Also, I can't go into details but I know that some pro-Craig people have made serious death threats against some of the people behind danielcraigisnotbond.com, really classy people, aren't they???
Yeah, I can imagine certain individuals going through the mental exercise of sharpening the knives
"...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.....
Also, as far as I know it has NOT been proven that the bad review of CR is a fake, just simply that it was removed because of complaints by Craig fans?
Actually, the review has been thoroughly debunked by our own JennyFlexFan. Have a look at this thread--scroll down to JFF's post (it's the ninth one down) and you'll see that the review was lifted almost word-for-word from someone else's review of The Living Daylights. That particular smoking gun is very hard to ignore.
As for death threats and not having enough people to moderate. . .well, those people have no credibility with me, so I'm not sure what to believe. However, if they're as popular as they say they are, there should be no shortage of volunteers stepping up to be mods.
Vox clamantis in deserto
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
but its creator is a schoolgirl... There is only childish anger and vindictiveness because Brosnan is not playing Bond in CR, and because the girly-girl in charge thinks that Craig isn't as pretty.
Be it far from me to slam a whole age group, but frankly that childish attitude can be found in both extreme camps. There certainly is a lot of that childing anger energizing the negativity of these discussions, and not from the anti camp. Goodness help you if you don't like Craig for whatever reason, creating an environment characterized by unyielding, intollerant, mean-spirited bitterness...pretty CnB in attitude, huh?
Yeah, AKB comes to mind as an anti-Craiger getting banned for going over the line, but I can think of a couple of pro-Craigers who've gotten banned for much worse abuse and yet there still others left, though not as nasty, but who go on to stir the pot with that childing anger. Personally, that's my only beef with the opposing "camp" if you can call it that because I appreciate the variety of opinions. But when you have members having tantrums and saying "they'll be proven wrong...they will all be proven wrong! ... sniff, sniff," I do not see that attitude being any different from that school girl in charge of CnB.
"...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.....
I was saying that I don't consider danielcraigisnotbond to be nearly as bad as some people seem to make it out to be.
Well, Eye, I must say that I consider that site to be worse than people say--far, far worse.
Also (and this isn't directed at you in particular, Eye, but to some others who are making this comparison), putting CNB on a par with CBn isn't so much comparing apples to oranges but comparing apples to dirty bombs. Maybe CBn does have a pro-EON agenda--I really don't know, because I haven't been on the site in ages (mod duties and a busy life away from the computer pretty well restrict me to AJB)--but the people there are fundamentally James Bond fans. If you don't like Craig and if you plan to boycott CR, you can still go to CommanderBond and talk about your favorite 007, opine about the novels, or write a fanfic story.
But what else can you do at CNB other than read stories that bash and trash Craig and encourage people to stay away from the film? It's simply an exercise in nastiness and negativity that exemplifies the worst the Net has to offer.
Beyond its status as the Black Hole of Bond sites, CNB is also contemptable in its phoniness and its downright fraudulence. I might have some respect for it if I thought that true Bond fans were behind its creation; but its creator is a schoolgirl who has posted to the Net her gushing fantasies not about James Bond, but about Pierce Brosnan AS James Bond. There is no real knowledge of Bond history on that site, no sense that the people behind CNB truly understand who and what Bond is. There is only childish anger and vindictiveness because Brosnan is not playing Bond in CR, and because the girly-girl in charge thinks that Craig isn't as pretty.
Then there's the "fan art." As many of you know, one of CNB's masterminds used to be here, but everyone got so tired of his photoshopping pictures of Craig that we finally gave him the boot (after several warnings, by the way). To be fair, some of the pictures they run ARE funny, but they are also massively unfair in that the CNBers tend to use stills and photos of Craig looking his worst and to present them as what Craig looks like all the time. Again, this is nothing short of juvenile, like schoolchildren drawing nasty pictures of a despised teacher.
