The Movie Thread

[Kiwiwomble]

Dune 2 = incredible

they will almost certainly make another because thats what hollywood does....but i really wish they would just leave be as about as perfect interpretation of the books IMO as can be done...didn't add loads of new stuff like the hobbit just to make it a trilogy....didnt cut too much to fit into one movie...pretty much just right with the huge opened question at the end....that i loved

 

[Deleted member 88328]

Aaron Taylor-Johnson: Speculation mounts again over new James Bond

Marvel star Aaron Taylor-Johnson is in the frame as the next actor playing James Bond, reports say.

www.bbc.co.uk

Bookies favourite and he's apparently been offered a contract already.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

But what is the story going to be? For those who have of course seen No Time to die.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Does it have to follow on?

I hope it doesn't, Bond films were better when they were (largely) stand alone

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Some of the stand alone ones were dreadful though - looking at the likes of Die Another day.

 

[Saintjay]

Some of the stand alone ones were dreadful though - looking at the likes of Die Another day.

I absolutely hate Moonraker and View to a kill. Safe to say I'm not a Moore fan. Golden Eye was ok but yeah the Brosnan Bond films weren't great.

 

[ncurd]

they will almost certainly make another because thats what hollywood does....but i really wish they would just leave be as about as perfect interpretation of the books IMO as can be done...didn't add loads of new stuff like the hobbit just to make it a trilogy....didnt cut too much to fit into one movie...pretty much just right with the huge opened question at the end....that i loved

TBH and I know people opinions vary wildly but Dune Messiah is quite legitimately the third part to Paul's story.

I think Villeneuve has always expressed he wanted to do three parts including Messiah.

 

[ncurd]

Aaron Taylor-Johnson: Speculation mounts again over new James Bond

Marvel star Aaron Taylor-Johnson is in the frame as the next actor playing James Bond, reports say.

www.bbc.co.uk

Bookies favourite and he's apparently been offered a contract already.

Too 'big' a name at least to my opinion.

Kinda disappointing if they don't go for a British PoC though, loads would be great for the role.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

I absolutely hate Moonraker and View to a kill. Safe to say I'm not a Moore fan. Golden Eye was ok but yeah the Brosnan Bond films weren't great.

I liked Moonraker, but by view to a kill Moore was just too old. Brosnan was just too nice to play Bond. Bond is a bit a Cnut - he has a nasty side. Connery had it and Craig did. That's what they got to find in the new one.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Just sick of everything trying to be a universe these days

If a Bond film is on TV I want to be able to watch it not try and work out if I've seen the previous 12 hrs to know what's going on

If it does have to be a big overarching story hopefully this is a fresh start at one and not a continuation of the Craig ones

 

[Deleted member 88328]

I liked Moonraker, but by view to a kill Moore was just too old. Brosnan was just too nice to play Bond. Bond is a bit a Cnut - he has a nasty side. Connery had it and Craig did. That's what they got to find in the new one.

It's a mixed bad when it comes to all the bonds. Connery fitted the role, but it's laughable how he got out of some of the situations. Moore came across very creepy to me, Dalton was very serious and Brosnan was probably the happy medium for me personally. The only issue he had was the stories got worse with each film. Craig was okay, but he was trying to come across as serious, but it just seemed grumpy to me. His biggest issue for me however was the films clearly just copied other popular films out at the time. Bourne, Marvel, Dark Knight. What original ideas they did have fell flat.

Just sick of everything trying to be a universe these days

If a Bond film is on TV I want to be able to watch it not try and work out if I've seen the previous 12 hrs to know what's going on

If it does have to be a big overarching story hopefully this is a fresh start at one and not a continuation of the Craig ones

It won't be. With each new actor, Bond basically hits a reset button and they do their own thing.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

TBH and I know people opinions vary wildly but Dune Messiah is quite legitimately the third part to Paul's story.

