No Time to Die production thread

14654664684704711208

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    WhyBond wrote: »
    WhyBond wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    There are some good things about Spectre but overall it's an average Bond movie at best.

    As for Skyfall, I think it's a good film. I wonder why people don't like this movie. It isn't without a few flaws but nor are any of the Bond films.

    The problem with SkyFall is the villain. I hated that the villain had "Mommy" issues. It took away from his menace that he wanted to kill M so bad. It would been better if he targeted all of MI 6 instead of trying to settle the score over how his "Mommy" abandoned him.

    Then you'd be taking one of the most interesting aspects of his character away and supplanting it with something more generic. SF is about the bad decisions M has made that's coming back to haunt her, and how it impacts her agents.
    Aww boo boo. Silvia knew the risks when he signed up to fight for Queen and Country. He knew he was expendable and that was his job. At the end when M is bleeding to death he caresses her doesn't seem like the guy hell bent on killing her in the first place. Javier is a great actor and it was a shame they wrote his character as a weak grown man with Mommy issues.

    Would you mind discussing like an adult? You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Silva. M's decision isn't what made him deranged. The guy was already so before she made the decision to give him up. She brought up that he was getting out of control and figured handing him over would be a swift way of tidying things up, unaware of the ramifications that would come about should a man like Silva live through and escape.
  • WhyBondWhyBond USA
    Posts: 66
    WhyBond wrote: »
    WhyBond wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    There are some good things about Spectre but overall it's an average Bond movie at best.

    As for Skyfall, I think it's a good film. I wonder why people don't like this movie. It isn't without a few flaws but nor are any of the Bond films.

    The problem with SkyFall is the villain. I hated that the villain had "Mommy" issues. It took away from his menace that he wanted to kill M so bad. It would been better if he targeted all of MI 6 instead of trying to settle the score over how his "Mommy" abandoned him.

    Then you'd be taking one of the most interesting aspects of his character away and supplanting it with something more generic. SF is about the bad decisions M has made that's coming back to haunt her, and how it impacts her agents.
    Aww boo boo. Silvia knew the risks when he signed up to fight for Queen and Country. He knew he was expendable and that was his job. At the end when M is bleeding to death he caresses her doesn't seem like the guy hell bent on killing her in the first place. Javier is a great actor and it was a shame they wrote his character as a weak grown man with Mommy issues.

    Would you mind discussing like an adult? You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Silva. M's decision isn't what made him deranged. The guy was already so before she made the decision to give him up. She brought up that he was getting out of control and figured handing him over would be a swift way of tidying things up, unaware of the ramifications that would come about should a man like Silva live through and escape.

    What is an adult conversation? The boo boo was not directed at a forum member but rather over Raul's feelings towards M. I gave my opinions why the characterisation of Raul dragged SkyFall down considerably.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    WhyBond wrote: »
    WhyBond wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    There are some good things about Spectre but overall it's an average Bond movie at best.

    As for Skyfall, I think it's a good film. I wonder why people don't like this movie. It isn't without a few flaws but nor are any of the Bond films.

    The problem with SkyFall is the villain. I hated that the villain had "Mommy" issues. It took away from his menace that he wanted to kill M so bad. It would been better if he targeted all of MI 6 instead of trying to settle the score over how his "Mommy" abandoned him.

    Then you'd be taking one of the most interesting aspects of his character away and supplanting it with something more generic. SF is about the bad decisions M has made that's coming back to haunt her, and how it impacts her agents.
    Aww boo boo. Silvia knew the risks when he signed up to fight for Queen and Country. He knew he was expendable and that was his job. At the end when M is bleeding to death he caresses her doesn't seem like the guy hell bent on killing her in the first place. Javier is a great actor and it was a shame they wrote his character as a weak grown man with Mommy issues.

    This isn't the thread for this. But as Moneypenny told Bond: "You should do your homework."