If you're still with me (I know, this has turned into a novel), what I find most nauseating about CNB is its spin--or, to put it less politely, its lying. Go to the site and you will see that they are still presenting a plagiarized and false negative review of CR as the first "unbiased" review of the movie. If they had any integrity, they'd take it down. Colin Salmon's grousing that he should have been given a shot to play Bond is trumpeted as evidence that EON is a racist organization. They claim that there is no buzz about CR (really?). The slightest offhand comment from an actor or one of the filmmakers is magnified and presented as proof positive that CR will be a huge, stinking disaster. A lot of positive reviews have been coming out, but I have the feeling none of them will appear on CNB, while every negative one (and there will be those) will be plastered all over the site as validation of CNB's hate.
Last of all, I feel the CNB bunch are a pack of miserable COWARDS. (I hope and pray one of them is reading this, because I want them to note that word.) Where are their forums? Where do they give people a chance to talk back? They don't have the guts to allow their opinions to be challenged in the same public forum they have claimed, and God help you if you send someone there an e-mail, because you will receive personal abuse and insults in return.
So say what you will about CommanderBond, but at its worst it's miles above CraigNotBond at its best.
Thanks for reading.
Trust me, if someone who is opposed to Daniel Craig posts on CBn they get bullied around big time!
After it became known on that site that I am opposed to Craig I received a PM from a moderator threatining to ban me for having typed "a$$." I was told that that was innapropriate and against the rules. However when a pro-Craig member posted full frontal nude photos of Daniel Craig on the site and I mentioned that I thought that that was completely innapropriate for that site I was told that "were all adults, and there isn't any harm in those photos being posted." HELLO ?:) ?:) ?:)
Also, as far as I know it has NOT been proven that the bad review of CR is a fake, just simply that it was removed because of complaints by Craig fans?
I have been told that danielcraigisnotbond.com are planing on eventually having forums for anyone and everyone to post on. From my understanding they just don't have enough people in charge of the site to get that done at this time and moderate it.
Also, I can't go into details but I know that some pro-Craig people have made serious death threats against some of the people behind danielcraigisnotbond.com, really classy people, aren't they??? 8-)
Sounds to me Eye, that you could be a staunch, loyal supporter of CnB. Hell, you may even be Brayton herself in disguise, because after all, she is the only one really running that site. Some wierd, warped, obsessed Brosnan fan - not a BOND fan (big difference). You seem to know a lot of the make-up behind the site, and you are also very knowledgeable about the kind of PM's they are receiving.
And as already pointed out earlier, if there is sooooo much support for this site, why are they finding it difficult to round up a few moderators. Surely they could hand pick a dozen from the 20,000 people who have already signed up......?
It's also interesting to note your quick dismissal of the many reviews that have surfaced in the past few days, all of them positive, with a nonchalant shrug of the shoulders by saying `And to be honest I still haven't seen that many reviewers saying that it is so great, just a small handfull so far.'
You can be sure as hell, that if these `small handful' were all negative, slating Craig as the worst Bond ever, and yelling that CR sucks to high heaven, you would be the first person to yell `I told you so! Look, everyone else thinks so too!'
Let's face it, if CR and Craig becomes a massive hit (which I've predicted all along), and most people end up loving Craig as Bond, this is your worst nightmare come true. Many Bond fans who opposed the reboot and casting are slowly becoming warm to the idea of Craig as Bond (or at least are willing to see CR with an open mind). I have seen it for myself on this forum and many others.
Yet I get the impression with you, that you really don't want this film to be any good. You don't want critics to love the movie. You don't want fans to love Craig's performance.
Even if the film itself is a masterpiece. Even if the story is excellent, the script gripping, the direction superb, Craig's performance excellent. You don't want this. You really don't want this movie to be good, for EON to pull out all the stops and make this a Bond film to remember. Why not? I'm curious.
Maybe you should go into hiding for the next few years, pal. I hear there is a new Bond in town - and without trying to sound too presumptious, it looks like he could be here to stay around for quite a while.
