No Time To Die: Production Diary

18898908928948952563

Comments

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    He's far to artsy and serious for a franchise that ought to be a pleasure trip.

    Movies of The Dark Knight trilogy and Inception were exactly as serious as a great Bond movie should be.

    I really really wonder where so many of you have gotten the idea that Bond movies should be about drama? After all, that's not the way he became a legend.
    Boggles my mind also!
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 2,115
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I'm trying to remember when the title was announced last time. Was it about ten months prior?

    Announced Dec. 4, 2014. I think filming began Dec. 8.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I'm trying to remember when the title was announced last time. Was it about ten months prior?

    Announced Dec. 4, 2014.
    One of the biggest *yawn* moments in the franchise's illustrious history imho. Hoping for something a little more inspired next time out.
  • Posts: 11,425
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Be careful what you wish for, all those saying that it's time for Craig to go.

    He's one of the best Bond actors we've had, clearly. Craig elevates mediocre material and brings gravitas and credibility that had long been missing from the films.Unless they're about to replace him with Fassbender, I'm not sure there's an obvious replacement out there.

    And with a lightweight actor in the role, it would be very, very easy for things to slip back to the sorry state they were in 2 decades ago.

    If you think SP was bad, then remember it can be a lot, lot worse.
    I can appreciate your fears, especially given the trauma you must have experienced after Dalton moved on in favour of Brosnan.

    There's nothing to be worried about. Unlike Dalton, who dug deep and went gritty for his second film with an inimitable performance like no Bond actor before him, Craig decided to adopt a more conventional style for his last outing, to decidely mixed results (to put it mildly). Even some of his biggest fans have acknowledged that. I don't judge an actor (or a person or a country) by their history or what they did 10 years ago, but rather by what they've done lately. On that score, I won't miss him.

    There's always a risk as you say, but I'm more than willing to take the chance. Moreover, change is good after more than a decade. Sadly, we'll probably have to wait another four years for the announcement based on prior behaviour (one year prior to B26's release).

    Fair enough if you feel that way, but I think you're hatred of SP is blinding you to the fact it's still a perfectly serviceable Bond performance from Craig.

    Bit unfair comparing Dalton's second outing with SP. Surely LTK should be compared with QoS? Plus we never got late Dalton Bond. Who knows where it would have ended up. Probably he would have gone out on a less hard hitting entry.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    edited August 2017 Posts: 1,187
    Filming will begin late 2018

    OMG. Where? Link??

    Jesus calm down mate youre like Pavlov's dog hearing the dinner bell.

    The film is realeased in 2019 so you don't have to be Woodward and Bernstein to surmise it will be filmed late 2018 into early 2019.

    A few more scoops:

    Post production will be done in mid to late 2019.
    The teaser trailer will be released in early to mid 2019.
    The poster will be released in mid to late 2019.

    Fuck sake, can I be......excited and happy??? Man, want me to throw myself off a building?? If you say "Calm Down!" then the same goes for you. No reason to get irritated by someone's sincere excitement!

    Well if if this statement of the obvious excites you I worry for your health when they actually cast anyone or the trailer is released.

    You need to watch your blood pressure because I hear an announcement on who's doing the on set catering is due soon.
    With the result that was SP (which I was very excited about prior to the release), I think I'm going to approach B25 with much less excitement. Rather be positively surprised at the cinema. Still, following the production over the next two years is going to be interesting.

    Absolutely. The lowness of expectation after SP and with the knowledge P&W are back means going in one can only be pleasantly surprised.
    Can you refrain from being a twerp on this thread, starting about now? It seems that is the only type of posts you can make. Surely the mods have thought about banning you?

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Be careful what you wish for, all those saying that it's time for Craig to go.

    He's one of the best Bond actors we've had, clearly. Craig elevates mediocre material and brings gravitas and credibility that had long been missing from the films.Unless they're about to replace him with Fassbender, I'm not sure there's an obvious replacement out there.

    And with a lightweight actor in the role, it would be very, very easy for things to slip back to the sorry state they were in 2 decades ago.

