No Time To Die: Production Diary

11511521541561572507

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    For some reason, I had it in my head that White was on the phone before Bond even called, as he was looking over the water. Christ, it shows how long it's been since I've seen CR, if anything.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    That whole scene was a sensational piece of outstanding artery. Wouldn't you say?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited May 2016 Posts: 28,694
    That whole scene film was a sensational piece of outstanding artery. Wouldn't you say?

    But of course. Knowing me, CR's plot could've stopped abruptly to signal a dance number between all the characters and I'd still love it. This movie can do no wrong for me, on most accounts.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2016 Posts: 8,183
    I've just realised that if Martin Campbell returns it'll be virtually the same length of time between GE and CR. I think that would be epic. 3 different Bond introduction spanning over 3 decades, woah! I think I want Campbell to return more than anything for B25. I just really want him to complete the trilogy: GoldenEye, Casino Royale and...
  • edited May 2016 Posts: 12,837
    Campbell returning would be great. The only issue would be hooking him, as I read on here before that he wasn't interested in a third Bond film because he'd done pretty much all he could with it (which does make sense, he turned down TND and I imagine the only reason he returned for CR was the whole reboot/origin story idea).

    After the overarching plot of the Craig era I'd like the introduction of the next actor to be a simple, day in the life story. Dredd (the 2012 one, one of my favourite films) is a good example of what I mean by this. He goes through all that, then when he finally reaches the top floor and kills the villain, he calls it in as a simple drug bust, and then leaves the other judges to deal with the cleanup while he presumably goes back out on patrol. This is an average day for him. And yet it didn't feel like the stakes were low, there was still danger, tension, excitement, etc.

    Bond should follow that template to introduce the new actor. Give him a regular mission to establish who this Bond is, then you can experiment and take liberties with the formula in future films. The ending could even solidfy this (example- MI6 contact Bond, "I'll be right back", Bond leaves the girl in bed and begins his journey back to London to report in and recieve his new mission, James Bond will return, roll credits).

    I mean I know in the books he said most of his job was paperwork but cinematic Bond and book Bond are two different beasts. One of the touches I liked in SP was how empty and depressing his flat was (because he's hardly ever there).

    Basically I think give the new actor his Goldfinger to start him off. And that will make it even more powerful when he does eventually get his OHMSS. They don't need to start off with a character study again, especially after we just got a whole era full of them (which is not a bad thing at all, but they need differentiate the new guy from DC, and I think a grounded, barebones, straight action/thriller film is the way to go).
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,183
    Campbell returning would be great. The only issue would be hooking him, as I read on here before that he wasn't interested in a third Bond film because he'd done pretty much all he could with it (which does make sense, he turned down TND and I imagine the only reason he returned for CR was the whole reboot/origin story idea).

    After the overarching plot of the Craig era I'd like the introduction of the next actor to be a simple, day in the life story. Dredd (the 2012 one, one of my favourite films) is a good example of what I mean by this. He goes through all that, then when he finally reaches the top floor and kills the villain, he calls it in as a simple drug bust, and then leaves the other judges to deal with the cleanup while he presumably goes back out on patrol. This is an average day for him. And yet it didn't feel like the stakes were low, there was still danger, tension, excitement, etc.

    Bond should follow that template to introduce the new actor. Give him a regular mission to establish who this Bond is, then you can experiment and take liberties with the formula in future films. The ending could even solidfy this (example- MI6 contact Bond, "I'll be right back", Bond leaves the girl in bed and begins his journey back to London to report in and recieve his new mission, James Bond will return, roll credits).

    I mean I know in the books he said most of his job was paperwork but cinematic Bond and book Bond are two different beasts. One of the touches I liked in SP was how empty and depressing his flat was (because he's hardly ever there).

    Basically I think give the new actor his Goldfinger to start him off. And that will make it even more powerful when he does eventually get his OHMSS. They don't need to start off with a character study again, especially after we just got a whole era full of them (which is not a bad thing at all, but they need differentiate the new guy from DC, and I think a grounded, barebones, straight action/thriller film is the way to go).