Funny you should mention that- on MI6 there's a member called Craig's_Agent (always writing boringly anti-Craig stuff) who was invited to the press screening by ITN so that he and other CnBers could be interviewed afterwards to see if they had changed their minds. Although he had the courage to bang on about how awful Craig is on the net he admitted he didn't want to be seen on telly doing it. The site's owner called him a coward and banned him from the forums today. Beautiful. http://www.mi6forums.com/viewtopic.php?t=29487&start=60
I'm not sure if I like that. He may be a coward, but to be banned? If what he had said previously wasn't enough to get him banned, then I don't think he should be banned now.
This isn't the first time he has been banned. He keeps on getting banned (I've lost count how many times he has re-appeared in different guises - he once even pretended to be a girl who knew bondfan personally). And each time he gets found out, the moderators become tolerant and ease off him, and allow him to stay on the forum under his new alias, and then he ends up going too far with his posts and gets banned again. It is an endless vicious circle that has repeated itself over and over and over again.
The reason he gets banned each time is because he ends up falling back into the trap of pointless spamming, repeating himself endlessly and turning every single thread back into a Craig-bashing campaign, posting pictures and clips of himself as Bond (which he really believes) oh, and posts fake reviews. After this, I'm not in the least bit suprised he keeps getting banned.
The only thing that really suprises me is that he doesn't get banned immediately once he reappears under a new name but his new guise slips. It's almost as though the mods say, `ok, we'll give him one more chance....'
But unfortunately it always ends up the same result......8-)
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Point, by point, Eye, nothing wrong at all with any of your opinions, at least nothing that anyone should be able to fault you for as unsound, improper or invalid.
"...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.....
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited November 2006
Good old Eye. Steadfast as the Great Pyramid, implacable as Stonehenge. {[]
These next pictures probably won't be your cup of tea, my friend.
I'm convinced that every Bond fan experiences a a 'Dark Age' at least once in his/her life---a stretch of time where we don't like a particular Bond actor, or what they're doing with the films at the moment. Mine lasted from 1973 through 1985; yours looks to begin in 2006...
I would only counsel patience; try to think in geological terms. This era will last the blink...of an eye
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
On the bright side, Craig has said he's only going to do three, so I suppose you wont be stuck with him for long.
However, who's to say Craig's casting wont open the door for more unconventional casting choices? Before Craig we looked at a very small window of actors (tall dark and handsome), now we have an even bigger window of actors that can possibly play Bond, thanks to Craig.
About what exactly blue? Accusing Eye Of The Tiger of being a staunch supporter of CnB, or better yet, it's creator?? I could have sworn I just read his entire explanation that he isn't. Maybe you missed it. 8-)
And as for being on other sites trashing certain Bond actors, maybe you shouldn't be throwing stones since you live in a glass house yourself. In other words, you should talk!
Eye has a history of saying a lot of really weird things on this forum, gildrose suggested he might be a child and--well gosh it kinda makes sense. He denies it, okay, but the way he goes on it's just not all that convincing IMHO. I dunno, it's an internet forum, he could be my grandma for all I know.
I mean should he not expect to be challenged when he spouts off his conspiracy theories? C'mon.
Bottom line is: there's a new Bond film out, with a new Bond in it, and cnd is becoming an increasingly tiny footnote. The reviews back this up, next week we'll get the box office and see what that does to it all--I'm expecting a big opening weekend, because it seems like CR is gonna be a crowd-pleaser. Eye can be whomever he wants--like me, he's the equivalent of a drop in the ocean in all this.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
I mean should he not expect to be challenged when he spouts off his conspiracy theories? C'mon.
Again, so have you. Do you easily forget your MI6 anti-Craig agenda theory?
Take Mo's advice about living in glass houses.
"...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.....
I am not assosiated with them in any way other than the fact that I view their site and that I agree with them on how bad of a decision it was to hire Daniel Craig.
Other than an e-mail or two that I have sent to DCnB I have not had any contact with them.
