By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - James Bond doesn't want to use Sony phones.. cause he only wants the best

ethomaz on 24 April 2015

shikamaru317 said:

Samasung Galaxy I believe.

WOW It is not even the best Android... it is only the most popular.



Around the Network
Turkish on 24 April 2015
ethomaz said:

shikamaru317 said:

Samasung Galaxy I believe.

WOW It is not even the best Android... it is only the most popular.


Xperia Z Compact for life, best damn phone ever!



DakonBlackblade on 24 April 2015

This sounds like made up news. Theres 0 chance someone working for Sony would say something like that. And the Xperia phones are pretty good, I have a Z3 and its very decent.



Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 24 April 2015

The amount of lolz in this is off the chartz.



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

gatito on 24 April 2015
Ka-pi96 said:
Turkish said:


Sure he is, there are a dozen quality actors who'd happily want to become the next face of James Bond.

And about the successes, 21 Jump Street? Spiderman? Their animation studio? MIB 3? http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=mib3.htm

Yeah, they've got plenty of other good successful movies as well


Yeah but Skyfall is #10 at the WW box office, the Bond franchise is best moneymaker they've got right now in their movie division. Their phones on the other hand are embarassing.



Around the Network
QUAKECore89 on 24 April 2015

Uh..... Just let James Bond have Samsung...



Chazore on 24 April 2015
Captain_Yuri said:
The amount of lolz in this is off the chartz.


You know in all my life of watching James Bond films the one thing that has always stood out more than the gadgets and that's the cars, those actually sold more because of the film than the gadgets/phones ever have and the cars have always served a more important role in Bond films as well as advertisement.

But I can't even with this, I need a new pair of sides after hearing some of these replies to Craig.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Chris Hu on 24 April 2015
Hiku said:
foodfather said:
Sony Pictures has nothing to do with Sony.

Chris Hu said:
The film isn't 100% made by Sony Pictures its a co production with MGM and Sony only owns 20% of MGM.

That would still make their production involvement 70% vs 30% for MGM.

Anyway, they seem to have agreed on Sony not having any influence on product placement. For some reason.

That might be the case but Eon Productions is also heavily involved with all Bond pictures and it isn't owned by Sony either.



Chris Hu on 24 April 2015
Signalstar said:
Honestly there are so many different hands involved in making Bond movies I don't know how they actually make money. Eon productions/ MGM/ Sony Pictures/ Fox owns the home video rights...etc.

Also as a huge Bond fan the movies are really just extravagant commercials at this point. A lot of the budget comes from product placement.

He has used Sony phones in the last three movies and coincidentally I have owned them all. I just can not see Bond going with the popular mainstream choice of a Samsung or *shudders* Iphone.

Bond is actually one of the most profitable movie franchises.  Plus it also makes a good amount of money from merchandising.



Chris Hu on 24 April 2015
Turkish said:
Mordred11 said:

Daniel Craig is far from being a crybaby actor or an expendable asset to Sony Pictures. And after all... this is all business and I'm sure the company didn't take it personal.

Although you should know that Skyfall is the single true success story for Sony Pictures in the past 5 years or so. Sam Mendes/ Daniel Craig can do whatever they want.


Sure he is, there are a dozen quality actors waiting to become the next James Bond. Without the role of 007 he's just a semi known actor playing in average movies.

And about the successes, 21 Jump Street? Spiderman? Their animation studio? MIB 3? http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=mib3.htm

MIB 3 also had a huge advertising budget so it actually wasn't that profitable and as far as animation studios goes Sony's is acutally the least profitable out of the big ones.  Illumination Entertainment (Universal), Dreamworks Animation, Blue Sky Studios (20th Century Fox), Pixar (Disney) and Disney Animation are all more profitable.  They really only had one huge hit with the first Smurfs movie.