No Time to Die production thread

17717727747767771208

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,517
    Broccoli and Wilson are 100% to blame for SP. They have the final say. If they don't, they have given up that power and authority over the direction of the series. If Purvis and Wade are bad writers, then its the ones who pay their wages who have to take responsibility for accepting their ideas and continually re-employing them.

    This is a great point. I'd happily put the blame for bad stories on P&W but I think you're 100% right.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    Posts: 280
    P&W did write two of my favourite Bond films (CR and SF) so I don't think they're completely talentless.
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 467
    Regarding the "Bond isn't relevant anymore" thing, you have to see the other side of the coin. In the first films, Bond was this great secret agent, who'd accomplish bigger and bigger things, until he basically saved the world in Thunderball. After that, everybody at MI6 would go on with what he'd suggest. The scenes with Moneypenny, Q or M, particularly in the Moore days, were on autopilot. They would just use some unordinary setting, like Abu Simbel or the wreck of the Queen Elizabeth to make them stand out.
    That's quite different from the books, where M keeps on having reservations on Bond, with a tenser relationship which they finally brought to the films when Judi Dench got the part.

    During the Brosnan and Craig years, the writers could have definitely come up with something more original. There may have been too many instances of a second act that's about Bond having to prove to his allies that he's the right guy for the job, with Skyfall being also in many ways a meta comment on the whole history of the franchise even more than on the particular Bond character played by Craig. But there was also a need to justify that a guy with such past achievements wouldn't get too much help provided by the MI6 or the CIA to crush an opponent, so he would have to stand on his own.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    OUQfamH.jpg
    uuE2raJ.jpg
    ZdKXKYc.jpg
    rW05fKK.jpg
    Wax4PNd.jpg
    ev0s7XS.jpg
    XTzt6XU.jpg
    UuqNeXF.jpg
    FOZuLTv.jpg
    LVfn7Ir.jpg
    naZg0xz.jpg
    k7rtjhr.jpg
    Va4fgFC.jpg
    aeAdvD0.jpg
    N90dnhO.jpg
    GO41fw1.jpg
    rjNOqGC.jpg
    lWebCxc.jpg
    dkKh1m8.jpg
    LVDmtjq.jpg
    Acpbe71.jpg
    vYKHzGr.jpg
    kb8FNkm.jpg
    PCx1edZ.jpg
    9nM4ADc.jpg
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    edited May 2020 Posts: 280
    Regarding the "Bond isn't relevant anymore" thing, you have to see the other side of the coin. In the first films, Bond was this great secret agent, who'd accomplish bigger and bigger things, until he basically saved the world in Thunderball. After that, everybody at MI6 would go on with what he'd suggest. The scenes with Moneypenny, Q or M, particularly in the Moore days, were on autopilot. They would just use some unordinary setting, like Abu Simbel or the wreck of the Queen Elizabeth to make them stand out.
    That's quite different from the books, where M keeps on having reservations on Bond, with a tenser relationship which they finally brought to the films when Judi Dench got the part.

    During the Brosnan and Craig years, the writers could have definitely come up with something more original. There may have been too many instances of a second act that's about Bond having to prove to his allies that he's the right guy for the job, with Skyfall being also in many ways a meta comment on the whole history of the franchise even more than on the particular Bond character played by Craig. But there was also a need to justify that a guy with such past achievements wouldn't get too much help provided by the MI6 or the CIA to crush an opponent, so he would have to stand on his own.
    Still, doing it twice in one era is overkill.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018
    @Pierce2Daniel Nope. No clapperboards in Safins lair that I know of.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited May 2020 Posts: 12,807
    Still another side to this item: it's been a longtime part of the formula that Bond is at odds with the bureaucrats. They've been dismissing him since Thunderball. Moonraker also comes to mind. It's cooked in that OO7 is a red-headed stepchild to them, they're ready to throw him under the bus when it suits them. And up front they don't approve of his methods.

    Not a new concept for the franchise. With Craig Bond, it makes sense that wouldn't be a one-off type element. It makes even more sense that our modern world would damn the person saving them. And that he'd do it anyway.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2020 Posts: 14,784
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Regarding the "Bond isn't relevant anymore" thing, you have to see the other side of the coin. In the first films, Bond was this great secret agent, who'd accomplish bigger and bigger things, until he basically saved the world in Thunderball. After that, everybody at MI6 would go on with what he'd suggest. The scenes with Moneypenny, Q or M, particularly in the Moore days, were on autopilot. They would just use some unordinary setting, like Abu Simbel or the wreck of the Queen Elizabeth to make them stand out.
    That's quite different from the books, where M keeps on having reservations on Bond, with a tenser relationship which they finally brought to the films when Judi Dench got the part.