I just think that at this particular time Pierce Brosnan was still the perfect James Bond, much as Sean Connery was back in the 60's, so why in the hell do you get rid of the best possible actor for the role???
Fair comments, but you are still stating that you view their site and have had contact with them. I think most Bond fans, anti-Craig or Pro-Craig, are completely against the offensive and immature nature of that website, regardless of its underlying message, yet this doesn't seem to bother you. It sounds to me that you have a lot to do with them, but are now too embarrassed to admit it.
This is your right of course. Feel free to do whatever you want - free country, freedom of speech and all that.
But if you start to attempt to defend CnB against another Bond site that does not show offensive material, but does have open forums to allow debate (no matter how biased the mods are), and if you care so much about upsetting the poor dears over there who have received death-threats (HA! Give me a break. They have asked for everything they get) then expect this line of questioning from someone like me, who is utterly DISGUSTED by that vile website.
Anyone who can sympathise with something like CnB needs to have their heads tested.
And in reference to Brosnan playing Bond again - fan or no fan - HE IS NOW TOO OLD!!! Surely you don't want CR to be another AVTAK. It was Roger Moore playing Bond right until the bitter end which ended up with Bond's popularity gradually waning throughout the 80's. It's great that Brosnan rejuvenated the franchise again, but he is physically too old now to play Bond again. His time is done, time to move on to another actor.
And Craig may not be your choice of actor, but every single review I have read in the past few days have all given Craig the thumbs up and made varying comments about him being the next Connery.
Yet still this does not excite you either. You simply dismiss it as `hmmm...its only a few. Wait till the rest of the media review it'. What's the matter with you? If every review that comes out now gives Craig the thumbs up, then maybe, just maybe, EON did choose the right guy after all.
But this will still not persuade you, will it. You'll still refuse to see it, regardless of film critics glowing reviews. Well in that case, why even bother coming back onto these boards then? To tell us what? That you still think Craig is no good - even though you won't see the film? How will your argument fare up against people on here who have seen the film (which will be the majority.)
Your opinion won't carry much weight anymore. Maybe you should just go back to CnB. At least you have people you can identify with over there.....
About what exactly blue? Accusing Eye Of The Tiger of being a staunch supporter of CnB, or better yet, it's creator?? I could have sworn I just read his entire explanation that he isn't. Maybe you missed it. 8-)
And as for being on other sites trashing certain Bond actors, maybe you shouldn't be throwing stones since you live in a glass house yourself. In other words, you should talk!
But did you read his post prior to this, where he claims to have insight knowledge of the site, and sympathises with them because the poor, frightened dear little lambs have been receiving death threats. If you do the crime, then do the time. They've asked for it, now they are getting it. Claiming Bond fans who don't oppose Craig's casting as `gayboys, Craig's Boy Toy's, wetting their pants, etc.' posting immature, badly made photoshop images, posting negative articles from obscure websites, yet choosing to ignore actual positive film reviews from more reputable sources, etc, etc. - the site is pathetic, and is a disgrace to the Bond community in general.
Regarding being on other sites trashing certain actors, there is a big difference going on something like CBn, in an open forum debate, and commenting on why Brosnan is now no longer right for the role in a particular thread, to the vile, despicable, no-forum-allowed, hate campaign over on CnB.
Craig has been trashed on here many times, yet I would never dare suggest that this suddenly makes AJB on the same parallels as CnB.
And Craig may not be your choice of actor, but every single review I have read in the past few days have all given Craig the thumbs up and made varying comments about him being the next Connery.
Yet still this does not excite you either. You simply dismiss it as `hmmm...its only a few. Wait till the rest of the media review it'. What's the matter with you?
Moviehole's even funnier- apparently all the positive reviews are because everyone at the screening was Daniel's mate. So... that's all the reviewers from all of the major newspapers.... riiiiiight....
I actually think that's great advise for us all...
As for MI:6, the next time they post a favorable pic of Craig on their website will be the first. Case closed.
