No Time to Die production thread (MINOR SPOILERS ALLOWED)

1100710081010101210131213

Comments

  • octofinger wrote: »
    There’s this small time producer called Kevin Feige.

    Keep an eye on that chap. I think he has a bright future.

    When the October delay was announced, a since banned user suggested bringing Feige into Eon "to bring some order to EONs house". Still one of the funniest things I've seen on here.

    Hey, at least we'd be guaranteed a Bond movie every two years.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,839
    octofinger wrote: »
    There’s this small time producer called Kevin Feige.

    Keep an eye on that chap. I think he has a bright future.

    When the October delay was announced, a since banned user suggested bringing Feige into Eon "to bring some order to EONs house". Still one of the funniest things I've seen on here.

    Hey, at least we'd be guaranteed a Bond movie every two years.

    I doubt it, he's got lots of Marvel films to make!
  • J_Bryce777J_Bryce777 San Francisco
    Posts: 78
    mtm wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    There’s this small time producer called Kevin Feige.

    Keep an eye on that chap. I think he has a bright future.

    When the October delay was announced, a since banned user suggested bringing Feige into Eon "to bring some order to EONs house". Still one of the funniest things I've seen on here.

    Hey, at least we'd be guaranteed a Bond movie every two years.

    I doubt it, he's got lots of Marvel films to make!

    Along with Marvel, he is also starting some Star Wars projects, both film and Disney +.
  • Posts: 784
    I was being facetious - hopefully that's obvious.

    On the other hand: Bond and Marvel now compete in the same space. They're both global tent-pole franchises that straddle the blockbuster/quality film divide.

    (Whether that's a category that continues to exist post-COVID is a different debate.)

    And Feige, whether you like him or not, delivers product. Marvel has consistently turned out solid movies and sold a lot of tickets under his watch. Insofar as EON decided to go for an overarching/interconnected narrative during the Craig era, I think Feige has done a better job of that piece. EON's approach was much more ad-hoc, whereas Marvel has clearly sat down and created a master plan of the narrative elements they want each film to introduce.

    Anyway, I digress.
  • octofinger wrote: »
    I was being facetious - hopefully that's obvious.

    On the other hand: Bond and Marvel now compete in the same space. They're both global tent-pole franchises that straddle the blockbuster/quality film divide.

    (Whether that's a category that continues to exist post-COVID is a different debate.)

    And Feige, whether you like him or not, delivers product. Marvel has consistently turned out solid movies and sold a lot of tickets under his watch. Insofar as EON decided to go for an overarching/interconnected narrative during the Craig era, I think Feige has done a better job of that piece. EON's approach was much more ad-hoc, whereas Marvel has clearly sat down and created a master plan of the narrative elements they want each film to introduce.

    Anyway, I digress.

    That was basically the point I was making. Whether you like Marvel movies or not, Feige has orchestrated a series of prolific releases that have been generally well-regarded by fans and critics. I wouldn't be completely thrilled if he was behind the Bond franchise, but like you said - he delivers product. I'd be tempted to have someone like him take the wheel because at least we'd get consistent releases.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,333
    octofinger wrote: »
    I was being facetious - hopefully that's obvious.

    On the other hand: Bond and Marvel now compete in the same space. They're both global tent-pole franchises that straddle the blockbuster/quality film divide.

    (Whether that's a category that continues to exist post-COVID is a different debate.)

    And Feige, whether you like him or not, delivers product. Marvel has consistently turned out solid movies and sold a lot of tickets under his watch. Insofar as EON decided to go for an overarching/interconnected narrative during the Craig era, I think Feige has done a better job of that piece. EON's approach was much more ad-hoc, whereas Marvel has clearly sat down and created a master plan of the narrative elements they want each film to introduce.

    Anyway, I digress.

    That was basically the point I was making. Whether you like Marvel movies or not, Feige has orchestrated a series of prolific releases that have been generally well-regarded by fans and critics. I wouldn't be completely thrilled if he was behind the Bond franchise, but like you said - he delivers product. I'd be tempted to have someone like him take the wheel because at least we'd get consistent releases.

    There are some huge differences between Marvel and Bond, though, as one is obviously centered around a single character. Marvel is more closely aligned with the Star Wars universe, where the branching off is also creating multiple characters and storylines.

    I may be wrong on this point, but it also seems that Marvel's source material has allowed it to have a plan. The films and characters are intertwined and work very well.