    During the Brosnan and Craig years, the writers could have definitely come up with something more original. There may have been too many instances of a second act that's about Bond having to prove to his allies that he's the right guy for the job, with Skyfall being also in many ways a meta comment on the whole history of the franchise even more than on the particular Bond character played by Craig. But there was also a need to justify that a guy with such past achievements wouldn't get too much help provided by the MI6 or the CIA to crush an opponent, so he would have to stand on his own.

    Interesting. I always appreciate alternative points of view on Bond.

    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    edited May 2020 Posts: 1,255
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Agent_One wrote: »
    Honestly, it annoys me that they're doing the whole 'Bond isn't relevant anymore' plot only two films after Skyfall, and even there it didn't 100% work either. Why couldn't Bond just be on leave at the end of Spectre?

    I have pondered this many times.

    Because that’s how Purvis and Wade write. They’ve been dried up since their beginning. Sorry to beat a dead horse, folks. Them leaving for good after DC leaves is the number one thing that needs to happen.

    *offtopicbegins* But you do know, who first and foremost fuck up DAD? Not P&W, there was madman by the name of Lee Tamahori helming it and having the most ridiculous ideas of his worked into the shooting script. Only saying, because many people prefer to blame them for this mess. Tamahori wanted all that crap, and BB and MGW supported him on that. They use to do that with every director they hire. At least after shooting has started and the director did not walk out by himself.*offtopicends*
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited May 2020 Posts: 12,807
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,784
    Well I enjoyed the making of video. But continue the usual 'Daniel Craig's Bond films are crap' conversation by all means... 8-|
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    edited May 2020 Posts: 280
    mtm wrote: »
    Well I enjoyed the making of video. But continue the usual 'Daniel Craig's Bond films are crap' conversation by all means... 8-|

    His tenure is split right down the middle for me. I love Casino Royale and Skyfall...Quantum of Solace and Spectre, not so much (and even then there's quite a big drop between those two).
  • edited May 2020 Posts: 17,168
    mtm wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)

    There was the high-speed driving on the Atlantic Road. I imagine whatever action the V8 sees happens somewhere in that sequence, either before or after the shots they filmed on the AR.
  • Posts: 1,964
    I have a feeling god forbid if the pandemic happens again in November they will just move the movie to Netflix or something.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,784
    mtm wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)

    There was the high-speed driving on the Atlantic Road. I imagine whatever action the V8 sees happens somewhere in that sequence, either before or after the shots they filmed on the AR.

    It was just crushing on the Atlantic road in the helicopter bits we saw at the time. This Scotland stuff is all doubling for Norway so it looks like things presumably get a bit hairier for it while it’s there.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited May 2020 Posts: 12,807
    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    Craig Bond overcomes each villain's plot similar to Connery in Dr No. That's all.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,784
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    CraigBond stops Le Chiffre as much as ConneryBonds Goldfinger I.e he’s barely involved in stopping Goldfinger.
    I struggle to see how he didn’t defeat the other baddies he’s met either.

    This stuff is tiring.
  • Slots for 2021 releases are filling up. A decision needs to be made fairly quickly.
  • edited May 2020 Posts: 17,168
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)

    There was the high-speed driving on the Atlantic Road. I imagine whatever action the V8 sees happens somewhere in that sequence, either before or after the shots they filmed on the AR.

    It was just crushing on the Atlantic road in the helicopter bits we saw at the time. This Scotland stuff is all doubling for Norway so it looks like things presumably get a bit hairier for it while it’s there.

    Indeed, but there was more happening there than what we saw at the time, I believe – not just A to B driving. One article mentioned that they did a test stunt on a closed track the day before they started shooting on the Atlantic Road, where the Toyota was seen overtaking the Aston, and the Range Rovers doing some high-speed bits. I imagine whatever happens in that sequence progresses in danger from the AR shots to what they filmed in Scotland.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    mtm wrote: »
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    CraigBond stops Le Chiffre as much as ConneryBonds Goldfinger I.e he’s barely involved in stopping Goldfinger.
    I struggle to see how he didn’t defeat the other baddies he’s met either.

    This stuff is tiring.

