Talk:Die Another Day

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B
This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid
This article has been rated as Mid-Importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Desmond Llewelyn

The article states that Die Another Day did not feature Llewelyn because he died. Actually, he officially announced he was done with the Bond movies shortly before his fatal car accident. I have edited the main page to reflect this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kuvopolis (talk • contribs) 04:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Misc

I am surprised the "capitalist" film was even shown in North Korea. -fonzy

It was banned in North Korea. There was a big fuss in the news over it. --Madchester 02:14, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)

Very few non-North Korean films are ever shown in North Korea, and so "banned" perhaps isn't quite the right word. It's not clear the film was ever seen by any North Korean officials before they condemned it. Then again, Kim Jong Il has a large personal library, so it's possible he's seen it... --ProhibitOnions 23:31, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

Given the extremely limited freedom in North Korea, being banned would be very likely as I have thought, but North Korean officials would probably not even want to spend 133 minutes to review the whole movie. Kim Jong Il would probably hate these portions undermining his country.--Jusjih 07:00, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Who said Branson was the inspiration for Graves? Seems a bit unlikely... Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 13:55, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

it was Rupert Murdoch, obviously Morwen 13:57, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)
Nah, Rupert Murdoch was the inspiration for Jonathon Pryce's character in Tomorrow Never Dies, surely? Or maybe they did him twice... he's such a baddie ... :) Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 14:03, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, Pete has it right, Murdoch was inspiration for Elliot Carver in TND - media mogul, worldwide satellite and newspaper interests. There are no parallels between Murdoch and the Graves character. First I've heard about Branson, though there are parallels for that, daredevil and philanthropist are definitely two qualities you could associate with both. Mark 23:19, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

There was a guy with a lot of diamonds in his face. How did that come about ?

He was the guy at the start who took Bond's picture and discovered his true identity. Then when he's about to be executed Bond detonates the briefcase that's filled with diomands which bury themselves in Zao's face. Mark 23:19, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The IMDb has a great list of the various on-screen references to past Bond films and books seen in this movie. I think something similar should be posted here, but one would have to be careful not to plagerize the IMDb list. 23skidoo 19:06, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)


About the reaction section... the info is wrong, considering that Judi Dench has played M since winning her Oscar in 1999. --Madchester 02:14, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)

Good catch. I think I wrote that initially and I was thinking of "guest stars" as it were, not regulars. I modified the section to note Dench winning the Oscar, however after she became a Bond regular. 23skidoo 04:02, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] James Bond ... a code name?

I removed the following trivia item ...

"At one point, it was rumored that the movie would reveal that, in reality, the character of James Bond was actually a moniker used by many MI6 agents in the past, thus allowing for cameos by each of the series' Bond actors as James, in one alleged pivotal scene, reflects back on the lives of the 007 agents that preceeded him. It is unknown if this was indeed a possibility early in the movie's inception or, if so, why it was dropped."

...on the basis that no source was provided. This sounds pretty far-fetched and I can't imagine the holders of the Bond franchise actually authorizing such a "jump the shark" moment. If someone can provide a source for this rumor, by all means put it back (with source cited, of course). 23skidoo 13:55, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oh my god, he actually said "jump the shark". That saying is one of the most useless sayings that came about, it is the "jump the shark" of sayings, not adopted by the industrie analysts or pros but for some reason retreaded by internet trolls. Anyway, you are right, Brocoli and company would probably never EVER allow that. I'm sure they are still angry about the original Casino Royale, they probably don't want another one. JayKeaton 11:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The anomymous user has tried to add this item again, but still failed to provide attribution, so have reverted again. 23skidoo 14:28, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
First I've heard of it. :/ K1Bond007 16:59, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
In my experience anon users don't seem to check edit histories or discussion pages, so to avoid a possible revert issue on this, I added an embedded editorial note that hopefully the person will see before adding this trivia item again. 23skidoo 17:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The James Bond codename used by various 007's is actually a theory that has been around for a while amongst certain Bond enthusiasts. Although i agree with 23skidoo in that this has never been officially endorsed by the James Bond franchise and I think it is unlikely it ever will be. If the rumour was true, then they really were scraping the barrel for ideas on this one.
Hah! Having multiple James Bond's in the movie would be the feature least likely to prove that the series had jumped the shark. The ice castle, invisible car, annoying minority sidekick, surfing to Korea, the Korean general turning into English businessman, exoskeletal power armour, would all seem to be indicators that this movie is total crap even without that. I doubt anyone would have noticed if they added one more really dumb thing to such an already extensive list. 70.64.104.35 20:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

your theory is wrong remember Bond(George Lazenby) was married to Terresa and she was killed Bond(Roger Moore) Visits Terresa's grave in For your Eyes Only Bond(Dalton) visits Felix's house when Felix had just gotten married Felix says:"he was married once but that was a long time ago" Dudtz 8/25/05 4:27 PM EST

