No Time To Die: Production Diary

11921931951971982507

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    The funny thing is, when all of this is settled we're going to have BB and MGW talking about how everything was decided and put into place from March 2016.
  • Posts: 6,601
    doubleoego wrote: »
    The funny thing is, when all of this is settled we're going to have BB and MGW talking about how everything was decided and put into place from March 2016.

    I could well imagine that. All concerned are probably very relaxed about it all, including DC. Right now, they are playing the public and the fans. Bond is everywhere and it doesn't cost them a penny.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2016 Posts: 7,976
    Johnny Depp is in the headlines at the moment too. I doubt the makers of the new Alice film are rubbing their hands together.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    :)) yep, like Jay Z's affair, just as Beyonce has a new album release.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2016 Posts: 7,976
    Point being, there is such a thing as bad publicity. Doping scandals on the front page of the newspapers will not lead to increased viewership of the Olympics. Danny's wrist slashing cments DO hurt the franchise, no matter how we try and spin it. Also it's very interesting how we are so quick to dismiss the Daily Mail articles, when Baz is one of the reliable sources we have. I think there may be a bit of confirmation bias going on here. We dismiss it as rubbish because we don't want it to be the case. What if the Daily Mail ran a story tomorrow that Daniel Craig has signed on for one more Bond film, would we treat that with the same skepticism?
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    In my opinion most of these stories are all spin, from actor's agents and bored
    or lazy journalists. I'm content in knowing who will be in the next Bond film.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    I've never thought of Daniel's comments as wrist slashing. :-B
    I don't feel he hurts the franchise, no.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I do think it was a rather unfortunate statement, however it was meant
    probably out of fatigue, but a mistake. :(
  • Posts: 6,601
    Plus Baz has been quiet. Without him, the DM is far from reliable. You Do know that - or not?
  • MrcogginsMrcoggins Following in the footsteps of Quentin Quigley.
    Posts: 3,144
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Plus Baz has been quiet. Without him, the DM is far from reliable. You Do know that - or not?

    Quite so dear lady .
  • Q's Cats

    This is the biggest question for me. If Craig doesn't return, will Q's cats still be an ongoing part of the franchise? It just wouldn't feel right hearing them mentioned again with a new actor as Bond. But then, do you just leave the cats out altogether? Gahhh! Thank goodness I don't have to decide such things...
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Only my opinion of course, ( and I do like DC) He occasionally says what he thinks, instead
    of " Staying on message" , So I think he probably did say it but as a joke. We'd all say the
    same if after finishing a hard job, we were asked did we want to do it again.
    Basically, I think it was a joke answer, which has been blown up out of all context.
  • Posts: 6,601
    I do think it was a rather unfortunate statement, however it was meant
    probably out of fatigue, but a mistake. :(

    ..and he paid for it. I suppose, even he might think twice next time. He admitted to a loud mouth. Sadly only the negativity gets that amount of media time. Right now, they are really giving it back to him - all the turning his back on them. He brought himself - with their help - in a position, where there is no way back IMO. People have a short memory and forget all the good quite easily. He certainly experienced the "One minute they love you, the next they hate you" and so on.

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Very true. In Britain the press have a habit of building you up, so they can knock
    You down :( in some ways this might be the start of what happened to Brosnan ?
    The turning of some from love to hate? Sad to see and not fair on any actor.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2016 Posts: 7,976
    Poor Daniel, to receive criticism for making such comments. Its our fault for being so fickle. Dan is a victim in every situation. Even his own comments, we should accept some responsibility for. He has no agency of his own.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    No, he's just a bit blunt in his remarks. In some ways refreshing to hear. :D
    I always like to cut people a little slack, just as he said it, he probably thought
    It was funny ? How many of us have had that happen ? ........ not me obviously ;)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    From y'all griping about others frustration as if it's a blasphemy to voice a concern. That's where.
    I'm with you @mcdonbb. Voice any frustrations you have and I'll defend you if I'm around. No one has a monopoly on opinion here. I welcome yours as I do that of others, including any new members.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2016 Posts: 7,976
    bondjames wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    From y'all griping about others frustration as if it's a blasphemy to voice a concern. That's where.
    I'm with you @mcdonbb. Voice any frustrations you have and I'll defend you if I'm around. No one has a monopoly on opinion here. I welcome yours as I do that of others, including any new members.

