I think this movi is gonna be awexome. i do agree with Some Guy about his hair and that guy is all solem type with attitude like james in the other movies. Im really excited bout it.
| Homestar Runner Wiki Forum http://forum.hrwiki.org/ |
|
| How do you feel about Casino royale http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8919 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | DarkSideOfTheSchwartz [ Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | How do you feel about Casino royale |
How do you feel about Casino Royale? I really want to see it. |
|
| Author: | Beyond the Grave [ Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't like the choice of the new Bond. I felt it should have gone to Clive Owen. I will see it, anyways. |
|
| Author: | Some Guy [ Mon Jun 26, 2006 9:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Everyone is all like: WHAT?! THE NEW JAMES BOND IS BLONDE! And I think it's probably because it's a prequel and James Bond is younger. Peoples' hair can get darker as they age and stuff so that's what I tell thems. |
|
| Author: | rise-against [ Mon Jun 26, 2006 9:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think this movi is gonna be awexome. i do agree with Some Guy about his hair and that guy is all solem type with attitude like james in the other movies. Im really excited bout it.
|
|
| Author: | racerx_is_alive [ Mon Jun 26, 2006 9:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Some Guy wrote: Everyone is all like: WHAT?! THE NEW JAMES BOND IS BLONDE!
And I think it's probably because it's a prequel and James Bond is younger. Peoples' hair can get darker as they age and stuff so that's what I tell thems. I'm sure Craig will be a fine Bond, but I agree with BTG, Clive Owen totally should have gotten the part. |
|
| Author: | Beyond the Grave [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
racerx_is_alive wrote: I'm sure Craig will be a fine Bond, but I agree with BTG, Clive Owen totally should have gotten the part. Hugh Jackman was also up for it.
|
|
| Author: | Beyond the Grave [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
racerx_is_alive wrote: I'm sure Craig will be a fine Bond, but I agree with BTG, Clive Owen totally should have gotten the part. Hugh Jackman was also up for it. They were turned down because of their age.
|
|
| Author: | ramrod [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 4:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Beyond the Grave wrote: racerx_is_alive wrote: I'm sure Craig will be a fine Bond, but I agree with BTG, Clive Owen totally should have gotten the part. Hugh Jackman was also up for it. They were turned down because of their age. |
|
| Author: | Krazed Squirell [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
ramrod wrote: Wait, they had a kinda old Connery in one of them, but they turn down the others for being old? I mean, I do know that Connery's the God of acting, but come on...
Yup, Connery popped up in 1983's Never Say Never Again when he was in his early 50's. The reason the age thing is so important in Casino Royale, is because (from what I've heard) the film is a retcon that shows Bonds early spy days. |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Early spy days? Another bloody prequel?! Enough of this already. I'm already dissatisfied with their choice in a man to play Bond, but they are defacing the reputation of the Bond legacy in such a way? Horrid... perish the thought... |
|
| Author: | gwr2004 [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm not a big movie buff, and James Bond plugs are nearly the worst. |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The thing is... I didnt' like The World Is Not Enough. The only thing I found redeemable about it was the theme song, because Garbage did it. |
|
| Author: | DarkSideOfTheSchwartz [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
DeathlyPallor wrote: Early spy days? Another bloody prequel?! Enough of this already. I'm already dissatisfied with their choice in a man to play Bond, but they are defacing the reputation of the Bond legacy in such a way? Horrid... perish the thought...
