James Bond 23: 2010

[Don Carlos]

Originally Posted by origenesprit

I think I'm one of the few people who liked Quantum of Solace just as much as Casino Royale, and it is easier to watch since it is an hour shorter.

Quantum's plot made no sense and was impossible to follow, but it is definitely a rewatchable movie. Mainly for Gemma Arterton and Olga Kurylenko.

 

[origenesprit]

Originally Posted by Arrogant Bastard

Quantum's plot made no sense and was impossible to follow, but it is definitely a rewatchable movie. Mainly for Gemma Arterton and Olga Kurylenko.

+1, she somehow managed to switch from annoying weirdo slut in Hitman to really hot decent actress in Quantum

 

[Sherlockian]

****. You mean Kurylenko was acting? I was too busy nursing my boner to pay any attention to her thespian qualities; I could, conversely, describe in considerable detail what she was wearing.

Would destroy, with similar force to the exploding building at the end after they did...er, whatever the mission was about.

 

[akatsuki]

Originally Posted by origenesprit

+1, she somehow managed to switch from annoying weirdo slut in Hitman to really hot decent actress in Quantum

Sorry.

Hitman - Olga naked
QoS - Olga not naked

Res ipsa loquitor - Hitman is the better movie.

 

[Mauby]

Originally Posted by akatsuki

Sorry.

Hitman - Olga naked
QoS - Olga not naked

Res ipsa loquitor - Hitman is the better movie.

I don't know.

Hitman - tattoo on her face.
QoS - she had a nice all over tan.

 

[Don Carlos]

She gets nekkid in Hitman? ****, suddenly I may have to tolerate sitting through that movie.

 

[origenesprit]

Originally Posted by Arrogant Bastard

She gets nekkid in Hitman? ****, suddenly I may have to tolerate sitting through that movie.

Better nude pics online than what they show in Hitman, plus she has a stupid haircut and dumb tattoo on her face.

Plus Timothy Olyphant has a stupid baby face.

 

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Arrogant Bastard

+1

WTF? It was just starting to get good again. Casino Royale was tight as ****. Quantumgravitationaltheory or whatever the ******* was called was definitely not great, but could have been worse. A third film could have gotten back on track again.

Hmmm. I think the writers do their best work when presented with a fresh face. After the honeymoon's over, though...they stop writing a good story and try to out-do themselves on the gadgets. Goldeneye and Casino Royale were IMHO the two best bond films in ages.

 

[Mark from Plano]

I recently re-watched two recent vintage Bond films: The World is Not Enough and Quantum of Solace.

TWINE was awful. Just doesn't hold up well at all. QoS was actually OK, IMO. Keep in mind that you've always got to suspend a certain amount of belief to watch any Bond film, and I'm OK with that. It's mind candy pure and simple, which I'm always up for (I hang out in Dumb Threads, after all).

Daniel Craig has really won me over as Bond. I'd really hate to see him replaced. I know that it seems like people think that it's Brosnan's birthright to play Bond for some reason, but IMO he's lost the job. I find that I like more of a tough-guy Bond (say, Connery and Craig) than the Dandy-Boy Bond (say, Moore and Brosnan).

I hope that they get the money thing worked out. They should because the franchise still has a lot of traction IMO. It should be a big money maker if they can get the project funded.

 

[gomestar]

Originally Posted by Mark from Plano

I hope that they get the money thing worked out. They should because the franchise still has a lot of traction IMO. It should be a big money maker if they can get the project funded.

+1
despite knowing nothing, I know that the movie will make money. Even QoS had a gross of nearly $600MM on a $200MMM budget. How can they not get funding?

 

[gomestar]

a random Wiki link says the movie is only postponed, not cancelled. Here's to hoping.

 

[Mark from Plano]

Originally Posted by gomestar

+1
despite knowing nothing, I know that the movie will make money. Even QoS had a gross of nearly $600MM on a $200MMM budget. How can they not get funding?

I don't know how these things work at all, but one would think that if MGM is having cash problems and can't come up with the $200MM to finance the project that the rights to the movie are an asset that they could sell to another production house to raise a bit of cash to help their financial situation. But who knows, perhaps their rights aren't transferrable. It would be too bad if this thing gets stuck in limbo over money.

 

[gomestar]

Originally Posted by Mark from Plano

I don't know how these things work at all, but one would think that if MGM is having cash problems and can't come up with the $200MM to finance the project that the rights to the movie are an asset that they could sell to another production house to raise a bit of cash to help their financial situation. But who knows, perhaps their rights aren't transferrable. It would be too bad if this thing gets stuck in limbo over money.

they could just call up a Russian oil guy, he'll front the $200MM. MGM makes the movie, it grosses $800MM (since it'll be better than QoS and the only thing in the near future to worry about is Harry Potter), they pay back the $200MM plus $20MM in interest to the Russian, and they keep the rest to help solve their cash problem.

Apparently I'm missing some detail because it seems too easy to me.

 

[Mark from Plano]

Originally Posted by gomestar

they could just call up a Russian oil guy, he'll front the $200MM. MGM makes the movie, it grosses $800MM (since it'll be better than QoS and the only thing in the near future to worry about is Harry Potter), they pay back the $200MM plus $20MM in interest to the Russian, and they keep the rest to help solve their cash problem.

Apparently I'm missing some detail because it seems too easy to me.

Russian oil guys come and eat your children if they don't get their money back though...and $20MM interest isn't right. It'd be more like $200MM, first out. Still, the concept of selling units in the production to offset the cost isn't a bad idea either and I think its done all the time. There's clearly something here we're missing.

 

[rvan]

They recently interview Christopher Nolan (Dark Knight) for the opening of Inception and he expressed interest in directing a Bond film according to NY Mag. http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment...e_to_do_a.html

I think it would interesting if he did more of a psychological thriller Bond, but I don't want him to cast his favorites like Michael Cane as Q or Christian Bale as Bond.