No Time To Die: Production Diary

1169516961698170017012563

Comments

  • edited August 2018 Posts: 5,673
    Sounds interesting, @Univex.

    Thanks, @Superintendent. It would be a good chance to see our man messing about in a very villainous way, while having non supervised fun. A more borderline Bond if you may. Craig could pull it off nicely. I could write it all in two weeks time or less, and make the script oscar worthy ;) (I know that would please BB)
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,547
    Univex wrote: »
    Here's my instant pitch:

    The film begins with Bond doing something quite anti-heroic, to our amazement (Like Bond killing M). Then we soon realize that ex-007, having quit the service in SP, is now a very expensive gun for hire in the vein of Scaramanga. He is hired by an oligarch that has some plans of his own. Bond joins the villain's ranks and seems to have the fun of his life on the dark side of things, enjoying the luxurious life in Dubrovnik and the Dalmatian coast, and then, just then, while all seems very, very surreal, Bond sabotages the whole thing. Only then it's revealed that the leaving the service thing was a mission itself, something sanctioned secretly by M himself (who is not really dead).

    See? Done right it could be cool. Not that it's a completely original ideia, but if the organics of the piece were done differently, juggling with the audience and our pre conceived ideia of who James Bond should be, it would be fun.
    Really like the sound of that, but it might be a bit too bold for certain member's tastes who want a more straightforward, back to basics film.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 5,673
    jake24 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Here's my instant pitch:

    The film begins with Bond doing something quite anti-heroic, to our amazement (Like Bond killing M). Then we soon realize that ex-007, having quit the service in SP, is now a very expensive gun for hire in the vein of Scaramanga. He is hired by an oligarch that has some plans of his own. Bond joins the villain's ranks and seems to have the fun of his life on the dark side of things, enjoying the luxurious life in Dubrovnik and the Dalmatian coast, and then, just then, while all seems very, very surreal, Bond sabotages the whole thing. Only then it's revealed that the leaving the service thing was a mission itself, something sanctioned secretly by M himself (who is not really dead).

    See? Done right it could be cool. Not that it's a completely original ideia, but if the organics of the piece were done differently, juggling with the audience and our pre conceived ideia of who James Bond should be, it would be fun.
    Really like the sound of that, but it might be a bit too bold for certain member's tastes who want a more straightforward, back to basics film.

    The way I'd write it, and if they like Fleming and the early Connery flicks, they'd love it (a mix of TMWTGG and YOLT novels, maybe). And while it would be a bit avant guarde, it would be more classic Bond than the last two films, that's for sure.
  • Maybe at the end of the movie Bond dies, but eventualy there is a coda in which M or MoneyPenny says that his body was never found and, after all the final credits, there is the tipical "James Bond will return". It would be a way to say: take it as you prefer.

    Anyway, I think we are paying too much attention to The Sun.
  • Posts: 4,619
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I just see it as somewhat lazy most of all. I mean if the big idea is just to kill James Bond, that’s pretty underwhelming in the originality department. YOLT already had his faked death, too. I would be stunned if they could actually pull it off (death/ambiguous death) in any worthwhile way. It’s possible, but I sort of doubt they will actually kill Bond in the next one - maybe an ambiguous thing at most.
    The BIG idea (also known as Boyle's idea) was NOT to kill Bond. The article that claimed they wanted to kill Bond said that it was EON's idea to kill him and Boyle was against it.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    edited August 2018 Posts: 1,756
    While I think the YOLT idea of Bond dying only officially was a good idea back in the 60s and even in Skyfall, I think nowadays the trope of "x character dies but then later we find out didn't" is overplayed.
  • Posts: 10,539
    Univex wrote: »
    Here's my instant pitch:

    The film begins with Bond doing something quite anti-heroic, to our amazement (Like Bond killing M). Then we soon realize that ex-007, having quit the service in SP, is now a very expensive gun for hire in the vein of Scaramanga. He is hired by an oligarch that has some plans of his own. Bond joins the villain's ranks and seems to have the fun of his life on the dark side of things, enjoying the luxurious life in Dubrovnik and the Dalmatian coast, and then, just then, while all seems very, very surreal, Bond sabotages the whole thing. Only then it's revealed that the leaving the service thing was a mission itself, something sanctioned secretly by M himself (who is not really dead). Oh, and no henchman, Bond would be the henchman, with a quirk of his own, a signature if you'd like.

    See? Done right it could be cool. Not that it's a completely original ideia, but if the organics of the piece were done differently, juggling with the audience and our pre conceived ideia of who James Bond should be, it would be fun.

