Comments on: Class action: Box set of “all” James Bond films didn’t have all of them

By: Sandmich

Sandmich — Wed, 31 May 2017 18:01:55 +0000

In reply to Here. Yes, MGM is the distributor for both the "missing" films as well so they didn't include them in the set as a matter of choice. They probably figured (mostly correctly) that the people buying the set had no interest in the "non canon" Bonds. As an owner of the set I wouldn't mind if they were in there, but I probably wouldn't watch them.

By: Another Guy named Dan

Another Guy named Dan — Wed, 31 May 2017 16:56:57 +0000

There is a canonical difference between Bond Films and films with the character James Bond. In addition to the 1967 Casino Royale, you could consider the 1558(?) television version of Casino Royale, and perhaps even the Young James Bond animated series.

The Bond Films would be the MGM-released, Broccoli Group produced films, which would pretty clearly exclude the Niven Casino Royale and Never Say Never Again, which were produced under different rights arrangements.

By: albeed

albeed — Sun, 21 May 2017 17:06:00 +0000

Great!

I am starting a suit against the New York Times. Why?

I don’t believe they publish “All the News That’s Fit to Print”!

By: Nobody Special

Nobody Special — Sun, 21 May 2017 16:06:14 +0000

I own this set “celebrating five decades of James Bond.” MGM is right. The packaging has no words to the effect that it’s supposed to have all the Bond films released up through that point, and it clearly lists all the films included. The top review comment on Amazon — the first one shown — says that NSNA isn’t included.

By: Here

Here — Sun, 21 May 2017 14:07:47 +0000

Good lord. Don’t people have anything better to do than file stupid lawsuits because they didn’t bother to read the description of the product they were buying? Does MGM even own the rights to the two “missing” films? Would the box set then be recalled if another Bond film comes out since it would be post facto inaccurate? Are we no longer allowed to use the word “all” in the English language because there might be an exception to the all that we thought we were describing?

By: Hugo S Cunningham

Hugo S Cunningham — Sun, 21 May 2017 11:20:45 +0000

If this sort of class-action is allowed to proceed, there may be an opportunity for Prenda Law, if they get bored with trolling worthless porn films on the Internet. They could produce $10,000 knockoffs in likely-to-be collected film series.