› › ›

No Time to Die production thread

1…773774776778779…1208

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Sure @NickTwentyTwo, having YKMN in different Renditions in the score, not having it as the opening song of each film. @Agent_One that's why I said much like the '007' theme from the older films.

    It seemed like they were trying to do something like this in Skyfall/Spectre with the "Grand Bazaar" song recurring in the Mexico sequence in Spectre... the only way I could appreciate it was reasoning that maybe they were trying to create a secondary theme for Craig, much like "007" as you said.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited April 2020 Posts: 4,247
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Sure @NickTwentyTwo, having YKMN in different Renditions in the score, not having it as the opening song of each film. @Agent_One that's why I said much like the '007' theme from the older films.

    It seemed like they were trying to do something like this in Skyfall/Spectre with the "Grand Bazaar" song recurring in the Mexico sequence in Spectre... the only way I could appreciate it was reasoning that maybe they were trying to create a secondary theme for Craig, much like "007" as you said.

    Exactly, the 'Grand Bazaar/Istanbul' seems to be Newman's favourite Bond track. It was also featured in 'Backfire' in SP. I would have also appreciated it more, if it were YKMN that was used that way. I still find myself listening to YKMN everyday.....after all these years, coz it's that good & enduring. It really should have been Craig's Secondary Bond theme. The song i feel, really sums up everything about Craig's Bond & it Suits his portrayal of 007.

    Like the '007' theme there's a genuine feeling of urgency in YKMN. Since Craig's Bond is all about Continuity, they should have made YKMN a recurring thing.

    It's unusual to feature a Bond Title Song in the scores of other Bond films. Even if Ballads are also very good....I feel YKMN being a Bondian Rock theme would have easily worked in the other Craig films....coz the DNA of the song already has an action vibe, like a track from a Bond Score.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Sure @NickTwentyTwo, having YKMN in different Renditions in the score, not having it as the opening song of each film. @Agent_One that's why I said much like the '007' theme from the older films.

    It seemed like they were trying to do something like this in Skyfall/Spectre with the "Grand Bazaar" song recurring in the Mexico sequence in Spectre... the only way I could appreciate it was reasoning that maybe they were trying to create a secondary theme for Craig, much like "007" as you said.

    Exactly, the 'Grand Bazaar/Istanbul' seems to be Newman's favourite Bond track. It was also featured in 'Backfire' in SP. I would have also appreciated it more, if it were YKMN that was used that way. I still find myself listening to YKMN everyday.....after all these years, coz it's that good & enduring. It really should have been Craig's Secondary Bond theme. The song i feel, really sums up everything about Craig's Bond & it Suits his portrayal of 007.

    Like the '007' theme there's a genuine feeling of urgency in YKMN. Since Craig's Bond is all about Continuity, they should have made YKMN a recurring thing.

    It's unusual to feature a Bond Title Song in the scores of other Bond films. Even if Ballads are also very good....I feel YKMN being a Bondian Rock theme would have easily worked in the other Craig films....coz the DNA of the song already has an action vibe, like a track from a Bond Score.

    I'm not sure licensing would allow for that...or that it would be easy to do.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,026
    There's a few nods to YKMN in the QoS score as is, if I remember correctly?
  • delfloriadelfloria
    edited April 2020 Posts: 1,706
    HildebrandRarity wrote: »
    How much screen time does Dr. No actually get in the finished film? He just shows up for the last 20 minutes. He's only "iconic" as he's the title character at the centre of the mystery and he's the prototype for the much more colourful and entertaining villains who came up next. But the character itself is rather terse, and he's mostly memorable because of the hands. Ask people to pick between Blofeld, Goldfinger, Largo, Stromberg, Janus, Scaramanga, Le Chiffre, Silva and Julius No, and I doubt that hardly any serious fan would have No as their iconic villain.

    Besides, it's definitely not a good idea for EON to celebrate now a character played by a Canadian actor in yellowface in 1962.

    As a matter of fact I WOULD place Dr. No above Largo, Stromberg, Janus Scaramanga, LeChiffre and Silva.
  • delfloriadelfloria
    edited April 2020 Posts: 1,706
    delfloria wrote: »
    HildebrandRarity wrote: »
    How much screen time does Dr. No actually get in the finished film? He just shows up for the last 20 minutes. He's only "iconic" as he's the title character at the centre of the mystery and he's the prototype for the much more colourful and entertaining villains who came up next. But the character itself is rather terse, and he's mostly memorable because of the hands. Ask people to pick between Blofeld, Goldfinger, Largo, Stromberg, Janus, Scaramanga, Le Chiffre, Silva and Julius No, and I doubt that hardly any serious fan would have No as their iconic villain.

    Besides, it's definitely not a good idea for EON to celebrate now a character played by a Canadian actor in yellowface in 1962.

    As a matter of fact I WOULD place Dr. No, as ICONIC, well above Largo, Stromberg, Janus Scaramanga, LeChiffre and Silva. Other than Dr. No, I don't think the average person would even recognize these other villains or their connection to James Bond.

    omit
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    TripAces wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Sure @NickTwentyTwo, having YKMN in different Renditions in the score, not having it as the opening song of each film. @Agent_One that's why I said much like the '007' theme from the older films.

    It seemed like they were trying to do something like this in Skyfall/Spectre with the "Grand Bazaar" song recurring in the Mexico sequence in Spectre... the only way I could appreciate it was reasoning that maybe they were trying to create a secondary theme for Craig, much like "007" as you said.

    Exactly, the 'Grand Bazaar/Istanbul' seems to be Newman's favourite Bond track. It was also featured in 'Backfire' in SP. I would have also appreciated it more, if it were YKMN that was used that way. I still find myself listening to YKMN everyday.....after all these years, coz it's that good & enduring. It really should have been Craig's Secondary Bond theme. The song i feel, really sums up everything about Craig's Bond & it Suits his portrayal of 007.

    Like the '007' theme there's a genuine feeling of urgency in YKMN. Since Craig's Bond is all about Continuity, they should have made YKMN a recurring thing.

    It's unusual to feature a Bond Title Song in the scores of other Bond films. Even if Ballads are also very good....I feel YKMN being a Bondian Rock theme would have easily worked in the other Craig films....coz the DNA of the song already has an action vibe, like a track from a Bond Score.

    I'm not sure licensing would allow for that...or that it would be easy to do.

    Yeah, well...I think it would have been possible....if EON really, really wanted it that way, they would have gotten it done.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    There's a few nods to YKMN in the QoS score as is, if I remember correctly?

    Yeah, I think the reason is, the first few seconds of Jack White & Alicia Key's Another Way To Die, sounds a bit like YKMN. Am sure Arnold felt the same way, that's why he featured the song in the tracks-'Time To Get Out' & 'The Palio'. I think QoS is the only film Arnold used a song, he didn't work on, in his score.
  • phantomvicesphantomvices Mother Base
    edited April 2020 Posts: 469
    FatherValentine wrote: »
    I can live with, and even like, the flaws of previous Bond films if they are made with the right intentions. If it's a moment of naffness, or it's outdated, or a camp tone etc. then I don't mind. But I think with Craig's films that they genuinely believe they are making better films than what came during the pre-Craig era. There's a certain smugness, as if they are being made by people who don't like James Bond films. (I don't get this with CR - i think that one is incredible).

    Consider the moment in SF when Q makes the exploding pen quip. Ok, it's quite funny I suppose. But it would have been even funnier, and far less smug, if they had included a moment later in the film where Bond could have done with an exploding pen - such as when he's in the tube tunnel and can't get through the door with the train coming; "You know what I could do with now Q? An exploding pen." - that sort of thing.

    I think that by giving all the power over to the director, there is far too much emphasis on a single vision that never used to be the case when Broccoli and Saltzman would come up with ideas for set pieces etc. I genuinely don't believe for one second that Forster or Mendes are fans of James Bond, or have any appreciation of the history or what fans might like.

