No Time To Die: Production Diary

1214621472149215121522507

Comments


  • That looks a better fit to me. The other rumoured Norwegian location was nice, but fairly generic (it could've been Canada, the northern USA, other parts of Scandinavia, etc.). For me, if they're going to use Norway at all - and I very much hope they do - they should really go for dramatic landscapes.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 820
    Can anyone tell us how long into the year the snow would be expected to hang in there at these locations?

    Granted, they'd be beautiful in the spring/summer as well. But these are striking winter-themed locales if the production can get there on time.

    EDIT: A quick Google search shows that village is a ski resort, so...
  • Posts: 14,831
    octofinger wrote: »

    That looks a better fit to me. The other rumoured Norwegian location was nice, but fairly generic (it could've been Canada, the northern USA, other parts of Scandinavia, etc.). For me, if they're going to use Norway at all - and I very much hope they do - they should really go for dramatic landscapes.

    Norway is far less generic than any part of the USA and Canada, surely.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    Can anyone tell us how long into the year the snow would be expected to hang in there at these locations?

    .

    At Beitostølen, the skiing season lasts until May.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    Ludovico wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »

    That looks a better fit to me. The other rumoured Norwegian location was nice, but fairly generic (it could've been Canada, the northern USA, other parts of Scandinavia, etc.). For me, if they're going to use Norway at all - and I very much hope they do - they should really go for dramatic landscapes.

    Norway is far less generic than any part of the USA and Canada, surely.

    Then there’s a great deal of the USA and Canada that you’ve never seen.

  • Posts: 820
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    Can anyone tell us how long into the year the snow would be expected to hang in there at these locations?

    .

    At Beitostølen, the skiing season lasts until May.

    Well that's neat...thank you!
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    EDIT: A quick Google search shows that village is a ski resort, so...
    Take all these individual pieces: an older Craig, snowy Norway rumored for the PTS and at a ski resort no less, a currently trendy actor rumored for the role of lead villain and a popular black actress we’re hoping is being considered for a henchwoman, and it all begins to sound a bit like... A View to a Kill.

    CJF’s first Bond film? A View to a Kill.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 17,290
    Minion wrote: »
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    EDIT: A quick Google search shows that village is a ski resort, so...
    Take all these individual pieces: an older Craig, snowy Norway rumored for the PTS and at a ski resort no less, a currently trendy actor rumored for the role of lead villain and a popular black actress we’re hoping is being considered for a henchwoman, and it all begins to sound a bit like... A View to a Kill.

    CJF’s first Bond film? A View to a Kill.

    The younger villain against an older Bond certainly has an AVTAK vibe over it. Wonderful! :-D
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 7,500
    Getafix wrote: »
    They were good character actors not well known outside their own home countries.

    This is a model Bond should always follow IMO.

    Mikkelson is excellent as Le Chiffre. A good unshowy villain.

    I personally didn't mind Amelrics turn in QOS although I understand why people are underwhelmed.

    David Harbour was a great bit of casting in QOS as well - look whats happened to his career.

    I struggle to think of any equally satisfying casting in SF and SP. Some good actors were cast in barely speaking roles which seems a real waste.

    Ola Rapace was wasted in that non-speaking role in SF. They could at least have given him a couple of lines.
    "Who do you work for? Who do you work for?"
    "Cai-Cai-Cairo!"

    Edited! Forgot about that.

    Edit 2: I've clearly not woken up yet :))
    In an alternate scene, he says "Mac-Mac-Macau!!".

    Better than nothing!


    I think that scene in Shanghai is the best scene in Skyfall and one of the best in the entire series. Pure gold! I wouldn't change anything about it.

    The key thing which makes the first half of Skyfall tic, is the mystery about it. A silent henchman leaving no verbal clues is perfect!
  • Posts: 17,290
    jobo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    They were good character actors not well known outside their own home countries.

    This is a model Bond should always follow IMO.