    Yesss!!! =D> I agree with this 1007% A day in the life story like TND would be perfect, except done a lot better than TND, of course. Focus on a strong plot rather than a strong story like the Craig films do. Throw out all that character drama that gets in the way of us having a good time! We should see the Bond character expressed through his actions and reactions in the heat of the moment. I would welcome a slick 2 hour Bond film that zips by, where we watch the enemies plan unfold before us, like with FRWL. I don't think we need to follow Bond on a leash the whole time, but instead give the new characters a bit of time to develop. That's being said, I what the MI6 crew back behind their respective desks, and limited to 1 - 2 scenes each.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Campbell returning would be great. The only issue would be hooking him, as I read on here before that he wasn't interested in a third Bond film because he'd done pretty much all he could with it (which does make sense, he turned down TND and I imagine the only reason he returned for CR was the whole reboot/origin story idea).

    After the overarching plot of the Craig era I'd like the introduction of the next actor to be a simple, day in the life story. Dredd (the 2012 one, one of my favourite films) is a good example of what I mean by this. He goes through all that, then when he finally reaches the top floor and kills the villain, he calls it in as a simple drug bust, and then leaves the other judges to deal with the cleanup while he presumably goes back out on patrol. This is an average day for him. And yet it didn't feel like the stakes were low, there was still danger, tension, excitement, etc.

    Bond should follow that template to introduce the new actor. Give him a regular mission to establish who this Bond is, then you can experiment and take liberties with the formula in future films. The ending could even solidfy this (example- MI6 contact Bond, "I'll be right back", Bond leaves the girl in bed and begins his journey back to London to report in and recieve his new mission, James Bond will return, roll credits).

    I mean I know in the books he said most of his job was paperwork but cinematic Bond and book Bond are two different beasts. One of the touches I liked in SP was how empty and depressing his flat was (because he's hardly ever there).

    Basically I think give the new actor his Goldfinger to start him off. And that will make it even more powerful when he does eventually get his OHMSS. They don't need to start off with a character study again, especially after we just got a whole era full of them (which is not a bad thing at all, but they need differentiate the new guy from DC, and I think a grounded, barebones, straight action/thriller film is the way to go).

    Yesss!!! =D> I agree with this 1007% A day in the life story like TND would be perfect, except done a lot better than TND, of course. Focus on a strong plot rather than a strong story like the Craig films do. Throw out all that character drama that gets in the way of us having a good time! We should see the Bond character expressed through his actions and reactions in the heat of the moment. I would welcome a slick 2 hour Bond film that zips by, where we watch the enemies plan unfold before us, like with FRWL. I don't think we need to follow Bond on a leash the whole time, but instead give the new characters a bit of time to develop. That's being said, I what the MI6 crew back behind their respective desks, and limited to 1 - 2 scenes each.
    Well said! =D>
  • Posts: 2,483
    That whole scene film was a sensational piece of outstanding artery. Wouldn't you say?

    But of course. Knowing me, CR's plot could've stopped abruptly to signal a dance number between all the characters and I'd still love it. This movie can do no wrong for me, on most accounts.

    Unfortunately, CR contains the nursery school-level screenwriting during Bond's recuperation scenes. That part of the film is DAD-bad. Otherwise, practically faultless.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,183
    That whole scene film was a sensational piece of outstanding artery. Wouldn't you say?

    But of course. Knowing me, CR's plot could've stopped abruptly to signal a dance number between all the characters and I'd still love it. This movie can do no wrong for me, on most accounts.

    Unfortunately, CR contains the nursery school-level screenwriting during Bond's recuperation scenes. That part of the film is DAD-bad. Otherwise, practically faultless.

    Definitely, that doesn't get mentioned enough. Well said. =D>
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    That whole scene film was a sensational piece of outstanding artery. Wouldn't you say?

    But of course. Knowing me, CR's plot could've stopped abruptly to signal a dance number between all the characters and I'd still love it. This movie can do no wrong for me, on most accounts.

    Unfortunately, CR contains the nursery school-level screenwriting during Bond's recuperation scenes. That part of the film is DAD-bad. Otherwise, practically faultless.

