No Time to Die production thread

15655665685705711208

Comments

  • Posts: 14,753
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Safin being called "chilling" doesn't reassure me somehow. I was/am hoping for a barely contained psycho who does actually lose it at times ... reminiscent perhaps of Benecio's turn in LTK (only smarter). I don't want this villain underplayed too much (and I can hear the bleating of complaints if it is, similar to most people disliking Blofeld in Spectre). I want him to ooze evil and a sick mind, even without dialog. I'm curious as to what he'll do and am looking forward to this film. Cary tends to help actors bring good performances, so I'm hopeful for that reason too.

    I was hoping for a villain as uncontrolled as Max Zorin, but it looks like this will be something completely different.

    Well I'm in the other camp: in general I far prefer controlled and chilling villains than extraverted madmen.

    For me it's 50/50. For this film I would like the extraverted madman.

    I think controlled villains work better for Craig overall, also I think too often extroverted villains too often turn into untreatening caricatures. Not always, but too often.

    Fair point, but it would've been interesting to see a complete madman, IMO.

    To be honest, by and large among all the madmen villains I only find the Joker to be interesting. Particularly Heath Ledger's Joker. Otherwise I really loved John Hurt as Caligula in I, Claudius but then the character is so rich and nuanced that he's no longer a villain, but a tragic evil madman. And I don't think either could work in a Bond movie, unless considerably toned down. Silva is maybe the closest thing we've had for this type of character, and while I thought he was great his madness was restrained into an almost rational obsession.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,824
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.
    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.
    I took it to be both sinking and collapsing, since it was under repair.

  • Posts: 17,185
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Safin being called "chilling" doesn't reassure me somehow. I was/am hoping for a barely contained psycho who does actually lose it at times ... reminiscent perhaps of Benecio's turn in LTK (only smarter). I don't want this villain underplayed too much (and I can hear the bleating of complaints if it is, similar to most people disliking Blofeld in Spectre). I want him to ooze evil and a sick mind, even without dialog. I'm curious as to what he'll do and am looking forward to this film. Cary tends to help actors bring good performances, so I'm hopeful for that reason too.

    I was hoping for a villain as uncontrolled as Max Zorin, but it looks like this will be something completely different.

    Well I'm in the other camp: in general I far prefer controlled and chilling villains than extraverted madmen.

    For me it's 50/50. For this film I would like the extraverted madman.

    I think controlled villains work better for Craig overall, also I think too often extroverted villains too often turn into untreatening caricatures. Not always, but too often.

    Fair point, but it would've been interesting to see a complete madman, IMO.

    To be honest, by and large among all the madmen villains I only find the Joker to be interesting. Particularly Heath Ledger's Joker. Otherwise I really loved John Hurt as Caligula in I, Claudius but then the character is so rich and nuanced that he's no longer a villain, but a tragic evil madman. And I don't think either could work in a Bond movie, unless considerably toned down. Silva is maybe the closest thing we've had for this type of character, and while I thought he was great his madness was restrained into an almost rational obsession.

    Well, I think madmen can be quite interesting if done right. I like it when you have characters that can go completely unhinged. That's why I like Max Zorin.
  • Posts: 6,621
    echo wrote: »
    I really doubt we'll have a Bond-less PTS. It worked in the '70s when they weren't sure if they could replace Connery, but now that that's been established... Plus, "where is Bond?" is not something you want the audience wondering during the main title song.

    But I could be wrong.

    I have a strong feeling most people here are presuming wrong about the pts!
  • Posts: 14,753
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Safin being called "chilling" doesn't reassure me somehow. I was/am hoping for a barely contained psycho who does actually lose it at times ... reminiscent perhaps of Benecio's turn in LTK (only smarter). I don't want this villain underplayed too much (and I can hear the bleating of complaints if it is, similar to most people disliking Blofeld in Spectre). I want him to ooze evil and a sick mind, even without dialog. I'm curious as to what he'll do and am looking forward to this film. Cary tends to help actors bring good performances, so I'm hopeful for that reason too.

    I was hoping for a villain as uncontrolled as Max Zorin, but it looks like this will be something completely different.

    Well I'm in the other camp: in general I far prefer controlled and chilling villains than extraverted madmen.

