Jump to content

Talk:The Man with the Red Tattoo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well established author for 2008

[edit]

One reason I changed this part that was it appears from the Sept. 12 announcement that IFP might be backing away from it. Maybe there's been a rumor mill started as to the possible writers and they want to nip it in the bud? 23skidoo 04:41, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The original report had a number of authors listed for who it might be (John le Carre being the biggest and subsequently making headlines from a number of other sources). They're just doing rumor control and it was merely tacked on to the bigger rumor of there being a Young Bond film in the works (for whatever reason - clearly BS). They claimed in the original confirmation that it "may" be written by an established author and that the book is in "early planning" phases. I think they're just stressing how early in the planning stages it is. K1Bond007 04:51, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

EON filming rumor

[edit]

Benson may correctly deny that EON ever planned to film the book, however a major newspaper, the Daily Record, reported it. Same with major media reporting that Sean Connery had filmed a cameo for Die Another Day and a Sun Media columnist reporting that every surviving Bond girl was to appear in TWINE. All reports ended up being bogus, but from an historical POV these erroneous reports are of interest as trivia. However I will add that Benson denies this was ever the case -- can anyone provide a print or online source for the denial that can be cited? 23skidoo 14:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was no truth to it. Just because it's reported does not mean we should include it. What does it do for Wikipedia when we leave in false information that has been denied? How many thousands of people should we include at CR for being mentioned in the media as being a contender for Bond? Having seen the devastation wrought by the tabloids on the entire movie in general, why is any of that important when it is not significant? The Connery cameo was true or a half-truth rather. The director was serious about getting him and it spawned the debate about "James Bond" being a codename. I don't know about the Bond girl rumor. It's never been denied, but this one specifically has. Wikipedia isn't a repository of useless and bogus information that was reported in the news. It would be one thing if it was significant. This is not. There is no reason to leave this in. K1Bond007 17:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I disagree. As long as it is clearly indicated that it has been denied the fact that a noted media outlet -- we're not talking the Enquirer here -- actually posted a report on this makes it notable and of interest. I see no difference whatsoever in referencing this than in including all the people who were reported to have been cast as James Bond in Casino Royale. If this is deleted, then IMO we need to remove the bogus reports from Casino Royale as well. 23skidoo 18:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Those were notable and significant. I already removed the ones that were blatant BS and completely unfounded or not well known from the CR article (Travolta, and there were others that I can't even remember now). And one of the main points of that section is that there was an overwhelming list of names mentioned in the media. "Throughout 2004 and 2005, an endless stream of potential new Bonds — both unknowns and established Hollywood actors — were rumoured and even announced by some media. Some of the popular names mentioned to be in actual consideration by EON Productions, a list at one point claimed by Michael G. Wilson to be over 200 names long are:" - nothing is wrong with that. What we have or rather had here was a completely bullshit rumor that was denied by the author of the book. It would be one thing if it was significant somehow, but we even noted that we don't know if it was ever really considered. We also know that EON Productions doesn't own the film rights to the book, we know that EON Productions has stated a number of times they they will never do an adaptation of a continuation novel, so right off the bat we know this specific rumor is suspect. If you feel it is relevant and important then add it back, but flesh it out more. In it's previous state it was hardly notable, and clearly false. It might have been okay while CR was in the planning phases as certainly no one knew, but now CR is in post-production. It's laughable. K1Bond007 19:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Man with the Red Tattoo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:53, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Man_with_the_Red_Tattoo&oldid=1210682609"