James Bond In Skyfall - Part 10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Random: Saw Goldeneye and I really think Ms. Judy Dench looks better now than she did back in 1995.

Just admit it Octoberist you want to see Judi Dench come out the ocean in a bikini in the next Bond movie :oldrazz:
 
James Bond star Daniel Craig has said that the next adventure after "Skyfall" will come sooner rather than later, indicating the series may be back to its two-year cycle again.

That would place Bond 24, his fourth film, around November 2014 - the spot that Sony were hoping for.

When asked by MTV Bond 24 will begin production sooner rather than later, Craig said: "Ask the producers. I don't know. I think they'd like to [speed up the timetable], and I think that would be the plan."

"That was too long last time, although I quite enjoyed the gap, but it's too long. As long as we've got the script and we're ready to go, there's no reason why we can't start shooting."

Pre-production work has already begun on Bond 24. To meet the November 2014 release date, filming would have to start around January 2014.
 
daniel-craig-skyfall-photo-call-01.JPG

l.

That's a nice suit Daniel Craig is wearing, I wonder if it is a Tom Ford?
 
That's a nice suit Daniel Craig is wearing, I wonder if it is a Tom Ford?

99% sure it is Tom Ford. All the little details are the same, but would need to see the label to confirm. It appears to be from the same O'Connor line that is featured in the film except it is the two button jacket variant. Ironically, the 2 button version is what is being sold and promoted as the Bond "Skyfall" suit design by Tom Ford retailers despite Craig actually wearing the 3 button variant in the film. I really don't understand why they opted for the 3 button variant in the film. 2 button suit jackets is far more Bondian. Connery exclusively wore 2 button suits as Bond and Moore did the same other than his occasional double-breasted suits. Bond wearing predominantly 3 button suits was something initiated by Lindy Hemming with Brosnan in Goldeneye. Lazenby and Dalton wore 3 button jackets with their 3 piece suits, but otherwise favoured 2 button jackets if I remember correctly.

Additionally, the suit Craig is wearing there is fitted more traditionally than his Skyfall suits (Tom Ford actually isn't a fan of the super tight, shrunken look that Craig wears in Skyfall. Colin Firth actually wears the same model of Tom Ford Suit as Bond in Ford's film A Single Man and it is fitted rather differently from Bond's) I personally think it looks more flattering and Bondian than his fit in Skyfall.
 
Last edited:
99% sure it is Tom Ford. All the little details are the same, but would need to see the label to confirm. It appears to be from the same O'Connor line that is featured in the film except it is the two button jacket variant. Ironically, the 2 button version is what is being sold and promoted as the Bond "Skyfall" suit design by Tom Ford retailers despite Craig actually wearing the 3 button variant in the film. I really don't understand why they opted for the 3 button variant in the film. 2 button suit jackets is far more Bondian. Connery exclusively wore 2 button suits as Bond and Moore did the same other than his occasional double-breasted suits. Bond wearing predominantly 3 button suits was something initiated by Lindy Hemming with Brosnan in Goldeneye. Lazenby and Dalton wore 3 button jackets with their 3 piece suits, but otherwise favoured 2 button jackets if I remember correctly.

Additionally, the suit Craig is wearing there is fitted more traditionally than his Skyfall suits (Tom Ford actually isn't a fan of the super tight, shrunken look that Craig wears in Skyfall. Colin Firth actually wears the same model of Tom Ford Suit as Bond in Ford's film A Single Man and it is fitted rather differently from Bond's) I personally think it looks more flattering and Bondian than his fit in Skyfall.

Yes the way he is wearing that suit above does look better then in the film.
By the way are you a tailor or something?
 
Yes the way he is wearing that suit above does look better then in the film.
By the way are you a tailor or something?

Just a big Bond fan growing up, who developed a love of suits as a result. In the books, Bond makes some very interesting observations about suspects and opponents' tailoring and that got me interested in the little details. I stumbled upon www.thesuitsofjamesbond.com about a year ago, its a blog about Bond's tailoring in the films, and its a very interesting read.
 
Does he deliver the ".....my name is Bond, James Bond...." line?
 