    Silva was not interested in simply killing M. He wanted "style points." And he wanted to do it on her turf, not his. He said, "All that running around, so dull, so dull." But he knew that that was what he was going to have to do. While he was a "point and click" villain, and could have killed M in the explosion, he had to wage this battle on the ground. That was why the hard drive was stolen. He didn't actually have to do that: he could have hacked his way into that info. This was Silva's sickness: all of that technology does nothing for the human soul if the kill is personal. Q's meeting with Bond, in the National Gallery, reflects that sentiment.

    Make no mistake, SF was the most deeply psychological Bond ever. To say that Silva had "Mommy Issues" is to miss the point entirely.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Correct, it wasn't just enough to have M killed, it was supposed to be a very personal move by him, which is partly why when he sees her wound in the chapel he becomes upset because she's mortally wounded by means other than him personally. Also consider: When he gets his first chance at the inquiry, for a brief moment he hesitates in shooting her, and by the time he does fire a shot someone had already jumped onto the line of fire. It makes me wonder, if Bond had not thrown the knife at Silva, would he have really pulled the trigger at himself and M? She was going to die of her wound no matter what, but what about Silva? For me it could go either way, but it really adds something to his character, and that Bond ultimately takes that decision away from him by killing him the old fashioned way. So even though M died, Silva still "lost", which is a nuance I really appreciate from SKYFALL.

    But as TripAces said, this really isn't the thread for that. Time to look forward to the next film.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited November 2019 Posts: 7,526
    Do we need a Production Thread as well as a Production Diary? Maybe make this the NTTD: Spoilers Thread, and the other one NTTD: Production Diary?
    Awful lot of work for someone here to check the news, to have to go into two identically-purposed threads ;)
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018
    Bloody hell!! Stop babbling about SF, SP, etc, in this thread!!!

    We have just discovered a pic taken at the RAF-base with the Aston Martin DBS Superleggera in the background. Debate that mystery instead.

  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited November 2019 Posts: 4,554
    Contraband wrote: »
    Bloody hell!! Stop babbling about SF, SP, etc, in this thread!!!

    We have just discovered a pic taken at the RAF-base with the Aston Martin DBS Superleggera in the background. Debate that mystery instead.

    Yes. Thank you. The SF issues should always be taken here: https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/9169/did-i-overcomplicate-the-plot-skyfall-appreciation-discussion#latest
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Nice to see the new photos.
    Also, here is this bit from interview with Dan:
  • edited November 2019 Posts: 5,767
    Denbigh wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Poor Dan Romer. Someone created this thread dedicated specifically to him, and now it´s misused to discuss everything but Dan Romer :-(.
    Wrong page @boldfinger Also why has this suddenly become a SF and SP review page? I thought this was about NTTD?
    Oh, haha, you got me there, @Denbigh, I got confused myself :-)).



    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    No time to die looks as like it will come in at 150-175 mil

    ?????

    The budget will likely be 150-175

    If it ends up in the 150-175M range, it would be the lowest budget a Bond film’s had since CR.

    Considering the amount of time wasted with Danny Boyle - writing scripts, location scouting, building sets - before ditching it and working with CJF. Then the sheer volume of locations used for NTTD and Craig's injury...........you're looking in excess of $200 million.

    It's kinda the standard in making these international action films. Also most studios lie with how much they spend on a film. If they say $200m it usually means $30 to $50 million more than that. Plus, marketing budgets are usually close to the size of production budgets. So NTTD is costing Universal/MGM at least $500-600 million.
    That could explain why Eon let´s us do the marketing ;-).
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018
    Don't forget Craigs salary, 30+ million dollars. He made 27 from doing Spectre

  • Posts: 1,680
    When people get desperate, the knives come out
  • On a separate note, I've found that the tabloids picking who should be the next Bond haven't been as prevalent as it was for SP. There is definitely some speculation, but it isn't as annoying as it has been in the past, which is odd considering this is meant to be Craig's last.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited November 2019 Posts: 5,869
    2Wint2Kidd wrote: »
    On a separate note, I've found that the tabloids picking who should be the next Bond haven't been as prevalent as it was for SP. There is definitely some speculation, but it isn't as annoying as it has been in the past, which is odd considering this is meant to be Craig's last.
    I think my honest opinion of that is down to the media really spreading the pointless speculation and negativity across the whole production. They seem to be more concerned about talking about what the current film is doing "wrong" and trying to push more ridiculous rumours about the film, and I personally believe it got worse after the whole unfortunate situation with people's reaction to Lashana Lynch. Another way the media managed to trigger a lot of people with their misleading articles.

