› › ›

No Time to Die production thread

1…156157159161162…1208

Comments

  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    I'm unsure if the actress, Nicola Thorp, is working on Bond 25 or is a friend of Lynch's but she posted this on Twitter:





    Nicola Thorp was on set at Pinewood Studios with Lashana in June 2019
    Nicola Thorp is not the only one to act as if she wants to empower women but uses comments that Sound more anti-male than pro-female. That´s why I don´t like this female 007 idea per se. Of Course it all depends totally on how it is handled in the film, and it is well possible that Fukunaga makes something subtle and entertaining out of it.
    But widening the chasm between men and women isn´t going to empower either of them. What we need to empower women is to acknowledge the differences and work with one another. I don´t see this approach in anything concerning this female 007 rumours. Ok, so a female gets the 007 moniker, hurrah, what a Statement. But then she´ll get rid of it again, doesn´t she? So why is that? Is she after all a woman and not strong enough to carry that number, or what? I find it hard to see much sense here.

    Exactly +1
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited July 2019 Posts: 8,087
    If Babs thinks this black 007 gimmick will win favour with fans then its a serious error of judgement. Just be glad they are getting this **** out of the way with Craigs last "experiemental art piece", so we can clear the decks with Bond 26. As far as I'm concerned they can do what they like with this film, and if the movie fails to do as well as Skyfall and SP, its their own fault.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    matt_u wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    dragonsky wrote: »
    Yowie, wowie, I've read a lot of people who are not using any logic regarding the "new 007" news, Jesus, this should not be this controversial to any smart Bond fans.

    The only thing people should complain is "Hmm..is Bond being retired a good plot? is this overdone? underdone?" etc

    Complaining about a rumour which will eventually lead to some BS "007 goes on a mission dies in first 5 minutes forcing M to say "eh, this is the 10th 007 I've lost in the last year time to call back Bond" means you are getting played.


    Hasn't he only had one 007 and that would be Bond.

    No, in Forever and a Day Bond adopts 007 from a dead agent. I like to think FAAD and TM are quite canonical.

    Like many here, I'm utterly bewildered by the backlash from some members who can't get to grips with Mi6 giving the 007 number to an active agent when Bond is inactive, and, it seems, when Bond 25 begins he has been retired for several years. It makes perfect sense for the 007 code to be passed on, and, in terms of the storytelling and characters, this move also offers so much playful drama, which is why I believe Craig wanted PWB to step in and bring more wit and a strong female voice to the screenplay. If the new agent was simply 008 or 009, then there would be no issue for Bond (or some of the members on this forum), but the fact that the agent has "his" number must prick Bond's ego, and that offers plenty of opportunities for drama (perhaps questions about how Bond perceives his own identity etc.) and humour for a writer like PWB.

    All it is making Bond a side piece in his own film for a political movement.

    Nonsense.

    Utterly nonsense.

    And this is the ultimate proof that these strong negative opinions regarding Lynch taking the codename - without knowing nothing at all about how they will handle this twist and who will be 007 by the end of the film - are not just driven by preferences, like someone said it before, but by PREJUDICE.

    So we are racist and sexist for having a different opinion interesting.

    Prejudice can be driven my many things. Sometimes yes, can be driven by latent racism or sexism. But inhere the prejudice against this premise - a narrative twist completely new to the Bond world - is driven just by fear of change and mind-closeness.

    I'm for change but not this.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    If Babs thinks this black 007 gimmick will win favour with fans then its a serious error of judgement. Just be glad they are getting this **** out of the way with Craigs last "experiemental art piece", so we can clear the decks with Bond 26. As far as I'm concerned they can do what they like with this film, and if the movie fails to do as well as Skyfall and SP, its their own fault.

    SF and SP are the biggest hits of the franchise since the Sixties. What a fail for EoN.

    The decks will be cleared for B26 only if 25 bombs. As long as this more authorial, deconstructive and personal approach will pay, you better find another franchise to follow.
  • ColonelSunColonelSun
    Posts: 1,453
    matt_u wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    dragonsky wrote: »
    Yowie, wowie, I've read a lot of people who are not using any logic regarding the "new 007" news, Jesus, this should not be this controversial to any smart Bond fans.

    The only thing people should complain is "Hmm..is Bond being retired a good plot? is this overdone? underdone?" etc

    Complaining about a rumour which will eventually lead to some BS "007 goes on a mission dies in first 5 minutes forcing M to say "eh, this is the 10th 007 I've lost in the last year time to call back Bond" means you are getting played.


    Hasn't he only had one 007 and that would be Bond.

