Bond 22 gearing up for pre-production

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 20 Oct 2008, 21:30

I wish I'd not seen this thread now. I now have concerns, I didn't have before. Still there's nothing worse than hype with a poor film.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Oct 2008, 00:52

That review whines about the lack of cheesy humour and gadgets etc, I thought that was what we were getting away from with this new Bond?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Oct 2008, 02:34

I read the Daily Express pre-review and their critic didn't like it much either; citing the same criticisms as the others.

Doesn't mean we won't like it, but I think it would be best to lower our expectations a bit.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Oct 2008, 02:51

Positive review:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/ ... 965892.ece

Round-Up:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog ... ws-roundup

Empire:

This more like it.

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/rev ... FID=134523

Killer Meteor · Post by **Killer Meteor** » 21 Oct 2008, 04:22

I never put much stock in the Daily Mail. Or Mirror. Or the D(ian)aily Express

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 21 Oct 2008, 08:32

grim_tales wrote:That review whines about the lack of cheesy humour and gadgets etc, I thought that was what we were getting away from with this new Bond?

Casino Royale didnt have cheesy humour, but it did HAVE humour, and it would be a shame if that dark humour that was in CR and that Craig pulled off so perfectly, and which is so great about the Bond character, would now be missing.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Oct 2008, 09:55

True, I loved some of CR's humour like when Craig snapped "Does it look like I give a damn!" when the barman asks him how he wants his drink

Still looking forward to QoS though

I skimmed through the "positive" reviews, I'm not reading any more.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 21 Oct 2008, 12:58

The best gag was the scratching balls gag in the torture scene, just what was needed

.

Markgway wrote:Empire:

This more like it.

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/rev ... FID=134523

Thanks Mark, for the reviews.

It's a given Empire would like, they always do like big blockbusters.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Oct 2008, 13:26

I loved the itchy balls gag!

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Nov 2008, 14:47

I hope we can get an uncut version of Quantum of Solace on DVD.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 21 Nov 2008, 14:51

Was it cut? I guess I've missed that, where's the link?

Not that I really care too much, it was poor. What did you think Grim?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Nov 2008, 15:01

I enjoyed it

Not as good as Casino Royale but it was a solid film. 7.5/10 IMO (so above average).

My review/thoughts here:

https://www.bulletsnbabesdvd.com/forums/ ... start=1040

On the BBFC site it says:

"General Remarks

This film was originally seen by the BBFC in an unfinished version, for advice as to the film's suitability at '12A'. The BBFC advised the company that the film would most likely receive a '12A' as it was, but that care should be taken when finishing the film not to increase the intensity of certain scenes. When the completed version of the film was submitted for classification, reductions to one of those scenes had been made and the film was passed '12A' without cuts."

So it sounds like cuts were made at the editing stage a la Goldeneye etc, but I'm not sure

Casino Royale was cut in USA/UK but uncut on R3 so who knows?

IronMonkey · Post by **IronMonkey** » 21 Nov 2008, 17:38

The film wasn't censored by either the BBFC or the MPAA. The film version of the film submitted to them was passed uncut.

Grim's quote above makes no mention of any cuts. It says "care should be taken when finishing the film not to increase the intensity of certain scenes". It does not say "we will demand cuts to certain scenes for it to pass as 12A".

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 21 Nov 2008, 17:59

Ah that. Thanks Grim. I knew about that from the BBFC website. We discussed it awhile back.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Nov 2008, 18:10

The BBFC didnt cut anything but it suggests the filmmakers toned a scene down for 12A.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 21 Nov 2008, 18:11

Or toned down for everywhere.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Nov 2008, 18:19

Possibly, we don't know...

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 21 Nov 2008, 18:46

I'll only buy an uncut version of Quantum of Solace if it has about a million cuts restored to the action scenes where all the action is missing due to diabolical editing

When seeing Daniel Craig jump over to the balcony on the behind the scenes documentary looked better than on the film itself, there's a problem.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 21 Nov 2008, 22:56

I'd love to see an 'extended' cut, where they fix the action-scenes and maybe include some extra characterisation stuff...

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Nov 2008, 23:34

An extended cut wouldn't surprise me in this instance. They could add a half hour and it'd still be well shy of CR's run time. The BBFC appear not to have asked for cuts, just said "be careful", and the company have overreacted.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 22 Nov 2008, 11:07

Well, who knows? They could do but have any of the Bonds been extended?
Maybe there'll be lots of deleted scenes.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 22 Nov 2008, 18:13

It certainly could not do with being extended, I was bored senseless before it had even finished! I then realised why it's so short (for a Bond film), lol.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 22 Nov 2008, 18:28

It definitely needs to be longer IF it's character and not action stuff.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 01 Jan 2009, 19:50

Maddox hates QoS.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net ... of_phallus

I'm surprised he didn't mention the atrocious editing, though.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 01 Jan 2009, 22:08

I don't know who Maddox is and don't care. That page was shitter than smelly shit in a 120 degree heat.