    I love that pitch. Far more interesting and unique than simply Bond dying or something. I’d love to see Craig tackle that. Excellent idea @Univex!
  • Posts: 15,566
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Can't we just, for once this century, have a Bond film that is plot driven and not Bond/M/MI6 driven? What is so goddamned hard about that?

    giphy.gif
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,547
    Maybe at the end of the movie Bond dies, but eventualy there is a coda in which M or MoneyPenny says that his body was never found and, after all the final credits, there is the tipical "James Bond will return". It would be a way to say: take it as you prefer.

    Anyway, I think we are paying too much attention to The Sun.
    The Bourne Ultimatum comes to mind.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    Posts: 7,305
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Can't we just, for once this century, have a Bond film that is plot driven and not Bond/M/MI6 driven? What is so goddamned hard about that?

    I'm with you 100 percent. The frustration is warranted at this point.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,499
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Here's my instant pitch:

    The film begins with Bond doing something quite anti-heroic, to our amazement (Like Bond killing M). Then we soon realize that ex-007, having quit the service in SP, is now a very expensive gun for hire in the vein of Scaramanga. He is hired by an oligarch that has some plans of his own. Bond joins the villain's ranks and seems to have the fun of his life on the dark side of things, enjoying the luxurious life in Dubrovnik and the Dalmatian coast, and then, just then, while all seems very, very surreal, Bond sabotages the whole thing. Only then it's revealed that the leaving the service thing was a mission itself, something sanctioned secretly by M himself (who is not really dead). Oh, and no henchman, Bond would be the henchman, with a quirk of his own, a signature if you'd like.

    See? Done right it could be cool. Not that it's a completely original ideia, but if the organics of the piece were done differently, juggling with the audience and our pre conceived ideia of who James Bond should be, it would be fun.

    I love that pitch. Far more interesting and unique than simply Bond dying or something. I’d love to see Craig tackle that. Excellent idea @Univex!

    I'd actually like that as a film with Dalton.
  • Posts: 10,539
    Honestly, I highly doubt The Sun’s story about Bond dying. My guess is the main reason for Boyle leaving was because he had less control than he wanted and just had too many opposing ideas to Craig and EON. But not the specific idea of killing off Bond. It’s possible I guess, but I’m going to doubt it until I see more proof.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I just see it as somewhat lazy most of all. I mean if the big idea is just to kill James Bond, that’s pretty underwhelming in the originality department. YOLT already had his faked death, too. I would be stunned if they could actually pull it off (death/ambiguous death) in any worthwhile way. It’s possible, but I sort of doubt they will actually kill Bond in the next one - maybe an ambiguous thing at most.

    This. Moreover, it doesn't have any point since we all know he'll return in the next one.
    Univex wrote: »
    Here's my instant pitch:

    The film begins with Bond doing something quite anti-heroic, to our amazement (Like Bond killing M). Then we soon realize that ex-007, having quit the service in SP, is now a very expensive gun for hire in the vein of Scaramanga. He is hired by an oligarch that has some plans of his own. Bond joins the villain's ranks and seems to have the fun of his life on the dark side of things, enjoying the luxurious life in Dubrovnik and the Dalmatian coast, and then, just then, while all seems very, very surreal, Bond sabotages the whole thing. Only then it's revealed that the leaving the service thing was a mission itself, something sanctioned secretly by M himself (who is not really dead). Oh, and no henchman, Bond would be the henchman, with a quirk of his own, a signature if you'd like.

    See? Done right it could be cool. Not that it's a completely original ideia, but if the organics of the piece were done differently, juggling with the audience and our pre conceived ideia of who James Bond should be, it would be fun.

    This is really cool, actually. It's pretty much a modern adaptation of TMWTGG's novel premise, except with the twist at the end.
    While I think the YOLT idea of Bond dying only officially was a good idea back in the 60s and even in Skyfall, I think nowadays the trope of "x character dies but then later we find out didn't" is overplayed.

    Agreed. In Skyfall it worked because we knew all along he didn't die (heck, it was shown in the trailers) and it was never meant to be a twist.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,964
    barryt007 wrote: »
    If Bond dies then the series becomes a joke and joins the other series....thats me done....Damn i wish the only Bond i knew in real life,Sir Roger,was still alive,we need him now.

    If Bond is killed of, then I wont bother watching the film. I didn't see SP on the big scree, because I was already sick of the direction, so it isn't that hard to do. It's bad enough that they are hell bent of removing any mystery Bond had.
  • Posts: 150
    A hero famous for jumping off cliffs, catching airplanes in mid-air and defying death in all manners possible would be just plain dumb to die. Just saying.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,748
    I think we’re getting ahead of ourselves here. Let’s take this one step at a time. Let’s pray we can get our director first, then we can worry about whether or not Bond gets killed off.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 4,619
    It's ridiculous that some people here are against Bond dying in one movie. There are 24 official Bond movies the hero has survived, why can't he die in a single one?
  • Posts: 10,539
    My guess is The Sun is just adding more drama to an already dramatic situation with Boyle leaving and everything.
  • Posts: 3,925
    barryt007 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    vzok wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Just make the f***ng film.
    (Preferably without the poisoned apple that is Daniel Craig).

