› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…15691570157215741575…2507

Comments

  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    "light on action" Im liking this news if true. A character piece is what is needed

    It depends, for example CR balances an action heavy film with a character piece portion too. And bond films are action films after all so it’ll be disappointing if there are only two or so main set pieces
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    "light on action" Im liking this news if true. A character piece is what is needed

    It depends, for example CR balances an action heavy film with a character piece portion too. And bond films are action films after all so it’ll be disappointing if there are only two or so main set pieces

    I agree. Well put.
    Remington wrote: »
    Please keep politics out of Bond.

    I also agree.
  • Tuck91Tuck91
    Posts: 1,680
    If their going to go action medium or lite then I'd like to see a momentum build up similar to goldeneye, after the pts bond didn't get involved in any heavy action until the archive shootout. the bottom line, the odds are against them, no bond actors tenure has ever ended on a film that was critically acclaimed, ever. Their going to need to bring more to the table than a protege & female villain imo.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    I'm not putting a lot of stock in rumored storylines and cast decisions. No matter what we hear at this point, I am confident that what Hodge and Boyle pitched to Babs and Michael (and DC, too) must have been kick a##. This is going to be a good film. I can't wait until December.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    edited June 2018 Posts: 15,818
    I embrace the idea of these rumors being bullocks. Complete B.S..
    This protege character driven Bond sounds astonishingly underwhelming. I'd hate to think that Mickey G and Barbara would have turned down a potential Purvis and Wade SHATTERHAND for this rubbish idea.

    This main A-lister villain idea with Angelina Jolie being aggressively pursued makes me even more lukewarm towards B25.

    Lets hope we get some real news regarding plot, casting , etc soon.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,270
    I am highly optimistic for it. I think it will be very original and entertaining, and maybe even spark an interest in Bond the way SF did again.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,882
    If any of this was true (and I doubt that it is), but if Boyke and EON want a female villain, then I'd suggest an actress with a better resume than Angelina Jolie.
    My first choice would be Dame Helen Mirren.
    An outstanding and versatile actress. Would be a great asset to the Bond series imo.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    As long as she played it relatively straight.

    would have preferred mirren as M to Dench personally.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    It's the protege stuff I don't care for. Reminds me of that Vesper's baby plot idea for QOS. Hope it's just a bad rumor.
  • Benjamin_Weekly69Benjamin_Weekly69 London
    edited June 2018 Posts: 727
    Remington wrote: »
    Please keep politics out of Bond.

    Keep politics out of my spy/assassin heralded by her majesty's government for intervention in other country's politics.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    If you want a political venture in a film, go watch a political thriller where the left and right throw mud at each other. Bond is not the franchise to bring that into.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    If you want a political venture in a film, go watch a political thriller where the left and right throw mud at each other. Bond is not the franchise to bring that into.

    Well said.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,533
    Murdock wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    If you want a political venture in a film, go watch a political thriller where the left and right throw mud at each other. Bond is not the franchise to bring that into.

    Well said.

    Precisely.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited June 2018 Posts: 11,425
    Bond is actually always political but not in the overt way of a political thriller. It's politics in a more subtle, cultural and sign of the times type way. Witness the evolution of the Bond girls, M, black characters in more varied roles. And Britian' s shifting fortunes always in the background. I can't remember what Fleming said exactly on this but he wrote Bond very much conscious of Britain's waning influence and America's growing dominance.

    Will be interesting to see if Boyle does in some subtle way shine a light on Brexit and Trump.

    John LeCarre (obviously political diametrically opposite of Fleming) has said he joined MI6 to defend European civilisation and sees Brexit as a devastating blow to his own values. Bond is not a LeCarre character but Bond films still reflect the world around them - just in a different way.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Depends on the politics. Above all, however, Bond has been the antithesis of real world politics where there’s always a third party trying to bring two sides into a war so they’d come out as the uprising power. Sure, most of the Fleming novels (the early ones, anyway) have been politically one-sided, but they realized its cons (as opposed to its pros), and introduced SPECTRE to avoid conflicts. FRWL particularly changed the involvement of SMERSH from the antagonists into SPECTRE.
  • fanbond123fanbond123
    edited June 2018 Posts: 1,661
    I think the plot of Bond 25 should Bond taking on the evil organization Zeddit that prides itself on spreading fake movie news.

    I hope Brexit isn't mentioned in Bond 25 because it will be weird. Bond vs the European Union (it's revealed the EU is funded by SPECTRE :P) could be interesting but I doubt the real EU would be happy with that!