I think Villeneuve has always expressed he wanted to do three parts including Messiah.

i did some googling after watching it as was kind of excited for another and youre right he has said that he wanted to do 3

Wiki tells me the next one starts of 12 years later though and all the stuff i want to see is over,the actual conquering of the empire and subduing of the great houses...it seemed more like the set up of the other sequels, the introduction of his kids etc...but thats someone interpretation on wiki so might be wrong

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Just sick of everything trying to be a universe these days

If a Bond film is on TV I want to be able to watch it not try and work out if I've seen the previous 12 hrs to know what's going on

If it does have to be a big overarching story hopefully this is a fresh start at one and not a continuation of the Craig ones

i get that

the issue i have is they keep going for older guys (this guy would have to be the youngest)...so with daniel craig we were lead to believe in casino he was early in his career (doesnt he only get his licence to kill in that film?)...but he was in his mid to late 40's and even though his 5 films are supposed to be very close together in movie time he's close to 60 by the time theyre done

I think they could do trilogies and actually drop them in subsequent years...so we get an honest to god early days trilogy (where he doesnt age out and become unbelievably) where he's learning things...then do a "old man" trilogy where maybe he comes out of retirement etc and people know theyre getting the same guy for three films

 

[big ginger 8]

i get that

the issue i have is they keep going for older guys (this guy would have to be the youngest)...so with daniel craig we were lead to believe in casino he was early in his career (doesnt he only get his licence to kill in that film?)...but he was in his mid to late 40's and even though his 5 films are supposed to be very close together in movie time he's close to 60 by the time theyre done

I think they could do trilogies and actually drop them in subsequent years...so we get an honest to god early days trilogy (where he doesnt age out and become unbelievably) where he's learning things...then do a "old man" trilogy where maybe he comes out of retirement etc and people know theyre getting the same guy for three films

Craig was 38 when Casino Royale came out and 53 when No Time to Die came out which had been delayed by Covid. I don't think he could have done any more but his age was mostly fine.

One of the reasons they turned down Cavil for CR was that they considered him too young.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Craig was 38 when Casino Royale came out and 53 when No Time to Die came out which had been delayed by Covid. I don't think he could have done any more but his age was mostly fine.

One of the reasons they turned down Cavil for CR was that they considered him too young.

fair, didn't check his ages, was vibe but he does noticeable age when i thought the movies were supposed to be over a short period of time. maybe the vibe i got about bond early in his career wasn't right

i still want to see the extremes of his career, how he is recruited and proper old man...but not moore being an old man pretending to be a young man....but more the the RED movies

 

[ncurd]

fair, didn't check his ages, was vibe but he does noticeable age when i thought the movies were supposed to be over a short period of time. maybe the vibe i got about bond early in his career wasn't right

i still want to see the extremes of his career, how he is recruited and proper old man...but not moore being an old man pretending to be a young man....but more the the RED movies

The issue is in terms of story Casino Royale is early career for a 00. They are essentially the elites of MI5 operatives. If you want to watch Bond the young years your not watching 007 going on mad exotic adventures.

 

[Saintjay]

I remember reading the Broccoli's were looking for an age range that would get around twenty years worth of releases. With Bond films going from a film every two years to more like three or four. One of the reasons Elba, Hardy, Hiddleston etc had poor odds at getting the role. Plus there already famous and more costly.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

The issue is in terms of story Casino Royale is early career for a 00. They are essentially the elites of MI5 operatives. If you want to watch Bond the young years your not watching 007 going on mad exotic adventures.

i think i would be alright with that...we have +25 of him doing mad capped adventures...a more serious take on Kingman leading into him doing bigger stuff would be a nice change for me

but surely some elite operative must be younger, there has to be some situations where a dude over 35 stands out like a sore thumb

I think where marvel was so successful (before loosing control and no knowing when it quit) was releasing those regular movies, or even better like LotR film all three together and drop them in subsequent years...get the hype going...where as i feel a lot of these bind fims end up being "did you know there a new bind film this year?"

 

[Deleted member 88328]

 

[Kiwiwomble]

where does that one sit in the timeline?