No Time To Die: Production Diary

19109119139159162507

Comments

  • Posts: 6,601
    ...excuse me, RC7 - just getting used to liking you and now this? I think, I can and did A LOT better then that.

    Come on, you can do better than that. Even @Germanlady brings better retorts and she's German... and a woman.

    Maybe we all get him wrong and Solace is a bigger fan of DC then we all and is just terribly afraid, something real bad will come out of that remark. Relax...nobody will die.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote: »
    ...excuse me, RC7 - just getting used to liking you and now this? I think, I can and did A LOT better then that.

    Come on, you can do better than that. Even @Germanlady brings better retorts and she's German... and a woman.

    I know. Sarcasm on my part.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Puhhh...
  • Posts: 1,162
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    He is a cock, though.

    Not that you knew how a real one looks.

    Come on, you can do better than that. Even @Germanlady brings better retorts and she's German... and a woman.

    I can, but apparently this is good enough for you and no, she can't.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Megan Ellison: Can Hollywood's Millennial Mogul Make It as a Studio Head?
    hollywoodreporter.com/features/megan-ellison-can-hollywoods-millennial-mogul-make-as-a-studio-head-1025689

    For those still hoping MGM goes with Annapurna, here is a very insightful look into the company from THR.
    She's definitely a risk taker from the looks of it. However, some of her bets aren't paying off. Detroit was a bold move that may be ultimately a failure. Doesn't bode well for Kings.

    Less chance of them getting Bond now imho.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    He is a cock, though.

    Not that you knew how a real one looks.

    Come on, you can do better than that. Even @Germanlady brings better retorts and she's German... and a woman.


    I just logged on and saw 54 new coments on this thread since I last checked 3 hours ago so naturally I assumed a director and actor had been announced.

    But no it's just still people banging on about an off the cuff comment by a bloke who had just finished a gruelling shoot that buggered his knee.

    Thankully the internet wasn't around when Sean made his 'I'd like to kill that damned James Bond' comment during the filming of TB or the 'best Bond ever' would have been lynched on Twitter.

    I really struggle to understand how some people cannot appreciate the difference between a throwaway remark and someone genuinely hating his job and the character.

    If he really despised the role don't you think he would have issued an official statement saying he was done by now?

    Maybe even people like him, who apparently don't care for money at all, have a hard time to reject their last chance to cash in a cool 20 or 30 millions. Just saying. And you people can argue all day long, it was still highly unprofessional of him to say it.
    Also, you hardly can compare Craig's situation with Connery's. Connery hardly could move without having a crowd of girls in his hair at this time. We will never be able to imagine what kind of hype it was back then. And, probably quite important as well, Connery had the distinct feeling that he wasn't getting his fair share of the profit. I take it none of you thinks Craig has any reason to do so . I also take exception to the notion that I somehow hate Craig. It's just that I try to infuse some measure in all this fan hype of some of yours.

    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    A bit of casual sexism and a Jonestown reference all in one post!

    Excellent work Sir.
  • Posts: 632
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    I don't think there has been any attempt of "damage control" from Eon regarding Craig. They've simply got on with their job and worked to strike a deal with Craig. Craig's agents and managers, all top of their game, know what to say and when, and they won't release any information which might spoil the deal they hope to strike with Eon.
    @ColonelSun, Craig has agents too.

    While EON may not care about his comments getting press coverage every other day for two years, I'm sure someone cares. He has to get other roles in the future once his Bond gig is done (whenever that may be). The fact that these 'rumours' have started leaking intensely around the same time as Logan Lucky is coincidental certainly. They don't hurt him, and only help after the past two years (wanting more money, cutting wrists etc. etc.).

    If he's back for B25, I'll be interested to see how he handles the press. I'm willing to bet it will be a far more 'muzzled' and behaved Craig. Like I said, he has to act after it's over and Hollywood is a touchy crowd.

    Yes, as I said, Craig's team are top notch, CAA in LA and Independent in London, and they will coordinate very, very carefully to manage Craig's career. As for Craig being muzzled - I don't know, it seems to me, like Connery, he's his own man in that respect.
    Sorry, I missed your comments on his agents when typing my response. It's a frightening prospect to think he will be allowed to go off the reservation again for B25's promotion. Lots of $$ at stake and a possible IPO off the backs of it.

    You could argue that his "slash my wrists" comment got far more media coverage over a long time (2 years and counting) than if he'd made a less controversial comment. God, we're still debating it now.
    I wouldn't just argue it. It's a fact. I don't know about you, but it's left a filthy taste in my mouth.

    There's good publicity associated with your product, and bad publicity. Both can create 'awareness' and sticky 'resonance'. I really believe this is the latter. The villainous kind.

