Was the reboot really essential to get box office?

osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
in The James Bond Films
And if not, were there alternatives that could have been explored that would just as equally have worked at reinvigorating the series?
«13

Comments

  • minigeffminigeff EnglandPosts: 7,884MI6 Agent
    Oh FFS
    'Force feeding AJB humour and banter since 2009'
    Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk
    www.cancerresearchuk.org
  • welshboy78welshboy78 Posts: 10,326MI6 Agent
    Brosnan was still pulling in the Box Office figures but the franchise was stale and running out of ideas, I personally lost interest in Bond.

    Casino Royale was a huge smack in the face, it was great, the PTS is so simple but due to the raw, aggressive DC it made me cheer for Bond again and was exactly what this franchise needed!!

    I think Casino Royale was perfect and could not have been much better, Bond has never been so popular in many years and its also cool again to like Bond after years of cheese!!!

    Brosnan went at the right time otherwise we would be starting to go back into late Moore territory.

    Yes the reboot was necessary otherwise I think we would have had more stinkers and the franchise would prob faded away
    Instagram - bondclothes007
  • osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
    I agree that the franchise was stale, but was a reboot (strictly speaking reinventing Bond's chronology) as opposed to a “makeover” (i.e., as in, I suppose, GF) necessary? I would have preferred a makeover. This would have solved the problem of staleness whilst keeping the essential Bondian character traits and filmic stylistic elements.

    I’m glad that SF has reintroduced some of those elements, though, as it indicates a movement by the producers towards a more traditionalist take on Bond, albeit within the limits of the reboot’s “alternative universe”.
  • superadosuperado Regent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
    minigeff wrote:
    Oh FFS

    What does that mean?
    "...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.....
  • Ens007Ens007 EnglandPosts: 863MI6 Agent
    welshboy78 wrote:
    Brosnan was still pulling in the Box Office figures but the franchise was stale and running out of ideas, I personally lost interest in Bond.

    Casino Royale was a huge smack in the face, it was great, the PTS is so simple but due to the raw, aggressive DC it made me cheer for Bond again and was exactly what this franchise needed!!

    I think Casino Royale was perfect and could not have been much better, Bond has never been so popular in many years and its also cool again to like Bond after years of cheese!!!

    Brosnan went at the right time otherwise we would be starting to go back into late Moore territory.

    Yes the reboot was necessary otherwise I think we would have had more stinkers and the franchise would prob faded away

    Great post sir & couldn't put it any better.
  • minigeffminigeff EnglandPosts: 7,884MI6 Agent
    superado wrote:
    minigeff wrote:
    Oh FFS

    What does that mean?

    It means 'oh for f@cks sake', as in "oh for f@cks sake not another 'is a reboot needed?' thread started by Osris."
    'Force feeding AJB humour and banter since 2009'
    Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk
    www.cancerresearchuk.org
  • zaphodzaphod Posts: 1,183MI6 Agent
    I think instituting change before it was necessary in Box office terms was a smart and bold move. We Bond nerds tend to dislike DAD, but if fared fairly well despite our grumblings.
  • superadosuperado Regent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
    minigeff wrote:
    superado wrote:
    minigeff wrote:
    Oh FFS

    What does that mean?

    It means 'oh for f@cks sake', as in "oh for f@cks sake not another 'is a reboot needed?' thread started by Osris."

    I'm getting old, but at least take comfort that that expression no longer takes the Lord's name in vain. To answer his question for this thread and future ones, "yes."
    "...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.....
  • osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
    Just saw this old article:

    "The Bond 'Reboot': Has the EON Bond Team finally lost their marbles?"

    http://danielcraigisnotbond.com/haseonlosttheirmrables.html
  • Ens007Ens007 EnglandPosts: 863MI6 Agent
    There's a shock - you've posted an age-old anti-DC article. 8-)
  • welshboy78welshboy78 Posts: 10,326MI6 Agent
    Haha

    I love the fact you have been browsing Danielcraigisnotbond


    Says it all really doesn't it
    Instagram - bondclothes007
  • osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
    edited December 2012
    welshboy78 wrote:
    Haha

    I love the fact you have been browsing Danielcraigisnotbond


    Says it all really doesn't it


    I've only been to that site a few times.