  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Exactly. One-sided political alignment slamming the other will only alienate a large portion of the audience it's detracting, and that's bad for business in the first place. Bond being an escapist entertainment instrument brings together hundreds of millions of people. Are Eon prepared to get lesser incomes and gains? I don't think so.
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    edited June 2018 Posts: 308
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Exactly. One-sided political alignment slamming the other will only alienate a large portion of the audience it's detracting, and that's bad for business in the first place. Bond being an escapist entertainment instrument brings together hundreds of millions of people. Are Eon prepared to get lesser incomes and gains? I don't think so.

    I agree. I think a lot of people are sick and tired of political activism in films, award shows and so on. MGW and BB having a difference of opinion in regards to politics is good news (was new for me) in that regard.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,090
    I think the problem with a 4 year gap between films with the same actor in the leading role, is that it doesn't so much build anticipation as Aude people to question the motivation of those involved. If they seriously didn't have any good ideas until Boyle came along, then what where they doing for the first 2 years of development time? It seems highly peculiar to throw out every you have to go with a new concept after so much time past already. Craig was cagey about coming back, his move seems due to his desire to work with autuers and boost his post Bond prospects. There is just that touch on cynicism about the whole affair which makes you wonder whether they are approaching this with the best of intentions.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited June 2018 Posts: 11,425
    People's motives change over time but I don't think any one involved would be making this film if deep down they didn't want to.

    My view on Craig is that he was ambivalent about role in the early years but then its grown on him. Also (and this surely hasn't passed him by) he hasn't had much success doing anything else. Golden Compass and TGWTDT were both flops and showed he's not really a big draw in anything other than Bond, so he's probably also realised that once he steps down he's going to see a significant drop in profile and status. I suppose this could be read as cynicism but I think he'd also have liked to have done more Bond movies in the time he had and feels the hunger to do one more.

    The perhaps slightly cynical decision was Mendes coming back for SP. I don't think he really wanted to do it and probably just had massive wads of cash waved under his nose.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    Getafix wrote: »
    The perhaps slightly cynical decision was Mendes coming back for SP. I don't think he really wanted to do it and probably just had massive wads of cash waved under his nose.
    100% agree - to me the final result shows that, exactly. He put all he had for Bond in SF (and succeeded) and did SP for the money ... without good enough ideas.

  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's the protege stuff I don't care for. Reminds me of that Vesper's baby plot idea for QOS. Hope it's just a bad rumor.

    Same, of all the rumors we've heard so far this has to be the worst.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    The perhaps slightly cynical decision was Mendes coming back for SP. I don't think he really wanted to do it and probably just had massive wads of cash waved under his nose.
    100% agree - to me the final result shows that, exactly. He put all he had for Bond in SF (and succeeded) and did SP for the money ... without good enough ideas.

    yes but I still prefer it to SF. that's not hard tho
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Remington wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    If you want a political venture in a film, go watch a political thriller where the left and right throw mud at each other. Bond is not the franchise to bring that into.

    Well said.

    Precisely.
    +3. I think it will be a big mistake if they try to bring a particular political slant to the proceedings with this film. Particularly given when it will be released (presumably in a post-Brexit environment if all works out). One doesn't know where the public mood will be at that point and attempting to forecast it one year out is a fool's game.
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Depends on the politics. Above all, however, Bond has been the antithesis of real world politics where there’s always a third party trying to bring two sides into a war so they’d come out as the uprising power. Sure, most of the Fleming novels (the early ones, anyway) have been politically one-sided, but they realized its cons (as opposed to its pros), and introduced SPECTRE to avoid conflicts. FRWL particularly changed the involvement of SMERSH from the antagonists into SPECTRE.
    Agreed again. One can only hope they remember that.
    Walecs wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    It's the protege stuff I don't care for. Reminds me of that Vesper's baby plot idea for QOS. Hope it's just a bad rumor.

    Same, of all the rumors we've heard so far this has to be the worst.
    I quite agree. The rumour of Lily James is suitably gratifying though. I can perhaps accept the premise, even if reluctantly, if she's onboard. It wouldn't surprise me if they go this route though. We sort of anticipated a female sidekick premise more than a year out, and especially after MI:RN's critical and commercial success.
  • LeonJames22LeonJames22
    Posts: 18
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    If you want a political venture in a film, go watch a political thriller where the left and right throw mud at each other. Bond is not the franchise to bring that into.

    Absolutely!
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,965
    Remington wrote: »
    Please keep politics out of Bond.

    Yes please. Last thing we need is for Bond to become all social justice warrior like.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I won't be happy unless Craig strips off to reveal a 'This is what a feminist looks like' t shirt
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    edited June 2018 Posts: 1,965
    James Bond should always be a white male. Period end of story. I know there are some SJWs that would love Bond to be female
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    Those people don't even like Bond.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,496
    How is CabbagePatch going to have time to appear in Bond 25 if he currently has 8 projects heading into pre-production?

    And is HBC really wanting to go from a potential 5 month shoot of 'The Crown' straight into Bond?
Sign In or Register to comment.