› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…11891190119211941195…2507

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2017 Posts: 23,883
    It's a fine line. At first read, I thought she had voiced the opinion about being 'too pretty' herself, which if so suggests excess vanity and should invite ridicule. Having read it more closely, I realize she said that the casting director apparently told her she was 'too pretty' for the part, so it was in fact allegedly their opinion, rather than hers.

    On a related note, does anyone really believe that the producers and film makers told her that was a reason she was being excluded from the part? In fact, does anyone believe that she actually tested for a role in the latest Bond film? The film, by the way, that as of now has no director or distributor based on what we know and which is to be released 2 years from now.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 13,948
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    If she is too pretty, they are looking for a villainous girl, a May Day type perhaps.
    I was thinking about this only yesterday, and the fact the Craig films haven't featured a female villain/femme fatale yet - unless you include Valenka poisoning his drink - which I don't. It would be interesting to see how Craig's Bond handles her.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,561
    JWESTBROOK wrote: »
    For the public record, I've flagged @dominicgreene 's recent post.

    There are more appropriate and respectful ways to voice an opinion.

    Noted, @JWESTBROOK. It's still not in the poorest of tastes, is it? ;-) I hope you can agree that the comment can be allowed a pass.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    @dominicgreene was making an obvious joke. Have we completely lost any sense of humour?
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's a fine line. At first read, I thought she had voiced the opinion about being 'too pretty' herself, which if so suggests excess vanity and should invite ridicule. Having read it more closely, I realize she said that the casting director apparently told her she was 'too pretty' for the part, so it was in fact allegedly their opinion, rather than hers.

    On a related note, does anyone really believe that the producers and film makers told her that was a reason she was being excluded from the part? In fact, does anyone believe that she actually tested for a role in the latest Bond film? The film, by the way, that as of now has no director or distributor based on what we know and which is to be released 2 years from now.

    The only way I can imagine if it was a general sort of casting -- i.e. looking for women who might be worth a closer look later when there's an actual story, etc.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2017 Posts: 23,883
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's a fine line. At first read, I thought she had voiced the opinion about being 'too pretty' herself, which if so suggests excess vanity and should invite ridicule. Having read it more closely, I realize she said that the casting director apparently told her she was 'too pretty' for the part, so it was in fact allegedly their opinion, rather than hers.

    On a related note, does anyone really believe that the producers and film makers told her that was a reason she was being excluded from the part? In fact, does anyone believe that she actually tested for a role in the latest Bond film? The film, by the way, that as of now has no director or distributor based on what we know and which is to be released 2 years from now.

    The only way I can imagine if it was a general sort of casting -- i.e. looking for women who might be worth a closer look later when there's an actual story, etc.
    Yes that is indeed a possibility. I didn't realize they would do such a thing so early on, but it's certainly possible.

    In this case Ajak Deng is very fortunate, because she is still in acting school. So they obviously didn't want an experienced actress, but they apparently didn't want someone as pretty as her either.

    So I'm honestly confused as to what they wanted really.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    dominicgreene wrote: »
    ajak-deng-for-wonderland-magazine-900x1200.jpg



    “I tested for one of the Bond girls for the new James Bond movie, but ... they told me I was too pretty for the role. "






    Very much a Grace Jones vibe there!
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,496
    bondjames wrote: »
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's a fine line. At first read, I thought she had voiced the opinion about being 'too pretty' herself, which if so suggests excess vanity and should invite ridicule. Having read it more closely, I realize she said that the casting director apparently told her she was 'too pretty' for the part, so it was in fact allegedly their opinion, rather than hers.

    On a related note, does anyone really believe that the producers and film makers told her that was a reason she was being excluded from the part? In fact, does anyone believe that she actually tested for a role in the latest Bond film? The film, by the way, that as of now has no director or distributor based on what we know and which is to be released 2 years from now.

    The only way I can imagine if it was a general sort of casting -- i.e. looking for women who might be worth a closer look later when there's an actual story, etc.
    Yes that is indeed a possibility. I didn't realize they would do such a thing so early on, but it's certainly possible.

