No Time To Die: Production Diary

1113111321134113611372507

Comments

  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited October 2017 Posts: 4,441
    n0JD91R.jpg
    After my new cover story neither eon want't me too.
    I don't how you did it how you leaked this news.

    But i told tell them that you and Sam knows everthing about it.

    American Beauty.. poor Sam, he tryde to make me straight.

    Everyone who worked with me will be a shamed and out off job.
    Even this guy next too you with his looks..

    So you getting out this car and ask Debbie girl to for your comeback..
    Then you going to play the dangerious directer we all whant see back for second refival.


    2019.
    Spectre%2Bscreencap%2B%252835%2529.jpg
    craig-3_1446051954-768x432.jpg
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    edited October 2017 Posts: 1,003
    Minion wrote: »
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele.
    In other words: Hundreds of critics all arround the world + tens of millions of moviegoers are all WRONG!

    SKYFALL was so terrible that audiences stayed away in DROVES when Spectre released, making it the lowest grossing Bond film of ALL TIME (including '67 Casino Royale). People have since been re-evaluating the works of Ed Wood as "actually not that bad, if compared to SKYFALL"

    Spectre was #4 in gross for bond films out of 24 films.. Live and let die was popular at #5 because of Paul McCartney...

    If Justin Bieber was in the next movie do you know how many jb fans would go see the movie? A lot lol. A lot of movie goers are middle school-high schoolers in my area and I live close to Austin, Tx. Tickets sell out fast. When I saw SP and SF it was all a super young crowd. There were some older people around 40+ but still.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Minion wrote: »
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele.
    In other words: Hundreds of critics all arround the world + tens of millions of moviegoers are all WRONG!

    SKYFALL was so terrible that audiences stayed away in DROVES when Spectre released, making it the lowest grossing Bond film of ALL TIME (including '67 Casino Royale). People have since been re-evaluating the works of Ed Wood as "actually not that bad, if compared to SKYFALL"

    Spectre was #4 in gross for bond films out of 24 films.. Live and let die was popular at #5 because of Paul McCartney...

    If Justin Bieber was in the next movie do you know how many jb fans would go see the movie? A lot lol. A lot of movie goers are middle school-high schoolers in my area and I live close to Austin, Tx. Tickets sell out fast. When I saw SP and SF it was all a super young crowd. There were some older people around 40+ but still.
    A super young crowd for SP? I'm truly surprised. What did they think of it? What did your friends think?
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,724
    A little late, but...
    Christoph Waltz will not return as Blofeld

    Well, I guess he waltzed off.

    He couldn't hanslanda the pressure.
  • GumboldGumbold Atlantis
    Posts: 118
    It was so much easier to be a Bond fan before Craigs tenure. They're just fucking it up left and right. Really wish they would go back to the old style
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    bondjames wrote: »
    Minion wrote: »
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele.
    In other words: Hundreds of critics all arround the world + tens of millions of moviegoers are all WRONG!

    SKYFALL was so terrible that audiences stayed away in DROVES when Spectre released, making it the lowest grossing Bond film of ALL TIME (including '67 Casino Royale). People have since been re-evaluating the works of Ed Wood as "actually not that bad, if compared to SKYFALL"

    Spectre was #4 in gross for bond films out of 24 films.. Live and let die was popular at #5 because of Paul McCartney...

    If Justin Bieber was in the next movie do you know how many jb fans would go see the movie? A lot lol. A lot of movie goers are middle school-high schoolers in my area and I live close to Austin, Tx. Tickets sell out fast. When I saw SP and SF it was all a super young crowd. There were some older people around 40+ but still.
    A super young crowd for SP? I'm truly surprised. What did they think of it? What did your friends think?

    I’m not in middle school or high school and I am past the college age so nice try..
  • Gumbold wrote: »
    It was so much easier to be a Bond fan before Craigs tenure. They're just fucking it up left and right. Really wish they would go back to the old style

    I do miss the simplicity of the old way of doing things. A new film with a new story would come out, if you liked it great, if not then oh well there'll be another one along in a couple of years, maybe that'll be better.

    Now a new film will come out every three or four years but you'd better brush up on your knowledge of the last couple just in case they're in the mood for continuity as well as Oscar nominations. Don't like the new film? Well another one will be along, eventually, but it could well be a sequel, or could not, depends how they feel. Either way you'll have to wait the best part of half a decade to find out.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Admittedly its a little trite, but there could be an easy explanation for a new actor as Blofeld, whilst writing out the 'foster brother' nonsense.

    Putting it simply, Waltz could have not been the real Blofeld from the start.