    For me it's 50/50. For this film I would like the extraverted madman.

    I think controlled villains work better for Craig overall, also I think too often extroverted villains too often turn into untreatening caricatures. Not always, but too often.

    Fair point, but it would've been interesting to see a complete madman, IMO.

    To be honest, by and large among all the madmen villains I only find the Joker to be interesting. Particularly Heath Ledger's Joker. Otherwise I really loved John Hurt as Caligula in I, Claudius but then the character is so rich and nuanced that he's no longer a villain, but a tragic evil madman. And I don't think either could work in a Bond movie, unless considerably toned down. Silva is maybe the closest thing we've had for this type of character, and while I thought he was great his madness was restrained into an almost rational obsession.

    Well, I think madmen can be quite interesting if done right. I like it when you have characters that can go completely unhinged. That's why I like Max Zorin.

    I've never been a big fan of Zorin or AVTAK. They can be interesting if done right, it's just so darn rare to be done right and not come off as a poor man's Joker.
  • edited January 2020 Posts: 17,185
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Safin being called "chilling" doesn't reassure me somehow. I was/am hoping for a barely contained psycho who does actually lose it at times ... reminiscent perhaps of Benecio's turn in LTK (only smarter). I don't want this villain underplayed too much (and I can hear the bleating of complaints if it is, similar to most people disliking Blofeld in Spectre). I want him to ooze evil and a sick mind, even without dialog. I'm curious as to what he'll do and am looking forward to this film. Cary tends to help actors bring good performances, so I'm hopeful for that reason too.

    I was hoping for a villain as uncontrolled as Max Zorin, but it looks like this will be something completely different.

    Well I'm in the other camp: in general I far prefer controlled and chilling villains than extraverted madmen.

    For me it's 50/50. For this film I would like the extraverted madman.

    I think controlled villains work better for Craig overall, also I think too often extroverted villains too often turn into untreatening caricatures. Not always, but too often.

    Fair point, but it would've been interesting to see a complete madman, IMO.

    To be honest, by and large among all the madmen villains I only find the Joker to be interesting. Particularly Heath Ledger's Joker. Otherwise I really loved John Hurt as Caligula in I, Claudius but then the character is so rich and nuanced that he's no longer a villain, but a tragic evil madman. And I don't think either could work in a Bond movie, unless considerably toned down. Silva is maybe the closest thing we've had for this type of character, and while I thought he was great his madness was restrained into an almost rational obsession.

    Well, I think madmen can be quite interesting if done right. I like it when you have characters that can go completely unhinged. That's why I like Max Zorin.

    I've never been a big fan of Zorin or AVTAK. They can be interesting if done right, it's just so darn rare to be done right and not come off as a poor man's Joker.

    It's all preference of course. Zorin is a favourite of mine, and I'd love a Zorin-like madman again. And it's not like every madman character will be a copy of Joker either. There are ways to make a madman character it's own thing.
  • Posts: 14,753
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Safin being called "chilling" doesn't reassure me somehow. I was/am hoping for a barely contained psycho who does actually lose it at times ... reminiscent perhaps of Benecio's turn in LTK (only smarter). I don't want this villain underplayed too much (and I can hear the bleating of complaints if it is, similar to most people disliking Blofeld in Spectre). I want him to ooze evil and a sick mind, even without dialog. I'm curious as to what he'll do and am looking forward to this film. Cary tends to help actors bring good performances, so I'm hopeful for that reason too.

    I was hoping for a villain as uncontrolled as Max Zorin, but it looks like this will be something completely different.

    Well I'm in the other camp: in general I far prefer controlled and chilling villains than extraverted madmen.

    For me it's 50/50. For this film I would like the extraverted madman.

    I think controlled villains work better for Craig overall, also I think too often extroverted villains too often turn into untreatening caricatures. Not always, but too often.

    Fair point, but it would've been interesting to see a complete madman, IMO.

    To be honest, by and large among all the madmen villains I only find the Joker to be interesting. Particularly Heath Ledger's Joker. Otherwise I really loved John Hurt as Caligula in I, Claudius but then the character is so rich and nuanced that he's no longer a villain, but a tragic evil madman. And I don't think either could work in a Bond movie, unless considerably toned down. Silva is maybe the closest thing we've had for this type of character, and while I thought he was great his madness was restrained into an almost rational obsession.

