Just moments ago I saw my first commercial for the new Ultimate Bond DVD's. I find it interesting but certainly NOT surprising that the very first Bond that they show in the commercial is Pierce Brosnan, and that it is Brosnan that they show the most in the commercial.
Connery is shown the second most. Dalton is very briefly shown. And they don't even bother to show Lazenby or Moore.
Doesn't suprise me either, as Brosnan is more relevant to todays target audience than Connery, who belonged to a different era. The youngsters watching new Bond films have all grown up with Brosnan, so it makes sense.
However, this will all start to change again, come next week....;)
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,700MI6 Agent
Dalton is very briefly shown. And they don't even bother to show Lazenby or Moore.
Maybe Lazenby isn't shown because OHMSS isn't in the sets for sale. OHMSS is in volume 3, which comes out on the 12th of Dec. I have no explanation for Moore. 3 of his movies are in the 2 volumes for sale today. Brosnan has 2 movies and both of Daltons are in Volumes 1 & 2.
Maybe when Volumes 3&4 come out, they'll show mostly Brosnan, Moore briefly with Connery and no Dalton.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
I'm not suprised that they aren't showing Lazenby. Many casual fans have never heard of him. There's a show on Australian TV in which celebrities debate some provocative topics (e.g. Beatles or Rolling Stones, Friends or Seinfeld etc..) and one of the topics was Moore or Connery. Several times during the show, it was implied that Moore replaced Connery, without any mention of Lazenby. So really, I'm not suprised that Lazenby isn't being shown. Outside of Bond circles, how many people have heard of or even care about him?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Well, in the spirit of being non-partisan here, if not at the polls today, if Bond and Borat opened on the same day, Borat would cream Bond at the box office no matter who's playing him! )
Would it, though? Borat made $26 million I believe and DAD made $40-odd, didn't it?
I know Borat's on less screens, but you didn't say that; and I'm not sure it works just scaling up by the number of screens (Santa Clause opened on 3,500, which would mean if you scaled up Borat by roughly 4 times to be on the same number of screens it would make $104 million; which isn't likely is it?).
No, I didn't mention the number of screens, though it would not be fair to keep that out of such an assumption. I'll remember your legalistic attention to details in issues the next time and conceive every possible scenario permutation before posting To make this hypothetical match fair, which movie would have better box office given the same marketing budget as Borat? What about the same question with the same production budget as Borat? I suppose you might say that these are comparisons to apples to oranges, but I wonder which film would fair better in terms of return on investment, which is an equitable measure of success as you can get.
Oh I don't know- I'm not going to do a load of maths just to please you. Fact is, the statement 'Borat would cream Bond at the box office no matter who's playing him' is just wrong. Borat made a lot less than pretty much any Bond at the box office.
Well, I'll tell you, if EON want to make as much (or at least almost as much) money off of a future Bond film then they need to bring Pierce Brosnan back for Bond 22. If they were to bring Brosnan back and were to play-up the "you were expecting someone else?" trailers and commercials once again, then they might be able to make DAD type money?
Sean Connery was mostly unknown when he was hired as Bond, Moore was a very popular choice overall, but when you think about it there has never been an actor who was a fan favorite going in to the series as Pierce Brosnan was/is.
I'm sorry but I don't know as that's true. The reviews for CR so far have been at worst, phenomenal. Even the one negative review I read singled Daniel Craig out for praise. He's getting the best reviews of any actor in the role since Connery.
Here in Los Angeles, the buzz on the movie is louder than a beehive that's been kicked. I remember a few months ago it was a little negative, but that's completely changed.
As I've said before, I fully expect CR to make more than Pierce Brosnan's most successful Bond film. You must agree, for CR to fail at the box office or even perform below my expectations, we'd better start hearing some major negatives about it soonish.
Even if by some bizarre twist, CR did bomb at the box office and EON asked Pierce to come back.... I hope he'd have the dignity and class to say no. Roger Moore came back three times too many and only ended up embarrassing himself. I'd hate to have the same happen with Brosnan.
I keep hearing about how Daniel Craig isn't attractive to women and Pierce Brosnan is... but I only ever hear that from men! Funny that. Almost all the women I know think Craig is really hot.
I wonder which film would fair better in terms of return on investment, which is an equitable measure of success as you can get.