    Definitely, that doesn't get mentioned enough. Well said. =D>
    Paul Haggis wrote all those bits, I believe.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    While I agree that some of those later scenes ('little fingers' and what not) are positively groan inducing, I don't know how they could have played that part differently, given they had limited time to establish a romance towards the end of the film. A musical montage (a'la OHMSS) may have come across as derivative.

    I have to admit that the latter half of CR (post-ball buster) is something I don't look forward to at all. If not for that last act, I'd probably watch the film much more often, because what precedes it is absolutely first class.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,183
    bondjames wrote: »
    While I agree that some of those later scenes ('little fingers' and what not) are positively groan inducing, I don't know how they could have played that part differently, given they had limited time to establish a romance towards the end of the film. A musical montage (a'la OHMSS) may have come across as derivative.

    I have to admit that the latter half of CR (post-ball buster) is something I don't look forward to at all. If not for that last act, I'd probably watch the film much more often, because what precedes it is absolutely first class.

    Exactly, that's my big problem too. They focused on their relationship during the train scene and the poker stuff, but that was more a working relationship as partners. I suppose you could argue that the shower scene constitutes the start of their feelings for one another. They endure a traumatic experience that binds them together. That's probably what some CR wiz would say, but I just wish there was that extra little something to suggest they have fallen for each other. As it is, it kind of comes out of left field. Bond wakes up to find the sassy confident woman he knew has transformed into a doting lover. It's never really explained whether she is putting this on to get the access codes for the money out of Bond, or whether she has genuinely fallen in love, or whether she stays with him simply to be feel safe. CR is often muddled like that.
  • Posts: 1,631
    It's never really explained whether she is putting this on to get the access codes for the money out of Bond, or whether she has genuinely fallen in love, or whether she stays with him simply to be feel safe. CR is often muddled like that.

    My interpretation of it is that they don't really need to explain it because it's really all three of those. I think that she does love him, which most likely began in the shower began to develop more fully in his recovery, and then was cemented after his declaration of love for her on the beach. I think her ideal plan would have been for the two of them to be together, fading into the background as it were so that they could both escape their pasts, and it's only until she sees Gettler on the docks in Venice that she knows she can't escape Quantum and moves forward with a new plan, securing Bond's safety in exchange for the money.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,183
    dalton wrote: »
    It's never really explained whether she is putting this on to get the access codes for the money out of Bond, or whether she has genuinely fallen in love, or whether she stays with him simply to be feel safe. CR is often muddled like that.

    My interpretation of it is that they don't really need to explain it because it's really all three of those. I think that she does love him, which most likely began in the shower began to develop more fully in his recovery, and then was cemented after his declaration of love for her on the beach. I think her ideal plan would have been for the two of them to be together,
    fading into the background as it were so that they could both escape their pasts, and it's only until she sees Gettler on the docks in Venice that she knows she can't escape Quantum and moves forward with a new plan, securing Bond's safety in exchange for the money.

    Yeah, the problem is it all takes so much parsing out, and when you reach a conclusion you're never really sure if its the one the director intended.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Can someone please explain to me the bit about Mathis (when Bond runs out of the restaurant after Vesper)? I've never understood that part.

    Why does he do that? Why does Le Chiffre tell a groggy Bond that "your friend Mathis is my friend Mathis"?

    How could he assume that Bond came after Vesper because she mentioned Mathis? If it was all part of some grand plan to have Bond come chasing after them just so they could trap him and ball bust him, then it all seems a little contrived to me.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,183
    bondjames wrote: »
    Can someone please explain to me the bit about Mathis (when Bond runs out of the restaurant after Vesper)? I've never understood that part.

    Why does he do that? Why does Le Chiffre tell a groggy Bond that "your friend Mathis is my friend Mathis"?

    How could he assume that Bond came after Vesper because she mentioned Mathis? If it was all part of some grand plan to have Bond come chasing after them just so they could trap him and ball bust him, then it all seems a little contrived to me.

