None of these characters and lines really have room to breathe: feels as if they exist just to go down the next step of the pipeline. In this film, stuff happens, and one of the many consequences just happens to be important, so let's go to where this points and etc. A more concise, more focused directorial style I think is better for Bond 26

    I mean, that's essentially plot to be fair.

    But I get what you're saying. I know a criticism of TSWLM's first act is that Bond goes from random person to random person, most of whom get killed, and one of whom - Hosein - may as well have been written out. Not unfair. It's more a script issue if anything, but I do like how the fast pace gives the feel of Bond having to scramble to achieve his mission, with things constantly changing and him having to face different obstacles. If anything I'd like them to lean into that idea for a future film as it could be interesting.

    What I guess I'm trying to say is that Gilbert's direction doesn't give us comfort in setting or in character much of the time. We move from setting to setting drastically with little reason (normally because of some exposition fed by a side character, giving the feeling that others do the dirty work). It doesn't feel like Bond spent more than the minutes on screen on set at the story's setting. This is at its worst in YOLT, because Bond is mostly in the same country but it feels like setting changes often. All three Gilbert efforts have the disjointed feel that comes with most the plot-driving elements done by others off-screen and Bond continually following up.

    I suppose, to wrap it all up I believe that Gilbert's direction doesn't take much of plot into consideration and the fast pace is because the plot falls thin between action sequences

    Fair enough, it’s a legit criticism that not everyone likes. Again, I quite like the fast pace and the idea of Bond having to quickly change plans and be thrown off course. And we do get some great pauses to take in the Egyptian and Japanese scenery, and what happens itself is very engaging, so I personally think they’re quite well directed.

    The flow of that section of TSWLM feels in particular, to my mind, quite modern and almost like a video game in some ways. It feels more akin to a modern Bond film (at least from the Brosnan era onwards) where there can be more quick hopping from situation to situation. Maybe Gilbert’s films were ahead of their time in a sense.
  • Posts: 727
    Can the broccoli’s now resist Sir Christopher Nolan?
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,547
    Can the broccoli’s now resist Sir Christopher Nolan?

    They've resisted many other big names in the past, so why not now?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,501
    I think the problem is everyone is trying to think outside the box, expecting EON to pull another Craig, when if the past has taught us anything it's that EON don't work in a predictable pattern, they adapt. ATJ might well be exactly what they are looking for this time, and the rumours are on the money, but because we think EON are looking for the next Craig not the next Bond, if refuse to accept it. Either way, there's about as much evidence pointing to ATJ being Bond as there is to Villeneuve directing, and we have no trouble accepting the latter as a real possibility.

    I don’t think I’ve heard anyone on this site, or anywhere else, talking about EoN pulling Craig 2.0. Or even wanting that??

    Fan of Craig, or not, I don’t think any serious fan wants to see a Craig 2.0– whatever that is. I AM a big fan of Craig, and I don’t want to see whatever it is you’re assuming we want, or assuming we think that that’s what EoN is thinking, 😂!!

    We want to see a new actor bring his own interpretation….

    As for Villeneuve, we know that he’s ACTUALLY had a meeting with EoN (after Boyle left), and he actually HAS spoken about his desire to direct Bond, @Mendes4Lyfe .

    So comparing The Sun’s breaking news with the idea that Villeneuve could be the next director, is comparing apples to oranges, Mendes.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,087
    Univex wrote: »
    I, for one, don’t think they’re looking for the next Craig, as that would be offensive towards Craig himself. Most here don’t want ATJ for his voice and attitude and are adamant that those are their reasons for disliking him. Had the guy a deeper voice and less of a smug thing going on, and most would be cheering for him, whilst knowing, just the same, that the rumours are unfounded. @peter has, meanwhile, shown us that Villeneuve has good chances for being chosen, and there are some big clues coming from the horses mouth in that regard. I do understand your point, @Mendes4Lyfe. And I don’t actually disagree. But it’s all a bit murky nowadays. No real news. Just reactions and opinions. And well, as you put it, expectations. Many of those.

    This is the first I'm hearing that ATJ is considered smug, I'll have to look out for that. Can't say that has ever struck me before. The voice thing I've heard about, but again, never really jumped out at me as being a big issue, personally.

    It just seems curious that we're willing to accept "clues" on the one hand like its inside baseball of what's happening behind the scenes, but then when it comes to ATJ we need to have confirmation from specific publications, and even then only specific journalists working for said publications before we can treat them as substantial and worth taking seriously.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,501
    Univex wrote: »
    I, for one, don’t think they’re looking for the next Craig, as that would be offensive towards Craig himself. Most here don’t want ATJ for his voice and attitude and are adamant that those are their reasons for disliking him. Had the guy a deeper voice and less of a smug thing going on, and most would be cheering for him, whilst knowing, just the same, that the rumours are unfounded. @peter has, meanwhile, shown us that Villeneuve has good chances for being chosen, and there are some big clues coming from the horses mouth in that regard. I do understand your point, @Mendes4Lyfe. And I don’t actually disagree. But it’s all a bit murky nowadays. No real news. Just reactions and opinions. And well, as you put it, expectations. Many of those.

    This is the first I'm hearing that ATJ is considered smug, I'll have to look out for that. Can't say that has ever struck me before. The voice thing I've heard about, but again, never really jumped out at me as being a big issue, personally.

    It just seems curious that we're willing to accept "clues" on the one hand like its inside baseball of what's happening behind the scenes, but then when it comes to ATJ we need to have confirmation from specific publications, and even then only specific journalists working for said publications before we can treat them as substantial and worth taking seriously.

    @Mendes4Lyfe … we are all asking for confirmation, big man. On all of it.

    And, like @DEKE_RIVERS , if you want to get your news (just general news, nothing film related), from something like The Sun, instead of say, media and columnists whose bread and butter it is to actually provide REAL NEWS, then you go ahead, brother! Enjoy the news about Princess Catherine “missing”, about her husband having an affair, about body doubles (while she was really readying herself to make her own announcement about her cancer diagnosis), then have at it!!

    If you want to believe The Sun that the new Bond film will have two actors playing Bond (one old, one young), enjoy! Or The Sun’s reporting that he was supposed to sign last week, eat it up, man!! 😂 😂 😂

  • edited March 29 Posts: 6,677
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I’ll tell you this, my friend, if ATJ is Bond in a Villeneuve film, I’ll be a happy fan. That being said, I still believe one rumour to be false, and the other, which actually is not a rumour but pure fan conjecture, to be credible, but only to the point that we may very well discuss both as possibilities, not realities.
Sign In or Register to comment.