Wanna give a little more info than just a snide remark? Thanks.TCTTS said:
That's not at all how any of that went down, but ok.
Wanna give a little more info than just a snide remark? Thanks.TCTTS said:
That's not at all how any of that went down, but ok.
MooreTrucker said:Wanna give a little more info than just a snide remark? Thanks.TCTTS said:
That's not at all how any of that went down, but ok.
Bobcat06 said:
That's not how he works.
I would say in this case, the burden of proof is on the one that says "that's not what happened" and to then show what DID happen instead.TCTTS said:MooreTrucker said:Wanna give a little more info than just a snide remark? Thanks.TCTTS said:
That's not at all how any of that went down, but ok.
I would love to hear why the burden of proof is on the person who literally just linked to an interview with the producers, and has an entire history of dispelling this nonsense in this thread, while Bobcat's own "snide remarks" go unchallenged.
That was addressed at the end.Brian Earl Spilner said:
I've never liked beer commercials for Bond. He doesn't drink beer, he drinks vodka martinis. Shaken, not stirred.
so that would make it the longest run time for a Bond movie. the current longest is spectre at 320 minutes, or at least it felt that way.TCTTS said:
Quite a few rumors saying No Time to Die is nearly THREE HOURS long at 174 minutes. Early runtime reports like this rarely ever pan out, but there does seem to be more smoke than usual for this one...