Spectre November 2015
Moderator: Germangirl
-
Sylvia's girl
- Posts: 11961
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:57 am
-
Sylvia's girl
- Posts: 11961
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:57 am
-
Sylvia's girl
- Posts: 11961
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:57 am
Yes, it most certainly is!Sylvia's girl wrote:This is surely bollocks...
http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/ ... -era-1960s
This has already be done : Austin Powers !Sylvia's girl wrote:This is surely bollocks...
http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/ ... -era-1960s
I’ve been lurking, just thought I’d give my 2 cents being as every man and his dog has an opinion.Germangirl wrote:So one good thing came out of this - you came back, at least for a short post.honeyjes wrote:Daniel I presume was mentally and physically tired at the time of some of these interviews, so for us to judge, condemn and think he is a dick/ungrateful et al is quite sad. Worry more about the well being of the man and less about the brand me thinks.
We all know that he puts in 110% and some when he works, and if that is how he was feeling, I think he would rather be hated for being honest than be loved for wearing a mask to please others.
I think most of us know what can come from holding it in in order put on front. People seem to lose perspective when it comes to those in the public eye and fail miserably when it comes to seeing that we are all fallible.
I asked Dunda about you and if you are still online here. She said yes and i thought, it was sad, we see so little of you.
What bothers me about the interview is - that now he has to deal with the shit. Whether or not its his faault or the papers or who elses doesn't matter, because in the end, he pays the bill. People love to jump into these headlines and love to believe the bad. I don't want him to destroy what he worked for so hard with a few words in jest.
I stand by it, that I think, he should tone down his "I don't give a damn" attitude, because only one person gets hurt - Daniel himself. If he was a newbie, I would understsnd, that he didn't know, how words gets twisted, but he only knows too well. Sadly.
I believe, nobody could doubt my dedication to the man, but here, I feel, he needs a kick in the pfa rather then pampering.
The fault, if any lays with the prods. They should know better by now then to set him up, tired and fed up, days before or after (I am not sure) shooting finishes. Give the man a rest, before you throw him into the lions den.
I would like so much, if he showed the world, what a great human being he is instead of giving it the finger so often.
I think some of the comments reflect modern day knee jerk instant gratification syndrome. Where headline making sound bites and deceit is the norm and woe betide anyone who isn’t PC enough.
The art of listening is dying and we only read and hear what we want. Daniel does give a damn, but he is not afraid to speak his mind and this obviously rubs people up the wrong way. I like him warts and all and just find it ridiculous that we allow the disingenuous nature of the media to hold sway in how we react and treat others.
If we are going to knock the man for not changing his nature and if he becomes banal and likeable to please the masses we then need to mothball this site in tribute to the man that was.
I’d better shut up before I really say what I mean lol.
Truth, wisdom, love, seek reasons; malice only seeks causes.
Johann Kaspar Lavater
Johann Kaspar Lavater
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enter ... 89751.html
Spectre: Daniel Craig's fourth outing as James Bond is likely to delve into 007's past – this is a worrying prospect
When Bond 24, Spectre, is released later this month, cinemagoers will discover whether Daniel Craig (in his fourth movie as 007) will finally be getting in touch with his inner Roger Moore… or whether this will be Bond back in Hamlet mode, agonising over the metaphysical meaninglessness of being an action man spy in the Edward Snowden era.
As ever, ahead of the release of a new Bond film, there has been wild speculation over which turn Bond will be taking. The talk among foreign distributors (who claim to have seen the film in advance) is that the franchise is going back to basics: no eyebrow arching and winking at Moneypenny, but no self-indulgent neurotic navel-gazing either. The trailer seems to back them up. “Is this really what you want, living in the shadows, hunting, being hunted, always alone?†Dr Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux) asks Craig’s Bond. “I don’t stop to think about it,†he blithely dismisses her line of inquiry.
However, Spectre director Sam Mendes spoke recently to one British newspaper about the importance of eradicating the “self-reflective jokes, the jokes, the nods and winksâ€, and in making Bond “real†and “emotionalâ€. This is a process that began (Mendes suggested) with director Martin Campbell on Casino Royale and that he has sought to continue in Skyfall and Spectre. There have even been rumours that, in Spectre, Bond “may finally find his familyâ€.