    No, in Forever and a Day Bond adopts 007 from a dead agent. I like to think FAAD and TM are quite canonical.

    Like many here, I'm utterly bewildered by the backlash from some members who can't get to grips with Mi6 giving the 007 number to an active agent when Bond is inactive, and, it seems, when Bond 25 begins he has been retired for several years. It makes perfect sense for the 007 code to be passed on, and, in terms of the storytelling and characters, this move also offers so much playful drama, which is why I believe Craig wanted PWB to step in and bring more wit and a strong female voice to the screenplay. If the new agent was simply 008 or 009, then there would be no issue for Bond (or some of the members on this forum), but the fact that the agent has "his" number must prick Bond's ego, and that offers plenty of opportunities for drama (perhaps questions about how Bond perceives his own identity etc.) and humour for a writer like PWB.

    All it is making Bond a side piece in his own film for a political movement.

    Nonsense.

    Utterly nonsense.

    And this is the ultimate proof that these strong negative opinions regarding Lynch taking the codename - without knowing nothing at all about how they will handle this twist and who will be 007 by the end of the film - are not just driven by preferences, like someone said it before, but by PREJUDICE.

    So we are racist and sexist for having a different opinion interesting.

    Prejudice can be driven my many things. Sometimes yes, can be driven by latent racism or sexism. But inhere the prejudice against this premise - a narrative twist completely new to the Bond world - is driven just by fear of change and mind-closeness.

    And the thing is, those arguing against the new 007 seem to be saying; A/ Only a man called James Bond can be 007. B/ The casting of a black woman is just a PC move.

    Those arguments seem pretty flimsy when we already know, with Bond 25, they are making huge efforts to create rounded and intriguing female characters, hence the hiring of a very talented and sharp minded female writer to focus on the characters.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    HildebrandRarity wrote: »
    007 is not part of Bond's identity. It's mostly part of the marketing.
    To the audience it is. I for my part would lose a lot of fun if it was just James Bond without the number 007. It´s brilliant iconography.

  • acidieacidie
    Posts: 152
    4EverBonded wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ok so just to sum up we have a James Bond film directed by Cary Fukunaga and written by Neal Purvis and Robert Wade with some heavy revisions done by Cary Fukunaga, Phoebe Waller-Bridge and Scott Z. Burns, and cinematography by Linus Sandgren. We have a seemingly larger-than-life villain played by Rami Malek, with a possible Hannibal-esque interaction between Waltz' Blofeld and Madeleine Swann, and two new beautiful Bond girls, one of whom is a 00 agent and a mysterious woman played by Ana de Armas, with a plot with heavy stakes. I'm in.

    Tried to skim thru comments to find: a) news ... and b) sanity
    So basically yeah this sums it up nicely.
    I'm all in for Bond 25. Looking forward to the trailer very much.
    Not concerned about anything, honestly. Roll on, Cary and crew. B-)


    Yep, im with you.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    edited July 2019 Posts: 3,126
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.
  • duke_togoduke_togo france
    Posts: 138
    if the rumor is true she is the hottest 007 ever...

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2019 Posts: 14,961
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Did you not see him wearing suits, driving Aston Martins and living in Jamaica carrying a speargun? :)
    Seems pretty bang-on 'Bond' to me!
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,087
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Correct.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    dragonsky wrote: »
    Yowie, wowie, I've read a lot of people who are not using any logic regarding the "new 007" news, Jesus, this should not be this controversial to any smart Bond fans.

    The only thing people should complain is "Hmm..is Bond being retired a good plot? is this overdone? underdone?" etc

    Complaining about a rumour which will eventually lead to some BS "007 goes on a mission dies in first 5 minutes forcing M to say "eh, this is the 10th 007 I've lost in the last year time to call back Bond" means you are getting played.


    Hasn't he only had one 007 and that would be Bond.

    No, in Forever and a Day Bond adopts 007 from a dead agent. I like to think FAAD and TM are quite canonical.

    Like many here, I'm utterly bewildered by the backlash from some members who can't get to grips with Mi6 giving the 007 number to an active agent when Bond is inactive, and, it seems, when Bond 25 begins he has been retired for several years. It makes perfect sense for the 007 code to be passed on, and, in terms of the storytelling and characters, this move also offers so much playful drama, which is why I believe Craig wanted PWB to step in and bring more wit and a strong female voice to the screenplay. If the new agent was simply 008 or 009, then there would be no issue for Bond (or some of the members on this forum), but the fact that the agent has "his" number must prick Bond's ego, and that offers plenty of opportunities for drama (perhaps questions about how Bond perceives his own identity etc.) and humour for a writer like PWB.