(as he awaits the inevitable house-shattering replies...and people, let's try not to be obvious, shall we..."he doesn't take a favorable pic," or "they're all copyrighted by EON" are too predictable, I want originality, creativity, heck even a good conspiracy theory will do, I'm sure there are still a few out there unbespoken for, I doubt me and Eye have cornered the market, lol)
Isn't it funny? Early November and we still can't stop talking about cnb. )
"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
Isn't it funny? Early November and we still can't stop talking about cnb. )
Put it this way: it's like people who can't stop looking at a car accident.
Anyway, ALL HAIL THE MIRACULOUS PSYCHIC ABILITIES OF THE HARDYBOY! I had a look at their main page and--whaddaya know?--out of all the reviews that came out of the press screening, all those glowing, enthusiastic words of praise, DCNB publishes only the mildly negative review from The Observer. Even then, they fudge things a bit by leaving out the four positive opinions that are attached to the original review!
To add to the fun, CNB has officially "endorsed" Happy Feet as the film to see, and they're trumpeting Ireland's strict rating on the film as further proof that it's garbage. When the site folds, these people have great careers in political spin ahead of them. . .
I actually think that's great advise for us all...
As for MI:6, the next time they post a favorable pic of Craig on their website will be the first. Case closed.
(as he awaits the inevitable house-shattering replies...and people, let's try not to be obvious, shall we..."he doesn't take a favorable pic," or "they're all copyrighted by EON" are too predictable, I want originality, creativity, heck even a good conspiracy theory will do, I'm sure there are still a few out there unbespoken for, I doubt me and Eye have cornered the market, lol)
Have you seen their "favorable" edit of the Oct 05 press con? Considering that most of Craig's unglam moments weren't included, that should count as much as a good picture.
"...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.....
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
For the record, whether or not CNB is terrible, which it is, the fact that they receive death threats is DISGUSTING. How can anyone say that they deserve it? What have they done that warrants death threats? They may lie and spin but it isn't like they raped your sister. They are a website, NOT Hitler. CALM down.
For the record, whether or not CNB is terrible, which it is, the fact that they receive death threats is DISGUSTING. How can anyone say that they deserve it? What have they done that warrants death threats? They may lie and spin but it isn't like they raped your sister. They are a website, NOT Hitler. CALM down.
But they have been instigating a form of bullying towards an actor. A vile, sick, hate-filled campaign against another human being. To me, this is where they crossed the line.
If crossing the line means they now face more severe consequences for their despicable actions, so be it. They brought this on themselves. No one else to blame but them. They can't blame Craig for this one.....
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
You're better than that, glid. Why sink to their level? If you do, you're only a hypocrite.
You're better than that, glid. Why sink to their level? If you do, you're only a hypocrite.
I try not to, but sometimes it is difficult to ignore. One quick peek at their site is enough to get my blood boiling again.
Ok.....I've taken a stress pill. I'm calm now....;)
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
Let me reiterate that I'm not trying to condone CNB, what they do is not only misleading but downright mean, however, I like to think that we here are much more mature than they are.
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
Or we could stay in the past. 8-)
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
Eye, read the new reviews. They are disagreeing with CnB, as they all like the film. They don't state outright that "CnB is wrong, wrong, wrong" but the magazine's views now oppose CnB's.
But aren't spin doctors usually in some way convincing?
CnB have only managed to convince the whole planet that they are a bunch of sad morons. Nothing more than that I'm afraid.....
Actually if that were true then we wouldn't be seeing many, many news papers, TV stations and websites mentioning DCnB, which they do. And I haven't seen any of them saying that the people at DCnB are wrong about what they say. I'm not saying that they are automatically saying that their right either, but no-one in the media have suggested that their a website that is not worth viewing either.
Hahaha!