    Mikkelson is excellent as Le Chiffre. A good unshowy villain.

    I personally didn't mind Amelrics turn in QOS although I understand why people are underwhelmed.

    David Harbour was a great bit of casting in QOS as well - look whats happened to his career.

    I struggle to think of any equally satisfying casting in SF and SP. Some good actors were cast in barely speaking roles which seems a real waste.

    Ola Rapace was wasted in that non-speaking role in SF. They could at least have given him a couple of lines.
    "Who do you work for? Who do you work for?"
    "Cai-Cai-Cairo!"

    Edited! Forgot about that.

    Edit 2: I've clearly not woken up yet :))
    In an alternate scene, he says "Mac-Mac-Macau!!".

    Better than nothing!


    I think that scene in Shanghai is the best scene in Skyfall and one of the best in the entire series. Pure gold! I wouldn't change anything about it.

    The key thing which makes the first half of Skyfall tic, is the mystery about it. A silent henchman leaving no verbal clues is perfect!

    Not going to disagree with this, it's just that I hate actors and actresses being wasted in small or non-speaking roles. SF managed to do that with both Ola Rapace and Bérénice Marlohe…
  • Posts: 7,500
    jobo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    They were good character actors not well known outside their own home countries.

    This is a model Bond should always follow IMO.

    Mikkelson is excellent as Le Chiffre. A good unshowy villain.

    I personally didn't mind Amelrics turn in QOS although I understand why people are underwhelmed.

    David Harbour was a great bit of casting in QOS as well - look whats happened to his career.

    I struggle to think of any equally satisfying casting in SF and SP. Some good actors were cast in barely speaking roles which seems a real waste.

    Ola Rapace was wasted in that non-speaking role in SF. They could at least have given him a couple of lines.
    "Who do you work for? Who do you work for?"
    "Cai-Cai-Cairo!"

    Edited! Forgot about that.

    Edit 2: I've clearly not woken up yet :))
    In an alternate scene, he says "Mac-Mac-Macau!!".

    Better than nothing!


    I think that scene in Shanghai is the best scene in Skyfall and one of the best in the entire series. Pure gold! I wouldn't change anything about it.

    The key thing which makes the first half of Skyfall tic, is the mystery about it. A silent henchman leaving no verbal clues is perfect!

    Not going to disagree with this, it's just that I hate actors and actresses being wasted in small or non-speaking roles. SF managed to do that with both Ola Rapace and Bérénice Marlohe…

    So your logic is that it is better to cast bad actors? ;)
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 17,290
    jobo wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    They were good character actors not well known outside their own home countries.

    This is a model Bond should always follow IMO.

    Mikkelson is excellent as Le Chiffre. A good unshowy villain.

    I personally didn't mind Amelrics turn in QOS although I understand why people are underwhelmed.

    David Harbour was a great bit of casting in QOS as well - look whats happened to his career.

    I struggle to think of any equally satisfying casting in SF and SP. Some good actors were cast in barely speaking roles which seems a real waste.

    Ola Rapace was wasted in that non-speaking role in SF. They could at least have given him a couple of lines.
    "Who do you work for? Who do you work for?"
    "Cai-Cai-Cairo!"

    Edited! Forgot about that.

    Edit 2: I've clearly not woken up yet :))
    In an alternate scene, he says "Mac-Mac-Macau!!".

    Better than nothing!


    I think that scene in Shanghai is the best scene in Skyfall and one of the best in the entire series. Pure gold! I wouldn't change anything about it.

    The key thing which makes the first half of Skyfall tic, is the mystery about it. A silent henchman leaving no verbal clues is perfect!