    If it's tiring you can just turn in. You seem to have a real problem accepting any opinion other than Daniel Craig is the messiah.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    CraigBond stops Le Chiffre as much as ConneryBonds Goldfinger I.e he’s barely involved in stopping Goldfinger.
    I struggle to see how he didn’t defeat the other baddies he’s met either.

    This stuff is tiring.

    @FatherValentine likes to stir the pot.

    Advice for him: don't watch NTTD-- it won't satisfy. It's already a failure. Wait til the next guy-- he and his films will be perfect. Trust me.

    Hi Peter, not sure we've had the pleasure. Sorry you think that disliking SP is such an unlikely opinion to hold that me 'stirring the pot' is the only possible explanation.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited May 2020 Posts: 7,517
    mtm wrote: »
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    CraigBond stops Le Chiffre as much as ConneryBonds Goldfinger I.e he’s barely involved in stopping Goldfinger.
    I struggle to see how he didn’t defeat the other baddies he’s met either.

    This stuff is tiring.

    If it's tiring you can just turn in. You seem to have a real problem accepting any opinion other than Daniel Craig is the messiah.

    I've never seen @mtm claim Craig is the messiah, but your post was the one saying Connery was so much better than Craig. All @mtm's post seemed to be saying was that they're both good.

    Craig's Bond justified, through his actions, whatever "reputation" he has as an agent in those films. Never once was I taken out of one of his films by thinking, "wow, everyone thinks he's so great, but what has he done really?", nor has anyone I know who's seen the films. I think to argue otherwise is to really be searching for something to complain about.

    Connery and Craig were both heavily involved in all the plots that they were the center of, to my recollection. As were Laz, Moore, Dalt, and Broz. And before you get at me as well, Craig isn't my favourite Bond (but he's up there for sure).
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    mtm wrote: »
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    CraigBond stops Le Chiffre as much as ConneryBonds Goldfinger I.e he’s barely involved in stopping Goldfinger.
    I struggle to see how he didn’t defeat the other baddies he’s met either.

    This stuff is tiring.

    If it's tiring you can just turn in. You seem to have a real problem accepting any opinion other than Daniel Craig is the messiah.

    I've never seen @mtm claim Craig is the messiah, but your post was the one saying Connery was so much better than Craig. All @mtm's post seemed to be saying was that they're both good.

    Craig's Bond justified, through his actions, whatever "reputation" he has as an agent in those films. Never once was I taken out of one of his films by thinking, "wow, everyone thinks he's so great, but what has he done really?", nor has anyone I know who's seen the films. I think to argue otherwise is to really be searching for something to complain about.

    Connery and Craig were both heavily involved in all the plots that they were the center of, to my recollection. As were Laz, Moore, Dalt, and Broz. And before you get at me as well, Craig isn't my favourite Bond (but he's up there for sure).

    I wasn't getting at anyone, just replying to comments. My initial comment was in response to @HildebrandRarity, and didn't drag in anyone who didn't want to be a part of the conversation. My debate with @mtm has been ongoing for a few days, and has built out of a debate about NTTD. And I don't believe I am complaining, just explaining why I hold the opinions I do when asked.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)

    There was the high-speed driving on the Atlantic Road. I imagine whatever action the V8 sees happens somewhere in that sequence, either before or after the shots they filmed on the AR.

    It was just crushing on the Atlantic road in the helicopter bits we saw at the time. This Scotland stuff is all doubling for Norway so it looks like things presumably get a bit hairier for it while it’s there.

    Indeed, but there was more happening there than what we saw at the time, I believe – not just A to B driving. One article mentioned that they did a test stunt on a closed track the day before they started shooting on the Atlantic Road, where the Toyota was seen overtaking the Aston, and the Range Rovers doing some high-speed bits. I imagine whatever happens in that sequence progresses in danger from the AR shots to what they filmed in Scotland.

    Didn't we read somewhere, that the bridge got a bit damaged and left with heavy black line while performing the stunts.
    Regarding the "Bond isn't relevant anymore" thing, you have to see the other side of the coin. In the first films, Bond was this great secret agent, who'd accomplish bigger and bigger things, until he basically saved the world in Thunderball. After that, everybody at MI6 would go on with what he'd suggest. The scenes with Moneypenny, Q or M, particularly in the Moore days, were on autopilot. They would just use some unordinary setting, like Abu Simbel or the wreck of the Queen Elizabeth to make them stand out.
    That's quite different from the books, where M keeps on having reservations on Bond, with a tenser relationship which they finally brought to the films when Judi Dench got the part.