One of the main reasons that the James Bond franchise has lasted for more than 50 years is precisely that Bond doesn’t have a backstory. As a character, he arrived on screen fully formed. In Dr No, his personality was already as faultlessly tailored as the dinner jacket he wore at the gambling tables. This is not a man prey to introspection, or fretting about the past or wondering how he might change in the future. He isn’t worried (like George Smiley) about being cuckolded by a colleague. He is promiscuous, but either has low sperm count or a faultless record with contraception: his girlfriends never seem to get pregnant. He doesn’t have elderly relatives he has to take to the hospital, nappies to change or children he has to pick up at the school gates. Nobody gives him birthday cakes and he is never called up by old school friends. He doesn’t age. The same observations found in Skyfall about him being too busy with his nocturnal activities to be in the shape required of “Double-O officers†were found in Dr No too.
“That’s basically Bond. Everyone has a different version in their heads,†director Sam Mendes recently observed of 007, pointing out that some people always grumble that the films are too funny, while others complain that they are not funny enough. His remarks hint at Bond’s secret. The 007 agent is a character of such monumental superficiality that we can project on to him. He is defined by his gadgets, weapons, cars, clothes and lovers. To invoke his childhood, put him in the psychiatrist’s chair or bring his family on to the screen would therefore surely be a huge mistake.
Craig has always approached playing Bond with all the drive and thoroughness of a Method actor trying to dig under the skin of a peculiarly troubled and complicated character. You can see why Craig follows this tack. The more details he absorbs, the richer he feels his performance will become. The actor has described Bond as a “misogynist†and someone with “serious f*****g problemsâ€. Asking what made Bond that way is to risk undermining his mystique. Craig’s brilliance in the role lies in the way he is able to hint at an interior life that Bond watchers know isn’t really there.
The screenwriters behind Bond have been performing a delicate balancing act for the past half century, trying to maintain what Richard Maibaum (who wrote more Bond movies than anyone else) called “the proper balance between the suspense, the sex and the funâ€.
The spy has had his emotional moments along the way. Long before Daniel Craig, George Lazenby’s Bond had to cope with seeing his new bride, Countess Tracy Di Vicenzo (Diana Rigg), shot to death in front of him in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.
“It’s alright. It’s quite alright really, she is having a rest,†the distraught secret agent, cradling her body in his arms, tells the policeman who turns up on the scene. “It’s no hurry. We have all the time in the world.†It’s a suitably atrocious piece of acting from Lazenby, who doesn’t look upset at all. Instead he looks rather embarrassed to be caught at such an intimate moment. This was not how anyone wanted to see Bond and the only surprise was that Lazenby didn’t wink to let us know for certain that he was only putting on the grief.
Helpfully, the scene came right at the end of the movie anyway, which meant that by the time the next Bond was made, Diamonds Are Forever, with Sean Connery back in the role, Countess Tracy was long since forgotten.
Timothy Dalton’s Bond was also shown close to tears, much to the indignation of many Bond watchers. Dalton was a better actor than Lazenby and even more soulful than Craig in the role. His Bond seemed less comfortable with violence than any other – one reason, perhaps, that he only lasted for two movies.
Generally, the Bond series has managed to auto-correct. If it lurches too far in one direction, it will always move swiftly in another.
As Maibaum noted, Fleming’s novels generally served up much the same basic ingredients: “a monstrous villain, torture scenes, card games, the femme lead involved with the opposition etc.†The trick was to tailor the screenplays so the “love stuff,†the suspense and the comic elements were all in the correct alignment. Delving too far into Bond’s memories would be one certain way of unbalancing the money-making machine that Broccoli and Saltzman coaxed into existence more than half a century ago.
Bond himself always looked forward, not back. That is why Spectre seems such a tantalising and worrying prospect. Its very title invokes memories of the shadowy organisation Bond fought against in earlier films. In the trailer, we see his name scrawled on a memorial listing of those who died serving their country. Christoph Waltz’s villain, the “author of all your painsâ€, seems desperate to dig his claws into Bond’s past and torment him that way. That raises the possibility of a more neurotic, conscience-stricken and traumatised Bond than we have ever seen before – a prospect most decidely not to be wished.
Spectre: Daniel Craig's fourth outing as James Bond is likely to delve into 007's past – this is a worrying prospect
When Bond 24, Spectre, is released later this month, cinemagoers will discover whether Daniel Craig (in his fourth movie as 007) will finally be getting in touch with his inner Roger Moore… or whether this will be Bond back in Hamlet mode, agonising over the metaphysical meaninglessness of being an action man spy in the Edward Snowden era.
As ever, ahead of the release of a new Bond film, there has been wild speculation over which turn Bond will be taking. The talk among foreign distributors (who claim to have seen the film in advance) is that the franchise is going back to basics: no eyebrow arching and winking at Moneypenny, but no self-indulgent neurotic navel-gazing either. The trailer seems to back them up. “Is this really what you want, living in the shadows, hunting, being hunted, always alone?†Dr Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux) asks Craig’s Bond. “I don’t stop to think about it,†he blithely dismisses her line of inquiry.
