› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…12371238124012421243…2507

Comments

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Heal the franchise from the rapes it has suffered in the last two movies by raping it even harder is not my idea of making things better.

    19789999.jpg
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,032
    You expressed my reaction to that post perfectly, @Murdock. Thank you.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    You expressed my reaction to that post perfectly, @Murdock. Thank you.

    You're welcome @RichardTheBruce. My thoughts exactly.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    Well done, @Murdock — levity, intelligence and humour.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    Hopefully Bond 25 will be to the first 4 Craig Bond movies what Skyfall was to the first 2 Craig Bond films. Anyway, I desperately need some official news. I give Barbara Broccoli 66 days to announce at least the director. If she fails to do so by the end of February, I will throw the single biggest temper tantrum mi6community has EVER seen.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Before we all get carried away, I just want to point out that his use of the term in that context is not incorrect.

    It can mean to plunder or pillage or to treat improperly; abuse or spoil.
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Heal the franchise from the rapes it has suffered in the last two movies by raping it even harder is not my idea of making things better.
    I quite liked SF, but I get your point.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    bondjames wrote: »
    I quite liked SF, but I get your point.
    His comment is incredibly foolish. It's not an accident that SF is widely regarded as one of the best Bond films ever.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    Moving on, I quite want to see this biggest tantrum ever.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2017 Posts: 23,883
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I quite liked SF, but I get your point.
    His comment is incredibly foolish. It's not an accident that SF is widely regarded as one of the best Bond films ever.
    Yes of course, but he's expressing his opinion, as we all do. He's not too keen on the Mendes era, and I believe others aren't too. Bottom line though is that his use of the term 'rape' in this instance to reflect his point of view is not incorrect.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    When someone compares a movie they don't like to rape, they need to take a step back and reflect on their life.

    I hated Gravity but that doesn't mean I felt raped for watching it, or sci fi movies were raped. Christ almighty what is this world coming to?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited December 2017 Posts: 13,032
    It's offensive the way it was used on this forum. Very much so.

    So it transcends opinion, and becomes behavior under discussion.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    No, not at all incorrect- just dramatic. But (shrugs), whatevs, as the kids say. Isn’t this a little off topic, though? At least @PanchitoPistoles threat (promise??) to throw a tantrum is in relation to this thread. I’d like to hear more of his plan.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    Murdock wrote: »
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Heal the franchise from the rapes it has suffered in the last two movies by raping it even harder is not my idea of making things better.

    19789999.jpg

    I know and mean it. Brothergate and the Bond Begins Bondcave in SF are exactly that.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Heal the franchise from the rapes it has suffered in the last two movies by raping it even harder is not my idea of making things better.

    19789999.jpg

    I know and mean it. Brothergate and the Bond Begins Bondcave in SF are exactly that.

    Don't be so overdramatic.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    Murdock wrote: »
    When someone compares a movie they don't like to rape, they need to take a step back and reflect on their life.

    I hated Gravity but that doesn't mean I felt raped for watching it, or sci fi movies were raped. Christ almighty what is this world coming to?

    With all due respect, but I don't think you're getting the analogy. Gravity wasn't the literary heritage of someone, getting profoundly altered on a directors fancy.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    When someone compares a movie they don't like to rape, they need to take a step back and reflect on their life.

    I hated Gravity but that doesn't mean I felt raped for watching it, or sci fi movies were raped. Christ almighty what is this world coming to?

    With all due respect, but I don't think you're getting the analogy. Gravity wasn't the literary heritage of someone, getting profoundly altered on a directors fancy.

    I couldn't care less what your analogy is. Comparing a movie you didn't like to an act of barbarity is beyond stupid.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2017 Posts: 23,883
    There have been worse comparisons made and poorer use of words here.

    I was under the impression that the joke post and a few following remarks implied certain posters thought his comment drew analogies to physical rape by men of women. The term in the context as used did not mean that, & I didn't want anyone to continue with that misunderstanding. That's what I meant to point out. Overdramatic? Inaccurate? Perhaps, but that's a different discussion & that applies to far more comments than his.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,032
    The concept presented was rape and raping. Not rape and pillaging.

    I don't like posters self-identifying as rape victims. It's an unnecessary disruption of discussion on a discussion board. Like introducing excrement and vomit as descriptors of content. It's offensive, crosses the line of civility beyond personal opinion. Derails actual discussion.