    Yes, there is a certain collectivist authoritarian note in some these comments. Like we should all agree to a set of opinions, and dissent is viewed as something we shouldn't tolerate. I value individual thought much more than collective sentiment.
  • Posts: 6,601
    No, he's just a bit blunt in his remarks. In some ways refreshing to hear. :D
    I always like to cut people a little slack, just as he said it, he probably thought
    It was funny ? How many of us have had that happen ? ........ not me obviously ;)

    Haha... ;;)
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,816
    I must've missed the confirmation from EON that Tom Hiddleston is being groomed for Bond 25.
    Though if Daniel Craig doesn't return, then I'll be happy with Tom.
    The thing that annoys me with any actor who says film making is hard work, yes I'm sure it is. But then normal people don't make millions of dollars for six months, a years work at best. Must be tough. Poor them.
    I love films, and I will be a Bond fan till I die. Personally I'd like to see a more stable series of films. Every two years, three at worst. If they could do it in the 60's, 70's and 80's I really don't see why they can't do it now. After all, it's money in their pocket at the end of the day.
  • edited May 2016 Posts: 6,601
    The funny thing is, DC has been the one taking the most blows on his health with real hurting inuries etc - why? Because he was the one, who jumped into the whole machinery like none of the others. Did he complain by himself? No! Did he answer questions? Yes! Did he say, he wants time with family and that it is hard to be away for months to come? Yes! If that is whining, so be it.

    Now the wrists comment was unnecessary and avoidable, but he did it, just letting it out, what he found, was a stupid question. "If I get silly questions, I give silly answers"
    Like I said, he did pay for that, to this day.

    His tone in interviews ALWAYS was, that he loves what he was doing immensely!!


    So - the press made A LOT out of very little to really screw him up. But its different, if fans do the same. They should know better then that. Just my two...

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Dan's wrist comment was blown out of all proportion by an idiotic media and equally idiotic portion of the general public. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence understood what he meant, but it's a cracking soundbite to hijack if you're a pillock with an agenda.
  • Benny wrote: »
    I must've missed the confirmation from EON that Tom Hiddleston is being groomed for Bond 25.
    Though if Daniel Craig doesn't return, then I'll be happy with Tom.
    The thing that annoys me with any actor who says film making is hard work, yes I'm sure it is. But then normal people don't make millions of dollars for six months, a years work at best. Must be tough. Poor them.


    To be fair, I would say that Craig plays the role more demandingly than any other Bond actor ever did (doing his own stunt work is probably a big factor), at a time where Bond films are at their biggest. I can understand the pressure and maybe even the fatigue and stress that comes with ir, especially considering the "hits" he has made with CR and SF. And you are discounting the fact that Craig has to promote the film afterwards, so it's really 9 months for one film. Which, to be fair, is not bad ar all. But I also get the sense that at this stage Bond is taking too much of his schedule, and as a good actor he wants to move on from that.

    There's also the fact that Craig could probably get some sort of high billing and make a good chunk of money without being Bond, or at least work as hard as being on a Bond film.
    I love films, and I will be a Bond fan till I die. Personally I'd like to see a more stable series of films. Every two years, three at worst. If they could do it in the 60's, 70's and 80's I really don't see why they can't do it now. After all, it's money in their pocket at the end of the day.

    We went two year cycles back then because we can afford to, with the number of unused Fleming material that screenwriters literally adapted from the books. It takes more time to write a Bond film now, with the increased competition and sophistication.

    Plus, filming today is of a different age than the 80's, even the 90's. IMAX conversion takes a good chunk of time. Shooting on location is more difficult, and post-production/CGI is a six month prerequisite.

    Alas, I think if you do want the 2 year cycles to return, you'd need MGM to get off their arse!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    We went two year cycles back then because we can afford to, with the number of unused Fleming material that screenwriters literally adapted from the books. It takes more time to write a Bond film now, with the increased competition and sophistication.