    To me it kind of was the catalyst for this film to come under more fire. There was even an article that said "we know too much about this film", when all we've done on this site really is have honest debates and discussions about how we know next to nothing about what's going on in this film, yet the tabloids seem to think otherwise.

    Lol sorry to bring it all up again but I think it's probably part of it. The only good thing to come out of this really is that at least they're talking about the film at hand for once, rather than "Will Tom Hiddleston or Tom Hardy play Bond?" Don't get me wrong I love Tom Hardy to hell and back, but he's never going to be Bond and the discussion is kinda getting old, at least with the repeated choices the usual articles throw at you.
  • Denbigh wrote: »
    2Wint2Kidd wrote: »
    On a separate note, I've found that the tabloids picking who should be the next Bond haven't been as prevalent as it was for SP. There is definitely some speculation, but it isn't as annoying as it has been in the past, which is odd considering this is meant to be Craig's last.
    I think my honest opinion of that is down to the media really spreading the pointless speculation and negativity across the whole production. They seem to be more concerned about talking about what the current film is doing "wrong" and trying to push more ridiculous rumours about the film, and I personally believe it got worse after the whole unfortunate situation with people's reaction to Lashana Lynch. Another way the media managed to trigger a lot of people with their misleading articles.

    To me it kind of was the catalyst for this film to come under more fire. There was even an article that said "we know too much about this film", when all we've done on this site really is have honest debates and discussions about how we know next to nothing about what's going on in this film, yet the tabloids seem to think otherwise.

    Lol sorry to bring it all up again but I think it's probably part of it. The only good thing to come out of this really is that at least they're talking about the film at hand for once, rather than "Will Tom Hiddleston or Tom Hardy play Bond?" Don't get me wrong I love Tom Hardy to hell and back, but he's never going to be Bond and the discussion is kinda getting old, at least with the repeated choices the usual articles throw at you.
    I do agree. I found it infuriating when SP was filming that there was all sorts of speculation on who the next Bond will be when we still have Daniel Craig. But yes, as long as there is some negative angle then Bond will always get roasted. Fingers crossed it's all smooth sailing from here on out until the film is released, which is where anything can happen in terms of negativity.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Denbigh wrote: »
    2Wint2Kidd wrote: »
    On a separate note, I've found that the tabloids picking who should be the next Bond haven't been as prevalent as it was for SP. There is definitely some speculation, but it isn't as annoying as it has been in the past, which is odd considering this is meant to be Craig's last.
    I think my honest opinion of that is down to the media really spreading the pointless speculation and negativity across the whole production. They seem to be more concerned about talking about what the current film is doing "wrong" and trying to push more ridiculous rumours about the film, and I personally believe it got worse after the whole unfortunate situation with people's reaction to Lashana Lynch. Another way the media managed to trigger a lot of people with their misleading articles.

    To me it kind of was the catalyst for this film to come under more fire. There was even an article that said "we know too much about this film", when all we've done on this site really is have honest debates and discussions about how we know next to nothing about what's going on in this film, yet the tabloids seem to think otherwise.
    What are you talking about. It is the most expectable thing that tabloids jump on the notion of a female 007, but the only negative stuff I know of I know from these discussions. I am not aware that the public outside these pages reacted much to the news of Lashana Lynch. Was there anything else I don´t know of?

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,544
    I'm with @boldfinger on this. I've never come across anything negative regarding Lashana. The way I see it, audiences neither scrutinize over such things the way we do nor are people surprised that we're going to play around a bit with gender, colour and whatnot. It's the way things are done nowadays, it's prevalent everywhere and in everything, but most of all, it's generally accepted. I felt that people's reaction to Lashana Lynch ranged from "okay' to "who is she? -- oh, the other actress in Captain Marvel!" to "could be interesting." I didn't read outrage or fury anywhere; not like when Disney announced a dark-skinned Ariel. ;-)
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    On Reddit the female 007 was heavily criticised and some YouTube video complained too
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,185
    Youtube was full of outrage videos, people complaining that EoN turned James Bond "woke", and many people saying that they will boycott the film.

