› ›

The Man from U.N.C.L.E.: original series & films

1…2324262829…73

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    Remember, it wasn't that long ago, they were talking about Channing Tatum (fall of 2011). He may be a star, but he doesn't strike me as a Solo either.

    That truly would have been tragic! Terrible actor imo. I'm willing to give both Cavill and Hammer a chance, and quite frankly my expectations of both are quite low, so they'll have to really screw up to disappoint me. The originals are hard to top though and we just have to accept that. Similar to Lynda Carter's Wonder Woman in that respect.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    The men who would be Napoleon Solo. Sampling of actors whose names have come up for the part.


    https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2013/05/25/the-men-who-would-be-napoleon-solo/
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Damn shame about Clooney. He could have been really good for a reinterpretation of Solo I think. Just way too old now.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    Had he been cast, he would have been a near-retirement Solo. Clooney would have been better casting if a movie could have been made around 1997 or so.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I agree. It likely could never have happened in 1997 though (the year of the horrendous Batman and Robin). Clooney was still in his head shaking phase of acting then (I think he took lessons to stop that quirk of his).
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    re: the trailer. At the beginning, Henry Cavill is in a Wartburg car while Armie Hammer is in a Trabant. Information via Quirky Rides, the company that provided the vintage cars.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    Finally get back here.

    Just saw the trailer: I freakin' LOVE it! Cool, sixties, fun, I like Cavill and Hammer a lot from just this small bit I've seen. Oh, I am so looking forward to this one.

    Of course they should use the UNCLE theme. But I'm going into this openminded about the rest of the film.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    4EverBonded wrote: »
    Finally get back here.

    Just saw the trailer: I freakin' LOVE it! Cool, sixties, fun, I like Cavill and Hammer a lot from just this small bit I've seen. Oh, I am so looking forward to this one.

    Of course they should use the UNCLE theme. But I'm going into this openminded about the rest of the film.

    Yeah, I'm also impressed by the trailer. Certainly going to see this in IMAX :-). Interesting to see how Solo can compete with Hunt and Bond ;-). By the way.....this means that "Mission: Impossible 5" will see a dramatic decrease of their IMAX viewings, when only two weeks later "UNCLE" premieres....also in IMAX.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    delfloria wrote: »
    Like the actors or not, film good or bad, it's still good to see U.N.C.L.E. back in popular culture.
    Yes, for sure!! We'll just have to see if the actors can pull it off.
    Like @bondjames I do have reservations.
    Good idea, if you haven't seen Lone Ranger - don't, until after Uncle is released.
    Any anxiety over Hammer, will be greatly lessened. ;)

    Interestingly, I thought both Fiennes and Thurman had Steed and Peel down well enough, in the Avengers big-screen adaptation.
    But it was the film itself that was kind of stifling, and didn't really allow them to stretch and work the characters as Macnee and Rigg were able to do, back in the day.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    timmer wrote: »
    Interestingly, I thought both Fiennes and Thurman had Steed and Peel down well enough, in the Avengers big-screen adaptation.
    But it was the film itself that was kind of stifling, and didn't really allow them to stretch and work the characters as Macnee and Rigg were able to do, back in the day.
    Another film that had all the necessary elements & actors that got let down by 'safe' direction.
    [-(
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Yes, safe direction is a good way to put it.
    Connery was good I thought, but he wasn't playing Bond or anything recognizable.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    timmer wrote: »
    Yes, safe direction is a good way to put it.
    Connery was good I thought, but he wasn't playing Bond or anything recognizable.
    It was very nearly a really good movie, but the director either wasn't a fan of the series, or the producers wouldn't let him explore the material as much as churn out a polished corporate turd product.

  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,708
    SPECTRE begins filming in Rome................. Following in UNCLE's footsteps once again. Spectre's budget, just for the Rome car chase, is $60mil and UNCLE's entire budget is $75mil. Just like old times. TV budget vs feature budget. Will be interesting.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    delfloria wrote: »
    SPECTRE begins filming in Rome................. Following in UNCLE's footsteps once again. Spectre's budget, just for the Rome car chase, is $60mil and UNCLE's entire budget is $75mil. Just like old times. TV budget vs feature budget. Will be interesting.

    Indeed, although I do like the fact that EON is spending bucket loads of money on "SPECTRE" ;-). There are at least no financing problems.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    delfloria wrote: »
    SPECTRE begins filming in Rome................. Following in UNCLE's footsteps once again. Spectre's budget, just for the Rome car chase, is $60mil and UNCLE's entire budget is $75mil. Just like old times. TV budget vs feature budget. Will be interesting.

