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

Sharky wrote:

Jack Wade wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Quote :

If you have a nice physique, why not wear a suit that accentuates it?

Connery didn't.

Different eras, different styles.

Connery's style is timeless (I'm talking about the suits alone here, not accessories such as trilby hats), and the looser cut doesn't date much either, compared to say the high collars and wide lapels of the 70s.

Who's to say a finely fitting suit won't be timeless? I think if you have the physique for it, it's much for stylish than something that doesn't accentuate your features.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

saint mark wrote:

I found the excitemant about this movie based upon this picture a bit to homo-erotic too, but you put it really out there. :affraid:

Interesting that you should find it homoerotic when nobody else has said that ...

Other people HAVE noticed it, if not in this thread then in many others. Why is it "interesting" that Saint Mark felt it was "homoerotic"?

Look, I *get* why the gay/bi demographic is being marketed to with this photograph; from a financial perspective it makes sense. But it's also clearly a transparent ploy on SONY/EON's part, and it's completely in line with Babs' mission to make James Bond every bit the explicit sex object in these films that the women USED to be (before becoming dour, sourpusses like suicidal Vesper or "damaged goods" Camille). I actually had to just go look up QUANTURD OF SOLACE on the IMDB because I'd forgotten the name of the character Olga played in it. That's all part of Bab's plan. She wants Bond to be objectified and sexualized as much, if not more, than the women.

And, like I said, I understand why EON has chosen this picture, but I don't agree with it. Obviously they felt that since Roger Moore retired there had been a lack of raw sexual machismo and studly hunkiness from Dalton and Brosnan; clearly Craig is meant to fully embrace not only the modern man (homo, bi, or "metro" sexual), but also to remind people of the glory days of the series back in the 70's and mid 80's with Sir Roger.

Jack Wade wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Jack Wade wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Quote :

If you have a nice physique, why not wear a suit that accentuates it?

Connery didn't.

Different eras, different styles.

Connery's style is timeless (I'm talking about the suits alone here, not accessories such as trilby hats), and the looser cut doesn't date much either, compared to say the high collars and wide lapels of the 70s.

Who's to say a finely fitting suit won't be timeless? I think if you have the physique for it, it's much for stylish than something that doesn't accentuate your features.

Stylish or not, Connery's cut looks far more Bondian and physically imposing than the skin-tight suits Craig wore QOS. Part of that is down to Craig's much smaller frame (arguably the smallest Bond to date - if we're talking about bone mass), and the Tom Ford suits accentuated that. Craig looked better in Brioni, especially the three-piece suit (minus the shirt collar) at the end.

And either way, Bond should never be the most stylish guy in the room. That was the problem with Brosnan's Bond. He should blend in and wear elegant but functional and unflamboyant clothes. He's a counter-intelligence agent with naval and commando training, not a fashion model.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Think of it in terms of cinematography. The scene is lit from the pool, with most of the surrounds in shadow.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Because people in the audience are all going to be marveling at the cinematography in the scene, or wondering what kind of lights were used to illuminate the pool. No, they're going to be saying: "Look! Bond's ass is peeking out of his swimsuit! Look at those buns!"

What have we come to now as a society that we have Bond being the sex object and not the women? Where are the pats to the rump like Bond gave Dink in GOLDFINGER? Where's the patronizing chauvinism of Fleming's Bond? Instead we get lessons on "sexual harassment" from Moneypenny, or M talking down to Bond in an ill-conceived public service announcement for International Womyn's Day.

These Daniel Craig films are making me embarrassed to be a misogynistic

Sharky wrote:

And either way, Bond should never be the most stylish guy in the room. That was the problem with Brosnan's Bond. He should blend in and wear elegant but functional and unflamboyant clothes. He's a counter-intelligence agent with naval and commando training, not a fashion model.

Bond has never really been about fitting in.

Jack Wade wrote:

Sharky wrote:

And either way, Bond should never be the most stylish guy in the room. That was the problem with Brosnan's Bond. He should blend in and wear elegant but functional and unflamboyant clothes. He's a counter-intelligence agent with naval and commando training, not a fashion model.

Bond has never really been about fitting in.

Connery's Bond did, and he's pretty much seen as the template. Fleming's Bond did too, in terms of clothing and even the name - "James Bond" was chosen because it was bland. The key thing is putting this cypher into bizarre situations and seeing how he handles them, and develops as a character.

Just in from Twitter.

Quote :

@GirthmanReece @Jules4_ at pinewood waiting in a ball room on our own they let us just look for Daniel Craig jeez pic.twitter.com/epuAdiY1

https://twitter.com/#!/leonbrownie11/status/160061753198264320/photo/1

First shot of the downed "Skyfall" satellite?

Lazenby. wrote:

Case closed. Optimists for this must have binlids over their eyes.