However, Spectre director Sam Mendes spoke recently to one British newspaper about the importance of eradicating the “self-reflective jokes, the jokes, the nods and winksâ€, and in making Bond “real†and “emotionalâ€. This is a process that began (Mendes suggested) with director Martin Campbell on Casino Royale and that he has sought to continue in Skyfall and Spectre. There have even been rumours that, in Spectre, Bond “may finally find his familyâ€.
One of the main reasons that the James Bond franchise has lasted for more than 50 years is precisely that Bond doesn’t have a backstory. As a character, he arrived on screen fully formed. In Dr No, his personality was already as faultlessly tailored as the dinner jacket he wore at the gambling tables. This is not a man prey to introspection, or fretting about the past or wondering how he might change in the future. He isn’t worried (like George Smiley) about being cuckolded by a colleague. He is promiscuous, but either has low sperm count or a faultless record with contraception: his girlfriends never seem to get pregnant. He doesn’t have elderly relatives he has to take to the hospital, nappies to change or children he has to pick up at the school gates. Nobody gives him birthday cakes and he is never called up by old school friends. He doesn’t age. The same observations found in Skyfall about him being too busy with his nocturnal activities to be in the shape required of “Double-O officers†were found in Dr No too.
“That’s basically Bond. Everyone has a different version in their heads,†director Sam Mendes recently observed of 007, pointing out that some people always grumble that the films are too funny, while others complain that they are not funny enough. His remarks hint at Bond’s secret. The 007 agent is a character of such monumental superficiality that we can project on to him. He is defined by his gadgets, weapons, cars, clothes and lovers. To invoke his childhood, put him in the psychiatrist’s chair or bring his family on to the screen would therefore surely be a huge mistake.
Craig has always approached playing Bond with all the drive and thoroughness of a Method actor trying to dig under the skin of a peculiarly troubled and complicated character. You can see why Craig follows this tack. The more details he absorbs, the richer he feels his performance will become. The actor has described Bond as a “misogynist†and someone with “serious f*****g problemsâ€. Asking what made Bond that way is to risk undermining his mystique. Craig’s brilliance in the role lies in the way he is able to hint at an interior life that Bond watchers know isn’t really there.
The screenwriters behind Bond have been performing a delicate balancing act for the past half century, trying to maintain what Richard Maibaum (who wrote more Bond movies than anyone else) called “the proper balance between the suspense, the sex and the funâ€.
The spy has had his emotional moments along the way. Long before Daniel Craig, George Lazenby’s Bond had to cope with seeing his new bride, Countess Tracy Di Vicenzo (Diana Rigg), shot to death in front of him in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.
“It’s alright. It’s quite alright really, she is having a rest,†the distraught secret agent, cradling her body in his arms, tells the policeman who turns up on the scene. “It’s no hurry. We have all the time in the world.†It’s a suitably atrocious piece of acting from Lazenby, who doesn’t look upset at all. Instead he looks rather embarrassed to be caught at such an intimate moment. This was not how anyone wanted to see Bond and the only surprise was that Lazenby didn’t wink to let us know for certain that he was only putting on the grief.
Helpfully, the scene came right at the end of the movie anyway, which meant that by the time the next Bond was made, Diamonds Are Forever, with Sean Connery back in the role, Countess Tracy was long since forgotten.
Timothy Dalton’s Bond was also shown close to tears, much to the indignation of many Bond watchers. Dalton was a better actor than Lazenby and even more soulful than Craig in the role. His Bond seemed less comfortable with violence than any other – one reason, perhaps, that he only lasted for two movies.
Generally, the Bond series has managed to auto-correct. If it lurches too far in one direction, it will always move swiftly in another.
As Maibaum noted, Fleming’s novels generally served up much the same basic ingredients: “a monstrous villain, torture scenes, card games, the femme lead involved with the opposition etc.†The trick was to tailor the screenplays so the “love stuff,†the suspense and the comic elements were all in the correct alignment. Delving too far into Bond’s memories would be one certain way of unbalancing the money-making machine that Broccoli and Saltzman coaxed into existence more than half a century ago.
Bond himself always looked forward, not back. That is why Spectre seems such a tantalising and worrying prospect. Its very title invokes memories of the shadowy organisation Bond fought against in earlier films. In the trailer, we see his name scrawled on a memorial listing of those who died serving their country. Christoph Waltz’s villain, the “author of all your painsâ€, seems desperate to dig his claws into Bond’s past and torment him that way. That raises the possibility of a more neurotic, conscience-stricken and traumatised Bond than we have ever seen before – a prospect most decidely not to be wished.