    It was a throw away comment from an actor coming off an intense and long shoot who evidently felt wiped out, but probably thought he was being humorous. The media blew it up, that's all. Yeah, I'm sure some stuffy studio suits didn't like it, but ho hum, from my experience, empathy towards talent or filmmakers is not always high on their agenda.
    I'm not judging him for making the comment @ColonelSun . I can appreciate why he said what he said. I'm more commenting on the implications of the remark playing nonstop and being associated with him & Bond for 2 long years (along with him being a man who wants more money). Sure it's made him perhaps more famous, but it's cemented his view of James Bond in the minds of the general public. I personally don't think that can ever be disassociated until B25 actually hits theatres and people see him in the role again.

    I can also believe that some studio heads will be wary of him.

    I think there is a reason the Logan Lucky trailer says "Introducing" Daniel Craig.

    The Logan Lucky "introducing Daniel Craig" is very typical of Soderbergh's sense of humour, it has zero to do with "slash my wrists".

    Seconded. I took it as Soderbergh winking at the audience, like introducing Julia Roberts in Ocean's 11 and then introducing Tess Ocean as Julia Roberts in Ocean's 12. Not only did I see it as being self-referential, but that he's introducing Craig in a way most audiences don't think of him.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    giphy.gif
  • Posts: 632
    Just watched Waltz on Colbert's show. He mentions that Waltz was Blofeld in Spectre, but it didn't go farther than that. Just talked about being altar boys and a bar in Vienna where you could order red, white,(referring to wine) Coke, or Fanta.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,093
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.
  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    He is a cock, though.

    Shhh @RC7. Please use the nicer, biologically more accepted word: penis. Or fallus.

    Obviously, I'm sure he's not. But the sustained digging out of Craig at every possible opportunity is as tedious as watching a test match. It's a Bond forum - he's going to be defended. Get over it.

    I know dude ;-). I was just fooling around a bit :-). I mean, calling each other penis has a rather weird....tone to it as well no?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Fallus. :))
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,425
    This thread is increasingly resembling Silva's rats in a barrel speech.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    Here's the coconut. Go nuts. ;)
    coconut.jpg
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Yep, all it needs is some coconuts.
  • Posts: 1,162
    Yep, all it needs is some coconuts.
    Actually, love is all you need.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Yep, all it needs is some coconuts.
    Actually, love is all you need.
    Relax, mate. I'm not criticizing anybody. If anything, some of us are being humorous here.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    I think Craig gets more love then he desrves. Like hes pretty good but its not like the bond franchise cant do with out him. If it was up to Cubby and saltzman I feel like they would have fired him after his slash my wrists comment and his lack of enthusiasm for the franchise coupled with his inability to sign on to a film. Rather then what wilson and barbara are doing which is wait 4 years and beg him to return because . Oh hes soooo good best bond in years.. mmmmmm
    I just think Craig should have a little more respect for the franchise. You would never see brosnan or moore say anything like that. ( but maybe connery??)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.

    No, that's not the end goal. I have a very balanced perspective on the Craig era. What this is about is perpetuating the agenda of those who want him gone, immediately. Hence clinging onto a two year old story for dear life. It's embarrassing.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,979
    Getafix wrote: »
    This thread is increasingly resembling Silva's rats in a barrel speech.

    Last call. Buy me a pint?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2017 Posts: 8,093
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.

    No, that's not the end goal. I have a very balanced perspective on the Craig era. What this is about is perpetuating the agenda of those who want him gone, immediately. Hence clinging onto a two year old story for dear life. It's embarrassing.

    If you have a balanced perspective you would see both sides. You position yourself firmly in one camp through your comments, consistently throwing yourself into the firing line on EON's behalf. The fact that you view any criticism of the current team as some kind of conspiracy is proof enough that you aren't a neutral party.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I don't think this is about perpetuating an agenda. From what we understand, Craig is back and possibly for two based on recent reports so it's moot.

    This is about the wrist cutter story still being mentioned with nearly every article about him and Bond. It's even there today in the Purity articles that are doing the rounds.

    I don't think anyone cares what we think. We're not important. It's the fact that the linkage is still there with nearly every mention of him and the film that should be troubling. That's what won't change because they allowed that story to take on a life of its own when a decent PR team would have firmly nipped it in the bud 2 years ago.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.

    No, that's not the end goal. I have a very balanced perspective on the Craig era. What this is about is perpetuating the agenda of those who want him gone, immediately. Hence clinging onto a two year old story for dear life. It's embarrassing.

    If you have a balanced perspective you would see both sides. You position yourself firmly in one camp through your comments, consistently throwing yourself into the firing line on EON's behalf. The fact that you view any criticism of the current team as some kind of conspiracy is proof enough that you aren't a neutral party.

    I've torn QoS a new one on many occasions and I've put the boot in on SF and SP on many occasions too. My defence of EON stems solely from personal experience of how difficult production can be. But I don't and never have jumped to their defence at every opportunity. They don't always get it right and they've made some big mistakes, but I'm a Bond fan and ultimately optimistic. I don't hold grudges for years on end and continue to perpetuate them ad Infinitum.

    The only perspective needed here is for people like yourself to remember when you start waxing lyrical about EON's shortcomings, it's just that, your perspective. Not fact. A perspective devoid of experience or real knowledge.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.