    Once Denbigh informed the rest of Spectre that Bond was on the case, the real Blofeld decided to use Oberhauser as a decoy, to mess with Bond's head and also to shield himself.

    Im not saying its a great idea, but it would probably work in the convoluted logic the Craig films seem to exist in.

    That what I was thinking make waltz Blofeld a fake
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Minion wrote: »
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele.
    In other words: Hundreds of critics all arround the world + tens of millions of moviegoers are all WRONG!

    SKYFALL was so terrible that audiences stayed away in DROVES when Spectre released, making it the lowest grossing Bond film of ALL TIME (including '67 Casino Royale). People have since been re-evaluating the works of Ed Wood as "actually not that bad, if compared to SKYFALL"

    Spectre was #4 in gross for bond films out of 24 films.. Live and let die was popular at #5 because of Paul McCartney...

    If Justin Bieber was in the next movie do you know how many jb fans would go see the movie? A lot lol. A lot of movie goers are middle school-high schoolers in my area and I live close to Austin, Tx. Tickets sell out fast. When I saw SP and SF it was all a super young crowd. There were some older people around 40+ but still.
    A super young crowd for SP? I'm truly surprised. What did they think of it? What did your friends think?

    I’m not in middle school or high school and I am past the college age so nice try..
    Oh sorry @CASINOROYALE, I didn't mean to imply that you were one of the 'super young'. Still, I'm surprised that there was a younger crowd in the theatre in Texas for SP. It doesn't seem like the kind of film that would necessarily appeal to that age group, particularly given the marketing for it.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele. So no please do not bring back Mendes. Spectre wasn’t bad but I am tired of them bringing things up that make zero sense. Mendes always forgets this little thing called plot holes... Oh Spectre agents all have rings and their dna is found on them but we never saw any of the previous villains with rings... We need a new director and different take. But do we really want another lackluster ending?

    Skyfall playing home alone in the middle of no where on a farm?

    Spectre shooting Blofelds helicopter down?

    Look at the ending of previous Bond films. Were any of them that bad?
    Hell QOS had a better ending then Skyfall and Spectre!

    He's got a point
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited October 2017 Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »
    Or more likely a new director just doesn't want to take on any of Mendes's baggage, which is what I assumed some time ago. Where I got it wrong was whether a new director would want Craig along either (given the baggage is all his).

    This is certainly an issue.

    Any director worth his salt would say no to cleaning up the steaming turd Mendes has left. But the baggage is not solely Mendes it's also Craig and the Craig era. They put continuity and connected narrative above all else with the Craig era and to just ignore all that for one tacked on film seems a massive cop out and a pretty pointless exercise to be honest.

    By all logic and reason the obvious thing to do would be to recast and start with a clean slate but of course that's not happening as due to trying to nail a better distribution deal they have signed Craig for one more.

    Babs is not fussed and would rather do her arty farty Oscar bait projects. MGW is spent and deserves his retirement. Dan is only really in it for the money at this stage (and possibly trying to elevate his legacy to join the big 2 of Sean and Rog). P&W sound like they are out of ideas. No director of substance would want to touch it. Even amongst the fans here there doesn't seem much excitement. We're just treading water until 2022 and a new Bond.

    I can't help feeling B25 is shaping up to be a lame duck film that nobody really wants.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,012
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It's like they didn't think of any of this when pondering whether or not trying to connect all four films via SP made remotely any sense.
    It's like they were making this up as they went along.

    Wait a minute...
    That...is awesome, @mattjoes.
    mattjoes wrote: »
    A little late, but...
    Christoph Waltz will not return as Blofeld
    Well, I guess he waltzed off.

    He couldn't hanslanda the pressure.
    Yeah, still pretty good.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited October 2017 Posts: 13,012
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It's like they didn't think of any of this when pondering whether or not trying to connect all four films via SP made remotely any sense.
    It's like they were making this up as they went along.

    Wait a minute...
    That...is awesome, @mattjoes.
    mattjoes wrote: »
    A little late, but...
    Christoph Waltz will not return as Blofeld
    Well, I guess he waltzed off.

    He couldn't hanslanda the pressure.
    Still, pretty good.
  • //They put continuity and connected narrative above all else with the Craig era//

    Except when they didn't. If you're going to play the continuity game, you have to go all in or don't try. Quantum of Solace was a "direct sequel" even though there were basic flaws (Bond goes from three-piece suit to two-piece suit, car changes, etc.)

    When you don't make "direct sequel" *an integral part of the marketing* this doesn't really matter. But when you play it up in all your marketing, press conferences, etc., it invites greater scrutiny.