    Bond can't compete on that scale and probably shouldn't. I do agree in essence that EON had a mistake by taking a page from Marvel and making DC's era a single arc--but doing so after three movies. They retrofitted it, and it doesn't quite work.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,156
    I think the next incarnation of Bond would benefit greatly from the presence of a guiding hand like Feige or, as with MI, Christopher McQuarrie. I like a lot about the Craig era, but in some ways it seemed aimless.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 720
    That is the part that I don't get (maybe because up until last year I haven't followed the production side of things all that closely): Shouldn't Eon be set-up much better to have a guiding hand than anybody else? Shouldn't those hands be those of Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson? I mean, this is where this discussion started in this thread: What film series has more prominent producers than the Broccoli Family for Bond? Plus, what other series has had the same writers at the helm for over 20 years now? Purvis and Wade should be a guiding hand, shouldn't they?
    Sure, there is MGM (and I don't really get the role and level of input they have) but I would assume Disney gives a lot more input into Marvel Studios, than the external input Eon get. I could be wrong of course.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 5,083
    talos7 wrote: »
    I think the next incarnation of Bond would benefit greatly from the presence of a guiding hand like Feige or, as with MI, Christopher McQuarrie. I like a lot about the Craig era, but in some ways it seemed aimless.

    I think the aimless nature of the Craig era is mostly down to the regaining of the SPECTRE and Blofeld properties in 2012, and perhaps feeling pressured to shoehorn them into what they were already establishing with Quantum, etc.
  • Posts: 12,264
    Contraband wrote: »
    Don't think this long interview has been posted before. From feb 2020. Cast, Cary and Michael/Babs


    Thanks for sharing as had not seen this before! :-bd Have to ask as i do not know? Is Barbara Broccoli ok? She looks to me like she has gone very thin in the face?
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,333
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Don't think this long interview has been posted before. From feb 2020. Cast, Cary and Michael/Babs


    Thanks for sharing as had not seen this before! :-bd Have to ask as i do not know? Is Barbara Broccoli ok? She looks to me like she has gone very thin in the face?

    I think she's just lost some weight.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,156
    talos7 wrote: »
    I think the next incarnation of Bond would benefit greatly from the presence of a guiding hand like Feige or, as with MI, Christopher McQuarrie. I like a lot about the Craig era, but in some ways it seemed aimless.

    I think the aimless nature of the Craig era is mostly down to the regaining of the SPECTRE and Blofeld properties in 2012, and perhaps feeling pressured to shoehorn them into what they were already establishing with Quantum, etc.

    Possibly, but it could have been handled much more organically, with a more measured, mysterious introduction of Blofeld, possibly done over more than one film. Quantum could have been revealed to be a branch, or upstart rival, of SPECTRE.
    I've always thought that a opening to the third film would have been that worldwide all of the known members of QUANTUM have been killed, eliminated by someone; this would have lead to SPECTRE.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,839
    I think showing Mr White (who for the purposes of the audience basically was Quantum) being killed by Spectre was pretty effective in that regard though. And the polonium was a nice touch, made it feel real without pointing any fingers at any country in particular.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 5,083
    talos7 wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    I think the next incarnation of Bond would benefit greatly from the presence of a guiding hand like Feige or, as with MI, Christopher McQuarrie. I like a lot about the Craig era, but in some ways it seemed aimless.

    I think the aimless nature of the Craig era is mostly down to the regaining of the SPECTRE and Blofeld properties in 2012, and perhaps feeling pressured to shoehorn them into what they were already establishing with Quantum, etc.

    Possibly, but it could have been handled much more organically, with a more measured, mysterious introduction of Blofeld, possibly done over more than one film. Quantum could have been revealed to be a branch, or upstart rival, of SPECTRE.
    I've always thought that a opening to the third film would have been that worldwide all of the known members of QUANTUM have been killed, eliminated by someone; this would have lead to SPECTRE.

    Absolutley, 100% agree; I think I've even voiced this near exact thought more than once on these boards. This more measured route to revealing/introducing SPECTRE would have been much more effective.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 5,083
    mtm wrote: »
    I think showing Mr White (who for the purposes of the audience basically was Quantum) being killed by Spectre was pretty effective in that regard though. And the polonium was a nice touch, made it feel real without pointing any fingers at any country in particular.

    Agreed. I wish they had just done a less in-your-face approach to Quantum being a part of SPECTRE; rather than having all the main villains from previous films be individual arms of the Octopus, they should have just had Quantum be one of the "arms", and they were operating however they pleased up until that point. They could have used the other "arms" as nods to other villainous goings-on in the Bond universe (maybe one of the arms could have alluded to Drax, Shatterhand, Zorin, etc).
  • Posts: 1,230
    The retro fitting of Blofeld/Spectre into the rest of the Craig era films was a disaster the way it was handled.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,333
    delfloria wrote: »
    The retro fitting of Blofeld/Spectre into the rest of the Craig era films was a disaster the way it was handled.