Hey, before you trash the idea, at least know that there were james bond books before there were movies, and Casino royale was the first bond book ever written |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Hey, before you trash the idea, at least know that there were james bond books before there were movies, and Casino royale was the first bond book ever written
I can guarantee you this, though. The book will still remain far superior... but, Prequels man...! |
|
| Author: | DarkSideOfTheSchwartz [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I know the book is better, and I know its true to the book from what I have heard freom the people that have read the screenplay on commanderbond.net. Also I agree that we need no more prequils or remakes (except re making bond movies so they are true to the books). |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
No more remakes either. I am sick to death of them. They butchered quite a few of the classic horror movies I ever loved, and I don't want to see this infection of unoriginality swim into any other genre. This is why I watch independent films, forigen films and more anime than should be allowed by law (wait... I'm having fun, such will soon be illegal... why did they take that cliché seriously?!). Plus, I doubt they would remake the Bond movies more accurate to reflect the books. Movies are never truly made to reflect the book. Timeline (originally a Michael Crichton book) was not done to reflect the book, and it was one of his best. |
|
| Author: | DarkSideOfTheSchwartz [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Why is it that when they make movies out of Michael Crichton's books, they butcher them horribly? Like more than most other movie adaptations of books, and also that bond remake thing, has been offically updated to rumor status. |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
DarkSideOfTheSchwartz wrote: Why is it that when they make movies out of Michael Crichton's books, they butcher them horribly? I've thought about that one. It's a shame, it honestly is. They take all of the substance out and put in mindless action sequences. Jurrasic Park, the movies... they all sucked royal! Quote: Like more than most other movie adaptations of books, Most people don't have the patience to read anymore... idiots... all of them. Missing out on so much. Their loss, though. Quote: ...also that bond remake thing, has been offically updated to rumor status.
Oh no... I smell blasphemy coming... |
|
| Author: | Schmelen [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ew, a blonde James Bond? That guy looks absolutely terrible. |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
You see? I'm not the only one that thinks that. Absolute blasphemy. They should have just cloned Sean Connery or just tracked down one of his many illegitmate children. We all know he's been around the block more than enough times to have stock bloodline for perfect Bonds. |
|
| Author: | DarkSideOfTheSchwartz [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
DeathlyPallor wrote: DarkSideOfTheSchwartz wrote: ...also that bond remake thing, has been offically updated to rumor status. Oh no... I smell blasphemy coming... What on earth do you mean? |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Bond remakes? Think about every other remake that has come out recently... absolute garbage. If they are considering of making remakes of the Bond movies... they will butcher them. Take all of the smoking out, among other things. |
|
| Author: | DarkSideOfTheSchwartz [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, I'm not really thinking re makes, just taking the plot from the books, and putting them into a bond movie with a different title. |
|
| Author: | DeathlyPallor [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That would be okay... but I just hope they don't screw them up. |
|
| Author: | Occasional JD [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'll probably go see it. But I won't like it. |
|
| Author: | Beyond the Grave [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You guys are all ticked about a blond Bond, but remember, Roger Moore had very light almost blond hair and he is veiwed as one of the great Bonds. So don't gert too worked up about it. This guy might turn out to be good. He is also fairly young, so they may be able to get a few Bonds out of him. |
|
| Author: | StrongRad [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
DeathlyPallor wrote: Bond remakes? Think about every other remake that has come out recently... absolute garbage. If they are considering of making remakes of the Bond movies... they will butcher them. It's Bond... You'd have to try pretty hard to screw that up. (please, MGM, don't take that as a challenge.)
I'm excited about it. I DO wonder about the new guy, but I'm extremely happy it's not Hugh Grant. I don't remember where I heard that the new Bond was going to be Grant, but I remember I almost burst into tears when they said it. Oh well, as long as we still have a Q, I'll be happy. |
|
| Author: | DESTROY US ALL! [ Tue Jun 27, 2006 10:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Meh, I'll watch it when it comes to DVD. But I'd rather just watch Dr. No and From Russia with Love again. |
|
| Author: | Some Guy [ Wed Jun 28, 2006 12:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[quote="StrongRad"] Oh well, as long as we still have a Q, I'll be happy.[/quote] Um...sorry to say this, but I believe Q isn't gonna be in this film. I guess because it's when James Bond just became a Double 0 agent or sumthin' like that. |
|
| Author: | StrongRad [ Wed Jun 28, 2006 12:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Some Guy wrote: StrongRad wrote: Oh well, as long as we still have a Q, I'll be happy. Um...sorry to say this, but I believe Q isn't gonna be in this film. I guess because it's when James Bond just became a Double 0 agent or sumthin' like that. OH well. There will still be random explosions.. I'll survive. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|