    The article is about the reboot being an afterthought, more than it is about Craig bashing. That’s why I posted the link.
  • AlphaOmegaSinAlphaOmegaSin EnglandPosts: 10,926MI6 Agent
    edited December 2012
    I cannot believe there is a whole site dedicated to bashing DC 8-)

    It also looks like the whole site was made using MS Paint.
    1.On Her Majesties Secret Service 2.The Living Daylights 3.license To Kill 4.The Spy Who Loved Me 5.Goldfinger
  • Ens007Ens007 EnglandPosts: 863MI6 Agent
    You're not anti-Craig, yet you attempt to back up your points by quoting from an anti-Craig site??! I'm still trying to work that one out ...
  • osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
    Just because a site is anti-Craig doesn’t mean it can’t have valid points about the reboot. In my view, a reboot would have been a bad idea even if Connery were Bond.
  • Ens007Ens007 EnglandPosts: 863MI6 Agent
    Have you seriously read the piece??!! Really???!!
  • osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
    Have you? If so, tell me your thoughts on it.
  • TheundeadkennedyTheundeadkennedy Posts: 292MI6 Agent
    osris wrote:
    Just saw this old article:

    "The Bond 'Reboot': Has the EON Bond Team finally lost their marbles?"

    http://danielcraigisnotbond.com/haseonlosttheirmrables.html

    Posting a link to that garbage could only hurt your cause.
  • The Domino EffectThe Domino Effect Posts: 3,638MI6 Agent
    Brought to you by the makers of "Will Skyfall be as bad as the last two Bond films?" and other such classics.
  • TheundeadkennedyTheundeadkennedy Posts: 292MI6 Agent
    :))
  • walther p99walther p99 NJPosts: 3,416MI6 Agent
    edited December 2012
    yes apparently it was.
    @deanwdunlevy
  • osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
    This discussion has more or less been covered in the following thread from page 2 onwards:

    http://www.ajb007.co.uk/topic/40078/who-were-the-least-muscular-bonds/page/2/

    Most of my points were made there, so I will just leave it at that.
  • minigeffminigeff EnglandPosts: 7,884MI6 Agent
    osris wrote:
    This discussion has more or less been covered in the following thread from page 2 onwards:

    http://www.ajb007.co.uk/topic/40078/who-were-the-least-muscular-bonds/page/2/

    Most of my points were made there, so I will just leave it at that.

    Could you summarise these points and the context in which you made them, as there might be others who wish to join this discussion but as it has spanned many posts and 3 separate threads, they might find it hard to follow, plus the thread to which you've posted the link to is now closed, making a continuation of the discussion there impossible.
    'Force feeding AJB humour and banter since 2009'
    Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk
    www.cancerresearchuk.org
  • osrisosris Posts: 558MI6 Agent
    edited December 2012
    If I did, this thread would be locked, too.
  • minigeffminigeff EnglandPosts: 7,884MI6 Agent
    osris wrote:
    If I did this thread would be locked, too.

    Don't understand why. :s
    'Force feeding AJB humour and banter since 2009'
    Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk
    www.cancerresearchuk.org
  • AlphaOmegaSinAlphaOmegaSin EnglandPosts: 10,926MI6 Agent
    8-)
    1.On Her Majesties Secret Service 2.The Living Daylights 3.license To Kill 4.The Spy Who Loved Me 5.Goldfinger
  • MANDY1MANDY1 TISPosts: 2,608MI6 Agent
    minigeff wrote:
    osris wrote:
    If I did this thread would be locked, too.

    Don't understand why. :s

    Maybe 'cause someone recently won Olympic Gold by being annoying :D
    Knowing who to trust is Everything in this business.

    TIS - "The moment you think you got it figured - you're wrong"

    Formerly known as Teppo
  • minigeffminigeff EnglandPosts: 7,884MI6 Agent
    Teppo wrote:
    minigeff wrote:
    osris wrote:
    If I did this thread would be locked, too.

    Don't understand why. :s

    Maybe 'cause someone recently won Olympic Gold by being annoying :D

    :))
    'Force feeding AJB humour and banter since 2009'
    Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk
    www.cancerresearchuk.org
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,934Chief of Staff
    osris wrote:
    If I did, this thread would be locked, too.

    Not strictly true...a well reasoned debate is always healthy...and I'm all for that...but I have yet to see one scrap of an idea from you...
    YNWA 97
  • Ens007Ens007 EnglandPosts: 863MI6 Agent
    Sir Miles wrote:
    osris wrote:
    If I did, this thread would be locked, too.

    Not strictly true...a well reasoned debate is always healthy...and I'm all for that...but I have yet to see one scrap of an idea from you...

    Sir Miles ... Did you not see the somewhat riveting read that was posted c/o the craigisnotbond site??! It really put forward such a strong case! :))
This discussion has been closed.

Copyright ajb007.co.uk 1998 - 2024

James Bond TM 007 and related James Bond Trademarks © 1962-2024

Danjaq LLC and United Artists Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

This website is a fan site and is in no way related to the official production companies.

All users are responsible for the content of their posts, by using this website you agree to the terms of use.