Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 145
  1. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisIII View Post
    Funny thing about the book and movie continuity, a few times the movies tried to have it both ways. When M mentions that his baretta jammed on a previous mission that had Bond hospitalized for a few months, in the novel this was referring to "From Russia With Love", where Bond actually was stabbed by the poison shoes and nearly died (In the novels, The Dr.No mission is recommended to Bond as an "easy assignment" to help get him back into the swing of things, because M just assumes Strangways eloped with his secretary). Of course given the next movie this obviously wasn't the case

    It's also the reason Bond and Blofeld don't recognize each other right away in OHMSS-the writer wanted it to be "true to the novel" (although the film still deviates quite a bit-Tracy is never captured by Blofeld).
    It may have been "true to the novel" but it made NO fucking sense film-wise. That should have been the writer's priority.

  2. #77
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James T. Kirk View Post
    It may have been "true to the novel" but it made NO fucking sense film-wise. That should have been the writer's priority.
    The big concept is that Blofeld supposedly had plastic surgery to look like the Count he was impersonating and Bond was in cover and disguised as a genealogist. Bond has a reason to not act like he knew Blofeld and really Blofeld kinda drops the charade pretty quick and acts like he knew who Bond was all along. Also they act pretty familiar with each other once the reveals happen. Basically just assume their disguises looked better than they did and that both were sort of playing cat and mouse.

  3. #78
    Extraordinary Member Jokerz79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Somewhere in Time & Space
    Posts
    7,613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    I don't think I can buy that. It's a film with the main character of James Bond, the character has all the attributes and personality of James Bond, has the same job, the same supporting characters, and the plot is a familiar one to a James Bond movie. It has excellent production values so it's not like a Roger Corman low budget fan film.

    The Eon films have no particular continuity beyond the occasional vague reference ("once married"), and even that is often completely dispensed with (The Craig films represent a full-fledged reboot, for that matter).

    There isn't really any quality or characteristic about Never Say Never Again that makes it not a "real" Bond film that I can see.
    The real issue with EON Canon is NSNA is a remake of Thunderball down to the same characters.

  4. #79
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerz79 View Post
    The real issue with EON Canon is NSNA is a remake of Thunderball down to the same characters.
    Which I would say makes it the very definition of a "Bond film." Until a few days ago on this thread, I would have thought that was self-evident, but many have differing thoughts on the matter, clearly.

  5. #80
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles California
    Posts
    1,115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Indian Ink View Post
    He's too old to start being Bond. He'll be 46 in a few weeks and he'd be 47 by the time they start shooting. Older than Roger Moore when he started, and he looked younger than his years to begin with. Idris looks his age. He's not too old to be Bond, but he's too old to start, and they'll need some who can do at least three films.
    Yes, he is too old.
    I’m hoping Daniel Kaluuya will be the new Bond.

  6. #81
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    Which I would say makes it the very definition of a "Bond film." Until a few days ago on this thread, I would have thought that was self-evident, but many have differing thoughts on the matter, clearly.
    It’s not an official Bond film. Which is what people mean by that.

  7. #82
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    It’s not an official Bond film. Which is what people mean by that.
    i'm really not trying to be argumentative, but I have no idea what is meant by "official" in this context. Is it that the movie doesn't have a particular production company's logo on it?

    if a movie is about James Bond, and he works for the British secret service, and flirts with his boss' secretary Miss Monneypenny, and a fights an organization called SPECTRE, lead by a guy named Blofeld, and is based on a story by the character's creator (in many ways a more faithful adaptation than the original movie) how is it not an official Bond movie? Perhaps an equally justified question is how are the Craig movies still official Bond movies?

    Are Godzilla 2002 or 2014 not official Godzilla movies? Is the Spider-man newspaper comic not an official Spider-man comic? A Nightmare On Elm Street? Ocean's 11 (12) (13)? Planet Of The Apes?

    The idea that any of these things are not official versions of the things that they are about is line of reasoning I've never encountered before.

  8. #83
    Astonishing Member Panic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,090

    Default

    From the Amazon description:
    Product Description
    Sean Connery returns - after a 12-year absence - to the role that made him famous, in this 'unofficial' Bond movie, made outside the auspices of regular producer Albert Broccoli and without any of the series' regular faces.
    AJBopp, NSNA is regularly referred to as unofficial. It is commonly left off Bond lists just like the 67 version of Casino Royale. This is normal.

