shaboinkin said:If some other studio gets their hands on the franchise, for the love of god DON'T give it to Michael Bay...
Or worse still, Tom Cruise who owns United Artists.
shaboinkin said:If some other studio gets their hands on the franchise, for the love of god DON'T give it to Michael Bay...
I agree. (Even though I really enjoyed Quantums attempt to weave a connective narrative between multiple movies, and the movie itself overall. ^_^) I really hope whatever company picks up the Bond Licence feels the same way about Craig as Bond, and greenlights immediate reshooting of the next Bond.Matt_LRR said:shame. Craig was really good, despite the mis-steps made in Quantum of Solace. Casino Royale was easily on par with Goldeneye.
-m
Um...Sean Connery is like, 80, that's a little old for James Bond...Bebus said:Hopefully they will recast Sean Connery and we can forget the years of awful sleaziness that Moore and Brosnan brought to the role!
Lies!omega_peaches said:Um...Sean Connery is like, 80, that's a little old for James Bond...Bebus said:Hopefully they will recast Sean Connery and we can forget the years of awful sleaziness that Moore and Brosnan brought to the role!
It had the most spuratic camera switching I have ever seen in a movie, had a bad story, (Revenge is a cheap way to drive a film) a boring love interest, and didn't feel the least bit like a James Bond movie. There was no Q, no gadgets, and Bond was completely lacking the wit that made him him. The movie was just bad.Woodsey said:What was wrong with Quantum of Solace?Matt_LRR said:shame. Craig was really good, despite the mis-steps made in Quantum of Solace. Casino Royale was easily on par with Goldeneye.
-m
OT: It's obviously not completely dead, but I do worry that Craig will not get the role again; he's my favourite by far.
So it would be like MGS4 with the whole old snake thing?Bebus said:Lies!omega_peaches said:Um...Sean Connery is like, 80, that's a little old for James Bond...Bebus said:Hopefully they will recast Sean Connery and we can forget the years of awful sleaziness that Moore and Brosnan brought to the role!
I can understand why people didn't like QoS for quite a few reasons already listed in this thread that I'm not going to rehash, but I completely disagree with the idea that gadgets and corny Bond wit make the films. One of my friends was raging hard after Casino Royale because these gadgets were missing.Decabo said:...and didn't feel the least bit like a James Bond movie. There was no Q, no gadgets, and Bond was completely lacking the wit that made him him. The movie was just bad.
Obnoxious shakeycame in the extreme, terrible filming in general, poor directing, no sense of style, story that makes little sense but is instantly boring.Woodsey said:What was wrong with Quantum of Solace?Matt_LRR said:shame. Craig was really good, despite the mis-steps made in Quantum of Solace. Casino Royale was easily on par with Goldeneye.
-m
OT: It's obviously not completely dead, but I do worry that Craig will not get the role again; he's my favourite by far.