[Potential Spoilers] Official SKYFALL Photo Thread (Part I)

It's not a witch hunt. EON's control over every facet of Bond films, their promotion etc is why they're still very rich and still in business despite MGM almost going belly up twice now. Nothing would be released without Bab's/Wilson's tick of approval. Marketing would no doubt have presented Babs/Wilson with dozens or hundreds of stills (depending on how much autonomy and trust they have to narrow choices down) and picked the one that was going to be released.

I'm well aware of that. I am under no illusions as to how the process happened. But that's not what GS said. This is what GS said:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

However, of all the first photographs that could have been released by the studio, it's very telling that they chose this one. Barbara's boner for Daniel refuses to go down.

Insinuating that Babs was the one who chose the photo to be released. Every time someone says this - and a lot of people have - I get the impression that people have this mental image of Babs picking the photo over the objections of everyone involved in production because it's a hot and sexy side of man and she believes that's what audiences want. But where is the proof that this happened at all?

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Insinuating that Babs was the one who chose the photo to be released. Every time someone says this - and a lot of people have - I get the impression that people have this mental image of Babs picking the photo over the objections of everyone involved in production because it's a hot and sexy side of man and she believes that's what audiences want. But where is the proof that this happened at all?

ROTFLMAO!! Uh, hello!!!! The proof is the picture. Barbara runs EON. It's her company. Even if she didn't personally take the picture or choose the picture, she's responsible for it being inseminated to the public.

Here's more proof that Barbara's libido is running the company:


She could gut glass with those puppies!!!


It's disgusting how she is sexualizing and degrading James Bond like's he's nothing but a piece of meat; that's what the Bond Girls are for.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

ROTFLMAO!! Uh, hello!!!! The proof is the picture. Barbara runs EON. It's her company.

No, she does not own EON. She does not run the company. She owns it and runs it with her half-brother - who has been producing the films for longer than she has, and so probably has a little bit more control through experience. He certainly seems to be the one to take the lead in all public appearances; the video introducing SKYFALL on 007.com is narrated by him.

Prove to me, undeniably, that when Babs and MGW had all the stills arranged on a table before them deciding on this particular picture, it was Babs who cast the deciding vote because of the semi-nude Bond, and not because she and her half-brother felt that picture best represented the visual style (in terms of direction and cinematography) of the film.

You can't.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Even if she didn't personally take the picture or choose the picture, she's responsible for it being inseminated to the public.

So your argument until now has been "Babs had this picture released because it contains a semi-nude Bond", but now it's changed to "Babs had this picture released because it contains a semi-nude Bond, even if she never actually saw or chose the picture before it was released"? How can you hold her personally accountable for the release of the picture even if she was never there to see or select it? You might as well say that Lee Harvey Oswald's father shot JFK, even though he was dead at the time, on the basis that he would not have liked JFK as a president.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

It's disgusting how she is sexualizing and degrading James Bond like's he's nothing but a piece of meat; that's what the Bond Girls are for.

Yep, wouldn't have happened in Cubby's day.

Oh, except it did. There are a gazillion photos of Connery from 1962-65 in swimming trunks or otherwise naked from the waist up, showing off his bulging arms and hairy chest.

Loomis wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

It's disgusting how she is sexualizing and degrading James Bond like's he's nothing but a piece of meat; that's what the Bond Girls are for.

Yep, wouldn't have happened in Cubby's day.

Oh, except it did. There are a gazillion photos of Connery from 1962-65 in swimming trunks or otherwise naked from the waist up, showing off his bulging arms and hairy chest.

GS is just pissed that he can't get Babs' nipples to dial a rotary telephone the same way Craig can.

Mrs Aural Sects wrote:

GS is just pissed that he can't get Babs' nipples to dial a rotary telephone the same way Craig can.

What is a rotary phone?

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

ROTFLMAO!! Uh, hello!!!! The proof is the picture. Barbara runs EON. It's her company.

No, she does not own EON. She does not run the company. She owns it and runs it with her half-brother - who has been producing the films for longer than she has, and so probably has a little bit more control through experience.

Well, it's been established that Wilson wasn't particularly interested in hiring Craig. He wanted to go with Cavill back in '05, but Barbara overruled them. So unless you can find me a picture of Michael G. Wilson sporting a chubby in his pants while standing next to Daniel Craig, I'm going to continue in my belief that Barbara's interest in Craig is more than purely professional.