    Plus, filming today is of a different age than the 80's, even the 90's. IMAX conversion takes a good chunk of time. Shooting on location is more difficult, and post-production/CGI is a six month prerequisite.

    Alas, I think if you do want the 2 year cycles to return, you'd need MGM to get off their arse!
    I hear you, but they delivered a cracker of a Bond film (with superior location work - imho) within 2 years in QoS just 8 years ago. I'd take that film in a flash over the most recent effort, which took an extra year to muddle through.

    Other studios are able to churn blockbuster films (and just as good products) within a 2 yr and even 1 yr cycle. So it can definitely be done. I just think they need a crack creative, distribution and studio team behind them.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,976
    In my experience its the ones downplaying it, or acting like its free publicity that have the agenda. Understanding what he meant isn't the media's job. Reporting what he said is.
  • Posts: 6,601
    People are comparing for instance to SW now, that they are at it already. But maybe consider, how LONG it took them to even make the new one. How many years. Its different for all included to do two films back to back more or less, when you haven't done any of them in many years. Plus people seem to forget, that the delays were NOT due to the prods or the actors but to other circumstances. What's so hard to understand? The films were scheduled to get into the theaters earlier. Like they planned all the writer strikes, the MGM misery etc etc. Well, they did not. They were victims of that and tried their best to deal with it, INCLUDING the actors or directors.

    Plus everything karate said.

    Now they have to deal with the distribution rights and maybe a new actor. That's not done in a heartbeat plus, as they all say, life doesn't solely consist of Bond, whether some here like it or not.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    In my experience its the ones downplaying it, or acting like its free publicity that have the agenda. Understanding what he meant isn't the media's job. Reporting what he said is.

    Understanding what he said is the responsibility of the individual, but a lot of people blindly take media drivel at face value.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Their creative team is not quite as good as I'd like it to be. Let's put it that way. They've had business problems yes, mainly on account of MGM, but they can do a much better job creatively as well.

    SW -TFA may have taken a while to come together, but they are getting a move on now with Rogue One and several other products as well as the Marvel entities. We may not like what they give us, but in terms of bang for the buck as a fan, it's impressive.

    As I said, QoS - delivered in 2 yrs flat, even with a writer's strike.

    It can be done, if they want to do it.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,882
    RC7 wrote: »
    In my experience its the ones downplaying it, or acting like its free publicity that have the agenda. Understanding what he meant isn't the media's job. Reporting what he said is.

    Understanding what he said is the responsibility of the individual, but a lot of people blindly take media drivel at face value.

    But if he had worded his answer differently, that storm in a tea cup wouldn't have been blown out of proportion. How hard would it have been for him to say something like "Right now, i'm not thinking about the next Bond film. I'm going to take some time off, then we'll see."
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    In my experience its the ones downplaying it, or acting like its free publicity that have the agenda. Understanding what he meant isn't the media's job. Reporting what he said is.

    Understanding what he said is the responsibility of the individual, but a lot of people blindly take media drivel at face value.

    But if he had worded his answer differently, that storm in a tea cup wouldn't have been blown out of proportion. How hard would it have been for him to say something like "Right now, i'm not thinking about the next Bond film. I'm going to take some time off, then we'll see."
    I tend to agree. He is a highly paid professional, who is the face of one of the most recognizable and famous franchises in the history of movies. He should have known better and he should have been trained to communicate better. It's part of the whole job of being Bond.

    That's also why I said Hiddle will have to stop dancing in public if he becomes Bond. Not because he shouldn't dance (it's his business), but because it will be used against the franchise.

    I almost get the impression DC did that intentionally, to sort of put the nail in the coffin. It may have been subconscious.

    Whether we like it or not, it has been damaging for his Bond tenure more than it has for Bond. If I was EON's marketing dept, I would say he has to go, in order to move forward and reignite energy in the franchise, and remove that misquote from being used whenever Bond is discussed.
Sign In or Register to comment.