    Whether that translates to ticket sales is anybody's guess and will heavily depend on EoN's marketing campaign that hasn't even started yet.

    Similar thing happend to Terminator Dark Fate, a film that was heavily scrutinized by outrage culuture, for being woke and pushing female characters to the forefront, month before release, and now we can say for certain that the film tanked at the BO. But the film itself was trully mediocre, and the script leaked month in advance, so you can't say for sure what exactly lead to it's demise. But the negative publicity didn't help for sure.

    In my personal opinion they should focus the marketing fully on Daniel, which is really a no brainer. It's his film and that's about it.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited November 2019 Posts: 3,497
    Getafix wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    There are some good things about Spectre but overall it's an average Bond movie at best.

    As for Skyfall, I think it's a good film. I wonder why people don't like this movie. It isn't without a few flaws but nor are any of the Bond films.

    I just feel SF is a bit of a downer movie. I personally prefer SP. But at the end of the day I am not a big Mendes fan full stop. I just don't particularly like his directing style although I've enjoyed a couple of his other films.

    Very happy that Cary is directing this one. I saw Sin Nombre at the cinema years ago and thought it was good but didn't really register the director's name. Then I watched True Detectives Series 1 and loved it but again didn't register his name. It wasn't until he was chosen for NTTD that I actually linked all these things I'd watched and mostly really enjoyed to CJF. I like the fact he is a writer as well and clearly loves well structured narratoves/plots. We haven't had that in a Bond film for a long time.

    I'm looking forward to some genuine intrigue, suspense and thrills. Mendes gave us an approximation of those things with his broad brush, impressionistic approach, but I think CJF is going to give us the real thing. A well told, gripping and suspenseful Bond film.

    PWB's involvement bodes well too. Would be happy to see her pen a future Bond film solo. Perhaps a female voice on the writing team is something we've been missing for too long.

    Would love to see Romer replaced with another composer and then everything would seem to be falling into place.

    We know.

    @Walecs too true, Sopranos was brilliant. Almost 7 years since Jim left us. :(
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,544
    Walecs wrote: »
    On Reddit the female 007 was heavily criticised and some YouTube video complained too

    Interesting. It's not like "Reddit" or "YouTube" represent the ticket-buying masses, of course, but that's certainly interesting. And as for YouTube, for every video telling us how awesome THE MATRIX is, there's also a video explaining "everything that's wrong with" THE MATRIX. Sometimes I think it's merely action-reaction, rather than legitimate opinions being posted by people who mean well. If ten videos will tell you that Lashana's involvement is great, another ten will soon bash her involvement. I don't know what to think of these videos. More than half the time, people's arguments are either non-existent or ridiculous anyways. Again, I doubt the most general of audiences out there, people who know of this James Bond but who couldn't tell you which film had which actor in it, care one way or the other.
  • NickThunderballsNickThunderballs Australia
    Posts: 133
    <iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https://www.facebook.com/JamesBond007AUS/videos/2439956729597173/&amp;show_text=0&amp;width=476&quot; width="476" height="476" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe>

    So far we've gotten one of these videos for SP and now SF. Could it be that they're doing a throwback sort of countdown so that after a CR one comes out, they release the NTTD trailer???
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018
    <iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https://www.facebook.com/JamesBond007AUS/videos/2439956729597173/&amp;show_text=0&amp;width=476&quot; width="476" height="476" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe>

    So far we've gotten one of these videos for SP and now SF. Could it be that they're doing a throwback sort of countdown so that after a CR one comes out, they release the NTTD trailer???

  • DeerAtTheGatesDeerAtTheGates Belgium
    edited November 2019 Posts: 524
    So far we've gotten one of these videos for SP and now SF. Could it be that they're doing a throwback sort of countdown so that after a CR one comes out, they release the NTTD trailer???