    Well, I think madmen can be quite interesting if done right. I like it when you have characters that can go completely unhinged. That's why I like Max Zorin.

    I've never been a big fan of Zorin or AVTAK. They can be interesting if done right, it's just so darn rare to be done right and not come off as a poor man's Joker.

    It's all preference of course. Zorin is a favourite of mine, and I'd love a Zorin-like madman again. And it's not like every madman character will be a copy of Joker either. There are ways to make a madman character it's own thing.

    I know, it's just that too often they come off as poor man's Joker.
  • Posts: 17,185
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Safin being called "chilling" doesn't reassure me somehow. I was/am hoping for a barely contained psycho who does actually lose it at times ... reminiscent perhaps of Benecio's turn in LTK (only smarter). I don't want this villain underplayed too much (and I can hear the bleating of complaints if it is, similar to most people disliking Blofeld in Spectre). I want him to ooze evil and a sick mind, even without dialog. I'm curious as to what he'll do and am looking forward to this film. Cary tends to help actors bring good performances, so I'm hopeful for that reason too.

    I was hoping for a villain as uncontrolled as Max Zorin, but it looks like this will be something completely different.

    Well I'm in the other camp: in general I far prefer controlled and chilling villains than extraverted madmen.

    For me it's 50/50. For this film I would like the extraverted madman.

    I think controlled villains work better for Craig overall, also I think too often extroverted villains too often turn into untreatening caricatures. Not always, but too often.

    Fair point, but it would've been interesting to see a complete madman, IMO.

    To be honest, by and large among all the madmen villains I only find the Joker to be interesting. Particularly Heath Ledger's Joker. Otherwise I really loved John Hurt as Caligula in I, Claudius but then the character is so rich and nuanced that he's no longer a villain, but a tragic evil madman. And I don't think either could work in a Bond movie, unless considerably toned down. Silva is maybe the closest thing we've had for this type of character, and while I thought he was great his madness was restrained into an almost rational obsession.

    Well, I think madmen can be quite interesting if done right. I like it when you have characters that can go completely unhinged. That's why I like Max Zorin.

    I've never been a big fan of Zorin or AVTAK. They can be interesting if done right, it's just so darn rare to be done right and not come off as a poor man's Joker.

    It's all preference of course. Zorin is a favourite of mine, and I'd love a Zorin-like madman again. And it's not like every madman character will be a copy of Joker either. There are ways to make a madman character it's own thing.

    I know, it's just that too often they come off as poor man's Joker.

    Can't deny that of course. But with the right casting, direction and script, it could be done.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.

    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.

    I find it irrelevant, really. The tension is ratcheted up to the point where that’s the least of my worries. In terms of drama and action it’s about as good as the series gets for me.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,965
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.

    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.

    I find it irrelevant, really. The tension is ratcheted up to the point where that’s the least of my worries. In terms of drama and action it’s about as good as the series gets for me.

    Absolutely. Top notch work from the effects team, too.
  • Posts: 14,753
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.

    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.

    I find it irrelevant, really. The tension is ratcheted up to the point where that’s the least of my worries. In terms of drama and action it’s about as good as the series gets for me.

    Kind of like the tarantula in DN: in the real world it's not lethal, but it works in the film.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.

    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.

    I find it irrelevant, really. The tension is ratcheted up to the point where that’s the least of my worries. In terms of drama and action it’s about as good as the series gets for me.

    It's incredibly inventive regardless of its plausibility, we are talking about a Bond film even taking into account CR is one of the more realistic of entries in the series.

    Totally agree it is one of the best action set pieces which has ever appeared in a Bond film.

    You can dislike because it doesn't do what the novel does but I didn't for one moment think that it would. The books are the books, they can be referenced and this film was pretty faithful as a contemporary update but this film was not going to do that.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    edited January 2020 Posts: 3,018
    Watch the video. Damn beautiful woman

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.

    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.

    In terms of drama and action it’s about as good as the series gets for me.