    If they had never said "direct sequel," Bond could have been driving for days with Mr. White in the trunk for all we knew. But we had Michael G. Wilson saying Quantum started "literally an hour" after Casino at a press event.

    With 20/20 hindsight, they should have zipped their lips and never said "direct sequel" if they weren't prepared to follow that course.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited October 2017 Posts: 4,554
    Milovy wrote: »
    Craig's Bond definitely has a sense of humour in CR and QoS, albeit very dry and biting. But he's not good at delivering jokes or "one-liners" like they gave him in SF and SP. I'd rather they gave him a dry sense of humour than ask him to spout puns or treat every situation with levity (that goes for the character as a whole, not just Craig's version).

    The humor in SF actually comes from what is not said. The National Gallery scene, with Q, is one of the more humorous scenes in a Bond film. The look on DC's face, when Q sits next to him, is priceless, and the reason DC is likely the best overall actor to ever play the role.
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele. So no please do not bring back Mendes. Spectre wasn’t bad but I am tired of them bringing things up that make zero sense. Mendes always forgets this little thing called plot holes... Oh Spectre agents all have rings and their dna is found on them but we never saw any of the previous villains with rings... We need a new director and different take. But do we really want another lackluster ending?

    Skyfall playing home alone in the middle of no where on a farm?

    Spectre shooting Blofelds helicopter down?

    Look at the ending of previous Bond films. Were any of them that bad?
    Hell QOS had a better ending then Skyfall and Spectre!

    Stop stop stop with the plot holes nonsense. This is BOND!!!! Every single film is choc full of not only gaping plot holes, but stupid plots, including facial reconstruction, stolen nuclear missiles, lazers, and space stations. And ridiculous send-ups, like a double-taking pigeon, a henchman who survives being thrown off a moving train, a bowler hat with a razor brim, a "poisonous" tarantula (which doesn't exist), a deadly scorpion (also doesn't exist), a woman who can crush men with her thighs, and on and on . I mean, for the love of Gawd... the whining about SF's plot within this arena is laughable.

    And to answer your question: YES. A lot of the endings are that bad. But we ignore them anyway. Granted, SP's was pretty bad. I agree there.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    Nothing beats Korean colonel turning into British industrialist billionaire as worst plothole in the Bond franchise. ;)
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Minion wrote: »
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele.
    In other words: Hundreds of critics all arround the world + tens of millions of moviegoers are all WRONG!

    SKYFALL was so terrible that audiences stayed away in DROVES when Spectre released, making it the lowest grossing Bond film of ALL TIME (including '67 Casino Royale). People have since been re-evaluating the works of Ed Wood as "actually not that bad, if compared to SKYFALL"

    Spectre was #4 in gross for bond films out of 24 films.. Live and let die was popular at #5 because of Paul McCartney....

    Suuuuuuure. Next thing you know you’ll be posting articles from the internet supporting this fact...
  • Posts: 11,425
    bondjames wrote: »
    I did a bit of quick research on Mr. Mendes.

    Apparently he will open a London theatre production mid next year focused on Lehman Brothers starring Simon Russell Beale. He will also take a play called The Ferryman (written by none other than Jez Butterworth) to Broadway next October.

    So rest easy folks, Mendes seems to be out of contention.

    The Ferryman is a smash show in London. If he's taking it to Broadway is he recasting? If not then it might not be as big a time consumer as you assume.
  • Posts: 676
    TripAces wrote: »
    Milovy wrote: »
    Craig's Bond definitely has a sense of humour in CR and QoS, albeit very dry and biting. But he's not good at delivering jokes or "one-liners" like they gave him in SF and SP. I'd rather they gave him a dry sense of humour than ask him to spout puns or treat every situation with levity (that goes for the character as a whole, not just Craig's version).

    The humor in SF actually comes from what is not said. The National Gallery scene, with Q, is one of the more humorous scenes in a Bond film. The look on DC's face, when Q sits next to him, is priceless, and the reason DC is likely the best overall actor to ever play the role.
    Yes, that's a great scene, and very amusing. There is some good humour in both SF and SP.
  • Posts: 12,267
    Interesting piece of news. Of course, I don't 100% trust Waltz since he also said he wasn't playing Blofeld before SP was released. I wouldn't jump to any conclusions based off this. Still lots to be decided/revealed about what the film will be like.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,724
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It's like they didn't think of any of this when pondering whether or not trying to connect all four films via SP made remotely any sense.
    It's like they were making this up as they went along.

    Wait a minute...
    That...is awesome, @mattjoes.
    mattjoes wrote: »
    A little late, but...
    Christoph Waltz will not return as Blofeld
    Well, I guess he waltzed off.

