› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…603604606608609…2507

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    octofinger wrote: »
    I'll say it: the 'Brits/Commonwealth' rule, if it does indeed exist, is monumentally stupid. Go with the talent, wherever you find it.

    I've been saying this for the longest time. Couldn't agree more.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Okay guys now something more controversial
    I am firmly against a black bond , woman Bond any of that
    I'm a minority but I don't give a shit I want my bond to be pure British white man none of this liberal media crap
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited February 2017 Posts: 8,079
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    QuantumOrganization wrote: »
    We need a great old school action director like Wolfgang Petersen and John Mctiernan.

    McTiernan would be an inspired choice. Can't believe he hasn't got more films to his credit.
    Good director, who I think could handle a Bond film well, and would respect the series.


    McTiernan was in jail until recently.

    And consequently he is finding it hard to get employed.

    Just goes to show, having success doesn't last forever. Eventually your back where you started, or worse.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    Please never never Petersen. I don't think he would be a good Bond-Director.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    John Boorman?
    Phillip Noyce?

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Milovy wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    QuantumOrganization wrote: »
    What were those? Bond and Oberhausen playing poker? Masquerade Ball? Tanner's Suicide?
    Hell no. Those were all awful.

    What I was referring to was the additional elements of Blofeld's backstory, that I believe were in an earlier version of P+W's draft. It involved Franz joining a platoon in the French Foreign Legion called Les Spectres de St. Pierre sometime in the early 1990s. Among the platoon was Mr. White. While partaking in a battle in the Moroccan dessert, a major sandstorm occurs that ends with Oberhauser and White being left for dead by the rest of their platoon. Waltz assumed the name Ernst Stavro Blofeld and, together with Mr. White, formed a crime syndicate called "SPECTRE."
    Wasn't there also something in this draft about Blofeld killing and cannibalizing some of the platoon to stay alive? They should recycle this idea for a future story, would make for a really despicable villain.

    Bond 25 pts perhaps?
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    Certainly time for a Bond-less PTS.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Would love for the B25 PTS to involve Blofeld escaping prison or something among those lines.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    How long after SPECTRE would you want it?
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    For,me ,not BOND25..hold Blofeld back for BOND26.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I want Madeleine off the pages. No revenge story. Personal vendetta maybe for Bond and Blofeld to lock horns and clash for one last time and face closure. Bond kills Blofeld in the end, SPECTRE is exposed and dismantled, Bond gets to be one of MI-6's most respected operatives in the service and gets it on in the end with a woman in bed. No more CRs, Vespers, death of lovers, emotional dilemmas, soap operas and OHMSSs. We've had enough of that in the past ten years.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Milovy wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    QuantumOrganization wrote: »
    What were those? Bond and Oberhausen playing poker? Masquerade Ball? Tanner's Suicide?
    Hell no. Those were all awful.

    What I was referring to was the additional elements of Blofeld's backstory, that I believe were in an earlier version of P+W's draft. It involved Franz joining a platoon in the French Foreign Legion called Les Spectres de St. Pierre sometime in the early 1990s. Among the platoon was Mr. White. While partaking in a battle in the Moroccan dessert, a major sandstorm occurs that ends with Oberhauser and White being left for dead by the rest of their platoon. Waltz assumed the name Ernst Stavro Blofeld and, together with Mr. White, formed a crime syndicate called "SPECTRE."
    Wasn't there also something in this draft about Blofeld killing and cannibalizing some of the platoon to stay alive? They should recycle this idea for a future story, would make for a really despicable villain.

    Bond 25 pts perhaps?

    Exactly my thought.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    They just got the rights back to Blofeld and Spectre. I don't think they'd want to shoot their wad in only two films. Rather, I'm sure they'd want to milk it for all it's worth. If they kill off Blofeld in the next one then they really won't be able to bring him back for some time, lest they confuse the audiences.

    Unless they choose to hard reboot again of course, which would be a terrible idea imho.

    So I'm guessing if Blofeld is back again, he isn't killed off.
  • octofingeroctofinger
    Posts: 787
    I assume so, too - SPECTRE was a slow and expensive 'get' for EON, as was Waltz. So surely they'll want to get more value from it. But then that makes some of the writing decisions in SP odd - why not have Blofeld escape at the end, so that he's free to roam for future scripts?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    octofinger wrote: »
    I assume so, too - SPECTRE was a slow and expensive 'get' for EON, as was Waltz. So surely they'll want to get more value from it. But then that makes some of the writing decisions in SP odd - why not have Blofeld escape at the end, so that he's free to roam for future scripts?
    That's a very good question. I believe it may have had something to do with Craig not being sure whether he wanted to do any more, and also the 'studio situation'.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited February 2017 Posts: 8,079
    It's a big mess at the moment. Nothing is clear. I am just hoping they reboot softly, and we see a new team up in 2019. I'd like to see Gregg Wilson take on a bigger role. let's put this whole Blofeld thing to one side for now, let sleeping dogs lie.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    "Conflicting schedules for MI6 crew" sounds not bad at all. It would be a good opportunity to dump them, hire some good but less-known actors and get back to a decent and meaningful home base for Bond, instead of having the office pros neglecting their posts and trying to imitate Bond.

    I like the current lineup of Fiennes, Harris and Wishaw, so it would be a shame to loose all three.

    My choice for director is still Jaume Collet-Serra.
    I like Naomi Harris, and Fiennes and Wishaw are terrific actors, but if it meant less screen time for their characters, I´d be happy to drop them in an instant.
    On the other hand, them staying would probably mean their characters yet again get too much screen time.