    I say all this knowing that evolution is inevitable and necessary, and that you don't need die hard fans of the franchise directing to make good films (and might even be counter productive). I am just giving my thoughts.

    I still have hopes for NTTD of course, and everyone involved in production is making the right noises, but personally I don't really like where it seems they are taking it and for the first time ever I am not looking forward to seeing what its like.

    All of this. And this also applies to a large amount of fans that I see on other forums who dogpile people for not thinking that Craig is the best. It's a attitude that seems based on competition and superiority and it's full on irritating, especially when you just want to have a casual conversation about Bond - these people will always turn it into a pissing contest no matter what.

    Still, it's easy to avoid these types of Craig fans. How do you identify one? Don't worry, they'll tell you.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    FatherValentine wrote: »
    I can live with, and even like, the flaws of previous Bond films if they are made with the right intentions. If it's a moment of naffness, or it's outdated, or a camp tone etc. then I don't mind. But I think with Craig's films that they genuinely believe they are making better films than what came during the pre-Craig era. There's a certain smugness, as if they are being made by people who don't like James Bond films. (I don't get this with CR - i think that one is incredible).

    Consider the moment in SF when Q makes the exploding pen quip. Ok, it's quite funny I suppose. But it would have been even funnier, and far less smug, if they had included a moment later in the film where Bond could have done with an exploding pen - such as when he's in the tube tunnel and can't get through the door with the train coming; "You know what I could do with now Q? An exploding pen." - that sort of thing.

    I think that by giving all the power over to the director, there is far too much emphasis on a single vision that never used to be the case when Broccoli and Saltzman would come up with ideas for set pieces etc. I genuinely don't believe for one second that Forster or Mendes are fans of James Bond, or have any appreciation of the history or what fans might like.

    I say all this knowing that evolution is inevitable and necessary, and that you don't need die hard fans of the franchise directing to make good films (and might even be counter productive). I am just giving my thoughts.

    I still have hopes for NTTD of course, and everyone involved in production is making the right noises, but personally I don't really like where it seems they are taking it and for the first time ever I am not looking forward to seeing what its like.

    $1.2B at the box office. I think Mendes knew Bond pretty damn well and knew what Bond fans might like.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    I think delving into Bond's Military Adventures, would be a very good direction for the 7th Bond....it would really remind us of Fleming & also remind us that Bond is a Naval officer.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    TripAces wrote: »
    FatherValentine wrote: »
    I can live with, and even like, the flaws of previous Bond films if they are made with the right intentions. If it's a moment of naffness, or it's outdated, or a camp tone etc. then I don't mind. But I think with Craig's films that they genuinely believe they are making better films than what came during the pre-Craig era. There's a certain smugness, as if they are being made by people who don't like James Bond films. (I don't get this with CR - i think that one is incredible).

    Consider the moment in SF when Q makes the exploding pen quip. Ok, it's quite funny I suppose. But it would have been even funnier, and far less smug, if they had included a moment later in the film where Bond could have done with an exploding pen - such as when he's in the tube tunnel and can't get through the door with the train coming; "You know what I could do with now Q? An exploding pen." - that sort of thing.

    I think that by giving all the power over to the director, there is far too much emphasis on a single vision that never used to be the case when Broccoli and Saltzman would come up with ideas for set pieces etc. I genuinely don't believe for one second that Forster or Mendes are fans of James Bond, or have any appreciation of the history or what fans might like.

    I say all this knowing that evolution is inevitable and necessary, and that you don't need die hard fans of the franchise directing to make good films (and might even be counter productive). I am just giving my thoughts.

    I still have hopes for NTTD of course, and everyone involved in production is making the right noises, but personally I don't really like where it seems they are taking it and for the first time ever I am not looking forward to seeing what its like.

    $1.2B at the box office. I think Mendes knew Bond pretty damn well and knew what Bond fans might like.

    Is that Skyfall or Spectre? Got no problem with SF. If Mendes knew what Bond fans wanted he wouldn't have had a teenage Bond and Blofeld frolicking in the snow together.