  9. #84
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panic View Post
    From the Amazon description:

    AJBopp, NSNA is regularly referred to as unofficial. It is commonly left off Bond lists just like the 67 version of Casino Royale. This is normal.
    Here's a site that tries to explain the whole thing https://decider.com/2015/01/29/james...-never-again/:

    Connery as James Bond, a British MI6 agent with the designation 007 who dashes across the globe in a thrilling and seemingly never ending quest to save civilization from the craven schemes of supervillains bent on creating chaos, all the while enjoying dry martinis, bedding women of innumerable national origin, and sporting sharply tailed suits and tuxes.

    In short, Never Say Never Again is a James Bond film.

    But it isn’t a James Bond film.

    Not officially.

    That’s because Never Say Never Again was not produced by Eon Productions, the Cubby Broccoli-sired studio that’s delivered the vast majority of the Bond films you know and love—the result of a long-running agreement with Bond creator Ian Fleming (and subsequently Fleming’s estate).
    My feeling: that's bullshit. It's a film about James Bond, and not being from a particular studio is no valid reason to ascribe "unofficial" (or "official", for that matter) to the film

  10. #85
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    Here's a site that tries to explain the whole thing https://decider.com/2015/01/29/james...-never-again/:



    My feeling: that's bullshit. It's a film about James Bond, and not being from a particular studio is no valid reason to ascribe "unofficial" (or "official", for that matter) to the film
    Well virtually the whole fandom feel that way. The film is not able to use anything that isn’t from the Novel Thunderball. It can’t use the official gunbarrel opening, didn’t have any of the primary series regulars like Llewelyn’s Q or Maxwell’s Moneypenny, wasn’t able to use any of iconography (series logos). It has virtually no connection the primary series and can’t exist within its continuity. When people think of Bond they think of the EON series. They think of the gunbarrel, they think of the opening credits sequence, the cold open, Q, Moneypenny, etc. NASA exists outside of that.

    Again by your definition the 1967 spoof Casino Royals is a film about 007. It’s also considered unofficial.

    It’s like if someone got the rights to one particular Superman story and could only make a non DVEU film with those plot elements but not the iconic S Sheild or iconic elements associated with the series

  11. #86
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    Here's a site that tries to explain the whole thing https://decider.com/2015/01/29/james...-never-again/:



    My feeling: that's bullshit. It's a film about James Bond, and not being from a particular studio is no valid reason to ascribe "unofficial" (or "official", for that matter) to the film
    Well virtually the whole fandom feel that way. The film is not able to use anything that isn’t from the Novel Thunderball. It can’t use the official gunbarrel opening, didn’t have any of the primary series regulars like Llewelyn’s Q or Maxwell’s Moneypenny, wasn’t able to use any of iconography (series logos). It has virtually no connection the primary series and can’t exist within its continuity. When people think of Bond they think of the EON series. They think of the gunbarrel, they think of the opening credits sequence, the cold open, Q, Moneypenny, etc. NASA exists outside of that.

    Again by your definition the 1967 spoof Casino Royals is a film about 007. It’s also considered unofficial.

    It’s like if someone got the rights to one particular Superman story and could only make a non DVEU film with those plot elements but not the iconic S Sheild or iconic elements associated with the series

  12. #87
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,691

    Default

    NO, Bond was always white! make your own goddamn original movie you idiots.

  13. #88
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    18,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TomServofan View Post
    NO, Bond was always white! make your own goddamn original movie you idiots.
    Only one Bond actor was actually Scottish, and none were half-Swiss.

  14. #89
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carabas View Post
    Only one Bond actor was actually Scottish, and none were half-Swiss.
    Bond was retroactively made Scottish in Flemings penultimate novel as a homage to Connery's portrayal. Prior to that it was just assumed that Bond was British proper.

  15. #90
    Extraordinary Member Jokerz79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Somewhere in Time & Space
    Posts
    7,613

    Default

    I don't care who plays Bond next except I'd like to see to tone to be more like it was before Craig I miss old school Bond.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •