MGM says the next Bond within 3 years

1246713

Comments

  • Posts: 1,548
    Just out of curiosity does anyone personally know of any idiot who subscribed to the Craig IsNot Bond website all those years ago? Just wondered if these people still existed any more to make fun of!
  • Posts: 498
    LeChiffre wrote:
    Just out of curiosity does anyone personally know of any idiot who subscribed to the Craig IsNot Bond website all those years ago? Just wondered if these people still existed any more to make fun of!

    Believe me after Casino Royale , Craig SILENCED the critics!
    I bet there's hardly anyone on it.


  • Posts: 498
    I just checked out their forums,
    Interesting :P

    http://classicbond.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3487
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Skyfail wrote:
    I just checked out their forums,
    Interesting :P

    http://classicbond.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3487

    Believe it or not it was the first time I went there 8-} I read a few comments, what a sad bunch of people.
  • Posts: 9,766
    Any thoughts on when we will know the director
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Risico007 wrote:
    Any thoughts on when we will know the director

    I bet, from the comment that they are announcing the name soon, that they are already negotiating with someone. I think as soon as they close the deal we will know something, if I'd have to make a guess I would say until the end of April.
  • Posts: 498
    Sandy wrote:
    Skyfail wrote:
    I just checked out their forums,
    Interesting :P

    http://classicbond.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3487

    Believe it or not it was the first time I went there 8-} I read a few comments, what a sad bunch of people.

    Haha ,
    Honestly I guess we all are entitled to our own ,
    I mean I am not in a particular good position right now since they moved from what I liked which were Craig's first two to Skyfall.

    They on the other hand have been with out a movie of their taste for 11 years !

    Everyone would like to be in your position right now
  • Posts: 498
    Risico007 wrote:
    Any thoughts on when we will know the director

    I think before Mid-summer for sure .
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Sandy wrote:
    Skyfail wrote:
    I just checked out their forums,
    Interesting :P


    Believe it or not it was the first time I went there 8-} I read a few comments, what a sad bunch of people.

    Sad is putting it mildly Sandy. Pathetic is much better. Some of these people are saying they would actually throw drinks, etc at Barb and/or Mike. Their opinions there are far from interesting, unless you are interested in reading completely immature comments from a bunch of mental midgets whose individual IQ's likely don't exceed their shoe size.

    Or as Sam Ash from Burn Notice would say, "Bunch of whiny little bitches" :)
    Them calling themselves Bond fans is the biggest joke I've ever heard.

  • Posts: 7,653
    Shardlake wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    If that is right DC would be 51 years old if he were to serve out his two movie contract, If I take into account that each movie will take 3 years.

    And I thought he looked old in SF.

    The difference is unlike Moore he wouldn't need an army of stuntmen to complete the film.

    Craig's detractors will always jump on this one, he has a weathered face granted but he should still be able to convince as Bond when it comes to physicality, something come Rog's last 2 films certainly he couldn't.

    With Roger Moore it is a valid critism so why can it not be with Daniel Craig??

    Will he be able to be so physical able in 6 years time??

    The great difference between Moore & Craig is that Moore always has had style, class and a wicked sense of humor. And very important he has always remained a gentleman on and off the set.

    But then again this is not about Roger Moore but Craigs age. And while somebody said he was supposed to look older due to the storyline, with the new M this storyline will continue not jump back so he will look older without a doubt. As long as they keep away from the Gollum shot in the backlighted return of JB in M's appartment.
  • Posts: 2,081
    SaintMark wrote:

    The great difference between Moore & Craig is that Moore always has had style, class and a wicked sense of humor. And very important he has always remained a gentleman on and off the set.

    Oh really? 8-|
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Tuulia wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:

    The great difference between Moore & Craig is that Moore always has had style, class and a wicked sense of humor. And very important he has always remained a gentleman on and off the set.

    Oh really? 8-|

    How isn't Craig a gentleman, @SaintMark?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited March 2013 Posts: 13,350
    The swearing, he's got mention the swearing...

    It's also worth pointing out 51 is not 57.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    SaintMark wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    If that is right DC would be 51 years old if he were to serve out his two movie contract, If I take into account that each movie will take 3 years.

    And I thought he looked old in SF.

    The difference is unlike Moore he wouldn't need an army of stuntmen to complete the film.

    Craig's detractors will always jump on this one, he has a weathered face granted but he should still be able to convince as Bond when it comes to physicality, something come Rog's last 2 films certainly he couldn't.

    With Roger Moore it is a valid critism so why can it not be with Daniel Craig??

    Will he be able to be so physical able in 6 years time??

    The great difference between Moore & Craig is that Moore always has had style, class and a wicked sense of humor. And very important he has always remained a gentleman on and off the set.

    But then again this is not about Roger Moore but Craigs age. And while somebody said he was supposed to look older due to the storyline, with the new M this storyline will continue not jump back so he will look older without a doubt. As long as they keep away from the Gollum shot in the backlighted return of JB in M's appartment.

    Craig is a very good ambassador for the series, yes he has a bit of a potty mouth but it could be in much worse hands, he's reinvigorated series and seems 100% behind it, Rog is a nice bloke but he outlasted himself. I'm sure Craig will know long before he's physically incapable to convince in the role unlike poor old Rog, did the stuntman get a cut of his salary for OP & VTAK?
  • Posts: 7,653
    Tuulia wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:

    The great difference between Moore & Craig is that Moore always has had style, class and a wicked sense of humor. And very important he has always remained a gentleman on and off the set.

    Oh really? 8-|

    How isn't Craig a gentleman, @SaintMark?

    Last weeks tantrum in NY when some poor smuck photographed him with Rachel and it took her diplomatic skills to stop this scene.

    Mr Craig does seem to have problems that people will see him as a star and as such will approach him or photograph him. If he cannot handle that I am sure Connery knows a nice estate where he can hide from the world.

    ;)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    SaintMark wrote:
    Tuulia wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:

    The great difference between Moore & Craig is that Moore always has had style, class and a wicked sense of humor. And very important he has always remained a gentleman on and off the set.

    Oh really? 8-|

    How isn't Craig a gentleman, @SaintMark?

    Last weeks tantrum in NY when some poor smuck photographed him with Rachel and it took her diplomatic skills to stop this scene.

    Mr Craig does seem to have problems that people will see him as a star and as such will approach him or photograph him. If he cannot handle that I am sure Connery knows a nice estate where he can hide from the world.

    ;)

    Oh, please. That paparazzi troll followed Dan and Rachel all around the store while they simply minding their own business and doing their grocery shopping. I fully understand and stand by Dan taking the man's phone, and would have acted the same way in that situation. If that paparazzi couldn't understand that people, even world-wide stars deserve their privacy he wouldn't have been told to stop and action like that wouldn't have been taken. It shouldn't be hard to understand that everyone, no matter their fame or yearly income deserve their privacy, though I don't expect prats who get paid to snap photos of famous people getting along with their private lives to understand that.
  • Posts: 1,407
    Craig is usually a very friendly person but he does care about his privacy. I'm sure we're not hearing the whole story as I can't imagine Craig thinking somebody photographing him in a public place is "rude" when him and his wife are as big of stars as they are.

    Craig is a GREAT ambassador for Bond simply because he cares about the character and the franchise. I wouldn't know about his personal behavior outside of public appearances but for me it doesn't matter.

    Although it IS hard to beat Roger as a couple of good friends of mine ran into Roger at a Chicago restaurant and when they went up to ask for an autograph, he actually JOINED them at their table as they are big Bond fans. So I'm sure Craig wouldn't do that but I don't think ANYBODY today would do that
  • Posts: 7,653
    With is job comes a responsibilty, some less satisfying side-effects of people threating him as a star and in this day and age it means getting photographed by any person with a smartphone.

    Be flipping gracefull when that happens at a public place if you cannot you should look for another job that offers you more privacy. The job of playing 007 does mean you get a lot of attention as the 1st actor to play him can tell you.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited March 2013 Posts: 28,694
    SaintMark wrote:
    With is job comes a responsibilty, some less satisfying side-effects of people threating him as a star and in this day and age it means getting photographed by any person with a smartphone.

    Be flipping gracefull when that happens at a public place if you cannot you should look for another job that offers you more privacy. The job of playing 007 does mean you get a lot of attention as the 1st actor to play him can tell you.