-
SmittenDramaKitten
- Posts: 9942
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 11:29 am
I agree with you totally HJ....honeyjes wrote:I’ve been lurking, just thought I’d give my 2 cents being as every man and his dog has an opinion.Germangirl wrote:So one good thing came out of this - you came back, at least for a short post.honeyjes wrote:Daniel I presume was mentally and physically tired at the time of some of these interviews, so for us to judge, condemn and think he is a dick/ungrateful et al is quite sad. Worry more about the well being of the man and less about the brand me thinks.
We all know that he puts in 110% and some when he works, and if that is how he was feeling, I think he would rather be hated for being honest than be loved for wearing a mask to please others.
I think most of us know what can come from holding it in in order put on front. People seem to lose perspective when it comes to those in the public eye and fail miserably when it comes to seeing that we are all fallible.
I asked Dunda about you and if you are still online here. She said yes and i thought, it was sad, we see so little of you.
What bothers me about the interview is - that now he has to deal with the shit. Whether or not its his faault or the papers or who elses doesn't matter, because in the end, he pays the bill. People love to jump into these headlines and love to believe the bad. I don't want him to destroy what he worked for so hard with a few words in jest.
I stand by it, that I think, he should tone down his "I don't give a damn" attitude, because only one person gets hurt - Daniel himself. If he was a newbie, I would understsnd, that he didn't know, how words gets twisted, but he only knows too well. Sadly.
I believe, nobody could doubt my dedication to the man, but here, I feel, he needs a kick in the pfa rather then pampering.
The fault, if any lays with the prods. They should know better by now then to set him up, tired and fed up, days before or after (I am not sure) shooting finishes. Give the man a rest, before you throw him into the lions den.
I would like so much, if he showed the world, what a great human being he is instead of giving it the finger so often.
I think some of the comments reflect modern day knee jerk instant gratification syndrome. Where headline making sound bites and deceit is the norm and woe betide anyone who isn’t PC enough.
The art of listening is dying and we only read and hear what we want. Daniel does give a damn, but he is not afraid to speak his mind and this obviously rubs people up the wrong way. I like him warts and all and just find it ridiculous that we allow the disingenuous nature of the media to hold sway in how we react and treat others.
If we are going to knock the man for not changing his nature and if he becomes banal and likeable to please the masses we then need to mothball this site in tribute to the man that was.
I’d better shut up before I really say what I mean lol.
... the bold comments... not too sure that I want to 'mothball' this site though. 
Daniel won't change to please others.... that's the best thing about him.... 
I also appreciate Cass posting that article from the Independent but don't really get what they're saying.
I'm not worried about the story that the movie is going to give us. I'm more worried about SEEING the movie enough times to keep me happy. 
Honestly, the thought that I may not LIKE Spectre never came to me and, I really do find that thought implausible...-
Germangirl
- Moderator
- Posts: 47069
- Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
- Location: Germany
As far as I am concerned, he could be whatever he wants in public, if there wasn't as bill to pay for this. And HE is paying that bill. So all I am saying is, for his own sake, he should be more careful. The press is not gonna change but can easily destroy his career, if he doesn't watch out. I don't want this.
And Jes, be Danielish and say, what you really mean
I can't imagine any of us wants to see him knocked out and hated, just because we find, he should not watch after his own itnerests a bit more and be a bit more diplomatic.
All of us have to make certain "bows" in our jobs or daily life to fare well, so why not him?
And Jes, be Danielish and say, what you really mean
I can't imagine any of us wants to see him knocked out and hated, just because we find, he should not watch after his own itnerests a bit more and be a bit more diplomatic.
All of us have to make certain "bows" in our jobs or daily life to fare well, so why not him?
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..
-
Germangirl
- Moderator
- Posts: 47069
- Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
- Location: Germany
Lets hope, we can see it soon.
Just saw an advert on TV about the Jonathan Ross Bond TV special and although the clips shown were brief, Ross appears to be agreeable and Craig looks to be relaxed and enjoying himself. Should be good
MI6
Just saw an advert on TV about the Jonathan Ross Bond TV special and although the clips shown were brief, Ross appears to be agreeable and Craig looks to be relaxed and enjoying himself. Should be good
MI6
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..
Graham Norton always pops up on YTFrenchCat wrote:Can these tv shows (Jonathan Ross and Graham Norton) be seen outside UK ? And if yes, where ?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCCQxU ... v3xU2YF7Cw
It may take some time until the latest episode shows up, but they all show up there
For JR we have to hope for the best that it shows up on YT too
Yes, let's hope we can see also the JR Special.