    Not going to disagree with this, it's just that I hate actors and actresses being wasted in small or non-speaking roles. SF managed to do that with both Ola Rapace and Bérénice Marlohe…

    So your logic is that it is better to cast bad actors? ;)

    Maybe…? :-D
    I guess anyone with the right look could have played Patrice, by the way the character was presented. Bérénice Marlohe's Sévérine was the best thing about SF IMO, but was killed off early – so that's a bit different.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Minion wrote: »
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    EDIT: A quick Google search shows that village is a ski resort, so...
    Take all these individual pieces: an older Craig, snowy Norway rumored for the PTS and at a ski resort no less, a currently trendy actor rumored for the role of lead villain and a popular black actress we’re hoping is being considered for a henchwoman, and it all begins to sound a bit like... A View to a Kill.

    CJF’s first Bond film? A View to a Kill.

    The younger villain against an older Bond certainly has an AVTAK vibe over it. Wonderful! :-D

    Didn't even connect that dot! Even better :-D
  • Posts: 17,290
    Minion wrote: »
    Minion wrote: »
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    EDIT: A quick Google search shows that village is a ski resort, so...
    Take all these individual pieces: an older Craig, snowy Norway rumored for the PTS and at a ski resort no less, a currently trendy actor rumored for the role of lead villain and a popular black actress we’re hoping is being considered for a henchwoman, and it all begins to sound a bit like... A View to a Kill.

    CJF’s first Bond film? A View to a Kill.

    The younger villain against an older Bond certainly has an AVTAK vibe over it. Wonderful! :-D

    Didn't even connect that dot! Even better :-D

    Had a great time watching AVTAK only last night, and I can definitely see the age gap between Bond and the villain providing us with some great moments.
  • Posts: 14,831
    talos7 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »

    That looks a better fit to me. The other rumoured Norwegian location was nice, but fairly generic (it could've been Canada, the northern USA, other parts of Scandinavia, etc.). For me, if they're going to use Norway at all - and I very much hope they do - they should really go for dramatic landscapes.

    Norway is far less generic than any part of the USA and Canada, surely.

    Then there’s a great deal of the USA and Canada that you’ve never seen.

    Yes but that's not the point: the USA has often been done, obviously in many movies. And Canada was often used to pass as the US in movies and TV series. In any case, Norway is much more exotic and lesser seen in movies. Hence my comment.
  • Minion wrote: »
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    EDIT: A quick Google search shows that village is a ski resort, so...
    Take all these individual pieces: an older Craig, snowy Norway rumored for the PTS and at a ski resort no less, a currently trendy actor rumored for the role of lead villain and a popular black actress we’re hoping is being considered for a henchwoman, and it all begins to sound a bit like... A View to a Kill.

    CJF’s first Bond film? A View to a Kill.

    The younger villain against an older Bond certainly has an AVTAK vibe over it. Wonderful! :-D

    I love this line of thought! Here's hoping. Just need a Barry-esqe score and we're all set.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited February 2019 Posts: 4,554
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Great news about Norway.

    I still hope Malik is just a rumour. He looks too youthful and can't picture him as being menacing against Craig. If he is cast as the villain I'll be open to the idea of course, but I can't say I like it now.

    Now about the Shatterhand title, and I know it is probably just a rumour gone wild. But I have an hypothesis : could it be a working title "promoted" to official title?

    But let's be honest. How many Bond villains truly are menacing, especially in a physical sense? Few of them could actually stand toe-to-toe with Bond.

    Dr. No? Menacing only because of his metal hands. I'll say no.
    Red Grant? YES. But is he a villain or a henchman? Rosa Kleib? Only because of a poisonous shoe.
    Goldfinger? The man is overweight and has a serious case of the yips on the golf course.
    Largo? Another overweight villain. He only looks like a badass because of his eye patch.
    Blofeld (Pleasence)? No. He's ugly. That's it.
    Blofeld (Savalas)? YES.
    Blofeld (Gray)? Absolutely not.
    Mr. Big. YES. I'l buy this.
    Scaramanga? YES.
    Stromberg? Seriously? No.
    Drax? No.
    Kristatos? Maybe. But I'll lean no.
    Kamal Khan? Puhleeeze.
    Zorin? Absolutely.
    Koskov? Not really, no.
    Sanchez? I'll lean YES.
    Trevelyan? Absolutely. YES.
    Carver? Nope.
    Renard? YES.
    Graves? Toss up. I'll go with YES because of the fencing duel.
    LeChiffre? No. The guy is a wimp, true colors seen when his mistress is threatened.
    Greene? No.
    Silva: YES. He's a former agent.
    Blofeld (Waltz): No.