    Thank you, @ColonelSun . I'm with you on this. And I'm trying just to skim here for news, without getting bogged down into the explosions of angst and bickering.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited July 2019 Posts: 4,343
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    They're making an action movie where James Bond is the hero of the story, a movie with uber Bondian locations, hot girls, fast cars, a world threatening villainous scheme and historical Bond characters coming back. What they are doing here is just putting Bond in a position he never had the chance to deal with in 50+ years, as a logic consequence of what Bond himself chose to do in the latest installment.

    This is not rocket science either.
  • antovolkantovolk
    edited July 2019 Posts: 3,164
    While some older fans may leave, new younger and more diverse fans - who may have avoided previous Bond films because of of their sensibilities - will be gained. The fan base evolves, just like the film series does.

    Have been seeing quite a bit of 'now I'm interested in this film' from people on social media.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2019 Posts: 14,961
    I kind of don't know how you couldn't write this, to be honest. As he's left the service you kind of have to show his replacement when he goes back, and as Bond is pretty much the most famous sexist in the world (well, if you ignore certain Presidents!) the dramatic irony of having a woman replace him is impossible to resist- to the extent that I actually can't think of another option. Having another man who's really similar to him just isn't interesting; maybe you could do a story about him being shown up by a younger model only for Bond to prevail in the end, but feels a bit played out by Skyfall's 'old dog' plot. The only option is to have him replaced by a guy who turns out to be the villain, and that's probably what'll happen here anyway.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited July 2019 Posts: 4,343
    antovolk wrote: »
    While some older fans may leave, new younger and more diverse fans - who may have avoided previous Bond films because of of their sensibilities - will be gained. The fan base evolves, just like the film series does.

    Have been seeing quite a bit of 'now I'm interested in this film' from people on social media.

    Waiting for someone's comment like "evolving doesn't mean destroying" in 3,2,1...

    BTW, I don't think the franchise needs a fanbase that wants Goldeneye all over again.
  • Commander_JimCommander_Jim Sydney
    edited July 2019 Posts: 2
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited July 2019 Posts: 2,541
    boldfinger wrote: »
    HildebrandRarity wrote: »
    007 is not part of Bond's identity. It's mostly part of the marketing.
    To the audience it is. I for my part would lose a lot of fun if it was just James Bond without the number 007. It´s brilliant iconography.

    Same here
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Correct.

    +1
    antovolk wrote: »
    While some older fans may leave, new younger and more diverse fans - who may have avoided previous Bond films because of of their sensibilities - will be gained. The fan base evolves, just like the film series does.

    Have been seeing quite a bit of 'now I'm interested in this film' from people on social media.

    Take a closer look at the all the social media majority of them are already boycotting or disgusted by this idea
    How Many of them do you think are older or younger fans.

    If this rumour is true or not this news did gave the attention EON or Universal looking for. Films Marketing just got boosted on a whole different level although it's really hard to predict box office at this point.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited July 2019 Posts: 4,343
    In more or less 2 weeks we could have a teaser trailer and a title.

    Tempus fugit.

    EDIT: I wouldn't call this a rumor anymore. We knew since a lot that Lynch was going to play an MI6 agent and many months ago Sassilive reported that Bond had a scene in a church with his replacement at MI6.
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,169
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    This could just be a rumor remember this everyone. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6919481/amp/Fleabag-stars-latest-creation-MeToo-makeover-James-Bond.html

    "This will be a very modern Bond for the MeToo era."

    Hasn't Bond treated women properly the last decade or so? So what's new? I don't get it.
    Are they going to strip Bond of all his masculinity or something?
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,677
    matt_u wrote: »
    In more or less 2 weeks we could have a teaser trailer and a title.

    Tempus fugit.

    Hope so ;)

    What about a teaser poster? When do you think we'll have one of those? A brilliant one, I hope, unlike the last three.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,293
    matt_u wrote: »
    In more or less 2 weeks we could have a teaser trailer and a title.

    giphy.gif
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    matt_u wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    They're making an action movie where James Bond is the hero of the story, a movie with uber Bondian locations, hot girls, fast cars, a world threatening villainous scheme and historical Bond characters coming back. What they are doing here is just putting Bond in a position he never had the chance to deal with in 50+ years, as a logic consequence of what Bond himself chose to do in the latest installment.

    This is not rocket science either.

    True I just think the backlash out ways the positives.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Did you not see him wearing suits, driving Aston Martins and living in Jamaica carrying a speargun? :)
    Seems pretty bang-on 'Bond' to me!