    During the Brosnan and Craig years, the writers could have definitely come up with something more original. There may have been too many instances of a second act that's about Bond having to prove to his allies that he's the right guy for the job, with Skyfall being also in many ways a meta comment on the whole history of the franchise even more than on the particular Bond character played by Craig. But there was also a need to justify that a guy with such past achievements wouldn't get too much help provided by the MI6 or the CIA to crush an opponent, so he would have to stand on his own.

    Interesting. I always appreciate alternative points of view on Bond.

    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    That depends on how general audience pursue it, box office result's and critics seems to be impressed with Craig Film's. Personal preference can be different, i don't have any issue with that but when you say "Craig had done nothing to justify that reputation" that is highly wrong. Craig isn't my favorite bond but he did earn that respect he is getting at the moment. Don't forget that he is the only actor in the series who was involved quite a lot in performing his own stunts (especially in QOS). Yes, he isn't exactly winning in every single films against bad guys like Connery, his film's have more bittersweet ending but that's because he isn't playing a cinematic bond, his film's are far more complex than that.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    peter wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    CraigBond stops Le Chiffre as much as ConneryBonds Goldfinger I.e he’s barely involved in stopping Goldfinger.
    I struggle to see how he didn’t defeat the other baddies he’s met either.

    This stuff is tiring.

    @FatherValentine likes to stir the pot.

    Advice for him: don't watch NTTD-- it won't satisfy. It's already a failure. Wait til the next guy-- he and his films will be perfect. Trust me.

    Hi Peter, not sure we've had the pleasure. Sorry you think that disliking SP is such an unlikely opinion to hold that me 'stirring the pot' is the only possible explanation.

    @FatherValentine , have you seen where SP rates for me? It’s in the bottom two or three.

    Anyways, you do seem like a passive aggressive gaslighter. Just my opinion.

    I am passive aggressive? You are the one who tagged me in a comment without addressing me directly.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2020 Posts: 14,784
    mtm wrote: »
    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    Actually wouldn't that ethos apply to Connery Bond if you're looking for the character to be justified.

    Rather than just understood up front as the best, as he's always been past and present. And based on performance in the field, it's justified as well.

    No, not in the slightest. Connery's Bond thwarts Spectre in DN. They attempt revenge in FRWL and he wins out. Then he stops Goldfinger and earns the respect and love of the US intelligence and political services. Then he averts nuclear devastation in TB and YOLT. He keeps getting better. Craig's Bond, whose achievements are all supposed to be one timeline, remember, comes nowhere close.

    CraigBond stops Le Chiffre as much as ConneryBonds Goldfinger I.e he’s barely involved in stopping Goldfinger.
    I struggle to see how he didn’t defeat the other baddies he’s met either.

    This stuff is tiring.

    If it's tiring you can just turn in. You seem to have a real problem accepting any opinion other than Daniel Craig is the messiah.

    What are you talking about? If you can counter the points I made in my post, do so. If not, leave it.
    I could well say you’re treating Connery like the messiah; where does that get us?
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)

    There was the high-speed driving on the Atlantic Road. I imagine whatever action the V8 sees happens somewhere in that sequence, either before or after the shots they filmed on the AR.

    It was just crushing on the Atlantic road in the helicopter bits we saw at the time. This Scotland stuff is all doubling for Norway so it looks like things presumably get a bit hairier for it while it’s there.

    Indeed, but there was more happening there than what we saw at the time, I believe – not just A to B driving. One article mentioned that they did a test stunt on a closed track the day before they started shooting on the Atlantic Road, where the Toyota was seen overtaking the Aston, and the Range Rovers doing some high-speed bits. I imagine whatever happens in that sequence progresses in danger from the AR shots to what they filmed in Scotland.

    Didn't we read somewhere, that the bridge got a bit damaged and left with heavy black line while performing the stunts.
    Regarding the "Bond isn't relevant anymore" thing, you have to see the other side of the coin. In the first films, Bond was this great secret agent, who'd accomplish bigger and bigger things, until he basically saved the world in Thunderball. After that, everybody at MI6 would go on with what he'd suggest. The scenes with Moneypenny, Q or M, particularly in the Moore days, were on autopilot. They would just use some unordinary setting, like Abu Simbel or the wreck of the Queen Elizabeth to make them stand out.
    That's quite different from the books, where M keeps on having reservations on Bond, with a tenser relationship which they finally brought to the films when Judi Dench got the part.