MR had many issues. The ridiculous idea of Bond in space, the constant travelling (I kept saying "Where is he?" many times during the movie), turning Jaws into a hero, and having a lame Bond Girl. MR was a mess and it sucks that Lewis Gilbert went out on that movie.

Turning Jaws into a good guy ranks up there with the worst choices in the franchise's history.

One thing I always will give Moonraker is the hilarious end bit when Bond pops up on the screen getting it on with Holly Goodhead in the floating bed and one stuffy old dude loudly blurts out "Good God! What's Bond doing?".....and Q deadpans "Attempting re-entry I think" :funny:
 
Turning Jaws into a good guy ranks up there with the worst choices in the franchise's history.

One thing I always will give Moonraker is the hilarious end bit when Bond pops up on the screen getting it on with Holly Goodhead in the floating bed and one stuffy old dude loudly blurts out "Good God! What's Bond doing?".....and Q deadpans "Attempting re-entry I think" :funny:

That was an amazing line. The best ending sex gag of all the Moore movies.
 
Got these today :woot:

tumblr_mbyzz8q1PN1qelzx8o1_500.png


Also got a skyfall poster, and grabbing legends tomorrow. :up:
Nice. Of the new books that have come out this year I've got 'Bond on Set filming Skyfall' and Roger Moore's 'Bond on Bond'. Is the '50 years of James Bond' book worth getting?
 
Nice. Of the new books that have come out this year I've got 'Bond on Set filming Skyfall' and Roger Moore's 'Bond on Bond'. Is the '50 years of James Bond' book worth getting?

I think it is. It's a cool little collectors item, but it doesn't really give much insight on the films (unless you know barely anything about them). Worth a pickup though, and for 10 bucks, not a bad price either.
 
But that doesn't make any sense.You can't watch the films like that.

Well, of course not, but in the new and modernized timeline, that's how it goes. I thought it was an interesting concept as it was a perfect compromise for people who wanted to see the old movies get remade, but without actually doing them so established fans don't get pissed off.

Its surreal to see Daniel Craig's Bond meet Tracy.

If they do a Legends sequel, I'd like to see Live And Let Die, Diamonds Are Forever, From Russia With Love, Dr. No, The Man With The Golden Gun, and The World Is Not Enough as levels.

Yeah, I think Charles Gray's recasting was the worst because his Blofeld was awful and looked completely different to Pleasance and Savalas.

Ironically, he's the closest of the three actors to the book Blofeld in terms of looks.

Charles Gray was terrable as Blofeld.What were Broccolli and Saltzman thinking.After doing 2 films In a row with bald blofeld He now has hair andhe was weak compared to other 2 blofelds.

Had Charles not played Dikko previously and showed the same ruthlessness that Donald did, DAF would've been a much better film.

What's baffling to me though is Connery came back, but not Pleasance? Seriously, WTF?


This is how Diamonds Are Forever should've started out:

[YT]xBJ7IhwMIQA[/YT]

None of that clones BS either.
 
Last edited:
Just rewatched Goldfinger. I take back what I said about it being slightly overhyped: It's an amazing piece of cinema and an awesome jetset 60's time capsule.

The funny thing is how it looks so beautiful (thanks to the cinematography) along with the locations, and yet when it came to the Moore era, half of his films look cheap. I mean, 70's TV show budget cheap. I love the 70's kitchiness and all, but following the 60's it was a step back.
 
I think production teams had to do more with less in the earlier days of cinema. They knew how to make sets and limited locations look stylish. Dr No is probably the best example; Bond's hotel room, where he is visited by the tarantula, is obviously just a few screens and some loose furniture in the corner of a studio. But it is lit and displayed in a way to give it a bold visual impact.

Sadly, we are now at the point where so much money and technology is lavished on movies that they end up looking over-processed and flat. The Hobbit stands as an example of a whole new and expensive technology being important especially to make the visuals look worse.
 
Seeing as how it looks like we are about to get an absolutely great Bond movie, looking back it seems almost inconceivable that there was a dark time when it didnt even look like this movie would be made at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,403
Messages
22,097,912
Members
45,893
Latest member
DooskiPack
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"