Quote :

He certainly seems to be the one to take the lead in all public appearances; the video introducing SKYFALL on 007.com is narrated by him.

You must have missed the video last year that Barbara produced for the National Association of Gals "International Women's Day", where Daniel Craig dressed up as a very ugly, unattractive broad and let Judi Dench's "M" dress him down and essentially emasculate him. If you had any doubts about who is running EON that video should have removed them all. It's Babs Coltrane!

Quote :

Prove to me, undeniably, that when Babs and MGW had all the stills arranged on a table before them deciding on this particular picture, it was Babs who cast the deciding vote because of the semi-nude Bond, and not because she and her half-brother felt that picture best represented the visual style (in terms of direction and cinematography) of the film.

You can't.

You can't prove that it didn't happen either.

Sharky wrote:

Yeah, uh, no. Didn't people, like, stop using those kinds of phones back in 1990 after cell phones were invented? I'm too young to remember rotary phones, but I can assure Mrs. Aural Sects that I'm perfectly capable of dialing a number using that phone without the aid of my hands.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

So your argument until now has been "Babs had this picture released because it contains a semi-nude Bond", but now it's changed to "Babs had this picture released because it contains a semi-nude Bond, even if she never actually saw or chose the picture before it was released"? How can you hold her personally accountable for the release of the picture even if she was never there to see or select it? You might as well say that Lee Harvey Oswald's father shot JFK, even though he was dead at the time, on the basis that he would not have liked JFK as a president.

I submit to you that Babs did indeed murder James Bond last year when she dressed him up as an ugly transvestite in a platinum blonde wig and six-inch pumps.


Babs as much as murdered James Bond as if she'd been lying on a grassy knoll with a sniper rifle.

Never forget! Never forgive! The day of reckoning is coming November 7th, 2012, and the high cost of Barbara's treachery towards 007 fans will be paid in full.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

You must have missed the video last year that Barbara produced for the National Association of Gals "International Women's Day", where Daniel Craig dressed up as a very ugly, unattractive broad and let Judi Dench's "M" dress him down and essentially emasculate him. If you had any doubts about who is running EON that video should have removed them all. It's Babs Coltrane!

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I submit to you that Babs did indeed murder James Bond last year when she dressed him up as an ugly transvestite in a platinum blonde wig and six-inch pumps.

No, I saw it. What I haven't seen is evidence that Daniel Craig did it against his will. Celebrities get behind causes all the time, and just because you're a man, it doesn't mean that you cannot believe in gender equality and womens' rights. Maybe Babs forced him into it. But maybe she simply told him about it and he thought "you know, this is something I can get behind". After all, he did Comic Relief with Catherine Tate a few years ago, so he's already got a documented history of getting behind causes.

Also, the reason why "Danielle Craig" is a particularly unattractive woman is that Daniel Craig isn't exactly pretty.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Quote :

Prove to me, undeniably, that when Babs and MGW had all the stills arranged on a table before them deciding on this particular picture, it was Babs who cast the deciding vote because of the semi-nude Bond, and not because she and her half-brother felt that picture best represented the visual style (in terms of direction and cinematography) of the film.

You can't.

You can't prove that it didn't happen either.

I don't need to. I just need to prove that there is more than one possible sequence of events that led to that photo being released. You claim that it was released because Babs wants everyone ogling Bond (and I am not denying that that is a possibility). I claim that it could have been released because EON wanted to show off the ambiance of the scene to give us a feel for the film. Or that they deliberately chose it because it was the most "neutral" photo available; ie, one that contained no spoilers whatsoever.

In the absence of any physical evidence that says Babs was directly responsible for choosing this photo for the reasons you gave, you have to admit that it is possible that this picture was chosen for other reasons. By your own admission, Babs may not have been present when the photo was chosen and she may not have had any input in her selection. In fact, Bond23.net is claiming that this may not be an official picture at all, but rather, a leaked one:

Quote :

From what we at Bond23.net understand, Empire were the first to break the story and it has since run all over the web as the first official still released to mainstream media…

However, the article at Empireonline.com (linked above) has since been removed.

If that is the case and the photo was leaked, how did Babs have any say in what happened?