Oh I don't know- I'm not going to do a load of maths just to please you. Fact is, the statement 'Borat would cream Bond at the box office no matter who's playing him' is just wrong. Borat made a lot less than pretty much any Bond at the box office.
And you know what's great?
In a week or so, we'll find out! {[]
However, I will make a little prediction for you now: Bond 22 will be bigger than Borat 2 (if there is one).
Here in Los Angeles, the buzz on the movie is louder than a beehive that's been kicked.
I keep hearing about how Daniel Craig isn't attractive to women and Pierce Brosnan is... but I only ever hear that from men! Funny that. Almost all the women I know think Craig is really hot.
Here in Cleveland there isn't any buzz at all about Casino Royale! There was tons of buzz about DAD. But there isn't any about CR.
I know that Cleveland doesn't play nearly as big of a role in Hollywood as L.A does. But if there isn't buzz in Cleveland that may mean that outside of Hollywood and a few other U.S cities that there isn't much buzz in most of the country?
We have what maybe 4 or 5 female members of AJB who post on a regular basis? And I would say that 3 or 4 of them have said many times that they don't find Daniel Craig attractive.
I'm a straight man and I don't claim or care to be an expert on men's looks. But I do know that I and many, many other men as well as women do have an image in our minds of what "James Bond" looks like. And from what I myself have heard the biggest majority don't consider Daniel Craig to look like "James Bond."
YAWWWWWN!!! This negative stance from you is becoming very repetitive - and quite frankly - very boring!
Here in Cleveland there isn't any buzz at all about Casino Royale! There was tons of buzz about DAD. But there isn't any about CR.
I know that Cleveland doesn't play nearly as big of a role in Hollywood as L.A does. But if there isn't buzz in Cleveland that may mean that outside of Hollywood and a few other U.S cities that there isn't much buzz in most of the country?
We have what maybe 4 or 5 female members of AJB who post on a regular basis? And I would say that 3 or 4 of them have said many times that they don't find Daniel Craig attractive.
I'm a straight man and I don't claim or care to be an expert on men's looks. But I do know that I and many, many other men as well as women do have an image in our minds of what "James Bond" looks like. And from what I myself have heard the biggest majority don't consider Daniel Craig to look like "James Bond."
Eye - give it a rest.
You don't think Craig's attractive, we get it. You want Brosnan back, we get it. But fact of the matter is, that's not going to happen. I'm afraid your repetitiveness on here is becoming very tiresome - we've heard it all before, there's nothing new. Your posts are turning into parodies of themselves. Casino Royale is out in a week - that's a fact you're going to have to deal with. It's getting generally good reviews, Daniel Craig's performance is (in the UK at least) being lauded, particularly from those publications (Daily Mirror) that were very quick to mock him in the beginning. There is, again in the UK at least, a massive publicity hype - it's everywhere.
This train can't be turned around. Daniel Craig is James Bond now, you don't have to like him, you don't have to continue being a fan of Bond, but there's nothing you can do about it now other than wait till his 3 film deal is up.
But if you're just coming back to us to tell us that women still find him ugly and there's no publicity for it in your town - then spare us. You've told us once, you don't have to continue telling us. Find something constructive to say.
As for CR not being in "top films of the fall" lists--the film has yet to be screened for American critics, so what are they to base their opinions on? Borat may indeed be the best film of the fall right now--but bear in mind that the big Oscar contenders will be coming out soon enough.
Now, I for one cannot believe that a city as large as Cleveland hasn't seen or heard anything about CR. Come on--I live in the hinterlands now, in a place so remote it doesn't even have a shopping mall, and news about CR is all over the place!
Well, Eye is being a bit disingenuous I think about reactions to CR in Cleveland. Here's his post and my reply from the "Is there a bad review yet?" thread. Look how he characterizes David Moss's reactions to the movie, then watch the clip and see the reality of it:
The TV station WJW channel 8 in Cleveland has a film critic that reviews all of the new movies that are in theaters. David Moss is one of the more well known film critics that is not nationally syndicated, and he gets to interview all of the big name stars as well as lesser known actors.
Just a few minutes ago channel 8 aired David Moss interview with Daniel Craig as well as a very quick review of Casino Royale.
The thing is that the review can't be considered to be possitive or negative about Craig or CR.
The most possitive thing that he said in his review is that the film has good action.