    Again, just because you are famous doesn't mean you lose your privilege of privacy. You are a human being first, not a star. Like I said, I don't expect people who get paid to snap photos of celebrities out and about to understand that. They lose any manners or respect for others they had (if they ever had any to begin with) the minute they took the job and got handed a camera.
  • Posts: 7,653
    SaintMark wrote:
    With is job comes a responsibilty, some less satisfying side-effects of people threating him as a star and in this day and age it means getting photographed by any person with a smartphone.

    Be flipping gracefull when that happens at a public place if you cannot you should look for another job that offers you more privacy. The job of playing 007 does mean you get a lot of attention as the 1st actor to play him can tell you.

    Again, just because you are famous doesn't mean you lose your privilege of privacy. You are a human being first, not a star. Like I said, I don't expect people who get paid to snap photos of celebrities out and about to understand that. They lose any manners or respect for others they had (if they ever had any to begin with) the minute they took the job and got handed a camera.

    This was a fan taking a picture not a papparazzi. They probably took photo's of DC losing his cool which is far more newsworthy.

    He gets payed a shedload of money, smile be gracious and do not explode. People will respond similar to that.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Again, whether it is a fan or not, that doesn't mean his privacy goes out the window. No sense in posting further unless I want to practice repeating myself again and again.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Again, whether it is a fan or not, that doesn't mean his privacy goes out the window. No sense in posting further unless I want to practice repeating myself again and again.

    Yes indeed, lets agree to not agree.

    However I cannot recall Roger Moore ever reacting like that in public, it must be his charm.

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited March 2013 Posts: 13,350
    I'd say it's more likely such an event wasn't reported even if it did happen.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Samuel001 wrote:
    I'd say it's more likely such an event wasn't reported even if it did happen.

    I would say that it is all about how to handle yourself in public. In his writings Moore always stated that it was part of the job so better be gracefull about it in public.

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited March 2013 Posts: 13,350
    Maybe he had an off day? He's only human. Give him a break. It happens to the best of us.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Maybe he had an off day? He's only human. Give him a break. It happens to the best of us.

    I do recall previous discussions on this kind of behaviour. So it does happen more often, and I do give him a break. But it does not make him a gentleman when compared to Sir Roger Moore, that was all I originaly stated.

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited March 2013 Posts: 13,350
    It is Roger Moore. Any actor would come off looking less compared to him. ;)
  • Posts: 7,653
    Samuel001 wrote:
    It is Roger Moore. Any actor would come off looking less compared to him. ;)

    the truth ;)

  • Posts: 2,081
    Is there any proof that the story discussed above even took place the way it was reported? I assume not. The guy gets photographed all the bloody time anyway, so if that particular story is even true (most likely exaggerated - otherwise it wouldn't be a "story"), maybe it was a worse than normal case one way or another. People can get very rude with their demands for bits and pieces (autographs, pics), or ignorance of personal space and any privacy, and I don't think that's excusable in any way.
    There is proof of Mr Craig being remarkably polite, calm, and reasonable with a jerk who kept filming him and his then girlfriend on beach some years ago. Also, the guy gets interrupted when having dinner with his wife on his birthday by someone asking for an autograph (it's those people who have no manners), and he still signs, and doesn't bite anybody's head off.
    Picking one minor incident - of which there is not even any proof of (as far as I know) - to show he's not a gentleman is rather lame. ;) A stalker or a pap (well that's often the same thing) wouldn't merit much respect anyway, and an actual fan with any manners wouldn't just follow them around, or snap away from close quarters without permission - why would a fan do that, it's idiotic and rude.
    Since when does being a gentleman mean one has to tolerate disrespect from people who behave nothing like gentlemen themselves?
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I know media intrusion has been around for a long time but the level has intensified so much more than Rog would have had to dealt with. Its not like anyone is going to pap Moore now as he's not news at the same level but the new Bond with his newish Bride a star in her own right.

    If the desire for a 80 + Rog being papped in the same way suddenly became a target for the tabs in Rog I think you might see a different side to his usually gentleman manner, I guess we'll never know but Craig is Bond in far more intrusive times than any other 007.
Sign In or Register to comment.