The film hasn't even come out yet. :| If the case is closed for you, might as well just throw your hands up in the air and say "I'm done" and move on. Mike and Babs have said from the get go that they'll continue the path CR took with SF, so in the end you're just gonna be disappointed because they're clearly not going to make the James Bond movie you want in the near future.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Obviously they felt that since Roger Moore retired there had been a lack of raw sexual machismo and studly hunkiness from Dalton and Brosnan; clearly Craig is meant to fully embrace not only the modern man (homo, bi, or "metro" sexual), but also to remind people of the glory days of the series back in the 70's and mid 80's with Sir Roger.

So your argument is that "Bond should do this because it is in character, and that's a bad thing"?

Bond, as we have repeatedly seen, has a certain way with women. Whether played by Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig, women have always found him attactive. I fail to see how EON can achieve that without actually making him attractive to women, because the alternative is to go down the creepy-uncle avenue that is inhabited by Pierce Brosnan.

::sigh::

Where's Bongster when you need him.

Sharky wrote:

First shot of the downed "Skyfall" satellite?

Today's dose of comedy comes to you from MI6 (as usual) who are reporting that the screen just to the left of the clapperboard contains - wait for it - a meteorite!

Yeah, I saw that meteorite post this morning. Had to read it twice. Not sure what kind of sauce JP had before he looked at the photo.

Probably his own power.

That said, once it's pointed out to you that the image looks like a meteor, it's kind of hard to see anything else. I can understand how he came to the conclusion that it could be a meteor; what I'm uncertain of is why this is the first thing he thought of. It reminds me of the original plot idea for AVTAK - instead of destroying Silicon Valley with an earthquake, Max Zorin was going to somehow re-direct Halley's Comet, which may well be the worst idea ever.

My two cents on what the actual image is would be the schematics for a defunct spy satellie, and MI6 is attempting to intercept a tranmission to/from it.

A satellite? DAD also had one of those as a major plot point and opinion on it is skewed towards it being one of the series' worst entries, so obviously Skyfall will be terrible too.

Sorry ... just running with the theme of condemning the film on the basis of a single picture .

Blunt Instrument wrote:

A satellite? DAD also had one of those as a major plot point and opinion on it is skewed towards it being one of the series' worst entries, so obviously Skyfall will be terrible too.

Sorry ... just running with the theme of condemning the film on the basis of a single picture .

I quite liked DAD so that is good news I get to like Bond23 better than QoS. :cheers:

It could be a meteor but if it is the question arises then what is supposedly taking the photograph? Many of the screens could be impact simulations but the lower left corner seems too ordered almost like an architectural schematic.

As villainous schemes go dropping a meteor on something or someone seems an inefficient form of attack to say the least, so I suspect (& kinda hope) the screens are depicting something else entirely.

The James Bond Club Switzerland (www.jamesbondclub.ch) reported in its newsletter yesterday, that filming in Shanghai began this week. The scene being filmed was a pursuit over the Shanghai highway!





After two days of practice, the shooting began on the 17th of January in the evening. The "extra cars" assembled by the Shanghai Science & Technology Museum and drove close together on a nearby highway, so they could shoot without another car entering the scene. The shooting continued for another two nights.

Chigawa wrote:

::sigh::

Where's Bongster when you need him.

Yeah, wish he'd comeback to Bond Land.

Mr. Brown wrote:

Chigawa wrote:

::sigh::

Where's Bongster when you need him.

Yeah, wish he'd comeback to Bond Land.

tried a few times. He's not been on the net for almost a year. Think he's had net problems before that. He did say after MI6 went kaputt that he'd join as soon as he was able.

I'd make a naff resident spy.

Sharky wrote:

The James Bond Club Switzerland (www.jamesbondclub.ch) reported in its newsletter yesterday, that filming in Shanghai began this week. The scene being filmed was a pursuit over the Shanghai highway!





After two days of practice, the shooting began on the 17th of January in the evening. The "extra cars" assembled by the Shanghai Science & Technology Museum and drove close together on a nearby highway, so they could shoot without another car entering the scene. The shooting continued for another two nights.

Looks very promising.

I think Skyfall might just be cracking. Forgive me for the optimism, but by Christ I'm sick of the whinging. :)

This scale of whinging is nothing compared to Pompey fans. If only they were sponsored by EOn

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Forgive me for the optimism, but by Christ I'm sick of the whinging. :)

I have a theory on that: Bond fans are only every happy when they have something to whinge about. And when we're not whinging about the films, we're whinging about the way other people are whinging.

Shanghai car chase? Sounds awesome.

Sharky wrote:

Something that I've noticed about the pictures from Shanghai and Shandhai sets: they're all bathed in neon. We've got a bright purple highway interchange, a clapperboard shot of green martini bar, and the introductory video posted on 007.com had a blue neon sign in it.