    In this case Ajak Deng is very fortunate, because she is still in acting school. So they obviously didn't want an experienced actress, but they apparently didn't want someone as pretty as her either.

    So I'm honestly confused as to what they wanted really.

    Unless they meant "too pretty" as a polite way of saying stick to modelling, not acting.

    But she definitely has some Grace Jones vibes about her.

    Maybe they don't want too pretty because Craig is Moore'ing like a freight train, and they're hoping the audience don't notice.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Maybe they don't want too pretty because Craig is Moore'ing like a freight train, and they're hoping the audience don't notice.
    I am concerned about that being an issue. I'm all for young and 'very pretty' Bond 'women' (as long as they are above the age of consent) or even 'equals' (as a last resort to satisfy current cultural requirements) but unlike others am not in favour of age appropriate actresses purely to accommodate the Bond lead actor (particularly when that means someone in their 50s).

    There are some long held traditions that must be upheld imho.
  • mattjoesmattjoes
    Posts: 6,743
    I think late thirties would be a good age for the next Bond girl.

    Regarding Craig Moore'ing... I wish they threw in this sound in the next film:
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=CPsOd4dHluw
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    To be honest my expectations for Bond 25 are already low.

    I just think Craig's tenure is played out. I am also very concerned that Mendes has left his Disney venture for this.

    Roll on Bond 26. Hopefully then we can have some fresh blood and zero melodrama...
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    FoxRox wrote: »
    On a side note, if Bond 25 is named Spectre: Part 2, I will throw up. And I like SP.

    Haha! Come on, rate EoN better than that. They know SP was a mess, they're not dumb enough to part 2 what was clearly a disappointment.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    doubleoego wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    On a side note, if Bond 25 is named Spectre: Part 2, I will throw up. And I like SP.

    Haha! Come on, rate EoN better than that. They know SP was a mess, they're not dumb enough to part 2 what was clearly a disappointment.

    You seem to have a lot more faith than I do.

    They don't seem to have learned that much from DAD do they when a mere 4 films later they make some equally shocking judgement calls?

    They're fortunate it's a family business and the public still keep turning up with their cash because the post Cubby era has only really had one film out of seven that can be classed as an undisputed classic.
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,539
    Tom Struthers (Dark Knight, Inception, Jack Ryan) stunt coordinator for Bond 25: http://bit.ly/2Ay8fOr

    88e7ZLc.jpg
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    Didn't you say Ben Cooke would be stunt-coordinator a while back?
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    jake24 wrote: »
    Didn't you say Ben Cooke would be stunt-coordinator a while back?
    Exactly!
  • Bentley007Bentley007 Manitoba, Canada
    Posts: 568
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Didn't you say Ben Cooke would be stunt-coordinator a while back?
    Exactly!

    I read the translation of the article attached. They acknowledge stating Ben Cooke was originally who they had heard would be stunt coordinator. It appears there has been a change in overall direction for Bond25 or at least that is what I got from it.
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,539
    Ben Cooke: stunt coordinator and Second Unit director (instead of Gary Powell).

    Tom Struthers: stunt coordinator.

    There's a lot of roles in the stunt field. I understand both of them will work on Bond 25 and Cooke will direct the Second Unit? Our source comes from London...
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    Second unit director was Alex Witt. Are you saying he's out of the frame?
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    edited November 2017 Posts: 15,818
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's a fine line. At first read, I thought she had voiced the opinion about being 'too pretty' herself, which if so suggests excess vanity and should invite ridicule. Having read it more closely, I realize she said that the casting director apparently told her she was 'too pretty' for the part, so it was in fact allegedly their opinion, rather than hers.

    On a related note, does anyone really believe that the producers and film makers told her that was a reason she was being excluded from the part? In fact, does anyone believe that she actually tested for a role in the latest Bond film? The film, by the way, that as of now has no director or distributor based on what we know and which is to be released 2 years from now.

    The only way I can imagine if it was a general sort of casting -- i.e. looking for women who might be worth a closer look later when there's an actual story, etc.
    Yes that is indeed a possibility. I didn't realize they would do such a thing so early on, but it's certainly possible.