    Very funny
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2019 Posts: 14,961
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Did you not see him wearing suits, driving Aston Martins and living in Jamaica carrying a speargun? :)
    Seems pretty bang-on 'Bond' to me!

    Very funny

    Funny? It's true! Did you not see any of those things and think it seemed like Bond?

    Does the knowledge he's got a little secret identity card in his wallet that says '007' on it make those scenes better somehow? He doesn't become someone else just because he's not wearing secret 007 identity ring or whatever :D
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2019 Posts: 14,961
    Resurrection wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    HildebrandRarity wrote: »
    007 is not part of Bond's identity. It's mostly part of the marketing.
    To the audience it is. I for my part would lose a lot of fun if it was just James Bond without the number 007. It´s brilliant iconography.

    Same here

    He gave up being 007 four years ago; did you think people would go around calling him 007 once he's retired? :D

    Look at the Red Bull F1 cars this weekend: they had the 007 logo all over them. The '007 iconography' isn't going anywhere. I'm not sure what you guys are worried about.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Did you not see him wearing suits, driving Aston Martins and living in Jamaica carrying a speargun? :)
    Seems pretty bang-on 'Bond' to me!

    Very funny

    Funny? It's true! Did you not see any of those things and think it seemed like Bond?

    Does the knowledge he's got a little secret identity card in his wallet that says '007' on it make those scenes better somehow? He doesn't become someone else just because he's not wearing secret 007 identity ring or whatever :D

    Does he get it back? How are people supposed to identify James Bond from the public?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2019 Posts: 14,961
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Did you not see him wearing suits, driving Aston Martins and living in Jamaica carrying a speargun? :)
    Seems pretty bang-on 'Bond' to me!

    Very funny

    Funny? It's true! Did you not see any of those things and think it seemed like Bond?

    Does the knowledge he's got a little secret identity card in his wallet that says '007' on it make those scenes better somehow? He doesn't become someone else just because he's not wearing secret 007 identity ring or whatever :D

    Does he get it back? How are people supposed to identify James Bond from the public?

    Well he's a secret agent: you're not supposed to identify him!

    And I'm willing to bet that yes, of course he gets it back. Because ultimately he's James Bond 007, yes. But it's like the examples of Batman or whatever that other folk gave- Alfred occasionally dresses in the outfit and is Batman briefly, but it's always Bruce Wayne in the end. And even when it's not (as in Dark Knight Rises), guess what- the series gets rebooted and Bruce is Batman again.
    How does he get the 007 number back? Well either she dies, gives it up, or she's a baddie and dies! There's just nothing to worry about here.

    I don't understand how anyone could be watching a brilliant action scene, or tense showdown with a villain or whatever and be unable to enjoy it because of the worry in the back of their head that he's not 007 at that moment.
    I mean look at this:

    678_1.jpg
    maxresdefault.jpg


    Did you hate these scenes? Because you realise you're not looking at 007 there..?
    He's just plain old James Bond. Double-O zero.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    The farther they move away from any sort of Bond anything more fans will leave. It's not rocket science.

    Did you not see him wearing suits, driving Aston Martins and living in Jamaica carrying a speargun? :)
    Seems pretty bang-on 'Bond' to me!

    Very funny

    Funny? It's true! Did you not see any of those things and think it seemed like Bond?

    Does the knowledge he's got a little secret identity card in his wallet that says '007' on it make those scenes better somehow? He doesn't become someone else just because he's not wearing secret 007 identity ring or whatever :D

    Does he get it back? How are people supposed to identify James Bond from the public?

    Well he's a secret agent: you're not supposed to identify him!

    And I'm willing to bet that yes, of course he gets it back. Because ultimately he's James Bond 007, yes. But it's like the examples of Batman or whatever that other folk gave- Alfred occasionally dresses in the outfit and is Batman briefly, but it's always Bruce Wayne in the end. And even when it's not (as in Dark Knight Rises), guess what- the series gets rebooted and Bruce is Batman again.
    How does he get the 007 number back? Well either she dies, gives it up, or she's a baddie and dies! There's just nothing to worry about here.

    A baddie would be a good twist.
  • ZekidkZekidk
    Posts: 3,169
    antovolk wrote: »
    While some older fans may leave, new younger and more diverse fans - who may have avoided previous Bond films because of of their sensibilities - will be gained.

    "007 is set to get dragged into the 21st Century with a feminist makeover"
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/8942445/james-bond-feminist-icon-fleabag-phoebe-waller-bridge/

    As we all know, Bond is a sexist dinosaur who doesn't treat women properly....or something. So there we have it: B25 - the feminism entry.
Sign In or Register to comment.