![]() ![]() |
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 9 January 2002 From: Edmonton, Canada |
Post
#1
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 23 October 2001 From: Chicago, USA |
Post
#2
|
|
Well, that's certainly very interesting. I wonder what the current story was, and why it was deemed insufficient? ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 9 January 2002 From: Edmonton, Canada |
Post
#3
|
|
I tried to make this article as passive as possible, as I really don't believe the sky is falling on Bond 22, but his remarks are interesting, nonetheless.
My speculation - and that's all it is - is that it's only an aspect of Bond 22's storyline that was ditched. That said, like most of what Haggis has said on the topic of Bond 22, it's open to a great deal of interpretation. (Let's also not forget that this interview took place prior to 11 September, and we've heard from Haggis since.) ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 23 October 2001 From: Chicago, USA |
Post
#4
|
|
(Let's also not forget that this interview took place prior to 11 September, and we've heard from Haggis since.) Yeah, I'm not worried at all. Still, I find it interesting. I am rather curious as to what was thrown out. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 3 December 2002 From: Bristol, TN |
Post
#5
|
|
Snap.
While I'm sure this may make some fans pretty apprehensive, at least they're being as thorough as possible with coming up with a final story. I'm sure that's comforting. Now I'm wondering if it will still pick up in CR's last scene...I hope it does. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 26 June 2003 From: New York |
Post
#6
|
|
Perhaps a few of these page number reports Haggis has been giving us lately are referring to this new draft then.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 20 June 2002 From: London |
Post
#7
|
|
Ooh- a Great Missing Bond Plot; I hope this turns up someday!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 23 October 2001 From: Chicago, USA |
Post
#8
|
|
Perhaps a few of these page number reports Haggis has been giving us lately are referring to this new draft then. Which would explain the slow progress. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commodore RNVR Group: The Admiralty Enlisted: 8 October 2001 From: 38.6902N - 89.9816W |
Post
#9
|
|
Now I'm wondering if it will still pick up in CR's last scene...I hope it does. Yes. It will. Haggis has mentioned that after this interview. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Midshipman Group: Crew Enlisted: 10 October 2007 From: Texas |
Post
#10
|
|
okay now I am really nervous!!! first the start date is ooming and we are still I assume working a script up to the last minute. Haggis went to Italy to finish it. A plot Haggisthought was terrific was tossed out...
true not necessarily a bad thing he said "we tossed" it out which I guess can be inferred they reached a concensus it was not workable. so they are still a team effort. but Haggis is working up to a deadline...locations being scouted...revisions...please guys hang in there and cross fingers this is all toward a good... |
|
|
|
|
|
Lt. Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 9 February 2005 From: Sweden |
Post
#11
|
|
So first P&W created a story for Bond22, then they tossed that one out when Haggis came in, and now they have changed his story too.
It seems like it was a wise choice to skip the original 2007 release date ![]() "I'm not about to come unhinged when everything goes wrong. A fact is something to be faced, But not for very long. The good times are coming, They'll be coming real soon. And I'm not just pitching pennies at the moon" YouTube |
|
|
|
|
|
Lt. Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 1 October 2006 |
Post
#12
|
|
I said it in my Valley Of Elah thread and i'll say it here...
His contribution to CR was WAY LESS in relation to Ian Fleming's and P+W's than some on here think. NO ONE, on CBn at least, can provide proof of CR draft 1 and CR draft 2. Also, his "acclaimed" work revolves around boring, dour subject matter that the majority of cinema goers couldnt care less for. Finally, THIS story indicates that PH's Bond stuff is sub par and closer to on par with his "acclaimed" (read BORING) stuff and was, rightly, tossed out. Thank goodness we have Barbara and Mike to continue the legacy...leaving it in the hands of Haggis would mean no Bond 23 for 6 to 8 yrs. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-Lieutenant Group: Crew Enlisted: 19 October 2004 From: North Carolina |
Post
#13
|
|
Hmmm. This definitely leaves me scratching my head. I wonder who the 'we' is that Haggis refers too. Was it Haggis and P&W, or the writers and Babs and Mike?
This post has been edited by HawkEye007: 12 October 2007 - 14:30 ![]() You are professional. You do not kill without reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 14 October 2005 From: the bottle to the belly! |
Post
#14
|
|
So first P&W created a story for Bond22, then they tossed that one out when Haggis came in, and now they have changed his story too. The only question that remains... who are “they”? The Algerian perhaps? But it can’t be, if he was thrown out with the script! No, in the article Paul actually says “we”, not “they”. It seems that |