Yeah, the marriage thread (one of the few points of actual continuity in the series) pretty much renders the theory moot. Similarly, the fact that Q treats Connery's Bond the same way he treats Brosnan's Bond suggests that, in theory, it's the same man throughout (though of course there has to be some suspension of disbelief here since Brosnan is clearly too young to have tangled with Dr. No more than 40 years ago; presumably in Brosnan's universe the encounter happened sometime in the 1980s). 23skidoo 02:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
Not to mention that in OHMSS Bond looks at three items from precvious films and recalls the assignments. Also, not to mention that Felix Leiter also knows Bond, or are we to assume Felix Leiter is also a code name as he is played by quite a few actors. Some people just overanalyse it. Douglasnicol 22:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] September 11

Was the fact to put Bond in jail for fourteen months in North Korea an attempt by the screenwriters to justify his inability (of Bond) to prevent September 11 ? Or am I going too far ?194.183.196.141 5 July 2005 10:52 (UTC)

Going to far. It was just so they could do something they'd never really done before. Similar to in The World Is Not Enough when Bond got hurt, which rarely ever happens in the films. K1Bond007 July 5, 2005 18:45 (UTC)
I agree that I don't think it was done as a means to an end, although M does make a fairly explicit reference to Bond having missed 9/11 so while it may not have been the filmaker's intended message, it did serve to dodge a little landmine in terms of "is Bond still relevant after 9/11". 23skidoo 8 July 2005 21:33 (UTC)

[edit] Bond film references

One thing this article lacks is a detailed listing of all the various references to Bond novels and films. Not counting unintentional rehashes of past themes (of which DAD has a few), there are enough intentional nods to past Bonds that I think it deserves its own section. 23skidoo 16:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Minus the list of gadgets etc that show up from previous films and I agree with you. K1Bond007 17:07, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Distributors of Die Another Day

Are we going to list Centfox Film, Filmes Castello Lopes, Gativideo, Gemini Film, etc etc etc too? Now you're just pick and choosing - but no we will not. Precedent for EVERY FILM ON WIKIPEDIA shows we only list the main one, which is MGM. Examples, how about Million Dollar Baby, look how many it has - do we list them all here at Wikipedia? No we don't. Titanic. No we don't. The main distributor in this case, MGM, is all that we list. They are the distributor of the film. They allow other distributors to do so in other countries. It was financed by MGM. etc etc etc. It is an MGM film, not a 20th Century Fox film. K1Bond007 16:53, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

I concur. If we're going to list every distributor for this film, then we'll need to add similar information to every movie article on Wikipedia. It's simply not doable. 23skidoo 19:06, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Fox were just as much the main distributors as MGM. We are not talking about listing every distributor for every territory, we are talking about the main international distributor for this film. MGM was the distributor in North America, Fox nearly everywhere else. That makes it the main distributor. It has nothing to do with who financed the film. The information is notable and should be included, and there is no precedent that says it shouldn't.
    And K1Bond007, it is a requirement of Wikipedia that you act with civility towards other users. Please do so in future. JW 10:20, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
There may be no precedent saying the information can't be included, but I've just spent the last 20 minutes without success trying to find another movie article on Wikipedia in which it is. 23skidoo 11:40, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
That's mainly because of the heavy US bias on WP and confusion over the roles of distributor/production company. No-one is suggesting that we should list every local distributor for every title, but Fox were the main distributor for Die Another Day worldwide, including the UK, Europe and the far east, so it seems fair to include them. I don't see that it does any harm to make the article more accurate. JW 14:01, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
There may be bias, but that's just the way it's set up. Maybe the solution here is to not bother listing distributors period and just stick with production companies. As K1Bond007 says above, if we list Fox then we'd have to list the others as well in order to be accurate and it would be just a mess. We need a consensus before making such a decision, but my vote is to eliminate all references to distributors, period. No one really cares anyway - it's the people who actually make the movie that count. Many MGM movies from the 1950s are now distributed worldwide by Warner Brothers which was at one point a fierce rival, but there's little point in going back to all those old films and adding this information. 23skidoo 14:39, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
I agree. I would much rather list production companies than distributors, but that's just the way it is at the moment. As long as we do list distributors, I don't understand why anyone would be violently opposed to a very minor addition like this that only makes the article more accurate and non US-centric. JW 15:09, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
I wouldn't say I'm violently opposed, but it's going to create work for someone because if you do this for DAD then at the very least the research needs to be done for the other Bond films in order to maintain consistency. 23skidoo 15:12, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
I can't say that Fox wasn't a main distributor of the film elsewhere in the world, but they're not the only one. Everyone knows that MGM is the distributor of the series (or maybe not, theres a lot of confusion with UA and now Sony). For the purpose of the infobox, IMHO it should be left as MGM. As 23skidoo states, I'm not "violently opposed" to adding Fox, but I also don't want to have to list every distributor in the world just so we're not showing U.S./NA bias here. Given the film is considered a UK film (although it's obviously questionable these days) perhaps Fox should also be listed. I don't know. K1Bond007 17:32, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The car's cloaking device