I think just about every single review or article I've read knocks that crappy website. Boy, you really are a staunch supporter of CnB aren't you. I can't wait to see your reactions in a couple of weeks when the cash starts to flow in at the box office. I wonder what your reaction will be to that. You've already started dismissing the many positive reviews. How will you dismiss the big box office takings too? How will your pals over on CnB cope with that too? You can see they are starting to struggle already by posting the ONE and only negative review, which still manages to praise Craig. This is going to be the darkest days for CnB once the film is released.
Couldn't happen to nicer people.....you are in good company over there.
Comments
Yeah, I can imagine certain individuals going through the mental exercise of sharpening the knives
Actually, the review has been thoroughly debunked by our own JennyFlexFan. Have a look at this thread--scroll down to JFF's post (it's the ninth one down) and you'll see that the review was lifted almost word-for-word from someone else's review of The Living Daylights. That particular smoking gun is very hard to ignore.
As for death threats and not having enough people to moderate. . .well, those people have no credibility with me, so I'm not sure what to believe. However, if they're as popular as they say they are, there should be no shortage of volunteers stepping up to be mods.
Be it far from me to slam a whole age group, but frankly that childish attitude can be found in both extreme camps. There certainly is a lot of that childing anger energizing the negativity of these discussions, and not from the anti camp. Goodness help you if you don't like Craig for whatever reason, creating an environment characterized by unyielding, intollerant, mean-spirited bitterness...pretty CnB in attitude, huh?
Yeah, AKB comes to mind as an anti-Craiger getting banned for going over the line, but I can think of a couple of pro-Craigers who've gotten banned for much worse abuse and yet there still others left, though not as nasty, but who go on to stir the pot with that childing anger. Personally, that's my only beef with the opposing "camp" if you can call it that because I appreciate the variety of opinions. But when you have members having tantrums and saying "they'll be proven wrong...they will all be proven wrong! ... sniff, sniff," I do not see that attitude being any different from that school girl in charge of CnB.
Sounds to me Eye, that you could be a staunch, loyal supporter of CnB. Hell, you may even be Brayton herself in disguise, because after all, she is the only one really running that site. Some wierd, warped, obsessed Brosnan fan - not a BOND fan (big difference). You seem to know a lot of the make-up behind the site, and you are also very knowledgeable about the kind of PM's they are receiving.
And as already pointed out earlier, if there is sooooo much support for this site, why are they finding it difficult to round up a few moderators. Surely they could hand pick a dozen from the 20,000 people who have already signed up......?
It's also interesting to note your quick dismissal of the many reviews that have surfaced in the past few days, all of them positive, with a nonchalant shrug of the shoulders by saying `And to be honest I still haven't seen that many reviewers saying that it is so great, just a small handfull so far.'
You can be sure as hell, that if these `small handful' were all negative, slating Craig as the worst Bond ever, and yelling that CR sucks to high heaven, you would be the first person to yell `I told you so! Look, everyone else thinks so too!'
Let's face it, if CR and Craig becomes a massive hit (which I've predicted all along), and most people end up loving Craig as Bond, this is your worst nightmare come true. Many Bond fans who opposed the reboot and casting are slowly becoming warm to the idea of Craig as Bond (or at least are willing to see CR with an open mind). I have seen it for myself on this forum and many others.
Yet I get the impression with you, that you really don't want this film to be any good. You don't want critics to love the movie. You don't want fans to love Craig's performance.
Even if the film itself is a masterpiece. Even if the story is excellent, the script gripping, the direction superb, Craig's performance excellent. You don't want this. You really don't want this movie to be good, for EON to pull out all the stops and make this a Bond film to remember. Why not? I'm curious.
Maybe you should go into hiding for the next few years, pal. I hear there is a new Bond in town - and without trying to sound too presumptious, it looks like he could be here to stay around for quite a while.
This isn't the first time he has been banned. He keeps on getting banned (I've lost count how many times he has re-appeared in different guises - he once even pretended to be a girl who knew bondfan personally). And each time he gets found out, the moderators become tolerant and ease off him, and allow him to stay on the forum under his new alias, and then he ends up going too far with his posts and gets banned again. It is an endless vicious circle that has repeated itself over and over and over again.