    That is crazy!

    Still, from what we've seen, the money spent on SPECTRE will clearly be visible up on the screen unlike QoS and SF.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Sorry $60m for a car chase that lasts how long exactly? I think these guys may need to hire better production people and accountants. That could feed a few people I would think.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    I think the SPECTRE shoot is more than just the car chase. However, "I've worked up a few statistics of my own."

    For a nice, round number, let's say SPECTRE has a 30-week shooting schedule.

    At $300 million, that's $10 million a week.

    The Rome shoot is five-weeks, but the spending figure is $60 million, or $12 million a week. So it is going to be more expensive portion of filming the movie.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Thanks. Hopefully it's really something to behold with that budget!
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    And the massive spending of 300 mil, will drive the broader economy, keeping business robust, people employed and bellies full. :D
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    I have a feeling The Spy Command is going to weigh in on this....

  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Uncle budget will suffice. They don't have to spend like Bond.
  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,708
    Fortunately, UNCLE will be a character study of Solo and Kuryakin with the action in a very supporting role.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    delfloria wrote: »
    Fortunately, UNCLE will be a character study of Solo and Kuryakin with the action in a very supporting role.

    Well, SF in my opinion was quite the character study as well. As in: Heavy on background history of characters.....and emotinal gravita. In all honesty, I think this will still be the case with SPECTRE.

    The Man From UNCLE for me looks a bit less heavy on character-driven drama and more heavy on fun.

    I think there's nothing wrong with a huge ($300 Million) production budget. And don't forget, lots of it will be spend on insanely huge crews (shooting schedules for Bond films are much tighter, work way more with 2nd, more expensive units. and on top of that recent Bond films have way more expensive actors picked).

    With UNCLE it's slightly different... Both SPECTRE and UNCLE will do filming in their own ways. And I think both budgets, $75 Million vs. $300 Million, will do wonders to their productions.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    If you think about it $75m is nothing to spend on a movie these days. That is the real surprise, not the $300m for SP. Are they filming it in Eastern Europe or something?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    Fortunately, UNCLE will be a character study of Solo and Kuryakin with the action in a very supporting role.

    Well, SF in my opinion was quite the character study as well. As in: Heavy on background history of characters.....and emotinal gravita. In all honesty, I think this will still be the case with SPECTRE.

    The Man From UNCLE for me looks a bit less heavy on character-driven drama and more heavy on fun.

    I think there's nothing wrong with a huge ($300 Million) production budget. And don't forget, lots of it will be spend on insanely huge crews (shooting schedules for Bond films are much tighter, work way more with 2nd, more expensive units. and on top of that recent Bond films have way more expensive actors picked).

    With UNCLE it's slightly different... Both SPECTRE and UNCLE will do filming in their own ways. And I think both budgets, $75 Million vs. $300 Million, will do wonders to their productions.

    Do you compare every movie with Skyfall? ;)
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    If you think about it $75m is nothing to spend on a movie these days. That is the real surprise, not the $300m for SP. Are they filming it in Eastern Europe or something?

    Both are surprises, if you say it like that. The "ultra-low" budget on UNCLE, which is even lower compared to the recent Mission: Impossible film and Kingsman. But the 300 Million for SPECTRE is quite insane also, even when compared to the biggest Marvel movies.
  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,708
    Nothing against Bond specifically but I'm not sure how you put $300 million worth of anything up on the screen. There's still only 2 1/2 hours of screen time and just so much story for any particular film that it seems there is a limit as to what can fill up the screen with.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    Crunching the numbers, SPECTRE spends 1.4-times as much as Dr. No every day. Yes, those figures aren't adjusted for inflation. At the same time, it's a reminder that studios don't spend Monopoly money. And they don't get to spend, or receive, inflation-adjusted dollars.

    http://bit.ly/1CKwQoK
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    delfloria wrote: »
    Nothing against Bond specifically but I'm not sure how you put $300 million worth of anything up on the screen. There's still only 2 1/2 hours of screen time and just so much story for any particular film that it seems there is a limit as to what can fill up the screen with.

    Read the leaked script or even the outline and its not as hard to see where all that money is going, never mind Craig, Waltz and Mendes salaries.
  • karatemanchan37karatemanchan37
    Posts: 584
    delfloria wrote: »
    Nothing against Bond specifically but I'm not sure how you put $300 million worth of anything up on the screen. There's still only 2 1/2 hours of screen time and just so much story for any particular film that it seems there is a limit as to what can fill up the screen with.

    Well, 300 Million can hire you Christoph Waltz, Ralph Fiennes and Sam Mendes :D
Sign In or Register to comment.