The interview and review were extremely brief, and Moss didn't even indicate whether he thinks the film is good or bad overall, or whether he thinks that Craig is any good in the film or not.
I think were going to be seeing a lot of that, in other words lack of interest one way or another?
As I mentioned earlier in another thread, There isn't any buzz at all for CR in Cleveland right now. There are TV commercials, but there isn't much talk or excitement about the film.
When I'm in the theaters here I will see someone look at a poster for the new Denzell Washington film that is soon to be released and say that it looks pretty good. You will here people talking about a lot of films. But I have yet to hear anyone talking about Casino Royale with the exception of people that I have asked what they think about it or Bond in general.
Are you delusional? David Moss clearly LOVES the movie, and he's having a blast interviewing Craig. You can't tell me that guy is on the fence about whether he likes it or not. Those curious can watch here:
You know, it's okay if you don't want to see CR. No one's going to make you or anything, but don't make stuff up to bolster your argument. It's pathetic.
About 10 years from now there'll be a seventh actor playing James Bond,Eye.He won't be Brosnan but maybe you'll like him more than you do Daniel Craig.
Or not.
And it's really impossible for film critics to determine if they like a motion picture before they even get a chance to see it.We'll all learn what the American critics think of Casino Royale after it debuts in theatres and not before.
Yes,there's an audience for Borat--but there's also an audience for James Bond.And we all know that Eon's recently changed their lead actor.But a change in 007s doesn't automatically mean that the film itself,or that that particular actor's abilities will be below those of the men who preceeded him.If the new 007's performance is good, the public will accept him.Change is what's kept this series alive for over 40 years--it always reinvents itself.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,654MI6 Agent
Would it, though? Borat made $26 million I believe and DAD made $40-odd, didn't it?
I know Borat's on less screens, but you didn't say that; and I'm not sure it works just scaling up by the number of screens (Santa Clause opened on 3,500, which would mean if you scaled up Borat by roughly 4 times to be on the same number of screens it would make $104 million; which isn't likely is it?).
No, I didn't mention the number of screens, though it would not be fair to keep that out of such an assumption. I'll remember your legalistic attention to details in issues the next time and conceive every possible scenario permutation before posting To make this hypothetical match fair, which movie would have better box office given the same marketing budget as Borat? What about the same question with the same production budget as Borat? I suppose you might say that these are comparisons to apples to oranges, but I wonder which film would fair better in terms of return on investment, which is an equitable measure of success as you can get.
Oh I don't know- I'm not going to do a load of maths just to please you. Fact is, the statement 'Borat would cream Bond at the box office no matter who's playing him' is just wrong. Borat made a lot less than pretty much any Bond at the box office.
Hmmm, won't do the math, but went to the trouble to do some research on Borat's business stats just so you can reply to me with an argument? I'm flattered :x
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Well, Eye is being a bit disingenuous I think about reactions to CR in Cleveland. Here's his post and my reply from the "Is there a bad review yet?" thread. Look how he characterizes David Moss's reactions to the movie, then watch the clip and see the reality of it:
The TV station WJW channel 8 in Cleveland has a film critic that reviews all of the new movies that are in theaters. David Moss is one of the more well known film critics that is not nationally syndicated, and he gets to interview all of the big name stars as well as lesser known actors.
Just a few minutes ago channel 8 aired David Moss interview with Daniel Craig as well as a very quick review of Casino Royale.
The thing is that the review can't be considered to be possitive or negative about Craig or CR.
The most possitive thing that he said in his review is that the film has good action.
The interview and review were extremely brief, and Moss didn't even indicate whether he thinks the film is good or bad overall, or whether he thinks that Craig is any good in the film or not.
I think were going to be seeing a lot of that, in other words lack of interest one way or another?
As I mentioned earlier in another thread, There isn't any buzz at all for CR in Cleveland right now. There are TV commercials, but there isn't much talk or excitement about the film.
When I'm in the theaters here I will see someone look at a poster for the new Denzell Washington film that is soon to be released and say that it looks pretty good. You will here people talking about a lot of films. But I have yet to hear anyone talking about Casino Royale with the exception of people that I have asked what they think about it or Bond in general.