    Interesting way of thinking! I was actually quite surprised when I saw the SP video, since that's not the usual style they have for such videos. These cost more time to edit. So it might be a well-thought out plan from the studios, and not just EON's social media team fooling around.

    Time-wise, if we get one video for each week, then the NTTD trailer could drop in the last week of november, which seems to be (roughly) as predicted.

    Also interesting to note that both times the videos showcase the PTS. If we also get a QOS and CR video, chances are they'll also feature the PTS. If not that trailer, might we get a video like these featuring the NTTD PTS? Traditionally, the PTS often gets used quite heavily in the marketing.
  • DarthDimi wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    On Reddit the female 007 was heavily criticised and some YouTube video complained too

    Interesting. It's not like "Reddit" or "YouTube" represent the ticket-buying masses, of course, but that's certainly interesting. And as for YouTube, for every video telling us how awesome THE MATRIX is, there's also a video explaining "everything that's wrong with" THE MATRIX. Sometimes I think it's merely action-reaction, rather than legitimate opinions being posted by people who mean well. If ten videos will tell you that Lashana's involvement is great, another ten will soon bash her involvement. I don't know what to think of these videos. More than half the time, people's arguments are either non-existent or ridiculous anyways. Again, I doubt the most general of audiences out there, people who know of this James Bond but who couldn't tell you which film had which actor in it, care one way or the other.

    Selection bias, I'd say. The sort of people who care enough to script, film, and upload a 10-minute video complaining about gender in Star Wars or James Bond definitely do not represent the average movie-goer.

    They're more often drawn from the extremes of gushing praise or frothy outrage, but precious little in the middle.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    edited November 2019 Posts: 5,185
    octofinger wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    On Reddit the female 007 was heavily criticised and some YouTube video complained too

    Interesting. It's not like "Reddit" or "YouTube" represent the ticket-buying masses, of course, but that's certainly interesting. And as for YouTube, for every video telling us how awesome THE MATRIX is, there's also a video explaining "everything that's wrong with" THE MATRIX. Sometimes I think it's merely action-reaction, rather than legitimate opinions being posted by people who mean well. If ten videos will tell you that Lashana's involvement is great, another ten will soon bash her involvement. I don't know what to think of these videos. More than half the time, people's arguments are either non-existent or ridiculous anyways. Again, I doubt the most general of audiences out there, people who know of this James Bond but who couldn't tell you which film had which actor in it, care one way or the other.

    Selection bias, I'd say. The sort of people who care enough to script, film, and upload a 10-minute video complaining about gender in Star Wars or James Bond definitely do not represent the average movie-goer.

    They're more often drawn from the extremes of gushing praise or frothy outrage, but precious little in the middle.

    I agree, and most of them aren't even Bond fans or know anything about the franchise. I was suprised what sort of people came out of the woodwork to complain about this, since they never had anything to do with Bond before.

    But the problem in my opinion is, that all these channels and "influencers" combined can paint a negative picture of EoN as greedy and money hungry feminist-symphizers to the average person who gets his info from youtube movie channels. We even had members on here (and still do) who bought into it. It happens.

    Again, i hope it won't translate into ticket sales and since EoN haven't really started their marketing yet, and haven't really given us any clue of what sort of movie they will give us this time around, there is no need to worry atm.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    00Agent wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    On Reddit the female 007 was heavily criticised and some YouTube video complained too

    Interesting. It's not like "Reddit" or "YouTube" represent the ticket-buying masses, of course, but that's certainly interesting. And as for YouTube, for every video telling us how awesome THE MATRIX is, there's also a video explaining "everything that's wrong with" THE MATRIX. Sometimes I think it's merely action-reaction, rather than legitimate opinions being posted by people who mean well. If ten videos will tell you that Lashana's involvement is great, another ten will soon bash her involvement. I don't know what to think of these videos. More than half the time, people's arguments are either non-existent or ridiculous anyways. Again, I doubt the most general of audiences out there, people who know of this James Bond but who couldn't tell you which film had which actor in it, care one way or the other.

    Selection bias, I'd say. The sort of people who care enough to script, film, and upload a 10-minute video complaining about gender in Star Wars or James Bond definitely do not represent the average movie-goer.