    I have been trying to figure out the same thing for years now. Another instance of CR being muddled. From what I can work out, Vesper saying 'Mathis' caused Bond to remember back to 'the tell' at the poker table. Bond only told Vesper and Mathis about the tell, and yet somehow LeChiffre finds out that Bond knows because he uses it against him. Bond somehow deduces that Mathis must be the traitor. Now, how LeChiffre knows that Bond made this connection, god only knows. Again, this sort of muddled, contrived storytelling gets criticised in SF and SP, but for some reason CR gets a free pass. I have brought up this exact issue before on these boards and was brushed off with 'nitpicking' or being a CR hater, despite CR being in my top 5!!
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I'm happy with all the actors who the producers have chosen to play 007.
    So Whomever they chose this time, I'm certain will be the right guy. ;)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Can someone please explain to me the bit about Mathis (when Bond runs out of the restaurant after Vesper)? I've never understood that part.

    Why does he do that? Why does Le Chiffre tell a groggy Bond that "your friend Mathis is my friend Mathis"?

    How could he assume that Bond came after Vesper because she mentioned Mathis? If it was all part of some grand plan to have Bond come chasing after them just so they could trap him and ball bust him, then it all seems a little contrived to me.

    I have been trying to figure out the same thing for years now. Another instance of CR being muddled. From what I can work out, Vesper saying 'Mathis' caused Bond to remember back to 'the tell' at the poker table. Bond only told Vesper and Mathis about the tell, and yet somehow LeChiffre finds out that Bond knows because he uses it against him. Bond somehow deduces that Mathis must be the traitor. Now, how LeChiffre knows that Bond made this connection, god only knows. Again, this sort of muddled, contrived storytelling gets criticised in SF and SP, but for some reason CR gets a free pass. I have brought up this exact issue before on these boards and was brushed off with 'nitpicking' or being a CR hater, despite CR being in my top 5!!
    Thanks. I didn't realize it had something to do with 'the tell'. I suppose it makes sense if Vesper had told Le Chiffre about it (tipped him off that is). However, as you note, that still doesn't explain how they could know that Bond would make this connection at that moment in the restaurant and suddenly come after them like that. Strange happenings, but I always brush it off mentally because what follows (ball buster) is so enticing & suspenseful.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,594
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I've been asking that same question for years now, I never really got how he puts all of that together.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,183
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I've been asking that same question for years now, I never really got how he puts all of that together.

    Yeah, I know! What if instead of making that link out of thin air, Bond instead follows Vesper outside, you know, to check out that behind, when suddenly she is whisked off the street and Bond has to jump into action. That way, Bond motivations are clear and we see that he is becoming very attracted to her. Then when the lovie dovie stuff starts later on, it feels more natural.
  • Posts: 1,631
    I don't think that Bond's reaction to "Mathis" at the dinner scene with Vesper is related to the tell. I think it's him realizing that something is wrong because there really is no reason for Mathis to need to meet with Vesper, especially since the CIA has since taken over the operation. Vesper is along for the the ride, she's not the operative on the mission. If there was business to be conducted, Mathis would have contacted Bond.

    Bond realizes this as Vesper leaves, wondering why Mathis would need to speak with her and then realizes that she's been fooled and is danger, so he chases after her. It's only after he crashes the Aston Martin when Le Chiffre mentions Mathis as misdirection that Bond begins to suspect Mathis of tipping him off with regards to his tell.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I always regarded that scene as Bond remembering he'd left his
    Johnny Mathis greatest hits cd, in his hotel room. :D
  • Posts: 1,181
    dalton wrote: »
    I don't think that Bond's reaction to "Mathis" at the dinner scene with Vesper is related to the tell. I think it's him realizing that something is wrong because there really is no reason for Mathis to need to meet with Vesper, especially since the CIA has since taken over the operation. Vesper is along for the the ride, she's not the operative on the mission. If there was business to be conducted, Mathis would have contacted Bond.

    Bond realizes this as Vesper leaves, wondering why Mathis would need to speak with her and then realizes that she's been fooled and is danger, so he chases after her. It's only after he crashes the Aston Martin when Le Chiffre mentions Mathis as misdirection that Bond begins to suspect Mathis of tipping him off with regards to his tell.

    That's how I always understood the scene.