Are you delusional? David Moss clearly LOVES the movie, and he's having a blast interviewing Craig. You can't tell me that guy is on the fence about whether he likes it or not. Those curious can watch here:
You know, it's okay if you don't want to see CR. No one's going to make you or anything, but don't make stuff up to bolster your argument. It's pathetic.
Oh Eye, Jacknaples has proven that you're basically lying. Turn it in; this is just silly. A man saying the film is 'wild and has a real edge; is, in your eyes, 'not indicating whether he thinks the film is good or bad'. Clasping at straws I can forgive, but just lying?
Hmmm, won't do the math, but went to the trouble to do some research on Borat's business stats just so you can reply to me with an argument? I'm flattered :x
Oh grow up- reading a news article in my lunch hour and being able to remember it is hardly the same the same as trying to decypher one of your posts and do some maths to try and please you. I'm not the one making the wild claims with no facts behind them- if you want to prove your weird 'Borat would beat any Bond film' hypothesis, go right ahead. More egg, more face.
Watching that TV clip, it clealry shows Eye to be a liar, but also very desperate. This pretty much says the same for the sad gang over at CnB too. The battle has been lost, yet now they are clinging on desperately to anything they can, and shred, any glimmer of hope. If this is the most negative clip Eye can find on Craig, then things must be really bad now for the CnB gang. The one midly negative review from The Observer was the other glimmer of hope they have clung on too, for dear life.
They were nothing but low-life despicable scum before, but now they look nothing more than desperate. I actually feel sorry for them, and Eye too (who to me is a CnB'er through and through).
Unreasonable, liars, hypocrites, homophobic, desperate, sad, twisted, bitter, Brosnan-worshippers, cowards, and overall - very unintelligent morons.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,654MI6 Agent
Hmmm, won't do the math, but went to the trouble to do some research on Borat's business stats just so you can reply to me with an argument? I'm flattered :x
Oh grow up- reading a news article in my lunch hour and being able to remember it is hardly the same the same as trying to decypher one of your posts and do some maths to try and please you. I'm not the one making the wild claims with no facts behind them- if you want to prove your weird 'Borat would beat any Bond film' hypothesis, go right ahead. More egg, more face.
Like you've every really proved any of your pained points, have you? Admit it, you've got a desperate need to make yourself feel better at the expense of others, that's plainly evident in how you carefully craft your attacks on people.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
'Every really'? ?:)
So I take it your predictable move onto insulting me means you can't actually back up any of your usual wild accusations with any facts?
Well, people, remember, back in 1997 there were fears that TND would get creamed at the box office by Titanic. And guess what...it didn't, even though Titanic broke the world box office record. Let's not get too worried here.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,654MI6 Agent
'Every really'? ?:)
So I take it your predictable move onto insulting me means you can't actually back up any of your usual wild accusations with any facts?
Do you consider your hemorrhoid-induced attacks as credible and sound arguments? come on, mincing words and parsing sentences to construe the conclusions you come up with...that's very CnB
Is it all about being right or smacking people down? You need a good hug
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Supes, bless you- you seem to have misunderstood this. You said 'Borat would cream any Bond at the box office'; I said he's at least 15 million off DAD's opening figure so that claim was probably rubbish. You challenged me to prove you wrong, which isn't how it works, and now you're getting insulting because you can't prove your own point and expect me to do it for you.
I'm not mincing or parsing or whatever you want to throw at me; I'm just describing what you're doing, and it makes no sense. Whatsoever. You're changing the subject into an area of pure insults to cover up the fact that there's no substance to your statement. That's even more CnB
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,654MI6 Agent
Supes, bless you- you seem to have misunderstood this. You said 'Borat would cream any Bond at the box office'; I said he's at least 15 million off DAD's opening figure so that claim was probably rubbish. You challenged me to prove you wrong, which isn't how it works, and now you're getting insulting because you can't prove your own point and expect me to do it for you.
I'm not mincing or parsing or whatever you want to throw at me; I'm just describing what you're doing, and it makes no sense. Whatsoever. You're changing the subject into an area of pure insults to cover up the fact that there's no substance to your statement. That's even more
CnB
Yeah? What did DAD open against? Did it open at the same time with a film comparible to Borat's popularity? Remember, the use of currency is mutually exclusive, which I'll explain for your benefit: If you spend money for one thing, you can no longer spend it for something else. What would DAD's take actually be if it opened against Men in Black II? Seems like you ignored that aspect of my premise, which really renders your hypothesis as completely invalid. PWNT!