    Point is, most of these men are threatening because of the muscle behind them. Goldfinger and Odd Job, for example. I can absolutely see Malik as one of these deviant brilliant villains, propped up by wealth and a henchman.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited February 2019 Posts: 5,979
    Getafix wrote: »
    smitty wrote: »
    Have been reading but not posting for a long while. Agree with some references about problems with Fiennes in SP. Logan’s script had Fiennes as a double agent, a not unique occurance in past British intelligence history. It would have added extra tension to the script, not to mention kept it tighter. But Fiennes refused to play the villain in the script as written, and EON very unwisely caved in to him. The script had to undergo a major rewrite to create C to allow the crucial plot point to move forward.

    I always thought it was a critical mistake for EON not to deal with Fiennes ego. The character of C added wasted screen time and extra narrative to accommodate the last minute script contrivance rewrite and no doubt the script rewrite added greatly to the chaos surrounding the development of SP. It weakened the entire film, particularly the last half. Hopefully Bond 25 will give us less M, and more Bond.

    Very well said. Casting someone who won't do what they're told is not good casting.
    To be fair to Fiennes, he wasn't wrong about it being an awful idea either, though.
    Agreed.

    I agree. I'm not sure that making Fiennes a traitor immediately in SP, after just having introduced him in SF, would have worked. I wouldn't want a series of revolving Ms. This isn't The Prisoner. #besttvseriesever

    Making Tanner the traitor would have been more dramatically satisfying as he's been around in Craig's era longer, and it would have the added bonus of culling the ranks of MI6 a bit. Now, Tanner as traitor would go against Fleming canon but since when is that a goal of Eon's? As an example, they killed Mathis! (I loved Kitchen in GE but that was so long ago, and Eon has been as erratic with Tanner as they have been with Leiter.)

    So yeah, I'm coming down on the side of: they should have killed Tanner in SP.

    I think most if not all of us would agree that the C character didn't work and that they either should have dropped this traitor storyline entirely or fleshed it out more.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 17,290
    Minion wrote: »
    AgentM72 wrote: »
    EDIT: A quick Google search shows that village is a ski resort, so...
    Take all these individual pieces: an older Craig, snowy Norway rumored for the PTS and at a ski resort no less, a currently trendy actor rumored for the role of lead villain and a popular black actress we’re hoping is being considered for a henchwoman, and it all begins to sound a bit like... A View to a Kill.

    CJF’s first Bond film? A View to a Kill.

    The younger villain against an older Bond certainly has an AVTAK vibe over it. Wonderful! :-D

    I love this line of thought! Here's hoping. Just need a Barry-esqe score and we're all set.

    I'm really looking forward to finding out who the composer for B25 is. Hopefully we'll know in a few weeks time!
  • Posts: 12,269
    Really hopeful we get an awesome skiing scene in Norway for the film. Last skiing sequence was TWINE’s, and that was not particularly great IMO.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 2019 Posts: 5,869
    echo wrote: »
    I think most if not all of us would agree that the C character didn't work and that they either should have dropped this traitor storyline entirely or fleshed it out more.
    I think it should've been dropped. It just once again completely undermined MI6, and makes you think about how they should really investigate the people they work with a little more closely. After the first three films, you'd they would learn from past mistakes, plus if they had cut C and the whole subplot, it would've given much more time to develop characters like Oberhauser and Madeleine Swann. Let's just hope Bond 25 doesn't have another mole or betrayal storyline because if it does, the MI6 of the Craig-era would probably become, even more so, the mostly inept spy agency we've seen.
  • RC7RC7
    edited February 2019 Posts: 10,512
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Really hopeful we get an awesome skiing scene in Norway for the film. Last skiing sequence was TWINE’s, and that was not particularly great IMO.