    Parsing word meanings and allowing bad behavior because "it's their opinion" doesn't work here.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    peter wrote: »
    No, not at all incorrect- just dramatic. But (shrugs), whatevs, as the kids say. Isn’t this a little off topic, though? At least @PanchitoPistoles threat (promise??) to throw a tantrum is in relation to this thread. I’d like to hear more of his plan.
    I'm planning to throw a tantrum so BIG that mi6 moderators will have no choice but to ban me. (Remember, this will happen only if EON won't announce at least the director by the end of February.)
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    edited December 2017 Posts: 6,730
    I agree that going strictly from what was written, the use of the word rape was not incorrect. However, my impression is that most people who use the term in sentences in the style of "raped my childhood" are not aware of --or do not have in mind-- the non-sexual meaning of the term (someone who knows how the mind works in relation to language and semantics might offer some valuable thoughts on this). Instead, they are thinking of the more common, sexual-related meaning, as an analogy. Now, they are obviously not being literal in their analogy, but the analogy is there to a degree, and it's a disproportionate one because a bad film is not like rape. And because the concept of rape involves suffering, it's probably a tactless analogy too.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    For those who have voiced it, your objections and outrage (including interpretations of the poster's intent) have been duly noted. The fact that the term can be used in this context has also been noted. At some point we can get back to discussing the issue that the post was meaning to address. Hopefully.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I quite liked SF, but I get your point.
    His comment is incredibly foolish. It's not an accident that SF is widely regarded as one of the best Bond films ever.
    Accident or not, it´s one of the hardest to understand things in recent history.

  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    boldfinger wrote: »
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I quite liked SF, but I get your point.
    His comment is incredibly foolish. It's not an accident that SF is widely regarded as one of the best Bond films ever.
    Accident or not, it´s one of the hardest to understand things in recent history.
    It's actually very easy to understand as long as you have good taste and can distinguish a good movie from a bad one.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    @PanchitoPistoles , I like your commitment.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    TripAces wrote: »
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    If they bring Spectre back, I can’t see why they can’t reveal the real Blofeld, in shadow, at the end of the film and introduce dialogue stating that the other chap was just a smoke screen and even subtly allude to the fact that Waltz’s character was a psychopathic liar, in reference to the stupid backstory we were fed in Spectre.

    Yes please! Anything along those lines. I would take almost any idea that erases brothergate.

    We can't erase it, but we can make better sense of it. I have said all along that the best way to work around this connection is that it's no coincidence.

    What if...

    --Bond's adoption by Oberhauser put him on MI6's radar?
    --MI6 began courting him early on and recruited him to infiltrate Oberhauser's organization? This would be similar to The Departed.
    --This line takes on bigger implications: "Orphans always did make the best recruits" (M, in Skyfall)?
    --And this line, too: "I never really had a choice" (Bond, about becoming an assassin)?
    I like your first four ideas a lot, @TripAces. When tracing it all back to what Charlie Higson wrote in his Young Bond books, A 14 year old James Bond and his actions do come to M’s attention in By Royal Command if I recall correctly. So, in my opinion, these ideas are solid.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,730
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    If they bring Spectre back, I can’t see why they can’t reveal the real Blofeld, in shadow, at the end of the film and introduce dialogue stating that the other chap was just a smoke screen and even subtly allude to the fact that Waltz’s character was a psychopathic liar, in reference to the stupid backstory we were fed in Spectre.

    Yes please! Anything along those lines. I would take almost any idea that erases brothergate.

    We can't erase it, but we can make better sense of it. I have said all along that the best way to work around this connection is that it's no coincidence.

    What if...

    --Bond's adoption by Oberhauser put him on MI6's radar?
    --MI6 began courting him early on and recruited him to infiltrate Oberhauser's organization? This would be similar to The Departed.
    --This line takes on bigger implications: "Orphans always did make the best recruits" (M, in Skyfall)?
    --And this line, too: "I never really had a choice" (Bond, about becoming an assassin)?
    I like your first four ideas a lot, @TripAces. When tracing it all back to what Charlie Higson wrote in his Young Bond books, A 14 year old James Bond and his actions do come to M’s attention in By Royal Command if I recall correctly. So, in my opinion, these ideas are solid.
    In terms of retroactively making the story of Spectre work better without undermining that film, those are definitely good ideas that could be feasibly, perhaps even easily implemented in Bond 25. But I wouldn't want a Bond film to deal with that type of story. I want Bond to be just Bond, merely one of several agents in the double-oh-section, not the one person who had to have a personal childhood connection to the biggest bad guy of them all.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    mattjoes wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    If they bring Spectre back, I can’t see why they can’t reveal the real Blofeld, in shadow, at the end of the film and introduce dialogue stating that the other chap was just a smoke screen and even subtly allude to the fact that Waltz’s character was a psychopathic liar, in reference to the stupid backstory we were fed in Spectre.

