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
It’s sad isn’t it. The way America is being run that country could do with someone who actually cares about people in charge.
We have asked repeatedly that posts not be politicised, yet this simple request is ignored.
This is the last time you’ll be told.
Not only do the images look silly, it’s just stupid.
It's funny really: in the 90s we had those photocomped VHS covers where they added odd little hands holding guns onto publicity shots of the actors and made them look weird: now they're removing the guns and making them look weird again! :D
I don't understand the point either mate, I mean if you watch a Bond film you know there's going to be guns.
Just serves as another example why fans will be weary of Amazon's stewardship of the series
On a vaguely related note, I remember hearing about some rule that in UK, you can't, or didn't used to be allowed to, have a film poster where a character aims a gun at the viewer. Hence there was a TND poster where Wai Lin pointed her gun at the camera in the US version, but the UK version amended it so she pointed it off to the side a bit.
So, I dunno, this could be about losing the guns, it could about generating artwork which can be used in all markets globally where some territory have tougher rules about showing guns than others, who knows.
Very true, but what irks me is the laziness. They could have whipped up some new images fairly quickly that wouldn't have appeared so cheap.
And then on top of that, James Bond has a license to kill. Showing a gun in a holster wouldn't have caused an uproar, I'm sure. To delete the gun from the man is more than silly. Instead of not bringing attention to this, they've done the opposite: they've placed a glaring spotlight on it.
I mean, the average person won't notice a gun in the posters, or not but; fans will. Hence why it's now a discussion that doesn't paint Amazon in the best light. It begs the question: what other things will they potentially be watering down.
Instead of avoiding a non controversy, they've started a minor one, haven't they?
This omission was stupid.
Are they going to take the gun out of the 007 logo next?
Stupid decision.
Have we even seen any other use for these images than the thumbnails on the Prime menu? Most films just get a publicity photo from the set of one of the actors rather than a load of bespoke images. I think some of the choices are odd: there must be other shots of Connery from Dr No (and I hate that shot anyway!) but there we go.
I mean AI could have whipped up something more decent than these pics.
And I do understand the sensitivity to gun culture, but we are talking about a secret agent. The most famous one in the world, where bartenders know his signature drink, as Moore jokingly made mention in interviews.
I think that instead of omitting guns in known stills, they should have created new images or used other stills (Bond sitting at dinner with Dr. No; Moore hanging off the Golden Gate Bridge etc etc…), where not seeing a gun wouldn’t have created any kind of stir.
But taking known stills and erasing Bond’s Walther was stupid and lazy and put a spotlight on it. They created a minor controversy when they didn’t have to.
This little blip had an easy fix, and any minor controversy didn’t have to happen.
I saw someone on Bluesky say that he looks like you've just said something mean about Cher :))
Yeah, agreed (I actually quite like the ones for TB and GF etc.; I think they're fine).
Regarding the minor controversy, I do note that it started when James Page, who based on past history doesn't mind starting a stir here and there, shared the portrait versions of the images, which as far as I can see haven't actually been released or used in any form officially.
In actual fact, as far as I can see, Prime have removed these images now so everyone can stand down. Teacup storm over :D
Sassy Bond 😂
😂 😂 😂
Yikes. Connery looks like a rentboy here.
Careful, he'll scratch your eyes out for that!
Yeah I've sort of wondered about that: I feel like Walther is the one long term brand partner who've never had to pay (maybe TLD?) ?
Personally, I don’t object to every revision ever made, but removing the iconic “gun pose” from Bond posters, however cosmetic and irrelevant to the films themselves, doesn’t sit right with me. I find it both insulting and, coming from Amazon of all companies, rather hypocritical.
https://www.deepdiscount.com/no-time-to-die/883929816668?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=17347185254
I don't even think the gun is there. It's as if they removed the gun, then put the name "conveniently" covering where the gun would be. :-??
EDIT
The gun is definitely NOT there. On the poster, you can see where the light is shining off the top of the barrel. But on that BR cover..... nothing. The text isn't thick enough to cover up the PPK if it were there.
If the logo were placed there for composition's sake then the light shining on top of the barrel would be removed as it would interfere with the logo, much like they've added a shadow to his hand and shirt to make the logo pop more. But it may well be right that they put it there to hide the gun: it's fully on show on the UK and other nations' versions that I can see, so maybe it's a US thing. The logo placement on Bond's body looks much less awkward on the UK version to me.