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
More or less back on topic: Borat is on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno as I write these words, and he just said that all of Kazakstan is looking forward to the "new James Bond"--Roger Moore. He also said he loves that in every film Bond defends England against "the Jew." )
Oh grow up- reading a news article in my lunch hour and being able to remember it is hardly the same the same as trying to decypher one of your posts and do some maths to try and please you. I'm not the one making the wild claims with no facts behind them- if you want to prove your weird 'Borat would beat any Bond film' hypothesis, go right ahead. More egg, more face.
Like you've every really proved any of your pained points, have you? Admit it, you've got a desperate need to make yourself feel better at the expense of others, that's plainly evident in how you carefully craft your attacks on people.
Well, I find it interesting how I have never made any personal attacks on any member of AJB, much less Glidrose, and yet he verbally abuses the people at DCINB and tries to claim that I'm one of them. So if he says those things about them, and then claims I'm one of them, then he's in his mind verbally abusing me too.
Please show where I said you're from CnB.
I have abused CnB members, but that's because their behavour is vile. I'd imagine you'll be hard pressed to find a mod who'll discipline anyone who abuses CnB.
Supes, bless you- you seem to have misunderstood this. You said 'Borat would cream any Bond at the box office'; I said he's at least 15 million off DAD's opening figure so that claim was probably rubbish. You challenged me to prove you wrong, which isn't how it works, and now you're getting insulting because you can't prove your own point and expect me to do it for you.
I'm not mincing or parsing or whatever you want to throw at me; I'm just describing what you're doing, and it makes no sense. Whatsoever. You're changing the subject into an area of pure insults to cover up the fact that there's no substance to your statement. That's even more
CnB
Yeah? What did DAD open against? Did it open at the same time with a film comparible to Borat's popularity? Remember, the use of currency is mutually exclusive, which I'll explain for your benefit: If you spend money for one thing, you can no longer spend it for something else. What would DAD's take actually be if it opened against Men in Black II? Seems like you ignored that aspect of my premise, which really renders your hypothesis as completely invalid. PWNT!
A point which has only just occured to you. Look at who started this thread and what the first post was.
And as to what DAD opened against- I have no idea. Did MIB2 make more or less than Borat? Why don't you do a bit of research and prove your points?
I guess I'm the only person here in the US who has HBO! I can't believe Cohen is getting the mileage that he is out that tired old dog and pony act. You couldn't PAY me to see that film. I hear he'll be getting 42.5 million USD to write and star in a Bruno movie????
The Borat movie is nothing more than old material from his HBO show lumped together for 84 minutes...
He was on Leno last night and I don't think I've ever been more annoyed in my life. I actually felt bad for Martha Stewart. Peter Sellers you are not...
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,654MI6 Agent
Supes, bless you- you seem to have misunderstood this. You said 'Borat would cream any Bond at the box office'; I said he's at least 15 million off DAD's opening figure so that claim was probably rubbish. You challenged me to prove you wrong, which isn't how it works, and now you're getting insulting because you can't prove your own point and expect me to do it for you.
I'm not mincing or parsing or whatever you want to throw at me; I'm just describing what you're doing, and it makes no sense. Whatsoever. You're changing the subject into an area of pure insults to cover up the fact that there's no substance to your statement. That's even more
CnB
Yeah? What did DAD open against? Did it open at the same time with a film comparible to Borat's popularity? Remember, the use of currency is mutually exclusive, which I'll explain for your benefit: If you spend money for one thing, you can no longer spend it for something else. What would DAD's take actually be if it opened against Men in Black II? Seems like you ignored that aspect of my premise, which really renders your hypothesis as completely invalid. PWNT!
A point which has only just occured to you. Look at who started this thread and what the first post was.
And as to what DAD opened against- I have no idea. Did MIB2 make more or less than Borat? Why don't you do a bit of research and prove your points?
Are you putting the burden of proof on me because of your ignorance or inability to logically counter my last post? Or, is it because you can't refute what I just said, because again, it totally rendered everything you've said on this point as invalid. Lazy, lazy, lazy. I thought you enjoyed digging up little trivia or figuring out the smallest loopholes in someone's sentence construction to give you your false sense of superiority. Go on, think of some other sidestep to the issue to disguise the skid marks on your head left after it was buried in your...