    Yes, especially since the arc is unnecessary. Really, we had two sets of tandem films (CR/QoS and SP/NTTD) bridged by SF. The first set is young, reckless Bond. The second set is older, more grizzled Bond. The two sets mirror each other in many ways: Bond is haunted by his love for a woman while dealing with a secret, sinister organization. All the while, SF acts to lead us from one to the other.

    Overall, I have thoroughly enjoyed the DC era, but to connect all five films was a bit of a mistake.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 3,880
    I love Craig's Bond as well. But the sudden thought of EON to link his films still hurts me. It really hurts because it's just one film that undermined everything. SP should have been a standalone Bond film like SF and nothing would have been connected. Although, I think another generation that would come, wouldn't notice the retconning that didn't work with us. Because they didn't follow the films one after the other like we did. They'll just stumble on the 5 Craig Bond films and would really enjoy the connection in the films.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    edited February 12 Posts: 720
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I love Craig's Bond as well. But the sudden thought of EON to link his films still hurts me. It really hurts because it's just one film that undermined everything. SP should have been a standalone Bond film like SF and nothing would have been connected. Although, I think another generation that would come, wouldn't notice the retconning that didn't work with us. Because they didn't follow the films one after the other like we did. They'll just stumble on the 5 Craig Bond films and would really enjoy the connection in the films.

    Honestly, I don't mind the general thought that they are connected. Two things that bother me:
    1. The unnecessary brother angle, which NTTD might make even more infuriating by ignoring it altogether. I don't know how they could do it, but I would prefer it if they somehow gave us a reason for the connection to be there in the first place. I think others here are more of the opinion that it should never be brought up again.
    2. Pulling SF into all of this. You rightly said that there are clear connections between CR, QoS and SP (the Mr. White Trilogy, if you will) that will be extended in NTTD. SF is basically a completely different thing apart from the personnel situation at MI6 (M, Q and Moneypenny). Silva is retconned as having a SPECTRE connection, but there is no indication of that in SF itself. Silva is such an incredible villain with such personal and psychotic motives, that his being a subsidiary of SPECTRE diminishes him, even though it is good Bond tradition to have every villain, no matter how independent they are, have some connection to SMERSH/SPECTRE.
    That movie to me is this weird little gem inside this bigger arc that doesn't fit into the rest of it at all. It is all about aging and heritage and being obsolete and last stands and somehow it is the middle point of a five-movie arc? I prefer to think of it as it's own thing that kind of stands to the side of the rest of the Craig era. Especially, when they now seem to rehash some of the "old Bond" points with the last film of the actor's run, as they should.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 3,880
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I love Craig's Bond as well. But the sudden thought of EON to link his films still hurts me. It really hurts because it's just one film that undermined everything. SP should have been a standalone Bond film like SF and nothing would have been connected. Although, I think another generation that would come, wouldn't notice the retconning that didn't work with us. Because they didn't follow the films one after the other like we did. They'll just stumble on the 5 Craig Bond films and would really enjoy the connection in the films.

    Honestly, I don't mind the general thought that they are connected. Two things that bother me:
    1. The unnecessary brother angle, which NTTD might make even more infuriating by ignoring it altogether. I don't know how they could do it, but I would prefer it if they somehow gave us a reason for the connection to be there in the first place. I think others here are more of the opinion that it should never be brought up again.
    2. Pulling SF into all of this. You rightly said that there are clear connections between CR, QoS and SP (the Mr. White Trilogy, if you will) that will be extended in NTTD. SF is basically a completely different thing apart from the personnel situation at MI6 (M, Q and Moneypenny). Silva is retconned as having a SPECTRE connection, but there is no indication of that in SF itself. Silva is such an incredible villain with such personal and psychotic motives, that his being a subsidiary of SPECTRE diminishes him, even though it is good Bond tradition to have every villain, no matter how independent they are, have some connection to SMERSH/SPECTRE.
    That movie to me is this weird little gem inside this bigger arc that doesn't fit into the rest of it at all. It is all about aging and heritage and being obsolete and last stands and somehow it is the middle point of a five-movie arc? I prefer to think of it as it's own thing that kind of stands to the side of the rest of the Craig era. Especially, when they now seem to rehash some of the "old Bond" points with the last film of the actor's run, as they should.