The reason he gets banned each time is because he ends up falling back into the trap of pointless spamming, repeating himself endlessly and turning every single thread back into a Craig-bashing campaign, posting pictures and clips of himself as Bond (which he really believes) oh, and posts fake reviews. After this, I'm not in the least bit suprised he keeps getting banned.
The only thing that really suprises me is that he doesn't get banned immediately once he reappears under a new name but his new guise slips. It's almost as though the mods say, `ok, we'll give him one more chance....'
But unfortunately it always ends up the same result......8-)
These next pictures probably won't be your cup of tea, my friend.
I'm convinced that every Bond fan experiences a a 'Dark Age' at least once in his/her life---a stretch of time where we don't like a particular Bond actor, or what they're doing with the films at the moment. Mine lasted from 1973 through 1985; yours looks to begin in 2006...
I would only counsel patience; try to think in geological terms. This era will last the blink...of an eye
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
However, who's to say Craig's casting wont open the door for more unconventional casting choices? Before Craig we looked at a very small window of actors (tall dark and handsome), now we have an even bigger window of actors that can possibly play Bond, thanks to Craig.
And as for being on other sites trashing certain Bond actors, maybe you shouldn't be throwing stones since you live in a glass house yourself. In other words, you should talk!
Eye has a history of saying a lot of really weird things on this forum, gildrose suggested he might be a child and--well gosh it kinda makes sense. He denies it, okay, but the way he goes on it's just not all that convincing IMHO. I dunno, it's an internet forum, he could be my grandma for all I know.
I mean should he not expect to be challenged when he spouts off his conspiracy theories? C'mon.
Bottom line is: there's a new Bond film out, with a new Bond in it, and cnd is becoming an increasingly tiny footnote. The reviews back this up, next week we'll get the box office and see what that does to it all--I'm expecting a big opening weekend, because it seems like CR is gonna be a crowd-pleaser. Eye can be whomever he wants--like me, he's the equivalent of a drop in the ocean in all this.
So have you.
So have you.
Again, so have you. Do you easily forget your MI6 anti-Craig agenda theory?
Take Mo's advice about living in glass houses.
Fair comments, but you are still stating that you view their site and have had contact with them. I think most Bond fans, anti-Craig or Pro-Craig, are completely against the offensive and immature nature of that website, regardless of its underlying message, yet this doesn't seem to bother you. It sounds to me that you have a lot to do with them, but are now too embarrassed to admit it.
This is your right of course. Feel free to do whatever you want - free country, freedom of speech and all that.
But if you start to attempt to defend CnB against another Bond site that does not show offensive material, but does have open forums to allow debate (no matter how biased the mods are), and if you care so much about upsetting the poor dears over there who have received death-threats (HA! Give me a break. They have asked for everything they get) then expect this line of questioning from someone like me, who is utterly DISGUSTED by that vile website.
Anyone who can sympathise with something like CnB needs to have their heads tested.
And in reference to Brosnan playing Bond again - fan or no fan - HE IS NOW TOO OLD!!! Surely you don't want CR to be another AVTAK. It was Roger Moore playing Bond right until the bitter end which ended up with Bond's popularity gradually waning throughout the 80's. It's great that Brosnan rejuvenated the franchise again, but he is physically too old now to play Bond again. His time is done, time to move on to another actor.
And Craig may not be your choice of actor, but every single review I have read in the past few days have all given Craig the thumbs up and made varying comments about him being the next Connery.
Yet still this does not excite you either. You simply dismiss it as `hmmm...its only a few. Wait till the rest of the media review it'. What's the matter with you? If every review that comes out now gives Craig the thumbs up, then maybe, just maybe, EON did choose the right guy after all.
But this will still not persuade you, will it. You'll still refuse to see it, regardless of film critics glowing reviews. Well in that case, why even bother coming back onto these boards then? To tell us what? That you still think Craig is no good - even though you won't see the film? How will your argument fare up against people on here who have seen the film (which will be the majority.)