    He couldn't hanslanda the pressure.
    Still, pretty good.

    Thank you, @RichardTheBruce
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Murdock wrote: »
    I wonder if this is a red herring. Considering months back he said he'd come back if Craig did so here we are. It's like the boy who cried wolf. It's hard to distinguish fact from fiction at this point.

    If Waltz confirmed his return it give away Blofeld and Spectre are part of a Bond 25 story. He also has prior for saying his character is not Blofeld. I would take what he said with a pinch of salt.
  • Posts: 5,767
    TripAces wrote: »
    Milovy wrote: »
    Craig's Bond definitely has a sense of humour in CR and QoS, albeit very dry and biting. But he's not good at delivering jokes or "one-liners" like they gave him in SF and SP. I'd rather they gave him a dry sense of humour than ask him to spout puns or treat every situation with levity (that goes for the character as a whole, not just Craig's version).

    The humor in SF actually comes from what is not said. The National Gallery scene, with Q, is one of the more humorous scenes in a Bond film. The look on DC's face, when Q sits next to him, is priceless, and the reason DC is likely the best overall actor to ever play the role.
    Skyfall was one of the worst bond movies ever. Only popular because of Adele. So no please do not bring back Mendes. Spectre wasn’t bad but I am tired of them bringing things up that make zero sense. Mendes always forgets this little thing called plot holes... Oh Spectre agents all have rings and their dna is found on them but we never saw any of the previous villains with rings... We need a new director and different take. But do we really want another lackluster ending?

    Skyfall playing home alone in the middle of no where on a farm?

    Spectre shooting Blofelds helicopter down?

    Look at the ending of previous Bond films. Were any of them that bad?
    Hell QOS had a better ending then Skyfall and Spectre!

    Stop stop stop with the plot holes nonsense. This is BOND!!!! Every single film is choc full of not only gaping plot holes, but stupid plots, including facial reconstruction, stolen nuclear missiles, lazers, and space stations. And ridiculous send-ups, like a double-taking pigeon, a henchman who survives being thrown off a moving train, a bowler hat with a razor brim, a "poisonous" tarantula (which doesn't exist), a deadly scorpion (also doesn't exist), a woman who can crush men with her thighs, and on and on . I mean, for the love of Gawd... the whining about SF's plot within this arena is laughable.

    And to answer your question: YES. A lot of the endings are that bad. But we ignore them anyway. Granted, SP's was pretty bad. I agree there.
    You are right about plot holes and silly things and stuff. This is exactly where Saltzman´s dictum comes in: The film has to be so intense that the audience don´t have time or motivation to question the ridiculousness. Most of the old Bond films (if not all) had an overall tone that allowed for silly jokes next to fierce violence. This is a high art, and at least the last director failed miserably in this department.

  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    Bond needs a villain like this again.

    MV5BMTk5MTg4NjAxMV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwOTUzODU5NTE@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,1250,1000_AL_.jpg
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,533
    001 wrote: »
    Bond needs a villain like this again.

    MV5BMTk5MTg4NjAxMV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwOTUzODU5NTE@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,1250,1000_AL_.jpg

    Amen. Was watching his movies earlier today.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,087
    Gumbold wrote: »
    It was so much easier to be a Bond fan before Craigs tenure. They're just fucking it up left and right. Really wish they would go back to the old style

    I do miss the simplicity of the old way of doing things. A new film with a new story would come out, if you liked it great, if not then oh well there'll be another one along in a couple of years, maybe that'll be better.

    Now a new film will come out every three or four years but you'd better brush up on your knowledge of the last couple just in case they're in the mood for continuity as well as Oscar nominations. Don't like the new film? Well another one will be along, eventually, but it could well be a sequel, or could not, depends how they feel. Either way you'll have to wait the best part of half a decade to find out.

    Nailed it.
  • 001001
    edited October 2017 Posts: 1,575
    Bond needs a Buxom Babe like this.

    artsfon.com-43316.jpg
  • Posts: 4,619
    If Waltz confirmed his return it give away Blofeld and Spectre are part of a Bond 25 story. He also has prior for saying his character is not Blofeld. I would take what he said with a pinch of salt.
    Back then it was obvious he was lying. Now it's obvious he is telling the truth.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    I agree - I think it‘s true and he‘s not coming back ... which means to me Blofeld won‘t be back either. As said by someone else here in this thread: They should‘ve kept Blofeld in the shadows in SP ... I am not at all sad the current incarnation of Blofeld won‘t be back. I liked him really shown in OHMSS, only anyway. He works best when remaining in the shadows.
Sign In or Register to comment.