Re: [scifinoir2] Re: Pierce Brosnan Out As James Bond, 007
I googled him. Nope Bond he aint. RS=D --- B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, yinka oyekunle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought it was said that he will return to this role. Is this old news or is Brosnan outed again? He's supposedly out for good. The Bond people want Daniel Craig from Layer Cake as the new Bond. I like Craig but he doesn't come across as Bond-like to me. Anyone who would give up a little liberty for more security deserves neither. Ben Franklin...My Fav links: http://www.geocities.com/jagrslc/tv.show.swop.list.htm [My complete TV Show collection for exchange]... http://www.geocities.com/jagrslc [My FF]... http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/tv-divx/ [Swop Mart for TV Shows]... http://www.geocities.com/slustufflikethat/First.Ladies.pdf [My labour of Love] Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- font face=arial size=-1a href=http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hdu8p8m/M=362335.6886444.7839734.2575449/D=groups/S=1705034827:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1124752159/A=2894362/R=0/SIG=138c78jl6/*http://www.networkforgood.org/topics/arts_culture/?source=YAHOOcmpgn=GRPRTP=http://groups.yahoo.com/;What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good/a./font ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [scifinoir2] Re: Pierce Brosnan Out As James Bond, 007
I still say Ewan McGregor would be a great Bond, but no one seems to agree with me. Clive Owen would have done well, too. -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of B. Smith Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 14:59 To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scifinoir2] Re: Pierce Brosnan Out As James Bond, 007 --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, yinka oyekunle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought it was said that he will return to this role. Is this old news or is Brosnan outed again? He's supposedly out for good. The Bond people want Daniel Craig from Layer Cake as the new Bond. I like Craig but he doesn't come across as Bond-like to me. --- Brent Wodehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/ap/20050817/112429692000.html Pierce Brosnan Out As James Bond, 007 Wednesday August 17 A single, surprising phone call and it was over. That's how Pierce Brosnan says he learned that his services as James Bond would no longer be required. One phone call, that's all it took! the 52-year-old actor tells Entertainment Weekly magazine in its Aug. 19 issue. Brosnan starred in four Bond films. He says that before they stopped negotiations, the producers had invited him back for a fifth time. You know, the movie career for me really started with Bond, says Brosnan, acknowledging that by the time GoldenEye premiered in 1995, he was already 42. He then starred as 007 in Tomorrow Never Dies (1997), The World Is Not Enough (1999) and Die Another Day (2002). His departure from the role was a titanic jolt to the system, says Brosnan, followed by a great sense of calm. I thought. ... I can do anything I want to do now. I'm not beholden to them or anyone. I'm not shackled by some contracted image. So there was a sense of liberation. Brosnan says he's grateful to have had the role, but adds: It never felt real to me. I never felt I had complete ownership over Bond. Because you'd have these stupid one-liners which I loathed and I always felt phony doing them. He plays a foulmouthed, skirt-chasing hit man in the upcoming film The Matador. (For this) to come on the heels of my departure from the world of Bond is sweet grace, to play this one as a farewell to that chapter in time it certainly wasn't planned. ___ On the Net: http://www.piercebrosnan.com/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _ YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS *Visit your group scifinoir2 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2 on the web. *To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ . _ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- font face=arial size=-1a href=http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12h11mp52/M=362335.6886444.7839734.2575449/D=groups/S=1705034827:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1124776622/A=2894362/R=0/SIG=138c78jl6/*http://www.networkforgood.org/topics/arts_culture/?source=YAHOOcmpgn=GRPRTP=http://groups.yahoo.com/;What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good/a./font ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [scifinoir2] Re: Movie theater owners fire back at studios
Oh, I don't argue the reality of what's happening. Like I said, i understand that finances and convenience make it desirable for many people to watch films at home. My wife's not so gung ho on going to the theatre as much as I am. I imagine that'll be more true once I get a widescreen theatre setup at home. And the Net's going to be a big player soon, the same way podcasts and stuff on the audio frontier are big. It's just that I still love the theatrical experience, and I worry about what may happen down the road. Will studios turn out cheaper films as the theatre crowd shrinks? (By cheaper I fear not just less money, but less quality, as they're wont to do). Will we get a lot of substandard stuff created for the direct-to-video/cable market? (Imagine all the in-da-hood movies starring the likes of Fat Joe and Mack 10 that now go direct to video). Most importantly, what would a emphasis on home theatre do to the flow, structure, and look of movies? One of the things that bothers me with a lot of folks who watch movies at home is that they often don't watch them in one chunk. I hear lots of people say stuff like I watched the first hour of 'Return of the King' tonight, and I'll catch the rest this weekend. Or they'll start a movie, stop it to cook or talk on the phone, then start it up again an hour or so later. Happens a great deal. I think people miss the feel, the true overall experience, when they watch movies at home like that. I try my hardest to watch a movie like a *movie*, to watch it in one uninterrupted session so the overall experience builds, not gets broken up.But if you know your audience is watching movies like tV shows, would you start changing the structure of those movies, perhaps building in breaking points in the story akin to commercial breaks in episodic TV? And will the look of movies themselves--the camera shots, the panning of the screen--change as films are shot for smaller home screens instead of big theatre screens? I mean, much of the beautiful scenery of Middle EArth, such as the awesome mountains of New Zealand, is lost on the small screen. Unless everyone is assumed to have widescreens at home, perhaps Hollywood will start scaling back the very look of films, since most will be going direct to video. Just thoughts as to what the future holds... -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of g123curious Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 17:40 To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scifinoir2] Re: Movie theater owners fire back at studios Unfortunately, it is not as simple as both sides to this argument portray the issue. As I see it, there are at least 5 sets of dates: 1) domestic theatrical release 2) international theatrical release 3) domestic cable release 4) domestic DVD release 5) domestic broadcast TV release Sometimes #2 happens before #1. More often, #1 is before #2. Either way, bootleg DVD copies circulate. Coming soon is the sixth release date: 6) Internet release The theatre owners are fighting an uphill battle as technology and change are against them. NetFlix comes to mind immediately. Economics is going to force it, too. With $3 a gallon gas by Thanksgiving, people in rural areas aren't going to drive as much to the movies. And if the rate of increase goes to $4 a gallon by Easter 2006, the shift in behavior will be even more dramatic. However, with comments like Iger's, the studios are acting short- sighted for at least 2 reasons: - lower production costs enable independents to enter the market and go straight to #4 or #6. Competition, baby... Atom Films and iFilm ain't going away. - Hollywood is no longer the only game in town. As demographics change, the audience is going around Hollywood and other areas such as Bollywood will gain more clout. The last unspoken reason for the behavior change is the reason few want to say publicly... perceived safety. In a post 9-11 world, some people are more comfortable just staying home and viewing movies there. Just my 2 cents... George Captain The USS Ronald E. McNair (Boston) --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Keith Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know a lot of you are watching more movies at home, due to reduced costs (no high theatre fees, overpriced food), comfort, and convenience. I imagine that's especially true for those with young kids. And I think that's great. I can't wait for the day when I have a nice HD widescreen setup with great sound. I'll be watching Lord of the Rings and playing Playstation games all day in my own theatre setup. But I still love the movie going experience. For one, even the best home system still doesn't match the spectacle of a huge theatre screen. There's nothing like watching larger-than-life action on thescreen. The panaromic views afforded by a big theatre screen too can't be quite matched by even the biggest home systems, no matter how costly. And, I love the event of going to the