Your opinion won't carry much weight anymore. Maybe you should just go back to CnB. At least you have people you can identify with over there.....
But did you read his post prior to this, where he claims to have insight knowledge of the site, and sympathises with them because the poor, frightened dear little lambs have been receiving death threats. If you do the crime, then do the time. They've asked for it, now they are getting it. Claiming Bond fans who don't oppose Craig's casting as `gayboys, Craig's Boy Toy's, wetting their pants, etc.' posting immature, badly made photoshop images, posting negative articles from obscure websites, yet choosing to ignore actual positive film reviews from more reputable sources, etc, etc. - the site is pathetic, and is a disgrace to the Bond community in general.
Regarding being on other sites trashing certain actors, there is a big difference going on something like CBn, in an open forum debate, and commenting on why Brosnan is now no longer right for the role in a particular thread, to the vile, despicable, no-forum-allowed, hate campaign over on CnB.
Craig has been trashed on here many times, yet I would never dare suggest that this suddenly makes AJB on the same parallels as CnB.
Moviehole's even funnier- apparently all the positive reviews are because everyone at the screening was Daniel's mate. So... that's all the reviewers from all of the major newspapers.... riiiiiight....
http://www.moviehole.net/news/20061106_gossip_monkey_61106.html
I actually think that's great advise for us all...
As for MI:6, the next time they post a favorable pic of Craig on their website will be the first. Case closed.
(as he awaits the inevitable house-shattering replies...and people, let's try not to be obvious, shall we..."he doesn't take a favorable pic," or "they're all copyrighted by EON" are too predictable, I want originality, creativity, heck even a good conspiracy theory will do, I'm sure there are still a few out there unbespoken for, I doubt me and Eye have cornered the market, lol)
Put it this way: it's like people who can't stop looking at a car accident.
Anyway, ALL HAIL THE MIRACULOUS PSYCHIC ABILITIES OF THE HARDYBOY! I had a look at their main page and--whaddaya know?--out of all the reviews that came out of the press screening, all those glowing, enthusiastic words of praise, DCNB publishes only the mildly negative review from The Observer. Even then, they fudge things a bit by leaving out the four positive opinions that are attached to the original review!
To add to the fun, CNB has officially "endorsed" Happy Feet as the film to see, and they're trumpeting Ireland's strict rating on the film as further proof that it's garbage. When the site folds, these people have great careers in political spin ahead of them. . .
But aren't spin doctors usually in some way convincing?
Haha! Exactly!
CnB have only managed to convince the whole planet that they are a bunch of sad morons. Nothing more than that I'm afraid.....
Have you seen their "favorable" edit of the Oct 05 press con? Considering that most of Craig's unglam moments weren't included, that should count as much as a good picture.
But they have been instigating a form of bullying towards an actor. A vile, sick, hate-filled campaign against another human being. To me, this is where they crossed the line.
If crossing the line means they now face more severe consequences for their despicable actions, so be it. They brought this on themselves. No one else to blame but them. They can't blame Craig for this one.....
I try not to, but sometimes it is difficult to ignore. One quick peek at their site is enough to get my blood boiling again.
Ok.....I've taken a stress pill. I'm calm now....;)
Let me reiterate that I'm not trying to condone CNB, what they do is not only misleading but downright mean, however, I like to think that we here are much more mature than they are.
Hahaha!
I think just about every single review or article I've read knocks that crappy website. Boy, you really are a staunch supporter of CnB aren't you. I can't wait to see your reactions in a couple of weeks when the cash starts to flow in at the box office. I wonder what your reaction will be to that. You've already started dismissing the many positive reviews. How will you dismiss the big box office takings too? How will your pals over on CnB cope with that too? You can see they are starting to struggle already by posting the ONE and only negative review, which still manages to praise Craig. This is going to be the darkest days for CnB once the film is released.
Couldn't happen to nicer people.....you are in good company over there.