    They're more often drawn from the extremes of gushing praise or frothy outrage, but precious little in the middle.

    I agree, and most of them aren't even Bond fans or know anything about the franchise.

    This is spot on. Most of the complaints I saw were from people who openly said "I don't even like Bond movies, I just think this way of hiring women in place of men for male roles is wrong"
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Walecs wrote: »
    00Agent wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    On Reddit the female 007 was heavily criticised and some YouTube video complained too

    Interesting. It's not like "Reddit" or "YouTube" represent the ticket-buying masses, of course, but that's certainly interesting. And as for YouTube, for every video telling us how awesome THE MATRIX is, there's also a video explaining "everything that's wrong with" THE MATRIX. Sometimes I think it's merely action-reaction, rather than legitimate opinions being posted by people who mean well. If ten videos will tell you that Lashana's involvement is great, another ten will soon bash her involvement. I don't know what to think of these videos. More than half the time, people's arguments are either non-existent or ridiculous anyways. Again, I doubt the most general of audiences out there, people who know of this James Bond but who couldn't tell you which film had which actor in it, care one way or the other.

    Selection bias, I'd say. The sort of people who care enough to script, film, and upload a 10-minute video complaining about gender in Star Wars or James Bond definitely do not represent the average movie-goer.

    They're more often drawn from the extremes of gushing praise or frothy outrage, but precious little in the middle.

    I agree, and most of them aren't even Bond fans or know anything about the franchise.

    This is spot on. Most of the complaints I saw were from people who openly said "I don't even like Bond movies, I just think this way of hiring women in place of men for male roles is wrong"

    News is slow again it seems.
  • Posts: 6,677
    It's been slow for quite a while now.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,869
    Well there was a huge amounts of backlash to Lashana Lynch’s role in the film. Twitter was ablaze with ridiculous comments, and like people have mentioned lots of YouTube complaining and boycotting. And yes, you could say they’re not real fans and it won’t effect the film, but the point still stands that the media fueled a raging fire, and are continuing to let it burn with stupid and ridiculous articles regarding the films casting, behind the scenes issues, and even the “heavy spoilers” we’ve received so far, which is completely not the case.

    So whether you believe it or not, or whether you believe these reactions represent a small amount of audience members or not, the point remains that the media seem to have had a lot of fun trashing on this film. Although just to add, does no-one remember how certain fans on here responded? People were saying how ugly she was, and how triggering it was, and how if she’s 007 at all I’m not gonna see this movie. You might not think they’re fans but they still have a part to play in the films success, and the media are only making it worse.
  • edited November 2019 Posts: 4,400
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Well there was a huge amounts of backlash to Lashana Lynch’s role in the film. Twitter was ablaze with ridiculous comments, and like people have mentioned lots of YouTube complaining and boycotting. And yes, you could say they’re not real fans and it won’t effect the film, but the point still stands that the media fueled a raging fire, and are continuing to let it burn with stupid and ridiculous articles regarding the films casting, behind the scenes issues, and even the “heavy spoilers” we’ve received so far, which is completely not the case.

    So whether you believe it or not, or whether you believe these reactions represent a small amount of audience members or not, the point remains that the media seem to have had a lot of fun trashing on this film. Although just to add, does no-one remember how certain fans on here responded? People were saying how ugly she was, and how triggering it was, and how if she’s 007 at all I’m not gonna see this movie. You might not think they’re fans but they still have a part to play in the films success, and the media are only making it worse.

    This debate is moot.

    We can all cherry-pick the quotes which suit our arguments. For example, I saw an overwhelming amount of positivity on Twitter.

    All these types of stories - whether it be The Little Mermaid, Ghostbusters, Star Wars, Catwoman - just push people into their corners more. There will be those who either LOVE it and then those who HATE it. With both sides refusing to engage and brand one side 'racist' or 'politically correct.' It's pretty boring and overly common on the Internet these days.

    Gladly I sit in the middle, where I genuinely struggle to care about fictional characters to such an extent. I just want a good movie
Sign In or Register to comment.