I suspect that you are using this photo as an opportunity to take another pot-shot at Babs regardless of any actual evidence.

Craig needs to stop fucking mumbling.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

I suspect that you are using this photo as an opportunity to take another pot-shot at Babs regardless of any actual evidence.

I've provided more evidence that the photo was meant to tittylate the audience than you have provided evidence to the contrary.And lettuce not forget Craig's comments at the Skyfall press conference, where he stated that not only were he and Javier expected to show some skin in this film, but Barbara wanted Daniel to be nude in this film. I'd say she's close to have gotten her wish.

Your suggestion that this photo was released to show the cinematography, lighting, and set detail is ridicurous. That's like saying you read Playboy for the articles. The entire point of this photo being released was to draw attention to Craig's perfectly sculpted, lilly-white arse that resembled two loaves of golden-buttered, deliciously baked, warm bread gently cooling off inside of a picnic basket on a crisp, Fall afternoon by the lake. But I digress.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Babs as much as murdered James Bond as if she'd been lying on a grassy knoll with a sniper rifle.

I doubt that pic and its imagery would really have an effect on the next Babs/Craig/Bond flick....

No current update about Skyfall ever bothers to mention it, or any perceived backlash. Craig's character was raping a guy in the ass in Infamous and no one carried that over to Bond either.

Now you are on record saying you're gonna sneak into the film after paying for something else as a sign of protest...but I'm not exactly seeing an endorsement from legions of other fans....in fact there were more people bitching about 'Craig Not Bond' and even they had zero impact on the Box Office...

Time will tell... :face:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I've provided more evidence that the photo was meant to tittylate the audience than you have provided evidence to the contrary.

Everything you have is circumstantial. Your two pieces of evidence are Daniel Craig dressed as a woman - which, as I said, can be explained by Craig wanting to support a cause.

As for the picture of babs having erect nipples when she stood next to Craig, you will also note that everyone in that picture is wearing several layers of clothing. Her nipples can be explained by a cold wind.

Face it - you've got nothing. Your entire argument hinges on Babs being the one to pick the photo that was released, but I've already shown you evidence that she may have had nothing to do with it. And by your own admission, she may not have.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

IAnd lettuce not forget Craig's comments at the Skyfall press conference, where he stated that not only were he and Javier expected to show some skin in this film, but Barbara wanted Daniel to be nude in this film. I'd say she's close to have gotten her wish.

Every Bond - except Dalton - has shown some flesh. Don't you remember the Brozzer greying snail trail? Or the way Moore took off his short to prove he was Scaramanga?

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

IYour suggestion that this photo was released to show the cinematography, lighting, and set detail is ridicurous.

Why, because it disagrees with you?

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

IThe entire point of this photo being released was to draw attention to Craig's perfectly sculpted, lilly-white arse that resembled two loaves of golden-buttered, deliciously baked, warm bread gently cooling off inside of a picnic basket on a crisp, Fall afternoon by the lake.

Except that you cannot see his backside.

Also, who has the hard=on for Craig now? I haven't heard a sentence that florid since Stephenie Meyer wrote anything.

Interesting discussion guys. Prisoner Monkeys, you have to admit that it appears as though Babs gets wet over Craig. No, there are no hard facts to back this up, just the drooling comments she has made over the years about her star, and wanting him to be naked whenever possible (she even made this comment at the Skyfall press conference, I think).

Babs and Mickey runs the show, so any first official photo release will probably have been given the green light by them. And that photo looks like a MILF fantasy, with Craig all buff, with just his ass cleavage teasing slightly.

It proved successful when CR was released, when Craig was snapped in his trunks by the beach, so it looks like Babs wants to try and emulate that hype and buzz again this time round.

I agree with GS on this one. There doesn't need to be hard evidence of Babs studying all the photos, and deciding excitedly `ohhh that one, please, with his ass showing!' while playing with herself under the table. This is just an assumption, based on the kind of comments she has made over the years. Craig's body made media hype during CR, and I think she is just trying to repeat that.

jet set willy wrote:

Prisoner Monkeys, you have to admit that it appears as though Babs gets wet over Craig.

I'm not denying that. What I'm denying is the idea that every single creative decision made in the past six years has been made on the basis of how much of Daniel Craig's body Babs can get away with showing.