    Yes please! Anything along those lines. I would take almost any idea that erases brothergate.

    We can't erase it, but we can make better sense of it. I have said all along that the best way to work around this connection is that it's no coincidence.

    What if...

    --Bond's adoption by Oberhauser put him on MI6's radar?
    --MI6 began courting him early on and recruited him to infiltrate Oberhauser's organization? This would be similar to The Departed.
    --This line takes on bigger implications: "Orphans always did make the best recruits" (M, in Skyfall)?
    --And this line, too: "I never really had a choice" (Bond, about becoming an assassin)?
    I like your first four ideas a lot, @TripAces. When tracing it all back to what Charlie Higson wrote in his Young Bond books, A 14 year old James Bond and his actions do come to M’s attention in By Royal Command if I recall correctly. So, in my opinion, these ideas are solid.
    In terms of retroactively making the story of Spectre work better without undermining that film, those are definitely good ideas that could be feasibly, perhaps even easily implemented in Bond 25. But I wouldn't want a Bond film to deal with that type of story. I want Bond to be just Bond, merely one of several agents in the double-oh-section, not the one person who had to have a personal childhood connection to the biggest bad guy of them all.
    I want what you want when it comes to that, @mattjoes, but we know the template we want for Bond won’t be coming in the Craig era. The current universe doesn’t play that way, I’m afraid. Although, I’m willing to see them go back to having Bond be Bond again by the time the next actor comes around.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,730
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    If they bring Spectre back, I can’t see why they can’t reveal the real Blofeld, in shadow, at the end of the film and introduce dialogue stating that the other chap was just a smoke screen and even subtly allude to the fact that Waltz’s character was a psychopathic liar, in reference to the stupid backstory we were fed in Spectre.

    Yes please! Anything along those lines. I would take almost any idea that erases brothergate.

    We can't erase it, but we can make better sense of it. I have said all along that the best way to work around this connection is that it's no coincidence.

    What if...

    --Bond's adoption by Oberhauser put him on MI6's radar?
    --MI6 began courting him early on and recruited him to infiltrate Oberhauser's organization? This would be similar to The Departed.
    --This line takes on bigger implications: "Orphans always did make the best recruits" (M, in Skyfall)?
    --And this line, too: "I never really had a choice" (Bond, about becoming an assassin)?
    I like your first four ideas a lot, @TripAces. When tracing it all back to what Charlie Higson wrote in his Young Bond books, A 14 year old James Bond and his actions do come to M’s attention in By Royal Command if I recall correctly. So, in my opinion, these ideas are solid.
    In terms of retroactively making the story of Spectre work better without undermining that film, those are definitely good ideas that could be feasibly, perhaps even easily implemented in Bond 25. But I wouldn't want a Bond film to deal with that type of story. I want Bond to be just Bond, merely one of several agents in the double-oh-section, not the one person who had to have a personal childhood connection to the biggest bad guy of them all.
    I want what you want when it comes to that, @mattjoes, but we know the template we want for Bond won’t be coming in the Craig era. The current universe doesn’t play that way, I’m afraid. Although, I’m willing to see them go back to having Bond be Bond again by the time the next actor comes around.

    @ClarkDevlin Yes, that is the case. But I still hold out hope for a standalone Craig entry, just because.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I quite liked SF, but I get your point.
    His comment is incredibly foolish. It's not an accident that SF is widely regarded as one of the best Bond films ever.

    Huh, obviously skyfall is one big mish mash of an accident. It was written by a 3 year old with crayons in his nose. Or no one, I wouldn’t know the difference. The only thing planned in that movie is the cinematography, which is awesome, everything else is just accident upon accident. They didn’t even have a writers strike
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    Hopefully Bond 25 will be to the first 4 Craig Bond movies what Skyfall was to the first 2 Craig Bond films. Anyway, I desperately need some official news. I give Barbara Broccoli 66 days to announce at least the director. If she fails to do so by the end of February, I will throw the single biggest temper tantrum mi6community has EVER seen.

    You do that all the time though. You've never really needed a reason to get...animated.
Sign In or Register to comment.