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Oh grow up- reading a news article in my lunch hour and being able to remember it is hardly the same the same as trying to decypher one of your posts and do some maths to try and please you. I'm not the one making the wild claims with no facts behind them- if you want to prove your weird 'Borat would beat any Bond film' hypothesis, go right ahead. More egg, more face.
Like you've every really proved any of your pained points, have you? Admit it, you've got a desperate need to make yourself feel better at the expense of others, that's plainly evident in how you carefully craft your attacks on people.
Well, I find it interesting how I have never made any personal attacks on any member of AJB, much less Glidrose, and yet he verbally abuses the people at DCINB and tries to claim that I'm one of them. So if he says those things about them, and then claims I'm one of them, then he's in his mind verbally abusing me too.
Apologies for tarnishing you with the same brush as CnB. I really thought at one point that you were part of that ghastly crew, but now it appears you are not. My mistake. I understand now that you recognise too how offensive they are, and wish to distance yourself sensibly from them also. Wise decision.
However, expect me to go on absuing and trashing CnB as much as I want. Anything as despicable as them deserves nothing less....
Comments
Doesn't suprise me either, as Brosnan is more relevant to todays target audience than Connery, who belonged to a different era. The youngsters watching new Bond films have all grown up with Brosnan, so it makes sense.
However, this will all start to change again, come next week....;)
Maybe Lazenby isn't shown because OHMSS isn't in the sets for sale. OHMSS is in volume 3, which comes out on the 12th of Dec. I have no explanation for Moore. 3 of his movies are in the 2 volumes for sale today. Brosnan has 2 movies and both of Daltons are in Volumes 1 & 2.
Maybe when Volumes 3&4 come out, they'll show mostly Brosnan, Moore briefly with Connery and no Dalton.
Oh I don't know- I'm not going to do a load of maths just to please you. Fact is, the statement 'Borat would cream Bond at the box office no matter who's playing him' is just wrong. Borat made a lot less than pretty much any Bond at the box office.
Here in Los Angeles, the buzz on the movie is louder than a beehive that's been kicked. I remember a few months ago it was a little negative, but that's completely changed.
As I've said before, I fully expect CR to make more than Pierce Brosnan's most successful Bond film. You must agree, for CR to fail at the box office or even perform below my expectations, we'd better start hearing some major negatives about it soonish.
Even if by some bizarre twist, CR did bomb at the box office and EON asked Pierce to come back.... I hope he'd have the dignity and class to say no. Roger Moore came back three times too many and only ended up embarrassing himself. I'd hate to have the same happen with Brosnan.
I keep hearing about how Daniel Craig isn't attractive to women and Pierce Brosnan is... but I only ever hear that from men! Funny that. Almost all the women I know think Craig is really hot.
And you know what's great?
In a week or so, we'll find out! {[]
However, I will make a little prediction for you now: Bond 22 will be bigger than Borat 2 (if there is one).
YAWWWWWN!!! This negative stance from you is becoming very repetitive - and quite frankly - very boring!
You don't think Craig's attractive, we get it. You want Brosnan back, we get it. But fact of the matter is, that's not going to happen. I'm afraid your repetitiveness on here is becoming very tiresome - we've heard it all before, there's nothing new. Your posts are turning into parodies of themselves. Casino Royale is out in a week - that's a fact you're going to have to deal with. It's getting generally good reviews, Daniel Craig's performance is (in the UK at least) being lauded, particularly from those publications (Daily Mirror) that were very quick to mock him in the beginning. There is, again in the UK at least, a massive publicity hype - it's everywhere.
This train can't be turned around. Daniel Craig is James Bond now, you don't have to like him, you don't have to continue being a fan of Bond, but there's nothing you can do about it now other than wait till his 3 film deal is up.
But if you're just coming back to us to tell us that women still find him ugly and there's no publicity for it in your town - then spare us. You've told us once, you don't have to continue telling us. Find something constructive to say.
Now, I for one cannot believe that a city as large as Cleveland hasn't seen or heard anything about CR. Come on--I live in the hinterlands now, in a place so remote it doesn't even have a shopping mall, and news about CR is all over the place!