    Yeah. That's it. And the aging and being obsolete thing would have even suited NTTD more, since he's coming back after leaving service. And maybe SF and SP should have continued to show him as the extremely aggressive 007 he was in CR & QoS, even if he introduced himself as Bond in CR's final scene.

    I think no matter what the plot of NTTD is or how it's handled, one thing that's certain is, it's going to be a return to CR & QoS' type of action....like right in our faces, which is what we expect from Craig's Bond. So that's already a positive sign for NTTD. NTTD could still be the perfect culmination of Craig's Bond, maybe that's why it has such a lengthy runtime.
  • Posts: 601
    Why can’t Bond be on television? Look how well MCU has slid into streaming. I feel that a Bond tv show, especially with the budget of a Disney plus show, can thrive in today’s world.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Costa Mucho
    Posts: 42,025
    Why can’t Bond be on television? Look how well MCU has slid into streaming. I feel that a Bond tv show, especially with the budget of a Disney plus show, can thrive in today’s world.

    It happened. 1954.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,333
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I love Craig's Bond as well. But the sudden thought of EON to link his films still hurts me. It really hurts because it's just one film that undermined everything. SP should have been a standalone Bond film like SF and nothing would have been connected. Although, I think another generation that would come, wouldn't notice the retconning that didn't work with us. Because they didn't follow the films one after the other like we did. They'll just stumble on the 5 Craig Bond films and would really enjoy the connection in the films.

    Honestly, I don't mind the general thought that they are connected. Two things that bother me:
    1. The unnecessary brother angle, which NTTD might make even more infuriating by ignoring it altogether. I don't know how they could do it, but I would prefer it if they somehow gave us a reason for the connection to be there in the first place. I think others here are more of the opinion that it should never be brought up again.
    2. Pulling SF into all of this. You rightly said that there are clear connections between CR, QoS and SP (the Mr. White Trilogy, if you will) that will be extended in NTTD. SF is basically a completely different thing apart from the personnel situation at MI6 (M, Q and Moneypenny). Silva is retconned as having a SPECTRE connection, but there is no indication of that in SF itself. Silva is such an incredible villain with such personal and psychotic motives, that his being a subsidiary of SPECTRE diminishes him, even though it is good Bond tradition to have every villain, no matter how independent they are, have some connection to SMERSH/SPECTRE.
    That movie to me is this weird little gem inside this bigger arc that doesn't fit into the rest of it at all. It is all about aging and heritage and being obsolete and last stands and somehow it is the middle point of a five-movie arc? I prefer to think of it as it's own thing that kind of stands to the side of the rest of the Craig era. Especially, when they now seem to rehash some of the "old Bond" points with the last film of the actor's run, as they should.

    The only clue, connecting SF and SP (which is kind of interesting), is Silva's use of sugar skulls in his computer messages to M.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited February 13 Posts: 9,352
    Silva works for the highest BEE-duh. Who would be the highest BEE-duh?

    SPECTRE is a natural connection and later reveal. It wouldn't serve the focus of the Skyfall story, also understanding the rights weren't available at the time.

    And the skulls are quite a visual connection as pointed out.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,156
    As Bond and Blofeld discuss their previous run ins and Bond realizes that Le Chiffre and Greene were operatives of SPECTRE I would have had him say, “Silva?
    After a pause Blofeld would reply, “ No.....he was brilliant, but too, impulsive; SPECTRE values discipline”.
    This is all that had to be mentioned of these characters; it would have loosely tied them to Blofeld without becoming convoluted. Mention them then move on.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 11,761
    Just getting back to NTTD for a minute:

    It took over a month, but finally, the third book arrived yesterday. Many thanks to @marketto007 @mtm @Torgeirtrap @MattiaDeVarti007 Well done guys.

    50938971331_6b46653840_o.jpg
    50939077622_6b1e114321_o.png
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,333
    QBranch wrote: »
    Just getting back to NTTD for a minute:

    It took over a month, but finally, the third book arrived yesterday. Many thanks to @marketto007 @mtm @Torgeirtrap @MattiaDeVarti007 Well done guys.

    50938971331_6b46653840_o.jpg
    50939077622_6b1e114321_o.png

    Love it!
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 11,761
    TripAces wrote: »
    Love it!
    Cheers! It's fun trying to re-enact the scene with what I have available.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,839
    I hadn't thought about those two photos being similar: looks like with those and the speargun he's always creeping around his house with a weapon. He should invest in a burglar alarm! Or doors.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,199


    A very in depth article from production sound mixer Simon Hayes about the Norwegian leg of the shoot.
Sign In or Register to comment.