    Are you available to direct B25?

    That will only give @barryt007 the opportunity to reintroduce Kara!

    YES !!!! killed by a car in 5 seconds.....3 times !!

    I wonder how you're going to sell that idea to EON! :))

    Call it a dramatic Craig'ish memory.

    Hahaha!
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    vzok wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Just make the f***ng film.
    (Preferably without the poisoned apple that is Daniel Craig).

    Are you available to direct B25?

    That will only give @barryt007 the opportunity to reintroduce Kara!

    YES !!!! killed by a car in 5 seconds.....3 times !!

    I wonder how you're going to sell that idea to EON! :))
    What's the biggest film of the year? Infinity War. Nearly everyone dies in that one, so why not kill off all of these jokers in the next Bond film too? They like to follow trends, so it makes sense. Get some emotions going in the audience and all that. Not as far fetched as we may think.

    Boyle's big idea, perhaps? Just kill everyone – making the most shocking Bond film ever?

    Casino Royale 1967 beat them to it.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 15,566
    It's ridiculous that some people here are against Bond dying in one movie. There are 24 official Bond movies the hero has survived, why can't he die in a single one?

    But why, WHY, should he die?
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,816
    Bond has died before though. In YOLT his 'death' is a set-up, in CR his heart stops, and in SF it's metaphorical.
  • We all know, James Bond doesn't die. Wouldn't work in a 21st century Bond movie.....
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,473
    Univex wrote: »
    This thread is a true yarn by now ;)

    Do you think there's someone at EON reading all of this? At this point I don't know who's making the fool out of themselves, them or us. It's all very foolish. But then again, all people are.

    I both hope so and hope not.
    It's ridiculous that some people here are against Bond dying in one movie. There are 24 official Bond movies the hero has survived, why can't he die in a single one?

    Because having him die and then come back to life in the next film reduces the character to a gimmick. Stakes are gone, any possible tension goes. From there on out, it doesn't matter whether he lives or dies as it can just be fixed with no fuss.

    One could certainly argue that there are other things that make Bond a bit gimmicky but I don't think it's ridiculous to not want him to become a video game character.

    On the flip-side, it does definitively tie off the Craig era as its own thing. So there's that.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,221
    So now I just come on this thread to be amused by the newest wild rumors. Do we have a rumors thread? I don't remember ... ;)
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 3,133
    It's ridiculous that some people here are against Bond dying in one movie. There are 24 official Bond movies the hero has survived, why can't he die in a single one?

    But why, WHY, should he die?

    Because it'd be a fitting end to Craig's self-contained arc before casting a new Bond?

    Like, we know there'll be more Wolverine movies with a new actor under Disney/Marvel Studios and they still killed off Hugh Jackman's...
  • Posts: 4,619
    Because having him die and then come back to life in the next film reduces the character to a gimmick. Stakes are gone, any possible tension goes.
    We already know that one way or another James Bond will always return. So the stakes were never there. Craig's Bond dying and then another interpretation of Bond appearing on the big screen years later would not reduce the character to a gimmick, because that wouldn't be Craig's Bond anymore. It would be a whole new interpretation.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    antovolk wrote: »
    It's ridiculous that some people here are against Bond dying in one movie. There are 24 official Bond movies the hero has survived, why can't he die in a single one?

    But why, WHY, should he die?

    Like, we know there'll be more Wolverine movies with a new actor under Disney/Marvel Studios and they still killed off Hugh Jackman's...

    Yeah, but in that case that's because (please correct me if I'm wrong) Logan was distributed by 21st Century Fox, not Disney.

    If EON were to sell Bond rights then they'd have a point in killing him, but that's not the case as far as we know (there have been rumors since SPECTRE's release, but nothing more).
  • Posts: 357
    My guess is they now want to kill Bond off in the last film of the actor's career, a bit like Dr.Who.

    It's a bad idea and isn't going to work.
  • Posts: 19,339
    It's ridiculous that some people here are against Bond dying in one movie. There are 24 official Bond movies the hero has survived, why can't he die in a single one?

    Seriously PP !!
  • Posts: 1,680
    All that money & red tape the to get the rights to spectre back & it seems there done with it already
Sign In or Register to comment.