    In this case Ajak Deng is very fortunate, because she is still in acting school. So they obviously didn't want an experienced actress, but they apparently didn't want someone as pretty as her either.

    So I'm honestly confused as to what they wanted really.

    Unless they meant "too pretty" as a polite way of saying stick to modelling, not acting.

    But she definitely has some Grace Jones vibes about her.

    Maybe they don't want too pretty because Craig is Moore'ing like a freight train, and they're hoping the audience don't notice.

    In honor of this being Craig's final outing, I can almost see B25 being a remake of AVTAK (of course it would be referred to as a re-boot).
    The press statement may read something like this: "The next James Bond film, still untitled, is not based on an Ian Fleming novel, however it's a reboot of the 1985 classic A VIEW TO A KILL, in which 007 (Daniel Craig) goes up against a mad industrialist bent on destroying Silicon Valley.
    In this version, there's a personal angle in which it turns out 007 himself is the product of a steroid experiment during the war and is, once again related to the main villain Max Zorin (soon to be cast)."
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited November 2017 Posts: 9,117
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's a fine line. At first read, I thought she had voiced the opinion about being 'too pretty' herself, which if so suggests excess vanity and should invite ridicule. Having read it more closely, I realize she said that the casting director apparently told her she was 'too pretty' for the part, so it was in fact allegedly their opinion, rather than hers.

    On a related note, does anyone really believe that the producers and film makers told her that was a reason she was being excluded from the part? In fact, does anyone believe that she actually tested for a role in the latest Bond film? The film, by the way, that as of now has no director or distributor based on what we know and which is to be released 2 years from now.

    The only way I can imagine if it was a general sort of casting -- i.e. looking for women who might be worth a closer look later when there's an actual story, etc.
    Yes that is indeed a possibility. I didn't realize they would do such a thing so early on, but it's certainly possible.

    In this case Ajak Deng is very fortunate, because she is still in acting school. So they obviously didn't want an experienced actress, but they apparently didn't want someone as pretty as her either.

    So I'm honestly confused as to what they wanted really.

    Unless they meant "too pretty" as a polite way of saying stick to modelling, not acting.

    But she definitely has some Grace Jones vibes about her.

    Maybe they don't want too pretty because Craig is Moore'ing like a freight train, and they're hoping the audience don't notice.

    In honor of this being Craig's final outing, I can almost see B25 being a remake of AVTAK (of course it would be referred to as a re-boot).
    The press statement may read something like this: "The next James Bond film, still untitled, is not based on an Ian Fleming novel, however it's a reboot of the 1985 classic A VIEW TO A KILL, in which 007 (Daniel Craig) goes up against a mad industrialist bent on destroying Silicon Valley.
    In this version, there's a personal angle in which it turns out 007 himself is the product of a steroid experiment during the war and is, once again related to the main villain Max Zorin (soon to be cast)."

    So from a nonentity of an 'actress' blagging herself a couple of column inches in a rag on the other side of the world you have managed to extrapolate all that?

    Veritably Sherlockesque.

    Who says there's no news? You can practically work out the entire plot so long as you can make preposterous inferences from the tiniest sub atomic morsel of fact.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 15,818
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's a fine line. At first read, I thought she had voiced the opinion about being 'too pretty' herself, which if so suggests excess vanity and should invite ridicule. Having read it more closely, I realize she said that the casting director apparently told her she was 'too pretty' for the part, so it was in fact allegedly their opinion, rather than hers.

    On a related note, does anyone really believe that the producers and film makers told her that was a reason she was being excluded from the part? In fact, does anyone believe that she actually tested for a role in the latest Bond film? The film, by the way, that as of now has no director or distributor based on what we know and which is to be released 2 years from now.

    The only way I can imagine if it was a general sort of casting -- i.e. looking for women who might be worth a closer look later when there's an actual story, etc.
    Yes that is indeed a possibility. I didn't realize they would do such a thing so early on, but it's certainly possible.