    It was poor. FYEO on the other hand...

    However - Dan doesn’t ski so I can’t see it. They contemplated it in SP.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    edited February 2019 Posts: 1,165
    echo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    smitty wrote: »
    Have been reading but not posting for a long while. Agree with some references about problems with Fiennes in SP. Logan’s script had Fiennes as a double agent, a not unique occurance in past British intelligence history. It would have added extra tension to the script, not to mention kept it tighter. But Fiennes refused to play the villain in the script as written, and EON very unwisely caved in to him. The script had to undergo a major rewrite to create C to allow the crucial plot point to move forward.

    I always thought it was a critical mistake for EON not to deal with Fiennes ego. The character of C added wasted screen time and extra narrative to accommodate the last minute script contrivance rewrite and no doubt the script rewrite added greatly to the chaos surrounding the development of SP. It weakened the entire film, particularly the last half. Hopefully Bond 25 will give us less M, and more Bond.

    Very well said. Casting someone who won't do what they're told is not good casting.
    To be fair to Fiennes, he wasn't wrong about it being an awful idea either, though.
    Agreed.

    I agree. I'm not sure that making Fiennes a traitor immediately in SP, after just having introduced him in SF, would have worked. I wouldn't want a series of revolving Ms. This isn't The Prisoner. #besttvseriesever

    Making Tanner the traitor would have been more dramatically satisfying as he's been around in Craig's era longer, and it would have the added bonus of culling the ranks of MI6 a bit. Now, Tanner as traitor would go against Fleming canon but since when is that a goal of Eon's? As an example, they killed Mathis! (I loved Kitchen in GE but that was so long ago, and Eon has been as erratic with Tanner as they have been with Leiter.)

    So yeah, I'm coming down on the side of: they should have killed Tanner in SP.

    I think most if not all of us would agree that the C character didn't work and that they either should have dropped this traitor storyline entirely or fleshed it out more.

    100% agree. Watch SPECTRE again and skip all the C bits and you'll find its a significantly stronger experience.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    Ludovico wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »

    That looks a better fit to me. The other rumoured Norwegian location was nice, but fairly generic (it could've been Canada, the northern USA, other parts of Scandinavia, etc.). For me, if they're going to use Norway at all - and I very much hope they do - they should really go for dramatic landscapes.

    Norway is far less generic than any part of the USA and Canada, surely.

    Then there’s a great deal of the USA and Canada that you’ve never seen.

    Yes but that's not the point: the USA has often been done, obviously in many movies. And Canada was often used to pass as the US in movies and TV series. In any case, Norway is much more exotic and lesser seen in movies. Hence my comment.

    This is debatable...

  • Posts: 12,269
    RC7 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Really hopeful we get an awesome skiing scene in Norway for the film. Last skiing sequence was TWINE’s, and that was not particularly great IMO.

    It was poor. FYEO on the other hand...

    However - Dan doesn’t ski so I can’t see it. They contemplated it in SP.

    Never too late to learn? Or they could leave it to the stuntman. I’m certainly all for it. The skiing scenes in OHMSS, TSWLM, and FYEO are a lot of fun.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The problem with C is that it was telegraphed from the off. If you want a ‘mole’, that’s completely fine, if a little cliched, but don’t cast Moriarty.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,979
    RC7 wrote: »
    The problem with C is that it was telegraphed from the off. If you want a ‘mole’, that’s completely fine, if a little cliched, but don’t cast Moriarty.

    Agreed. That's why Tanner would have been a better choice. Who would suspect him?
  • Posts: 1,680
    This is going to be a weird bond film I can tell already.
Sign In or Register to comment.