    If you think SP was bad, then remember it can be a lot, lot worse.
    I can appreciate your fears, especially given the trauma you must have experienced after Dalton moved on in favour of Brosnan.

    There's nothing to be worried about. Unlike Dalton, who dug deep and went gritty for his second film with an inimitable performance like no Bond actor before him, Craig decided to adopt a more conventional style for his last outing, to decidely mixed results (to put it mildly). Even some of his biggest fans have acknowledged that. I don't judge an actor (or a person or a country) by their history or what they did 10 years ago, but rather by what they've done lately. On that score, I won't miss him.

    There's always a risk as you say, but I'm more than willing to take the chance. Moreover, change is good after more than a decade. Sadly, we'll probably have to wait another four years for the announcement based on prior behaviour (one year prior to B26's release).

    Fair enough if you feel that way, but I think you're hatred of SP is blinding you to the fact it's still a perfectly serviceable Bond performance from Craig.

    Bit unfair comparing Dalton's second outing with SP. Surely LTK should be compared with QoS? Plus we never got late Dalton Bond. Who knows where it would have ended up. Probably he would have gone out on a less hard hitting entry.
    There's no 'hatred' here. That's not an emotion I'm partial to. Severe disappointment is more like it.

    Serviceable you say? That's a bit generous don't you think? Anyway, I thought we were supposed to be getting a bit more than that, weren't we? That was the whole promise of the Craig era. If I'm supposed to settle for 'serviceable' then let's get a younger actor in the role who can fully live up to cinematic Bond's glamour, style and uniqueness.

    Of course LTK can be compared to QoS. That's not the point I was making. The point is I am not wed to this actor, his interpretation or his direct continuity story and troubles. While a valid argument could be made that Dalton's run was 'cut short' after two years, that he went out on a high (performance wise) and that he didn't have an opportunity to give us everything he could, the same can't be said for Craig. He has been given a chance to play all sides of Bond, just like Brosnan was given a chance.

    Craig is not Tom Cruise. Bond is not his cinematic invention. He started as a rookie with the reboot and has taken the franchise back to the 'old school' style with SP. Now, in the interests of giving the franchise a fresh start after 12 years (since he was originally cast), I personally feel it's time to move on, especially since the whole era has been 'connected' in a tiresome way.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 2,993
    When Nolan talks about
    not hearing the back stories of the soldiers and empathizing simply down to the struggle of the situation at hand, I think that summerizes what has to happen with Bond. Throw him into a situation and make the audience care simply due to the odds being staked against him. That's about as sympathetic as Bond needs to be, and no dialogue is needed to illustrate this. Instead focus on the atmosphere and suspense of the moment. Nolan just lays out how to reinvent Bond after Craig, and he's not speaking on the sane topic. Wow!

    "Empathizing. "Care." "Sympathetic." Yeah...because Bond films need more emotional drama shoved into them after the Craig era.

    It's not "emotional drama" to give a damn about whether your protagonist lives or dies.

    The idea you presented of Bond being outmatched with the odds against him is antithetical to most of film Bond. The films are at their best and most entertaining when Bond is a force to be reckoned with who's kicking ass while being smug and unflinching in the face of danger. Suspense is good, necessary, and enjoyable, but if you're suggesting that Bond should be put in a situation where he's in as seemingly hopeless a situation as the events of Dunkirk, then that would make for one heck of a dreary Bond movie. It a Nolan for me. To each their own though.
    When Nolan talks about
    not hearing the back stories of the soldiers and empathizing simply down to the struggle of the situation at hand, I think that summerizes what has to happen with Bond. Throw him into a situation and make the audience care simply due to the odds being staked against him. That's about as sympathetic as Bond needs to be, and no dialogue is needed to illustrate this. Instead focus on the atmosphere and suspense of the moment. Nolan just lays out how to reinvent Bond after Craig, and he's not speaking on the sane topic. Wow!

    "Empathizing. "Care." "Sympathetic." Yeah...because Bond films need more emotional drama shoved into them after the Craig era.
    Luckily, we don't need to worry about these. Mendes himself very well stated that the producers are already taking a different direction with the next one so however the fans of the emotional dilemmas with "deep meanings" support it, we know the next one won't ever employ that tone and resort to a lighter area with coherent plot than character-driven installment.

    Music to my ears.

    But surely there has to be dramatic tension somewhere along the road. Where's the fun in sitting for 2 hrs and watching someone just cruising? Even in the early Connery films, he would get ruffled and look stressed at how to cope with the situation. In Dr No, for instance he gets plonked down in Jamaica and largely has to work for himself. He has no idea who can be trusted, and he has to exercise caution at every turn, being very careful about who he puts his trust in. Of course Bond always comes out on top, but if he never even breaks a sweat, then the story becomes truly dull for me.

    As I said, suspense is good, necessary, and enjoyable. The examples of drama and suspense in the Connery films that you cite are good, and well balanced in the films overall; they are not all that their respective films have to offer. If Nolan were to do a Bond movie, I fear that it would be a dull, overly serious, overly dramatic slog to sit through, that would put its entire focus on drama. Take Dunkirk for example. If you were to take the tone of that movie and translate it to a Bond movie, you would have exactly the overly dramatic Bond film I don't want. Nolan seems to think of himself as an artist, and cinema as a pure art, to the point where I believe a Nolan Bond movie would likely end up being a very stuffy affair.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Be careful what you wish for, all those saying that it's time for Craig to go.

    He's one of the best Bond actors we've had, clearly. Craig elevates mediocre material and brings gravitas and credibility that had long been missing from the films.Unless they're about to replace him with Fassbender, I'm not sure there's an obvious replacement out there.

    And with a lightweight actor in the role, it would be very, very easy for things to slip back to the sorry state they were in 2 decades ago.

    If you think SP was bad, then remember it can be a lot, lot worse.
    I can appreciate your fears, especially given the trauma you must have experienced after Dalton moved on in favour of Brosnan.

    There's nothing to be worried about. Unlike Dalton, who dug deep and went gritty for his second film with an inimitable performance like no Bond actor before him, Craig decided to adopt a more conventional style for his last outing, to decidely mixed results (to put it mildly). Even some of his biggest fans have acknowledged that. I don't judge an actor (or a person or a country) by their history or what they did 10 years ago, but rather by what they've done lately. On that score, I won't miss him.

    There's always a risk as you say, but I'm more than willing to take the chance. Moreover, change is good after more than a decade. Sadly, we'll probably have to wait another four years for the announcement based on prior behaviour (one year prior to B26's release).

    Fair enough if you feel that way, but I think you're hatred of SP is blinding you to the fact it's still a perfectly serviceable Bond performance from Craig.

    Bit unfair comparing Dalton's second outing with SP. Surely LTK should be compared with QoS? Plus we never got late Dalton Bond. Who knows where it would have ended up. Probably he would have gone out on a less hard hitting entry.
    There's no 'hatred' here. That's not an emotion I'm partial to. Severe disappointment is more like it.

    Serviceable you say? That's a bit generous don't you think? Anyway, I thought we were supposed to be getting a bit more than that, weren't we? That was the whole promise of the Craig era. If I'm supposed to settle for 'serviceable' then let's get a younger actor in the role who can fully live up to cinematic Bond's glamour, style and uniqueness.

    Of course LTK can be compared to QoS. That's not the point I was making. The point is I am not wed to this actor, his interpretation or his direct continuity story and troubles. While a valid argument could be made that Dalton's run was 'cut short' after two years, that he went out on a high (performance wise) and that he didn't have an opportunity to give us everything he could, the same can't be said for Craig. He has been given a chance to play all sides of Bond, just like Brosnan was given a chance.

    Craig is not Tom Cruise. Bond is not his cinematic invention. He started as a rookie with the reboot and has taken the franchise back to the 'old school' style with SP. Now, in the interests of giving the franchise a fresh start after 12 years (since he was originally cast), I personally feel it's time to move on, especially since the whole era has been 'connected' in a tiresome way.

    I think SP and Craig's performance in it are one of the few things you and I seem to disagree on @bondjames but as for the rest, well said. Dalton's era was cut tragically short. With Brosnan you can make a case for him never really getting the film he wanted, since his suggestions about the direction he wanted to take it in were ignored more often than not, and I'd say he deserved a fifth film to rectify that.

    But Craig has pretty much been able to do everything he wants with the role. He's done Fleming esque vulnerability, Dalton esque intensity and in the last two has tapped into the more classic Connery/Moore/Brosnan side of things. He's done funny Bond, suave Bond, angry brutal Bond, mopey alcoholic post tragedy Bond, rookie Bond, old man Bond, etc. Are there really any different facets left that he can tap into while still making it feel like he's playing the same person? He's had an unusual amount of creative control, he was a producer on SP and he got to handpick the director of his last two. He hasn't really had any restrictions, so at this point I think it's fair to say that he's been able to do all he can with the part. So not only does the story of his era feel done but so does his Bond. It's been 12 years. If he comes back he'll have been Bond longer than Moore was. It's time for a change.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Be careful what you wish for, all those saying that it's time for Craig to go.

    He's one of the best Bond actors we've had, clearly. Craig elevates mediocre material and brings gravitas and credibility that had long been missing from the films.Unless they're about to replace him with Fassbender, I'm not sure there's an obvious replacement out there.

    And with a lightweight actor in the role, it would be very, very easy for things to slip back to the sorry state they were in 2 decades ago.

    If you think SP was bad, then remember it can be a lot, lot worse.
    I can appreciate your fears, especially given the trauma you must have experienced after Dalton moved on in favour of Brosnan.

    There's nothing to be worried about. Unlike Dalton, who dug deep and went gritty for his second film with an inimitable performance like no Bond actor before him, Craig decided to adopt a more conventional style for his last outing, to decidely mixed results (to put it mildly). Even some of his biggest fans have acknowledged that. I don't judge an actor (or a person or a country) by their history or what they did 10 years ago, but rather by what they've done lately. On that score, I won't miss him.

    There's always a risk as you say, but I'm more than willing to take the chance. Moreover, change is good after more than a decade. Sadly, we'll probably have to wait another four years for the announcement based on prior behaviour (one year prior to B26's release).

    Fair enough if you feel that way, but I think you're hatred of SP is blinding you to the fact it's still a perfectly serviceable Bond performance from Craig.

    Bit unfair comparing Dalton's second outing with SP. Surely LTK should be compared with QoS? Plus we never got late Dalton Bond. Who knows where it would have ended up. Probably he would have gone out on a less hard hitting entry.
    There's no 'hatred' here. That's not an emotion I'm partial to. Severe disappointment is more like it.

    Serviceable you say? That's a bit generous don't you think? Anyway, I thought we were supposed to be getting a bit more than that, weren't we? That was the whole promise of the Craig era. If I'm supposed to settle for 'serviceable' then let's get a younger actor in the role who can fully live up to cinematic Bond's glamour, style and uniqueness.

    Of course LTK can be compared to QoS. That's not the point I was making. The point is I am not wed to this actor, his interpretation or his direct continuity story and troubles. While a valid argument could be made that Dalton's run was 'cut short' after two years, that he went out on a high (performance wise) and that he didn't have an opportunity to give us everything he could, the same can't be said for Craig. He has been given a chance to play all sides of Bond, just like Brosnan was given a chance.

    Craig is not Tom Cruise. Bond is not his cinematic invention. He started as a rookie with the reboot and has taken the franchise back to the 'old school' style with SP. Now, in the interests of giving the franchise a fresh start after 12 years (since he was originally cast), I personally feel it's time to move on, especially since the whole era has been 'connected' in a tiresome way.

    I think SP and Craig's performance in it are one of the few things you and I seem to disagree on @bondjames but as for the rest, well said. Dalton's era was cut tragically short. With Brosnan you can make a case for him never really getting the film he wanted, since his suggestions about the direction he wanted to take it in were ignored more often than not, and I'd say he deserved a fifth film to rectify that.

    But Craig has pretty much been able to do everything he wants with the role. He's done Fleming esque vulnerability, Dalton esque intensity and in the last two has tapped into the more classic Connery/Moore/Brosnan side of things. He's done funny Bond, suave Bond, angry brutal Bond, mopey alcoholic post tragedy Bond, rookie Bond, old man Bond, etc. Are there really any different facets left that he can tap into while still making it feel like he's playing the same person? He's had an unusual amount of creative control, he was a producer on SP and he got to handpick the director of his last two. He hasn't really had any restrictions, so at this point I think it's fair to say that he's been able to do all he can with the part. So not only does the story of his era feel done but so does his Bond. It's been 12 years. If he comes back he'll have been Bond longer than Moore was. It's time for a change.
    Agreed @thelivingroyale, and I can appreciate your enjoyment of Craig's work in SP. He definitely did his most conventional interpretation of the character there and the film itself recalled past efforts. I get that, even if I didn't enjoy it.

    More than anything and as you said, it's the time that has elapsed which makes me want a change. That and the interconnected nature of his era (connections which I find strained and forced). I just feel that his era is now weighed down, and to suddenly break with that for B25 in order to give him a 'standalone' sendoff (on a high, as some of his fans want) seems a bit excessive.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,425
    Dangerous radicalism!

    This is the kind of irresponsible attitude that gave us Brexit and Trump.

    I am a small c conservative of the 'if it ain't broke' school of thought.

    While I can see that some might argue Bond is broke (taking it a bit far IMO), I am not convinced anyone at EON has the tools or energy to fix it.

    So best to stick with the best Bond in two decades IMO.

    Tinkering by Babs and Purvis and Wade will only lead to more serious engine failure.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 4,619
    He's far to artsy and serious for a franchise that ought to be a pleasure trip.

    Movies of The Dark Knight trilogy and Inception were exactly as serious as a great Bond movie should be.

    I really really wonder where so many of you have gotten the idea that Bond movies should be about drama? After all, that's not the way he became a legend.
    I really really wonder where so many of you have gotten the idea that Nolan's big budget movies are dreary dramas. Inception or Batman Begins might be serious, but at the same time they are more fun than most Bond movies.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Perhaps a Nolan appreciate thread required. I can't see him direct a Craig Bond film. If he is to step in it will be a total reboot with his own leading man. I note nothing official on Craig's return but for me it's given he will. What happens after 25 who knows but that another 5 year down the line.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Perhaps a Nolan appreciate thread required. I can't see him direct a Craig Bond film. If he is to step in it will be a total reboot with his own leading man.
    Fully agreed and that is the way it should be. If it's Nolan he will control the vision. Not the lead actor.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Yes and I look forward to it - in 5 or 6 years
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I know a lot of people credit Fiennes with objecting to M being the mole in the early draft of SP. I'm not one of them because I think even though 'M as mole' would have been predictable, it would have avoided the requirement for that loser 'C' and may have resulted in some decent face to face scenes between Fiennes and Waltz.

    What I'm curious to know is what did co-producer Craig have to say about that or 'brother' or the rest of it? He certainly was quite involved in this whole thing. Is there anything written anywhere about what Craig objected to?

    Just curious.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    edited August 2017 Posts: 1,756
    Getafix wrote: »
    Dangerous radicalism!

    This is the kind of irresponsible attitude that gave us Brexit and Trump.

    I am a small c conservative of the 'if it ain't broke' school of thought.

    While I can see that some might argue Bond is broke (taking it a bit far IMO), I am not convinced anyone at EON has the tools or energy to fix it.

    So best to stick with the best Bond in two decades IMO.

    Tinkering by Babs and Purvis and Wade will only lead to more serious engine failure.

    If it ain't broke, it's boring. EON should be looking to continuously improve. CR was one of the best Bond films, it broke the mold. That's what helps Bond survive.

    Pierce's movies post-Goldeneye and Spectre are lackluster, because when you rely too much on formula and "the way things used to be" you end up with a self-parody which was Spectre and DAD. That's why Austin Powers was so successful, it reflected people's sediments on the Bond films at the time.

    Whatever Bond does next, it needs to be fresh. But knowing how sentimental Babs gets, I'm ready for disappointment. So I partially agree and disagree.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    edited August 2017 Posts: 5,172
    Nolan reaffirming once more that he would be on board if EoN ever wants him.


    (22:44)

    even though i have some reservations about him (for Bond), i almost feel like it's inevitable that he'll do it at some point

    but for gods sake, let us have some fun and straight forward Bond Movies before he takes over
  • Posts: 630
    Having just rewatched TWINE again last week, I have to say I'm a fan, too, but Denise Richards' delivery leaves something to be desired at times.

    Watched Sicario yesterday to check out Villeneuve. He would definitely make an interesting Bond, but I don't see it happening with all his other commitments. You never know, though. I would be happy to see Deakins return with him. Not a fan of scores that drone, so I would hope that would mean no Zimmer or Johannsson.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,117
    00Agent wrote: »
    Nolan reaffirming once more that he would be on board if EoN ever wants him.


    (22:44)

    even though i have some reservations about him (for Bond), i almost feel like it's inevitable that he'll do it at some point

    but for gods sake, let us have some fun and straight forward Bond Movies before he takes over

    Interesting that he references the 70's Bonds. Everyone's assuming a Nolan Bond would simply be more SF but perhaps he's imagining an extravagant Roger style romp?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,331
    00Agent wrote: »
    Nolan reaffirming once more that he would be on board if EoN ever wants him.


    (22:44)

    even though i have some reservations about him (for Bond), i almost feel like it's inevitable that he'll do it at some point

    but for gods sake, let us have some fun and straight forward Bond Movies before he takes over

    Interesting that he references the 70's Bonds. Everyone's assuming a Nolan Bond would simply be more SF but perhaps he's imagining an extravagant Roger style romp?

    That's because people make the easiest connection possible and run with it.

    BTW, does anyone else think its strange we haven't had a follow up announcement yet?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    00Agent wrote: »
    Nolan reaffirming once more that he would be on board if EoN ever wants him.


    (22:44)

    even though i have some reservations about him (for Bond), i almost feel like it's inevitable that he'll do it at some point

    but for gods sake, let us have some fun and straight forward Bond Movies before he takes over

    Interesting that he references the 70's Bonds. Everyone's assuming a Nolan Bond would simply be more SF but perhaps he's imagining an extravagant Roger style romp?

    That's because people make the easiest connection possible and run with it.

    BTW, does anyone else think its strange we haven't had a follow up announcement yet?
    I'm still watching the interview. Fascinating stuff and he's obviously a very detail oriented man. His discussion of the technicalities of film vs. digital was especially interesting.

    Regarding 70's Bond: that is precisely what I assumed (and mentioned a few weeks back) based firstly on his age and based secondly on what I could glean from his own films.

    EDIT: The follow up announcement is apparently expected in late Aug/early Sep.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Filming will begin late 2018

    OMG. Where? Link??

    Jesus calm down mate youre like Pavlov's dog hearing the dinner bell.

    The film is realeased in 2019 so you don't have to be Woodward and Bernstein to surmise it will be filmed late 2018 into early 2019.

    A few more scoops:

    Post production will be done in mid to late 2019.
    The teaser trailer will be released in early to mid 2019.
    The poster will be released in mid to late 2019.

    Fuck sake, can I be......excited and happy??? Man, want me to throw myself off a building?? If you say "Calm Down!" then the same goes for you. No reason to get irritated by someone's sincere excitement!

    Well if if this statement of the obvious excites you I worry for your health when they actually cast anyone or the trailer is released.

    You need to watch your blood pressure because I hear an announcement on who's doing the on set catering is due soon.
    With the result that was SP (which I was very excited about prior to the release), I think I'm going to approach B25 with much less excitement. Rather be positively surprised at the cinema. Still, following the production over the next two years is going to be interesting.

    Absolutely. The lowness of expectation after SP and with the knowledge P&W are back means going in one can only be pleasantly surprised.
    Can you refrain from being a twerp on this thread, starting about now? It seems that is the only type of posts you can make. Surely the mods have thought about banning you?

    Unlikely. It was before your time, but Wiz was once voted one of the top 5 c***** on the board. I have to say I was delighted to finish above him, although I'm not convinced it was entirely deserved. In context this is rather polite. The mods don't ban sarcasm. Cheer up, old boy.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,238
    Judge Rules MGM Must Face Lawsuit Over James Bond Box Set Missing Two Bond Films
    hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/judge-rejects-mgms-bid-toss-lawsuit-james-bond-box-set-missing-two-bond-films-1026846

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 35,458
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Judge Rules MGM Must Face Lawsuit Over James Bond Box Set Missing Two Bond Films
    hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/judge-rejects-mgms-bid-toss-lawsuit-james-bond-box-set-missing-two-bond-films-1026846

    Surely it doesn't take a Bond expert to be able to Google search some more information about the boxset. A ten second search would've told her everything she needed to know.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,116
    Christ this is the last thing MGM needs. :O
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    Filming will begin late 2018

    OMG. Where? Link??

    Jesus calm down mate youre like Pavlov's dog hearing the dinner bell.

    The film is realeased in 2019 so you don't have to be Woodward and Bernstein to surmise it will be filmed late 2018 into early 2019.

    A few more scoops:

    Post production will be done in mid to late 2019.
    The teaser trailer will be released in early to mid 2019.
    The poster will be released in mid to late 2019.

    Fuck sake, can I be......excited and happy??? Man, want me to throw myself off a building?? If you say "Calm Down!" then the same goes for you. No reason to get irritated by someone's sincere excitement!

    Well if if this statement of the obvious excites you I worry for your health when they actually cast anyone or the trailer is released.

    You need to watch your blood pressure because I hear an announcement on who's doing the on set catering is due soon.
    With the result that was SP (which I was very excited about prior to the release), I think I'm going to approach B25 with much less excitement. Rather be positively surprised at the cinema. Still, following the production over the next two years is going to be interesting.

    Absolutely. The lowness of expectation after SP and with the knowledge P&W are back means going in one can only be pleasantly surprised.
    Can you refrain from being a twerp on this thread, starting about now? It seems that is the only type of posts you can make. Surely the mods have thought about banning you?

    Unlikely. It was before your time, but Wiz was once voted one of the top 5 c***** on the board. I have to say I was delighted to finish above him, although I'm not convinced it was entirely deserved. In context this is rather polite. The mods don't ban sarcasm. Cheer up, old boy.

    Can't remember who won, just the crushing disappointment that it was neither of us. Pretty sure that was underserved too.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,331
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Judge Rules MGM Must Face Lawsuit Over James Bond Box Set Missing Two Bond Films
    hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/judge-rejects-mgms-bid-toss-lawsuit-james-bond-box-set-missing-two-bond-films-1026846

    Could this be the disruption that delays production, and leads to another soft reboot? Hehe unlikely, but it would be kinda funny if that happened.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Judge Rules MGM Must Face Lawsuit Over James Bond Box Set Missing Two Bond Films
    hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/judge-rejects-mgms-bid-toss-lawsuit-james-bond-box-set-missing-two-bond-films-1026846

    Could this be the disruption that delays production, and leads to another soft reboot? Hehe unlikely, but it would be kinda funny if that happened.
    The plaintiff has a point in my view, strictly speaking. The judge made the right call.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,331
    bondjames wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Judge Rules MGM Must Face Lawsuit Over James Bond Box Set Missing Two Bond Films
    hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/judge-rejects-mgms-bid-toss-lawsuit-james-bond-box-set-missing-two-bond-films-1026846

    Could this be the disruption that delays production, and leads to another soft reboot? Hehe unlikely, but it would be kinda funny if that happened.
    The plaintiff has a point in my view, strictly speaking. The judge made the right call.

    So they can't start production until this is sorted? I have no idea about this stuff. It would be funny if something like this ended up disrupting production somehow.
Sign In or Register to comment.