I too am kind of puzzled over how fans spew venom at Babs in over the top ways. It's even worse at the CraigNotBond forum where everyone just outright calls her "whore" and "bitch". You'd think she kicked a bunch of kittens. I don't quite view her as some sort of Palpatine hellbent on ruining the James Bond franchise, rather just a producer who had made some bad calls (EQUALS ad) and yet some good ones (hiring Daniel Craig).

I think it's because they feel that a woman couldn't possibly understand Bond since Bond has always been such a masculine character. It probably stems back to 1995, when Judi Dench was cast as M (although a woman being in charge ties into a major thematic point since the film questions Bond's place in a world that has changed so drastically with the collapse of the Soviet Union).

So what if the thought of Daniel Craig makes Babs salivate at the mouth faster than a leg of lamb? Casting him in the role gave us CASINO ROYALE, which was a fantastic film, and I seriously doubt that Henry Cavill could have pulled it off half as well. Craig made CASINO ROYALE the film that it was, and if that decision was made because Babs' panties were wet, so be it. That's the price we have to pay. But the idea that every decision she has made has been made to get Craig's sculpted abs on-screen as much as possible is ridiculous. Honestly, it's a teenage boy's fantasy, like cougars.

Yes, it's MI6, but there's some good stuff here:

http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/gallery/skyfall_london_jan2012d.php3?s=bond23&id=03058

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Everything you have is circumstantial.

That's why it's called CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE in a court of law. It's permissible and it usually helps win a lot of cases.

Quote :

Your two pieces of evidence are Daniel Craig dressed as a woman - which, as I said, can be explained by Craig wanting to support a cause.

But the Bond image isn't meant to be used and licensed by feminist groups.

Quote :

As for the picture of babs having erect nipples when she stood next to Craig, you will also note that everyone in that picture is wearing several layers of clothing. Her nipples can be explained by a cold wind.

It could be explained that way, but it's not. While yes, temperatures were cool, everyone else was appropriatelydressed for the weather. But oh no! Nots our Barbara. She went on the set in s skimpy, spandex tube top without wearing a bra, and quite clearly her half-dollar sized nipples were really, really, happy to meet Craig that day.

Quote :

Except that you cannot see his backside.

Yes you can. You can just see the beginning of ass-cleavage, and the top 1/3rds of each cheek are gently peeking out of their swim trunks like a couple of naughty golden retriever puppies gently tussling with each other under an afghan quilt. And then if you analyze the photograph in a 4-D computer simulation you can rotate the image up, down, side, frontwards, backwards, inside and out. You can reverse the image and see Craig from the front, and I've got to tell you, he's either shoving a wad of socks into his crotch for this photoshoot or else he's hung like an African Elephant. By flipping the picture you can see Craig with his legs wide open, and nothing is left to the imagination. You can see clear up his trunks six million ways to Sunday. It's unseemely...It's in poor taste. The eyes of decent, honest, God-fearing Bond fans should not have to be confronted with this debauchery.

I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I think your arguments are specious at best, rely entirely too much on assumptions and leaps in logic that I think are far too large to be resonable, are contradicted by your own statements and generally reek of an underlying agenda - to criticise Barbara Broccoli. We've got a whole set of new photos to digest (even if they do have that silly purple watermark on them), and you're still sprouting about Babs. I'm not even sure you know what you're talking about anymore.

And the last paragraph of that post about 4-D computer imaging and God-fearing Bond fans makes absolutely no sense.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Yes, it's MI6, but there's some good stuff here:

http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/gallery/skyfall_london_jan2012d.php3?s=bond23&id=03058

Thanks for that PM. I have ran with those photo's on my website now..... :*h*:

Quote :

Following up on the update we gave a couple of days ago with the first official photo released on Daniel Craig as Bond in Skyfall, and the photo leaked by the Evening Standard, here are more photo’s from that shoot in London, Charing Cross tube station, published by Bond fan site MI6.
http://www.filmnav.co.uk/2012/01/15/daniel-craig-on-the-run-skyfall-photo/

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Yes, it's MI6, but there's some good stuff here:

http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/gallery/skyfall_london_jan2012d.php3?s=bond23&id=03058

He's starting to look a bit like Lois Maxwell in A View To A Kill. :suspect: