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
I mean, the word "origin" is already referring to another reboot if I'm not mistaken. I am actually very much against the idea of a "007 extended cinematic universe", but my worries are furthermore enhanced by the Dynamite Comic Book series. We all know that this 'comic book universe' is already extended by separate Moneypenny and Felix Leiter comic book series. The new comic book series could give EON Productions plentiful source material and it could enlighten pre-production work for EON, since they only have to adapt these comic books.
The film business is dimensions, galaxies and outer spaces beyond larger than the comic book and literature industry. They won't take risks by injecting characters like Tanner or Moneypenny or Q or Leiter into getting their own flicks. These characters aren't developed to be protagonists and even thinking about giving them their own movies will be a business suicide. A spin-off in "the Bond film universe" is out of the question. Won't happen and will never happen. It works in the comics industry. It doesn't in the film industry unless you have a solid protagonist colorful enough that isn't Bond. And right now, there isn't one.
If that was the case, Marvel would have given Pepper Potts (Gwenyth Paltrow) her own movie, labeling it as an Iron Man spin-off. Or perhaps giving Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) a chance to "shine" on her own without needing Peter Parker to be present in the film. See where I'm going?
But http://origin.007.com redirects to the official Bond site.
You're all readin way too much into this
The URL .origin read-only property returns a USVString containing the Unicode serialization of the origin of the represented URL, that is:
- for URL using the http or https, the scheme followed by '://', followed by the domain, followed by ':', followed by the port (the default port, 80 and 443 respectively, if explicitely specified);
- for URL using file: scheme, the value is browser dependant;
- for URL using the blob: scheme, the origin of the URL following blob:. E.g "blob:https://mozilla.org"; will have "https://mozilla.org".
Thats a crying shame.
I'd pay good money to watch a film where Tanner is strapped to the gurney in Utah State Penitentiary.
Once again with that puzzled and 'have I just shit myself ?' expression,of course.
Maybe they'll make a ten minute soap opera about how Tanner got into where he is, in the first place, and release it as a web movie sponsored by YouTube while promoting the said untitled B25.
Well naturally. People say Roger was limited but at least he had left eyebrow/right eyebrow. All Rory's got in his repertoire is his 'Oops followed through again' look.
Ben Wishaw in I, Q.
That was actually the final theatrical poster they released for the film.
A lot of people seemed to enjoy that bit, surprised they didn't pull a Tourjansky and have them return in another London scene in SP.
I think they tried to duplicate their success with the oblivious opera-loving driver in SP, but he didn't do it for me.