    Yeah I feel the same. CR is by far my favorite Bond. Maybe it's the fact that I've been in Venice like 20 times and its quite close to my home city, but the concept always feels a little bit too much to me. From a thematic standpoint is interesting, since in that moment Bond's world is also collapsing in a way, but the practical angle is just... weird.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    edited January 2020 Posts: 3,018
    Golden Globes 2020




    Craig aint there to answer Bond questions:



    Stills

    Esc3SX9.jpg
    QFKDoa3.jpg
    CJEWLDP.jpg
    8lthUTF.jpg
    s80ksHj.jpg
    a1VrITE.jpg
    3hPsauM.jpg
    oSaGbWf.jpg
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Damn. Craig looks absolutely phenomenal. More handsome with age.
  • Posts: 12,210
    Contraband wrote: »

    Sorry - hadn’t watched it when I posted.

    Watching that bit with Craig: “That’s impossible” was quite awkward
  • Posts: 6,519
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »

    Sorry - hadn’t watched it when I posted.

    Watching that bit with Craig: “That’s impossible” was quite awkward

    Specially when the interviewer said "That is impossible" was a two word sentence.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    We all know Craig has never been that good with interviews.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018


  • Posts: 12,210
    Contraband wrote: »


    His Bond comments were nice. You can tell he has loved playing the part but wants to move on. I’m happy that’s he’s happy with it. Hopefully NTTD is a treat for all of us!
  • Posts: 11,425
    It's weird as an interview is a form of acting. You'd have thought he'd have got his head around it by now. Just playing another part that is the public version of himself.

    It doesn't really wash that an actor isn't very good at interviews.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited January 2020 Posts: 15,681
    Getafix wrote: »
    It's weird as an interview is a form of acting. You'd have thought he'd have got his head around it by now. Just playing another part that is the public version of himself.

    It doesn't really wash that an actor isn't very good at interviews.

    It's not like Hollywood legends like Harrison Ford or Robert De Niro aren't also very awkward and/or grumpy in certain interviews. It also depends on the interviewer. I always found that Graham Norton is the only one to get Ford at ease.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018
    You did not see this picture coming. Craig & Tarantino. That would be something, Craig directed by Tarantino in one of his weird upcoming projects. Pulp fiction on stereoids :D

    FiAIZAS.jpg

    BKLNDiY.jpg
    vYUrPBL.jpg
    nuMiBz1.jpg
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Getafix wrote: »
    It's weird as an interview is a form of acting. You'd have thought he'd have got his head around it by now. Just playing another part that is the public version of himself.

    It doesn't really wash that an actor isn't very good at interviews.

    It's not like Hollywood legends like Harrison Ford or Robert De Niro aren't also very awkward and/or grumpy in certain interviews. It also depends on the interviewer. I always found that Graham Norton is the only one to get Ford at ease.

    Graham is a rare talent, he knows how to be funny without insulting someone. Can't wait to see Craig and cast of NTTD on the show, i am still wondering who will be come with him this time 🤔.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,681
    A shame we didn’t get another picture like this last night:
    C65555-B2-7703-452-D-AE48-B5-E4-A8-F52-A00.jpg

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,792
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.

    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.

    In terms of drama and action it’s about as good as the series gets for me.

    Yeah I feel the same. CR is by far my favorite Bond. Maybe it's the fact that I've been in Venice like 20 times and its quite close to my home city, but the concept always feels a little bit too much to me. From a thematic standpoint is interesting, since in that moment Bond's world is also collapsing in a way, but the practical angle is just... weird.

    Yeah I find it a bit forced. Feels like they’re slightly struggling to find a ‘big’ ending.
    How deep are those canals supposed to be?! :D
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    mtm wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    CR third act is excellent.

    Yes it’s pretty good. The only thing I hate is the concept of an entire building sinking in Venice 5 meters deep waters. Too silly, given how grounded the movie is.

    In terms of drama and action it’s about as good as the series gets for me.

    Yeah I feel the same. CR is by far my favorite Bond. Maybe it's the fact that I've been in Venice like 20 times and its quite close to my home city, but the concept always feels a little bit too much to me. From a thematic standpoint is interesting, since in that moment Bond's world is also collapsing in a way, but the practical angle is just... weird.

    Yeah I find it a bit forced. Feels like they’re slightly struggling to find a ‘big’ ending.
    How deep are those canals supposed to be?! :D

    Canal Grande is 5 meters deep.
Sign In or Register to comment.