  • Posts: 15,876
    I always regarded that scene as Bond remembering he'd left his
    Johnny Mathis greatest hits cd, in his hotel room. :D

    Nice!!!

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,183
    If Bond 25 is released in late 2018, that means production must begin around December 2017, which means that we will know who will be playing Bond by June 2017 at the latest. Only one more year to go!!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,594
    If Bond 25 is released in late 2018, that means production must begin around December 2017, which means that we will know who will be playing Bond by June 2017 at the latest. Only one more year to go!!

    IF it comes in 2018, that is. Six months on and we've received not one hint of real news, and both cast and crew alike seem just as confused and lost as to the future of the series and what's going on, so at this rate, I think it's more likely that we'll get 'Bond 25' in 2019. Unless, of course, a substantial amount of work is made on things by the end of the year.
  • edited May 2016 Posts: 1,631
    I think there's a decent chance it still comes out in November 2018. They've been meeting with potential leading men should Craig decide to hang it up, so they're ahead of the game so to speak in that regard. So far, we only know of two of them (three if you count the 2012 meeting with Elba), but it would make sense that they've probably met with a few others that aren't on the radar of the press at the moment, if there is indeed a search underway and EON isn't just talking to people to cover their bases for an uncertain future.

    It really all comes down to MGM, though. It would seem as though EON at least has some idea of where it might be headed in terms of the distributor since they're supposedly meeting with potential leading men, as whoever the distributor ends up being is certainly going to want some say in the process, but that's not certain in the least. If MGM can get their distributor deal done by the end of the year, or early 2017 at the latest, then there's a reasonable chance that they could get the next one into production by January 2018 and on target for an Oct/Nov release later in the year.
  • edited May 2016 Posts: 11,425
    There might be a number of things going on in the background. Craig may be playing hard to get in order to maximise his next pay check (didn't say he'd do another for the money?) After all, his asking price per movie is going to plummet after he steps down as Bond - he may went to do a little more feathering of that nest before he takes a bow.

    Likewise, EON will be playing along with this approach and making it known that they are considering possible replacements.

    Didn't Rog and Cubby play that same game many times in the 80s?

    Also, may be Craig has decided he's stepping down but EON have asked him to keep it under his hat until the new Bond is appointed. Perhaps the 'official' Bond is even paid some kind of retainer - surely Dalton got something from EON during those long five years? So perhaps Craig is keeping quiet out of respect to the series or because he's paid to?

    While he is the official Bond he must still get to take home all the lucrative endorsements and advertising pay checks after all, so there is an incentive to just sit there and wait until EON are ready to say goodbye.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2016 Posts: 8,183
    Getafix wrote: »
    There might be a number of things going on in the background. Craig may be playing hard to get in order to maximise his next pay check (didn't say he'd do another for the money?) After all, his asking price per movie is going to plummet after he steps down as Bond - he may went to do a little more feathering of that nest before he takes a bow.

    Likewise, EON will be playing along with this approach and making it known that they are considering possible replacements.

    Didn't Rog and Cubby play that same game many times in the 80s?

    Also, may be Craig has decided he's stepping down but EON have asked him to keep it under his hat until the new Bond is appointed. Perhaps the 'official' Bond is even paid some kind of retainer - surely Dalton got something from EON during those long five years? So perhaps Craig is keeping quiet out of respect to the series or because he's paid to?

    While he is the official Bond he must still get to take home all the lucrative endorsements and advertising pay checks after all, so there is an incentive to just sit there and wait until EON are ready to say goodbye.

    So you mean paid for silence? Now that is devious.
  • Posts: 2,483
    That whole scene film was a sensational piece of outstanding artery. Wouldn't you say?

    But of course. Knowing me, CR's plot could've stopped abruptly to signal a dance number between all the characters and I'd still love it. This movie can do no wrong for me, on most accounts.

    Unfortunately, CR contains the nursery school-level screenwriting during Bond's recuperation scenes. That part of the film is DAD-bad. Otherwise, practically faultless.

    Definitely, that doesn't get mentioned enough. Well said. =D>
    Paul Haggis wrote all those bits, I believe.

    Well he did say that it was his ambition to destroy James Bond...

Sign In or Register to comment.