Are you delusional? David Moss clearly LOVES the movie, and he's having a blast interviewing Craig. You can't tell me that guy is on the fence about whether he likes it or not. Those curious can watch here:
http://www.myfoxcleveland.com/myfox/pages/Entertainment/Detail?contentId=1432103&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=7.2.1
You know, it's okay if you don't want to see CR. No one's going to make you or anything, but don't make stuff up to bolster your argument. It's pathetic.
Or not.
And it's really impossible for film critics to determine if they like a motion picture before they even get a chance to see it.We'll all learn what the American critics think of Casino Royale after it debuts in theatres and not before.
Yes,there's an audience for Borat--but there's also an audience for James Bond.And we all know that Eon's recently changed their lead actor.But a change in 007s doesn't automatically mean that the film itself,or that that particular actor's abilities will be below those of the men who preceeded him.If the new 007's performance is good, the public will accept him.Change is what's kept this series alive for over 40 years--it always reinvents itself.
Hmmm, won't do the math, but went to the trouble to do some research on Borat's business stats just so you can reply to me with an argument? I'm flattered :x
Oh Eye, Jacknaples has proven that you're basically lying. Turn it in; this is just silly. A man saying the film is 'wild and has a real edge; is, in your eyes, 'not indicating whether he thinks the film is good or bad'. Clasping at straws I can forgive, but just lying?
Oh grow up- reading a news article in my lunch hour and being able to remember it is hardly the same the same as trying to decypher one of your posts and do some maths to try and please you. I'm not the one making the wild claims with no facts behind them- if you want to prove your weird 'Borat would beat any Bond film' hypothesis, go right ahead. More egg, more face.
They were nothing but low-life despicable scum before, but now they look nothing more than desperate. I actually feel sorry for them, and Eye too (who to me is a CnB'er through and through).
Unreasonable, liars, hypocrites, homophobic, desperate, sad, twisted, bitter, Brosnan-worshippers, cowards, and overall - very unintelligent morons.
Like you've every really proved any of your pained points, have you? Admit it, you've got a desperate need to make yourself feel better at the expense of others, that's plainly evident in how you carefully craft your attacks on people.
So I take it your predictable move onto insulting me means you can't actually back up any of your usual wild accusations with any facts?
Do you consider your hemorrhoid-induced attacks as credible and sound arguments? come on, mincing words and parsing sentences to construe the conclusions you come up with...that's very CnB
Is it all about being right or smacking people down? You need a good hug
I'm not mincing or parsing or whatever you want to throw at me; I'm just describing what you're doing, and it makes no sense. Whatsoever. You're changing the subject into an area of pure insults to cover up the fact that there's no substance to your statement. That's even more CnB
Yeah? What did DAD open against? Did it open at the same time with a film comparible to Borat's popularity? Remember, the use of currency is mutually exclusive, which I'll explain for your benefit: If you spend money for one thing, you can no longer spend it for something else. What would DAD's take actually be if it opened against Men in Black II? Seems like you ignored that aspect of my premise, which really renders your hypothesis as completely invalid. PWNT!
Please show where I said you're from CnB.
I have abused CnB members, but that's because their behavour is vile. I'd imagine you'll be hard pressed to find a mod who'll discipline anyone who abuses CnB.
A point which has only just occured to you. Look at who started this thread and what the first post was.
And as to what DAD opened against- I have no idea. Did MIB2 make more or less than Borat? Why don't you do a bit of research and prove your points?
The Borat movie is nothing more than old material from his HBO show lumped together for 84 minutes...
He was on Leno last night and I don't think I've ever been more annoyed in my life. I actually felt bad for Martha Stewart. Peter Sellers you are not...
Are you putting the burden of proof on me because of your ignorance or inability to logically counter my last post? Or, is it because you can't refute what I just said, because again, it totally rendered everything you've said on this point as invalid. Lazy, lazy, lazy. I thought you enjoyed digging up little trivia or figuring out the smallest loopholes in someone's sentence construction to give you your false sense of superiority. Go on, think of some other sidestep to the issue to disguise the skid marks on your head left after it was buried in your...
Apologies for tarnishing you with the same brush as CnB. I really thought at one point that you were part of that ghastly crew, but now it appears you are not. My mistake. I understand now that you recognise too how offensive they are, and wish to distance yourself sensibly from them also. Wise decision.
However, expect me to go on absuing and trashing CnB as much as I want. Anything as despicable as them deserves nothing less....