Quantum Of Solace came online for tracking and I’m told the good news has Sony doing somersaults. Because the first choice is almost double what it was for Daniel Craig’s debut as Bond in Casino Royale, That’s a very solid start with 3 weeks to go before its release November 14th. Nevertheless, 007 fanatics posting online about their longing for the established Bond cliches and stereotypes. They say the 22nd Bond movie looks more like Bond-as-Bourne since it’s “dropped Moneypenny, dropped Q, dropped the wit, dropped the gadgets, and dropped the line ‘The name is Bond, James Bond’.” That said, Sony is trying to ignore rival studio chatter that this may be the costliest film ever made minute by minute: $261 million for a 105-minute movie, which comes out to almost $2.5 million per minute. (As opposed to, say, the $300M pricetag for 165-minute-long Pirates Of The Caribbean 3.) But Sony sources say that number is “off base by more than 60. Plus we have tax credits from filming.”
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







Comment by #44 — October 27, 2008 @ 6:39 pm
It was a joke you silly head.
Saw it last night and it is indeed “The Bond Identity”. Precious little humour but more action than Sasha Grey gets in an afternoon.
Mr. John Chambers (aka Paul Haggis lover) i wonder if you have ever read a PAUL HAGGIS script? you say you venture a guess that PH had some great dialogue in there and Forrester cut it out? hilarious! Haggis has some of the worst dialogue in the history of cinema. he was paid 4million and delivered a script that had thoughtful action sequences like: “there is a chase.” and if you get your hands on the script you will pee your pants laughing at how bad a writer haggis is. the bloom is off the rose on PH and its doubtful he will match that quote again soon as word of mouth on his QOS work is “terrible”. Daniel was unable to deliver many of his lines with a straight face — thats why there are so few in the script, and if you are in the business you know that everybody wants bourne on any action movie. so stop comparing credits on IMDB and blasting forrester for delivering what every studio wants… and try reading the script.
JOHN CHAMBERS
Forster did NOT hire Bradley he was in place from the producers. Forster did not hire the second editor either, he had his regular cutter (so that was probably the producers as well.) I interviewed both Forster and his cinematographer for the next issue of ICG, and they (especially the DP) absolutely HATE shakeycam and the Bourne look, and both told Bradley he was not hired to shoot that way. And he was fine with that, apparently.
If this second cutter blitzed this thing and turned well-shot sequences into overcut shit, I imagine that is the Broccoli clan messing w/ Forster’s cut, not the other way round.
Considering how much I despised baby-immature Bond in CR and absolutely loathe Craig in the role (he ain’t Dalton and he ain’t Connery, but he IS buttugly), I was still looking forward to this movie … but the cutting sounds … like something went horribly wrong.
The new bond film actually upset me. Im a bond fan, if i wanted perfect reality i would join the M.O.D
which i did for a bit actually (no shit)