  • SuperintendentSuperintendent A separate pool. For sharks, no less.
    Posts: 871
    Bounine wrote: »
    My god, what great stuff! Whoever chose to get rid of this great material and replace it with the flimsy, god awful foster brother angle must be mentally deranged.

    I'm not so sure that 'foster brother angle' was a replacement for that Blofeld's backstory. More an addition to it. Had they done it, Blofeld would still have been Franz Oberhauser, i.e. Bond's childhood friend (foster brother).

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    It's a big mess at the moment. Nothing is clear. I am just hoping they reboot softly, and we see a new team up in 2019. I'd like to see Gregg Wilson take on a bigger role. let's put this whole Blofeld thing to one side for now, let sleeping dogs lie.

    Be careful what you wish for.
  • Tuck91Tuck91
    Posts: 1,680
    They need to make another film in the vein of Goldeneye. GE is the last truly good movie & "Bond" movie put together. CR was just a good film, not a good cinematic Bond film.

    I also like GE over SF for the fact GE is more visceral & executed better,
  • MilovyMilovy
    Posts: 676
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    They need to make another film in the vein of Goldeneye. GE is the last truly good movie & "Bond" movie put together. CR was just a good film, not a good cinematic Bond film.
    Why not a good cinematic Bond film?
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,864
    As much as I don't think they will, because Bond is all about exploring Bonds psyche now, and plots based on his past or revenge. But I'd like an old formula Bond film. Worked well from 1964-1987.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Benny wrote: »
    As much as I don't think they will, because Bond is all about exploring Bonds psyche now, and plots based on his past or revenge. But I'd like an old formula Bond film. Worked well from 1964-1987 2002.
    Corrected it for you. ;)
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,864
    Personally I feel TLD is where the formula ended. LTK is revenge based. Then from GE onwards they started looking deeper and deeper into Bond. Peeling back the skin if you will. Paris, a woman he loved. The shoulder injury and Elektra in TWINE. Being detained and a suspect briefly in DAD.
    Those films didn't follow the old formula.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    That, I know what you mean. I also rather they kept the personal angle out. But, lest we forget in TLD, Bond refused to assassinate Pushkin because he knew him and predicted the man was not the enemy. Again, something got personal there and M threatened to hand the mission over to another 00 but Bond took the assignment regardless to actually protect Pushkin from immediate signed death warrant and find out if the man is guilty or not on his own. So, I'd say the formula ended in 1985.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    I would argue that all those "explorations" are in keeping with places the series had already gone before, while still overall adhering to the old formula (LTK perhaps being the farthest any of those "explorations" pushed things). In the old films you had Bond bristling over the death of Jill, giving up the service, going after Blofeld against M's orders, getting married, visiting his wife's grave, cold-bloodedly avenging fallen allies, and defying his mission objective in TLD. Yes, the going-rogueness of LTK and DAD pushed things a bit farther than usual, but they were still pretty thoroughly formula films.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Benny wrote: »
    As much as I don't think they will, because Bond is all about exploring Bonds psyche now, and plots based on his past or revenge. But I'd like an old formula Bond film. Worked well from 1964-1987.
    I wouldn´t even mind exploring Bond´s psyche, if it weren´t done so amateurishly and inconsequential, and disturbed by unfittingly bad attempts at humor.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited February 2017 Posts: 8,079
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    They need to make another film in the vein of Goldeneye. GE is the last truly good movie & "Bond" movie put together. CR was just a good film, not a good cinematic Bond film.

    I also like GE over SF for the fact GE is more visceral & executed better,

    I think they should hire Campbell again, recast Bond, and aim to perfect what he tired to do with both his earlier films. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy both films a lot, although they are both slightly off-centre, if you understand me? Goldeneye is just slightly too "jokey action-fest" and Casino is just slightly too "stern drama". Neither film truly nails it. I would love to see a third film from Campbell which attempts to merge the best of both together. There is an interesting space to be explored there, I think. At the same time, it could update things to the more modern times, with a new, more offhand Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    They need to make another film in the vein of Goldeneye. GE is the last truly good movie & "Bond" movie put together. CR was just a good film, not a good cinematic Bond film.
    I agree, if you mean 'formula Bond film'. I've always said that I believe GE was the last great 'formula' Bond film. There was a hint of the personal, yes, but it didn't overwhelm the narrative.

    The standard elements that make a Bond film great were all present and nicely executed with some modern touches. I don't think it's a coincidence that this was the last film made while Cubby was still with us.

    It's the latest EON film that I can watch in that same carefree way in which I enjoy the earlier classics. I agree that it's time for another one of these. We're long overdue.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,079
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    They need to make another film in the vein of Goldeneye. GE is the last truly good movie & "Bond" movie put together. CR was just a good film, not a good cinematic Bond film.
    I agree, if you mean 'formula Bond film'. I've always said that I believe GE was the last great 'formula' Bond film. There was a hint of the personal, yes, but it didn't overwhelm the narrative.

    The standard elements that make a Bond film great were all present and nicely executed with some modern touches. I don't think it's a coincidence that this was the last film made while Cubby was still with us.

    It's the latest EON film that I can watch in that same carefree way in which I enjoy the earlier classics. I agree that it's time for another one of these. We're long overdue.

    Yes, I get that feeling too, but I feel like they should not go back on what we have seen in the Craig era, in terms of that extra realism, either. There is no reason why they should be mutually exclusive. They did the fun adventure Bond with Goldeneye, they did the more realistic portrayal with Casino. The next natural step, the third point on the triangle if you will, is to see what happens when those two sides are combined into one.
Sign In or Register to comment.