    During the Brosnan and Craig years, the writers could have definitely come up with something more original. There may have been too many instances of a second act that's about Bond having to prove to his allies that he's the right guy for the job, with Skyfall being also in many ways a meta comment on the whole history of the franchise even more than on the particular Bond character played by Craig. But there was also a need to justify that a guy with such past achievements wouldn't get too much help provided by the MI6 or the CIA to crush an opponent, so he would have to stand on his own.

    Interesting. I always appreciate alternative points of view on Bond.

    I think the problem is that, despite it being reboot, the franchise now relies upon the idea of Bond being a brilliant agent. But if you discount everything prior to Craig, which we should if it is a new timeline, then Craig's Bond has done nothing to justify having such a good reputation.

    That depends on how general audience pursue it, box office result's and critics seems to be impressed with Craig Film's. Personal preference can be different, i don't have any issue with that but when you say "Craig had done nothing to justify that reputation" that is highly wrong. Craig isn't my favorite bond but he did earn that respect he is getting at the moment. Don't forget that he is the only actor in the series who was involved quite a lot in performing his own stunts (especially in QOS). Yes, he isn't exactly winning in every single films against bad guys like Connery, his film's have more bittersweet ending but that's because he isn't playing a cinematic bond, his film's are far more complex than that.

    Hi @Resurrection. I think you have slightly misquoted me there. I didn't write that Daniel Craig has done nothing to earn his reputation, but that his version of James Bond, within the films, hasn't. By that I mean he hasn't saved many innocent people throughout the series - not directly anyway.

    For the record, Daniel Craig has absolutely earned his high praise and reputation as an actor and for his portrayal of Bond. He takes the role seriously, has got himself into excellent shape each time, looks great, and has contributed to many great moments in his 4 films because of his approach to the character. I agree with you there 100%. Any issue I have with his tenure is due to the creative decisions behind the camera, poor writing often, and the direction the series has taken.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2020 Posts: 14,784
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)

    There was the high-speed driving on the Atlantic Road. I imagine whatever action the V8 sees happens somewhere in that sequence, either before or after the shots they filmed on the AR.

    It was just crushing on the Atlantic road in the helicopter bits we saw at the time. This Scotland stuff is all doubling for Norway so it looks like things presumably get a bit hairier for it while it’s there.

    Indeed, but there was more happening there than what we saw at the time, I believe – not just A to B driving. One article mentioned that they did a test stunt on a closed track the day before they started shooting on the Atlantic Road, where the Toyota was seen overtaking the Aston, and the Range Rovers doing some high-speed bits. I imagine whatever happens in that sequence progresses in danger from the AR shots to what they filmed in Scotland.

    Didn't we read somewhere, that the bridge got a bit damaged and left with heavy black line while performing the stunts.

    Funnily enough I think the problem with that is that’s how they found the road when they arrived! Some sort of car club had been having fun there I think...?

    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Screencaps: Scotland location, second unit and stunt crew

    Thanks Contra, surprised no-one seems interested in this..?
    Contraband wrote: »
    Wax4PNd.jpg

    This is the one that interests me: they don't usually put those stunt driver rigs on top of cars for just standard driving scenes, do they? They're there for stunt driving, which suggests the V8 sees a bit of action. I'm not sure there was any hint of that before, was there?

    (Not much clearance on those wheelarches either! :) Have they lowered them?)

    There was the high-speed driving on the Atlantic Road. I imagine whatever action the V8 sees happens somewhere in that sequence, either before or after the shots they filmed on the AR.

    It was just crushing on the Atlantic road in the helicopter bits we saw at the time. This Scotland stuff is all doubling for Norway so it looks like things presumably get a bit hairier for it while it’s there.

    Indeed, but there was more happening there than what we saw at the time, I believe – not just A to B driving. One article mentioned that they did a test stunt on a closed track the day before they started shooting on the Atlantic Road, where the Toyota was seen overtaking the Aston, and the Range Rovers doing some high-speed bits. I imagine whatever happens in that sequence progresses in danger from the AR shots to what they filmed in Scotland.

    Yes it’ll be interesting to see how he gets from the Aston to the Toyota. It certainly looks like a lot of fun to have a fully off road car chase though. I can’t remember seeing that in anything before.
Sign In or Register to comment.