    No, that's not the end goal. I have a very balanced perspective on the Craig era. What this is about is perpetuating the agenda of those who want him gone, immediately. Hence clinging onto a two year old story for dear life. It's embarrassing.

    If you have a balanced perspective you would see both sides. You position yourself firmly in one camp through your comments, consistently throwing yourself into the firing line on EON's behalf. The fact that you view any criticism of the current team as some kind of conspiracy is proof enough that you aren't a neutral party.

    A bit rich banging on about a lack of neutrality from the bloke who suffers from Turner diarrhoea.
  • Posts: 1,162
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.

    No, that's not the end goal. I have a very balanced perspective on the Craig era. What this is about is perpetuating the agenda of those who want him gone, immediately. Hence clinging onto a two year old story for dear life. It's embarrassing.

    If you have a balanced perspective you would see both sides. You position yourself firmly in one camp through your comments, consistently throwing yourself into the firing line on EON's behalf. The fact that you view any criticism of the current team as some kind of conspiracy is proof enough that you aren't a neutral party.

    A bit rich banging on about a lack of neutrality from the bloke who suffers from Turner diarrhoea.

    Well, he never claimed to be neutral when it came to Turner, BUT he also never got insulting to those who objected or even ridiculed him.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2017 Posts: 8,093
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.

    No, that's not the end goal. I have a very balanced perspective on the Craig era. What this is about is perpetuating the agenda of those who want him gone, immediately. Hence clinging onto a two year old story for dear life. It's embarrassing.

    If you have a balanced perspective you would see both sides. You position yourself firmly in one camp through your comments, consistently throwing yourself into the firing line on EON's behalf. The fact that you view any criticism of the current team as some kind of conspiracy is proof enough that you aren't a neutral party.

    I've torn QoS a new one on many occasions and I've put the boot in on SF and SP on many occasions too. My defence of EON stems solely from personal experience of how difficult production can be. But I don't and never have jumped to their defence at every opportunity. They don't always get it right and they've made some big mistakes, but I'm a Bond fan and ultimately optimistic. I don't hold grudges for years on end and continue to perpetuate them ad Infinitum.

    The only perspective needed here is for people like yourself to remember when you start waxing lyrical about EON's shortcomings, it's just that, your perspective. Not fact. A perspective devoid of experience or real knowledge.

    Yes, you've criticised QoS, SF and SP, but you've always made sure to pre-empt it with a little disclaimer absolving EON and Craig of any responsibility, making them little more than victims of circumstance, passive participants in their own productions. When it comes to CR, you're the first to lay praise at EON's feet (and you don't mince words about it), but when it comes to the mistakes they've made you start playing this weird obfuscation game.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    Get back on topic please.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    So if everyone agrees it was unprofessional can we stop harping on about it? Because I literally have no idea what the end game is here? Do we all gather round and perform some sort of forum-based Jonestown; renouncing Craig before slitting our wrists in unison?

    You know exactly what the end goal is, otherwise you wouldn't fight against it so hard.

    In case you're still in the dark the end goal is to view the Craig era, and EON's participation, with some sense of perspective. Glad I could enlighten you.

    No, that's not the end goal. I have a very balanced perspective on the Craig era. What this is about is perpetuating the agenda of those who want him gone, immediately. Hence clinging onto a two year old story for dear life. It's embarrassing.

    If you have a balanced perspective you would see both sides. You position yourself firmly in one camp through your comments, consistently throwing yourself into the firing line on EON's behalf. The fact that you view any criticism of the current team as some kind of conspiracy is proof enough that you aren't a neutral party.

    I've torn QoS a new one on many occasions and I've put the boot in on SF and SP on many occasions too. My defence of EON stems solely from personal experience of how difficult production can be. But I don't and never have jumped to their defence at every opportunity. They don't always get it right and they've made some big mistakes, but I'm a Bond fan and ultimately optimistic. I don't hold grudges for years on end and continue to perpetuate them ad Infinitum.

    The only perspective needed here is for people like yourself to remember when you start waxing lyrical about EON's shortcomings, it's just that, your perspective. Not fact. A perspective devoid of experience or real knowledge.

    Yes, you've criticised QoS, SF and SP, but you've always made sure to pre-empt it with a little disclaimer absolving EON and Craig of any responsibility, making them little more than victims of circumstance, passive participants in their own productions. When it comes to CR, you're the first to lay praise at EON's feet (and you don't mince words about it), but when it comes to the mistakes they've made you start playing this weird obfuscation game.

    I think it's called emotional response. It's what defines us humans from you robots.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    tqb wrote: »
    Yes it does, as does every bit of speculation and leak (which is all we have) since April.

    I don't usually trust one unnamed source, but when one has so many basically alluding to the same thing (including a named Exec this time around), then it's pretty much confirmed.

    So the real interest will be in the distributor and hopefully director announcements when they finally are made.
Sign In or Register to comment.