  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    It really looks like Mendes was misled by SF's successful narrative....misled in the sense that, he saw it that audiences liked him going into Bond's past and family....so he felt the need to carry on with that & the result was SP. I think it's fair to say he looked too much into Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, without knowing that that Narrative Suits Batman More. I just feel Cary is too intelligent to make the same mistake of over-doing the personal stuffs....very few Directors are good at handling personal stories. Nolan also apes Bond a lot, but he still gets to retain his style.
  • TR007TR007
    Posts: 1,165
    Mendes wasn’t responsible for the revisionist history regarding Bond and Blofeld’s backstory in Spectre. That was Michael G Wilson’s idea.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    Posts: 280
    TR007 wrote: »
    Mendes wasn’t responsible for the revisionist history regarding Bond and Blofeld’s backstory in Spectre. That was Michael G Wilson’s idea.

    Source?
  • BonSimonLeBon_1BonSimonLeBon_1
    Posts: 2,436
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think delving into Bond's Military Adventures, would be a very good direction for the 7th Bond....it would really remind us of Fleming & also remind us that Bond is a Naval officer.

    They were originally going to do that when they were planning The Living Daylights.
  • TR007TR007
    Posts: 1,165
    Agent_One wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Mendes wasn’t responsible for the revisionist history regarding Bond and Blofeld’s backstory in Spectre. That was Michael G Wilson’s idea.

    Source?
    Some Kind of Hero.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    BonSimonLeBon_1 wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think delving into Bond's Military Adventures, would be a very good direction for the 7th Bond....it would really remind us of Fleming & also remind us that Bond is a Naval officer.

    They were originally going to do that when they were planning The Living Daylights.

    That would have been great!...but then again, I love the The Living Daylights....it's still a Military Bond film....I think the Military Bond films that Critics adore are:-
    *TSWLM
    *TLD
    *GE
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    TR007 wrote: »
    Agent_One wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Mendes wasn’t responsible for the revisionist history regarding Bond and Blofeld’s backstory in Spectre. That was Michael G Wilson’s idea.

    Source?
    Some Kind of Hero.

    Then Wilson has been an idiot.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    The Psychological thriller genre is another genre Bond hasn't really tried. But I think the closest we've arrived at that is maybe in OHMSS, TWINE, CR & SF....and maybe SP in a way.

    That would be another great genre to take Bond to, imagine a David Fincher Bond film with all the requisite Bondian elements....maybe even a Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross Score, which would be great.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited April 2020 Posts: 5,869
    In my eyes, the issue with Spectre wasn't the ideas, it was the execution of those ideas. I think that Quantum of Solace was also in same boat.
  • belleswannbelleswann britain
    edited April 2020 Posts: 35
    I know a lot of people here dislike Spectre but I think the general audience liked it and it's made the most money after skyfall why else make a direct sequel to it.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    edited April 2020 Posts: 280
    The general audience seems very split on it; Brofeld is not popular at all.

    I'd argue many inferior sequels make a large amount of money off goodwill from the previous film.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    It's the Lukewarm reception SP got that stopped it from being a classic....not money. Money will never be Bond's Problem. Even the most Polarizing Bond films are Box-Office Behemoths.....if DAD wasn't financially successful, we wouldn't have gotten CR.
  • belleswannbelleswann britain
    Posts: 35
    I just think if the people involved in making these films thought of Spectre the way most here do wouldn't they have started fresh with this one like they did with skyfall when they basically pretended quantum never happened
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    Posts: 280
    Yet they revisited Quantum in the film after that...
  • belleswannbelleswann britain
    Posts: 35
    Because they got the rights to Spectre and they did want to tie quantum to that because let's be honest Quantum only exists because they didn't have Spectre at the time so they retconned it when they did. If they had the rights from the beginning the films would join up better.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    Posts: 280
    If they never got the rights back, they likely just would've continued using Quantum.
  • belleswannbelleswann britain
    Posts: 35
    I don't know just because skyfall was totally separate but maybe.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    edited April 2020 Posts: 280
    Goldfinger was totally separate from Terence Young's Spectre films.
Sign In or Register to comment.