Who keeps changing cloaking device to adaptive camoflauge? The feature on Bond's car is a cloaking device. The name may seem too sci fi for some 007 fans, but as the saying goes, if it walks like a duck, it IS a duck. Simon Beavis

It keeps getting changed because in the film they call it adaptive camoflauge. I really don't care. I prefer "invisible" (unlinked) :) K1Bond007 04:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Buy another day"

Anybody have a reference for the "buy another day" nickname? I've personally never heard this one before. Guinness 14:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

It's true. It's not a widely used nickname, but it was used by the BBC, Time, and Reuters (although I can't find the original report by them. Search Google for "Buy Another Day" and the Reuters report will come up a bunch of times on other websites). K1Bond007 21:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Switchblade"

What about the so-called "switchblade" stealth gliders? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ralphybaby (talk • contribs) .

Added. K1Bond007 23:53, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The film references ... again

Nearly a year ago I suggested a section be added referencing some of the major references to earlier Bond films, especially since the introduction makes explicit mention of this yet the article doesn't really follow up save for one trivia item. I just tried to add a list, but I realized that it was making the article too long (even though I was just listing major and notable references, not some of the the rather debatable and IMO dubious "references" contained within the IMDb listing for the film). Any ideas how this should be handled? I'm hesitant to create an article on the references as I've seen several go the way of AFD recently. Yet the references are undeniably a major part of the film, acknowledged by the creators, so they should be mentioned somehow ... 23skidoo 17:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the Bond-film (and book, etc) references are a serious omission from this article at present. What's the length issue?? Plenty of wikipedia articles are much longer than this. Rather than sponsoring a free-for-all of each person's favourite bond-references they think they've spotted (like on IMDB), can we not get an authoritative source on what references were *intentionally* incorporated by the scriptwriters/directors/etc? Any ideas anyone? Mooncow 17:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Do not split the article

I oppose splitting the article into separate film and novel articles. I fail to see how this would benefit Wikipedia, plus the resulting article would be simply a stub unless you want to simply repeat the plot summary given here. 23skidoo 13:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MPAA delay?

There is a section headed "MPAA delay", but it doesn't actually mention any particular delay. Was the delay important and should it be mentioned? This sounds like somebody's pet peeve to me. Can this note simply be rewritten more briefly and added to the Overview? Any objections? Mooncow 17:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

It's really not that important, IMHO. For now, I guess, I merged it with the trivia section. No reason whatsoever for it to have it's own section. K1Bond007 06:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia cleanup

I cleaned up the bloated trivia section as much as I think I could. It was a judgement call on a lot of it. Some were pretty obvious deletions (eg: Chang is a very common oriental surname - its not notable to have people showing up in various movies with that surname). Some were inconsequential (Bond has long hair? Branson as a model for Graves?) or just out of date (Judi Dench is in Casino Royale hence its pointless to talk about her planned replacement in this movie). Discussions and analysis about Oedipal issues of Bond villains should not be really be dumped into trivia (its not really trivia - its an analysis and opinion IMO). I moved the item about elements being borrowed from Moonraker and other Bond books to the overview section as the analysis fits better there than being in the "trivia basket".

On the Lee Tamahori speculation that "James Bond" is a title and not a name, I have copied the item point here:

The director, Lee Tamahori, wanted Sean Connery to film a cameo appearance in the movie, however, the producers rejected the idea because they didn't want to have two actors who were James Bond on screen at the same time. To explain how this occurrence is possible, Tamahori concocted a controversial theory that the name "James Bond" is a codename (like 007) which is given to the best and most accomplished secret agents.[1] It is also meant to explain Bond's ageless ability, his difference in appearance and radical changes between actors (e.g., Roger Moore vs Timothy Dalton). The only possible evidence to support this theory in the official EON film series is George Lazenby's final line in the pre-title sequence of On Her Majesty's Secret Service where the Bond girl runs away after Bond is ambushed on a beach: "This never happened to the other fella." However, the idea that "James Bond-007" is an identity passed to various MI6 agents is the basis of the plot to the spoof version of Casino Royale (1967 film). The theory is largely denounced by fans and somewhat undermined by the light continuity in subsequent films when Bond's wife, Tracy, or his marriage in general (from On Her Majesty's Secret Service) is mentioned. Nevertheless, the theory tends to be subject to much debate.

It really shouldn't be in the already bloated Trivia section of Die Another Day. Its really a fanboy discussion at best (start a new Wiki article if you want :) . I moved it here as a record of the item and as a politeness. I left in the trivia that he wanted Sean Connery for a cameo appearance but was nixed by the producers. --Eqdoktor 19:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Parody

There is a parody of this movie in Hokkien--a short one. [1] Do you think we should add it in the trivia section? Anyway, it's worth watching it. 165.21.155.11 03:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

This movie is such a piece of shite it is a parody of itself. Good thing they are making reasonable Bond movies again. 70.64.104.35 20:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/i/e/Talk%7EDie_Another_Day_3e14.html"