max power 21 Posted March 10, 2011 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/movies/daniel-craig-as-james-bond-will-get-3-d-treatment-for-next-film/story-e6frf9h6-1225818694206 Possibly the worst idea I've heard in a while. I liked the realistic direction the series was taking.. now it's going full cartoon! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raynor 0 Posted March 10, 2011 3d =/= cgi. 3d = 3d. Personally I don't care because all the movies I get end up in 2d on my screen. Put on your (3d) glasses. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryguy 10 Posted March 10, 2011 Yea dude this doesn't even mention CGI! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
soul_assassin 1750 Posted March 10, 2011 lol thats too funny Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PuFu 4600 Posted March 10, 2011 theo, you are on the wrong side of the world mate Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Hey, good catch. The guy who forwarded this to me was on about it being a 3d animated production. It was solidified in my mind with the talk about taking the film in 'a new direction'. I feel better now :p I don't understand the issue about 3d being gimmicky, then. It's not like it's not possible to watch a film shot in 3d in 2d. So long as they steer clear of the idiotic scenes where shit flies at the camera all the time it should be good! Edited March 10, 2011 by Max Power Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jblackrupert 14 Posted March 11, 2011 Not all 3D is bad. Here's John Candy before he became famous. iEnCKEfSgUM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted March 11, 2011 SCTV was pretty funny ^_^ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 146 Posted March 11, 2011 I don't care as long as the director of Quantum of Solace dies a slow and painful death. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-)rStrangelove 0 Posted March 11, 2011 I don't care as long as the director of Quantum of Solace dies a slow and painful death. True. What CasinoRoyale gained back was almost entirely destroyed by QoS again. GJ. :rolleyes: Something like a CasinoRoyale2 is badly needed to get the drive back. I doubt it though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted March 11, 2011 In my opinion putting him as james bond was a mistake in the very first place. (Pierce Brosnan really did a better job, Craig trys to look cool all the time. He is trying that way too hard and looks silly doing so) Making him stand out in the movie is just a gimmick for me.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted March 11, 2011 I've liked both of the new ones quite a bit. I kind see where you are coming from with Craig always trying to look cool but overall I have liked them better than most the others. I'm not looking forward to it being 3D but it is likely it will be released both 3D and 2D. I just hope they don't try too hard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Mac 19 Posted March 11, 2011 )rStrangelove;1871949']True. What CasinoRoyale gained back was almost entirely destroyed by QoS again. GJ. :rolleyes:Something like a CasinoRoyale2 is badly needed to get the drive back. I doubt it though. The both sucked IMO. I thought getting rid of Pierce Brosnan as 007 was their first big mistake and their second one was radically changing the "007 Formula" from the old style Bond which has been going strong since Sean Connery was 007 to this new formula which IMO is just shit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gnarly_rider 0 Posted March 11, 2011 )rStrangelove;1871949']True. What CasinoRoyale gained back was almost entirely destroyed by QoS again. GJ. :rolleyes:Something like a CasinoRoyale2 is badly needed to get the drive back. I doubt it though. Amen :bounce3: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
An-225 0 Posted March 11, 2011 The both sucked IMO. I thought getting rid of Pierce Brosnan as 007 was their first big mistake and their second one was radically changing the "007 Formula" from the old style Bond which has been going strong since Sean Connery was 007 to this new formula which IMO is just shit. This. Even the novels had outlandish plots, contrast that with the two hours of blandness in Casino Royale and QoS. That's what made the series special, and without that escapism involved, it may as well be a Bourne film. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Serclaes 0 Posted March 11, 2011 I liked the old 007s and i liked Daniel Craig. Especially since he isn't shallow anymore. Even if quantum of solace could have been a little better. Think of the Daniel Craig stuff as disconnected from the others and just enjoy it ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted March 11, 2011 The first Bond movie I ever saw was Goldeneye although I think that I have seen all of them now. I thought that Pierce was really good but I also feel that it started going downhill in his time. Die Another Day was a piece of crap so i'm glad I can pretend like it never happened now. I like this new style because it seems a lot more realistic to me. The Gadgets aren't totally ridiculous like some of the other ones, specifically Die Another Day. I do see how you can compare it to a Bourne movie but I think that it is a good middle ground between Bourne and old James Bond. I feel that Bond is a real person whereas before he didn't feel that way in most of the movies and I never liked how things never really carried over from other ones. I like that about the new ones. After all, I never realized that Bond ever even had a wife for the longest time. She's in OHMSS and then gets a brief mention at the beginning of the next one for 10 seconds. Then she is never mentioned again. In the new ones the loss of Vesper feels like it actually changed him a bit which makes him more realistic to me. My favorite Bond movies in no real order: Goldeneye, OHMSS, Quantum, Casino Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 146 Posted March 11, 2011 Goldeneye was Brosnan's best film, and the best Bond film without exception. When I was 10, I used to come home from primary school, do my homework and watch it. Again. And again. And again. I could quote the entire movie line for line by the end. Then it came out on the N64, and the outside world as I knew it pretty much ended. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel 0 Posted March 11, 2011 The both sucked IMO. I thought getting rid of Pierce Brosnan as 007 was their first big mistake and their second one was radically changing the "007 Formula" from the old style Bond which has been going strong since Sean Connery was 007 to this new formula which IMO is just shit. No way man! Casino Royale is the first good Bond film in years! Especially after Die Another Day *shudder* :p Think of the Daniel Craig stuff as disconnected from the others and just enjoy it This. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pyronick 21 Posted March 11, 2011 Casino Royale was really fresh, a more realistic and gritty approach. I had really good hopes for Quantum of Solace after watching Casino Royale. Especially the opening scene was spectacular, everything after that was more like a regular action movie. Even the fact that simple Alfa-Romeo 159 Ti's could keep up with an Aston-Martin DBS spoiled it a bit for me. :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Mac 19 Posted March 11, 2011 No way man! Casino Royale is the first good Bond film in years! Especially after Die Another Day *shudder*Oh come on man. Die Another Day was alright. I still preferred the 3 previous Brosnan Bond films to Die Another Day, but Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were more like Bourne films (And I hate Matt Damon and those wannabe 007 Bourne films.) than 007. I actually walked out of the theater halfway through Quantum of Solace. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel 0 Posted March 11, 2011 h come on man. Die Another Day was alright. Haha, no it wasn't! That surfing ice-cliff scene thing... Casino Royale might not have been in with the cheesy theme but it was definitely a better movie. But then again I loved the Bourne series. To be honest I can't remember much from Quantum of Solace. But Casino Royale stood out as a good film. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jblackrupert 14 Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) James bond is obsolete, at least the old style one with the evil enemies with volcano hideouts. Gadgets and super villains don't fly anymore. Walmart sells better gadgets and the villains of old just look silly especially after the Austin Powers movies. Edited March 12, 2011 by jblackrupert Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryguy 10 Posted March 12, 2011 (And I hate Matt Damon and those wannabe 007 Bourne films.) than 007. I actually walked out of the theater halfway through Quantum of Solace. Wannabe??! Are you forgetting that they were books first and that the first one came out before Casino Royale?! Nothing about bourne is similar to bond except for the fact they are both agents. Literally everything else is different. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roberthammer 582 Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) In my opinion - they created Daniel Craig as action hero like Bourne films , Bond is a spy , not action hero like Sylvester Stallone or other The best for me was the Goldeneye and the Tomorrow Never Dies was good too Edited March 12, 2011 by RobertHammer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites