No Time To Die: Production Diary

18958968989009012563

Comments

  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 979
    Roadphill wrote: »
    There was nothing wrong with Waltz's performance. He just needed a little more screentime. He wasnt helped by millions of fans simultaneously rolling there eyes at his personal connection with Bond.

    That wasn't the actors fault, just ham fisted, melodramatic story telling by the production team. Unfortunately I think even Daniel Day Lewis and Orson Welles love child would have had trouble saving that "twist".

    Pardon? Blofeld a neurotic and jealous weeper with daddy issues and nothing wrong with it? Actually this is the Bond film about a spoiled brat "super" villain meeting a secret agent with mommy issues. In short, all I ever wanted to see in a Bond movie.

    Like I said, not the actors fault, poor writing and storytelling.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,341
    Something that occurred to recently is - if EON are selling up with the next film, why not just do it now? Sure they might make a pretty penny on B25, but a cashgrab is a very risky move when it could result in devaluing a franchise that you happen to be looking for a buyer for. Either they are super confident that the next film will add value to the franchise as a whole, or they don't care and want to end their run of Bond films how they want, and be damned if they get a lower price in a couple of years.

    Either that, or maybe this "one picture deal" is quietly a handover to the intended buyer.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 10,945
    Or they're not selling. I don't expect they are.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    edited August 2017 Posts: 979
    I think the best course of action would be a clean sweep, standalone mission. Throw in an offhand comment about Blofeld still being incarcerated and Bond leaving Madeline early, and lets forget the po faced nonsense we have had for the last 3 films.

    Please EON give us a good old fashioned Bond film.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited August 2017 Posts: 3,157
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.

    I wonder why people expected to be surprised as if there absolutely HAS to be a twist they hadn't seen coming up. That's why I always considered it a Jekyll and Hyde twist.

    If they wanted no twist, then why didn't they announce that Waltz played Blofeld? Clearly, they wanted us to be surprised.
    shamanimal wrote: »
    If they had done it well with Blofeld explaining it all in detail over dinner then it might have been ok but I'm afraid merely 'Quantum, Greene, Silva it was all me James' was just lamentable.

    I remember reading Devil May Care, and M says something like "this is the most dangerous villain we've come across James", and it's just left there to be supposed. And it's the same with Spectre. As you rightly point out, "it was all me" isn't enough. The viewer has no emotion invested in hating the villain. You just don't care.

    I completely agree. That's one of SPECTRE's main issues.

    shamanimal wrote: »
    What was the Mission Impossible film where the villain shoots Tom Cruise's wife/lover at the start? Then the main movie is a flashback. Wow, that's a way to set up a villain.


    You mean the way Fleming did with Blofeld back in the '60s?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.

    I wonder why people expected to be surprised as if there absolutely HAS to be a twist they hadn't seen coming up. That's why I always considered it a Jekyll and Hyde twist.

    If they wanted no twist, then why didn't they announce that Waltz played Blofeld? Clearly, they wanted us to be surprised.
    Which is rather hilarious when one thinks about it. The fact that they would think it would be a twist. Goes to show we really need a shake up over there because how anyone let this one out in this state (especially given how many people were involved and how much they were paid) is completely beyond my comprehension.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 10,945
    Much different than
    the death of Vesper being a twist.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2017 Posts: 11,120
    I've heard over time:
    The arc was finished with CASINO ROYALE.
    The arc was finished with QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
    The arc was finished with SKYFALL.
    The arc was finished with SPECTRE.
    So I'm seeing a pattern.

    I agree on all but Spectre. CR and QoS basically had the same ending: this is the Bond we know, we've just seen him become the man from the other films. Then in SF he starts off in his prime but straight away becomes a shadow of his former self, spends the whole film getting back to where he was until at the end we again get another "classic Bond is back" ending.

    SP had a different arc entirely. It wasn't about Bond becoming 007 (CR, QoS) or rebecoming 007 (SF), it was about him giving it up.

    Mendes really crippled the Craig era creatively. After CR this era was full of so much promise, heck even SF is largely forgivable and what it offered should have been left there as well as Mendes' contribution to the series. What were EoN thinking? They've been doing this long enough now and they know who the draw is and as great as Craig is l'm sorry but it's NOT him. Never has and never was. If Bond can survive Connery, Moore and Brosnan then Craig's overstated value placed upon by EoN just perplexes me.

    I love Craig in the role but given what's transpired I'm ambivalent about his return and quite frankly I'm indifferent towards Bond's future until I see a Bond film that finally delivers on the hype after so long and makes the character and his world enticingly great again. I'm so bored with the disappointment and not just that but the disappointment after frequent lengthy gaps.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2017 Posts: 15,534
    bondjames wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.

    I wonder why people expected to be surprised as if there absolutely HAS to be a twist they hadn't seen coming up. That's why I always considered it a Jekyll and Hyde twist.

    If they wanted no twist, then why didn't they announce that Waltz played Blofeld? Clearly, they wanted us to be surprised.
    Which is rather hilarious when one thinks about it. The fact that they would think it would be a twist. Goes to show we really need a shake up over there because how anyone let this one out in this state (especially given how many people were involved and how much they were paid) is completely beyond my comprehension.

    EON has also shown it's inability to hide a twist when there actually is one. The '006 is the villain' twist in GE, the 'Elektra is the villain' twist in TWINE and the 'Vesper dies at the end' of CR were all blatantly spoiled in the trailers for the respective films.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.

    I wonder why people expected to be surprised as if there absolutely HAS to be a twist they hadn't seen coming up. That's why I always considered it a Jekyll and Hyde twist.

    If they wanted no twist, then why didn't they announce that Waltz played Blofeld? Clearly, they wanted us to be surprised.
    Which is rather hilarious when one thinks about it. The fact that they would think it would be a twist. Goes to show we really need a shake up over there because how anyone let this one out in this state (especially given how many people were involved and how much they were paid) is completely beyond my comprehension.

    EON has also shown it's inability to hide a twist when there actually is one. The '006 is the villain' twist in GE, the 'Elektra is the villain' twist in TWINE and the 'Vesper dies at the end' of CR were all blatantly spoiled in the trailers for the respective films.
    All true, & it's very unfortunate. They were more unforgivable perhaps because those were at least meaningful twists (except Vesper because I knew about that having read the novel).

    This last one is just a laughable premise in itself. It was a 'headshake' moment to me and perhaps even more so to the average movie goer for whom the name means nothing. I can just see someone saying the following to their buddy:

    'So this guy who hates James so much due to some childhood spat has a secret name he took from his mother's side? Who cares? Did I miss something?'
  • Posts: 13,972
    @Walecs No idea and I don't think a twist was or is necessary in SP or a Bond film. But in any case it was obvious that Waltz would play Blofeld. Hence my Jekyll and Hyde analogy: the novella is written with that big twist yet now everybody knows it. The stepbrother angle notwithstanding (and they could have easily erased that bit changing nothing else of the film), it was obvious Blofeld was played by Waltz, just like 006 is truly Janus.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,119
    I've heard over time:
    The arc was finished with CASINO ROYALE.
    The arc was finished with QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
    The arc was finished with SKYFALL.
    The arc was finished with SPECTRE.
    So I'm seeing a pattern.

    Perhaps Craig's four films aren't a perfect quadrilogy. But to me his films are more fun by watching all of them altogether. You can even see small references from CR in SF. When it comes to colors, production techniques, the acting, the more intense drama, the deeper themes of the films.......CR, QOS, SF and SP to me are actually a pretty good quadrilogy. And most likely...I have to update below collages again in 2019 ;-). In any case, Ian Fleming would have been proud of these four films, as they represent the same amount of continuity/chronology that his novels had:

    z9rxr60.jpg
    62uIs9V.jpg
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.

    I wonder why people expected to be surprised as if there absolutely HAS to be a twist they hadn't seen coming up. That's why I always considered it a Jekyll and Hyde twist.

    If they wanted no twist, then why didn't they announce that Waltz played Blofeld? Clearly, they wanted us to be surprised.
    Which is rather hilarious when one thinks about it. The fact that they would think it would be a twist. Goes to show we really need a shake up over there because how anyone let this one out in this state (especially given how many people were involved and how much they were paid) is completely beyond my comprehension.

    Let's not forget the cunning subterfuge of 'Naomie Harris is just playing a character called Eve. Definitely not Moneypenny'

    I imagine every time EON pull out one of these genius twists they dance around the office shouting 'Hahaha I fooled you' like Nick Nack in the fun house.

    Youve hired double Oscar winner Christoph Waltz so clearly he is the main villain and in a film called SPECTRE, unless you've got an uncredited cameo by Daniel Day Lewis or Brando up your sleeve, then he's obviously going to be playing Blofeld so why treat everyone like children by pretending he isn't?
    shamanimal wrote: »
    I remember reading Devil May Care, and M says something like "this is the most dangerous villain we've come across James", and it's just left there to be supposed. And it's the same with Spectre. As you rightly point out, "it was all me" isn't enough. The viewer has no emotion invested in hating the villain. You just don't care.

    A new low for EON. When people are comparing the quality of your writing to the monumentally appalling Devil May Care it's time to realise you really would have been better off hiring a pair of the proverbial infinite monkeys who are trying to write the complete works of Shakespeare and let them have a prod at a typewriter for a few months. Couldn't have been a lot worse really.

  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    If Eon was a competent company they would take attention to what the real fans want they could easily have anonymously put on this forum in 2013 that Blofeld could be a step brother, then seen how negitvaly it went over with the fans AND THEN NOT DO IT
  • Posts: 11,119
    If Eon was a competent company they would take attention to what the real fans want they could easily have anonymously put on this forum in 2013 that Blofeld could be a step brother, then seen how negitvaly it went over with the fans AND THEN NOT DO IT

    Well, with your criticism the Bond franchise would certainly sail into better territories no?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2017 Posts: 15,534
    bondjames wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.

    I wonder why people expected to be surprised as if there absolutely HAS to be a twist they hadn't seen coming up. That's why I always considered it a Jekyll and Hyde twist.

    If they wanted no twist, then why didn't they announce that Waltz played Blofeld? Clearly, they wanted us to be surprised.
    Which is rather hilarious when one thinks about it. The fact that they would think it would be a twist. Goes to show we really need a shake up over there because how anyone let this one out in this state (especially given how many people were involved and how much they were paid) is completely beyond my comprehension.

    Let's not forget the cunning subterfuge of 'Naomie Harris is just playing a character called Eve. Definitely not Moneypenny'.

    That, hands down, is one of the most idiotic PR interview ever made by any cast/crew member involved in a Bond movie. Eve being Moneypenny or not was totally not important, but whatever ounce of surprise a few of us Bond fans could have had when she reveals her name in the last scene of SF was gone the moment Harris said 'I am not Moneypenny', as it was now obvious to everyone that Eve really was Moneypenny.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,583
    It had been rumoured shortly after she was cast that she was going to play Moneypenny.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2017 Posts: 15,534
    Rumoured, yes, but never confirmed. Anyone who didn't follow the SF production thread and had only seen that Harris interview would put 2 and 2 together and know she was going to be Moneypenny. It wasn't even integral to the plot in any way and someone involved in the film still spilled the beans. Likewise when Waltz denied time and time again he wasn't Blofeld was indirect confirmation that he was, and was a waste of time when the film he was the main villain in is called 'Spectre'.
  • If Eon was a competent company they would take attention to what the real fans want they could easily have anonymously put on this forum in 2013 that Blofeld could be a step brother, then seen how negitvaly it went over with the fans AND THEN NOT DO IT

    Or they could have just watched Austin Powers in Goldmember, cleaned up the chocolate milk that shot out of their noses from shock, then jumped on the phone to cuss Logan out for defamation of Fleming's legacy, silly plagiarism, and gross incompetence.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2017 Posts: 15,534
    I wonder if @TheWizardOfIce could come up with an example of discussion/speculation in a production thread if Bond 23 with Craig wasn't SF but GF (had that novel not been adapted yet), and Gert Frobe, after being cast as the 'mysterious lead villain', would say in every interview that he was definitely not playing Auric Goldfinger.
  • Posts: 5,767
    001 wrote: »
    Should bond get rid of his ppk in the next films like Brozza did ?
    And Craig in CR ;-).

  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,119
    boldfinger wrote: »
    001 wrote: »
    Should bond get rid of his ppk in the next films like Brozza did ?
    And Craig in CR ;-).

    But Craig already got rid of his PPK a few times. I recall he also used the P99
    http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/c/cc/Cr-w99a.jpg/601px-Cr-w99a.jpg
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Manfrit Bumgartner

    I did enjoy that. And people say Carry On humour is dead.
  • Posts: 1,680
    I can see how some fans have been left out since CR. Its been almost eleven years since their preference of a Bond film came out,

    I was all for Mendes coming back after Skyfall, but looking back it was a mistake.

    Spectre was probably the best film on paper since CR, the problem is the action is misdirected, & it has clunky subpar moments.

    I think EON has seen where they misfired & will right the ship in 2019.

    EON moved faster than we thought though, they had a first draft last year & hired a director probably earlier this year,
  • //If Bond can survive Connery, Moore and Brosnan then Craig's overstated value placed upon by EoN just perplexes me.//

    First Bond selected by BB and MGW, rather than Albert R. Broccoli.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    //If Bond can survive Connery, Moore and Brosnan then Craig's overstated value placed upon by EoN just perplexes me.//

    First Bond selected by BB and MGW, rather than Albert R. Broccoli.
    Good point. First one selected by Babs more like. Wilson wanted Cavill from what I recall.

    Difficult to cut that cord but eventually it must be done.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Was it Wilson or Campbell? I remember Wilson being against the idea... or I must've read wrong.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,172
    Wilson and Campbell were in the Cavill camp when Barbara wanted Craig. IIRC.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    //If Bond can survive Connery, Moore and Brosnan then Craig's overstated value placed upon by EoN just perplexes me.//

    First Bond selected by BB and MGW, rather than Albert R. Broccoli.
    Good point. First one selected by Babs more like. Wilson wanted Cavill from what I recall.

    Difficult to cut that cord but eventually it must be done.

    While Bond is certainly bigger than any one actor, there's a lot weighing on the selection of each new Bond actor. They scored with Craig. Perhaps there's some worry about striking gold twice.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    //If Bond can survive Connery, Moore and Brosnan then Craig's overstated value placed upon by EoN just perplexes me.//

    First Bond selected by BB and MGW, rather than Albert R. Broccoli.
    Good point. First one selected by Babs more like. Wilson wanted Cavill from what I recall.

    Difficult to cut that cord but eventually it must be done.

    While Bond is certainly bigger than any one actor, there's a lot weighing on the selection of each new Bond actor. They scored with Craig. Perhaps there's some worry about striking gold twice.
    Inevitably, and I can understand their position and possible point of view, even if I don't share it.

    If only they hadn't tied themselves down with this silly connected storyline I wouldn't be so inclined to want a change.

    Anyway it's probably moot, because if reports are to be believed he's back.
Sign In or Register to comment.