    In this case Ajak Deng is very fortunate, because she is still in acting school. So they obviously didn't want an experienced actress, but they apparently didn't want someone as pretty as her either.

    So I'm honestly confused as to what they wanted really.

    Unless they meant "too pretty" as a polite way of saying stick to modelling, not acting.

    But she definitely has some Grace Jones vibes about her.

    Maybe they don't want too pretty because Craig is Moore'ing like a freight train, and they're hoping the audience don't notice.

    In honor of this being Craig's final outing, I can almost see B25 being a remake of AVTAK (of course it would be referred to as a re-boot).
    The press statement may read something like this: "The next James Bond film, still untitled, is not based on an Ian Fleming novel, however it's a reboot of the 1985 classic A VIEW TO A KILL, in which 007 (Daniel Craig) goes up against a mad industrialist bent on destroying Silicon Valley.
    In this version, there's a personal angle in which it turns out 007 himself is the product of a steroid experiment during the war and is, once again related to the main villain Max Zorin (soon to be cast)."

    So from a nonentity of an 'actress' blagging herself a couple of column inches in a rag on the other side of the world you have managed to extrapolate all that?

    Veritably Sherlockesque.

    Elementary. Deductive reasoning, putting all the pieces together, then concluded with a generous serving of post SP cynicism.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,048
    Cynicism is key. A poster will declare you brilliant.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    Not that I lend a world of credence to this model having actually been screen-tested and not just saying she was for the headlines, but she does bear a strong resemblance to Grace Jones and if true I sincerely hope they are not trying to create a May Day homage character here. Now don't get me wrong: I love May Day. I love A View to a Kill. I love the idea of a creaky old, knee-blown, huffing-while-jogging Daniel Craig going up against a May Day-type in his final outing. But this is exactly the road I do not want future Bonds to go down: filling their running times with homage characters and spiritually kindred scenes and references to past Bond films. Spectre did enough of that already with Bautista playing the Jaws-type Wile E. Coyote lug and action scenes and set-pieces riffing off everything from The Spy Who Loved Me to Dr. No to Licence to Kill. If I want to watch those films, I'll watch those films. They're so easily homagable precisely because they have such unique identities. Once you start stuffing Bond full of homage, the new film loses any semblance of its own identity. And what then? You can't very well homage the homage of May Day, can you? You're left with a finite degree of originality that defines cinematic Bond. All else is a carbon.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 15,818
    I initially thought she resembled one of Drax's girls in MR rather than Grace.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    edited November 2017 Posts: 6,844
    The haircut, yes. But there's definitely Grace Jones in the area around her eyes and eyebrows.

    In that photo at least. Then again, she also rather resembles Grace Jones here with her mouth, where you can't even see her eyes and eyebrows:

    2461B35700000578-0-image-a-22_1420292758613.jpg

    But as someone else has said already, I believe she's probably had her 15 minutes.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 15,818
    Some_Kind_Of_Hero wrote: »
    The haircut, yes. But there's definitely Grace Jones in the area around her eyes and eyebrows.

    In that photo at least. Then again, she also rather resembles Grace Jones here with her mouth, where you can't even see her eyes and eyebrows:

    2461B35700000578-0-image-a-22_1420292758613.jpg

    But as someone else has said already, I believe she's probably had her 15 minutes.

    True. She certainly has an intense look, but casting this early in the game is like speculating who will be performing the title song.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    There's probably no truth to her having screen-tested at all. I'm just saying that given how homage-happy the Bond team has become, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to discover they're trying to cast for a May Day 2.0.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 15,818
    Some_Kind_Of_Hero wrote: »
    There's probably no truth to her having screen-tested at all. I'm just saying that given how homage-happy the Bond team has become, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to discover they're trying to cast for a May Day 2.0.

    I can see there being a character like that to wrap up Craig's tenure. I don't think he's even had a femme fatale in his era so we may be due.
  • Tuck91Tuck91
    Posts: 1,680
    I think at the very least a screen test happened, Seydoux was already cast in April 2014
Sign In or Register to comment.