NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - First Reactions vs. Current Reactions

1258259261263264298

Comments

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,985
    One thing none of the Bonds were shown 5 years after retirement, it's a totally seprate scenario not in conflict
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Interesting that the idea of giving Bond a child came from the revered Boyle/Hodges collaboration.

    Did it? I hadn't heard anything about the Boyle/Hodge script, other than Bond was going to spend a lot of the film in a prison/gulag

    Yes, the article is on the main page. It appears that the child from Boyle/Hodges got grafted onto the P&W script. I wonder if the original P&W script ended like the Fleming novel?

    That's news to me thanks for the update mate. I wasn't excited to see a Boyle Bond film and I was relieved when he left, but I'd love to know what was in his script

    Same here. We dodged a missile there.

    Oh funny yes.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,958
    One thing none of the Bonds were shown 5 years after retirement, it's a totally seprate scenario not in conflict
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Interesting that the idea of giving Bond a child came from the revered Boyle/Hodges collaboration.

    Did it? I hadn't heard anything about the Boyle/Hodge script, other than Bond was going to spend a lot of the film in a prison/gulag

    Yes, the article is on the main page. It appears that the child from Boyle/Hodges got grafted onto the P&W script. I wonder if the original P&W script ended like the Fleming novel?

    That's news to me thanks for the update mate. I wasn't excited to see a Boyle Bond film and I was relieved when he left, but I'd love to know what was in his script

    Same here. We dodged a missile there.

    Oh funny yes.

    Except for David Niven. I do wonder how much Eon in NTTD looked to CR '67 for "inspiration," much like the '80s films hewed closely to Gardner's books.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,921
    echo wrote: »
    I do wonder how much Eon in NTTD looked to CR '67 for "inspiration," much like the '80s films hewed closely to Gardner's books.

    Someone recently posted a big list of similarities between NTTD and CR'67 - it was quite an eye-opener!
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,261
    It would be interesting to learn more about the Boyle/Hodge script. But as it is owned by EON (Boyle said, he and Hodge got paid for it, and that it now belongs to EON), it's unlikely we will see it, unless they use it (or bits of it) for a future Bond movie.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited May 2022 Posts: 17,785
    It would be interesting to learn more about the Boyle/Hodge script. But as it is owned by EON (Boyle said, he and Hodge got paid for it, and that it now belongs to EON), it's unlikely we will see it, unless they use it (or bits of it) for a future Bond movie.

    Yes, that'll be the reason they won't give it up fully especially as money changed hands. It's part of their ideas pool for future Bond films now. For Eon there is no such thing as a bad idea unless it is truly awful, merely an idea to be deferred to another era and Bond actor. We've seen examples of this sort of thing across the Bond film series and most recently in NTTD where the idea to kill off all of SPECTRE first appeared in an unused script for TSWLM, albeit in a different and more politicised form. Still, an idea is an idea forever and little is ever thrown away by Eon short of making Dr No a monkey!
  • Posts: 727
    The more I think about the more I believe NTTD is the best looking film in the Craig-verse. Sure, you could probably have a cinematography enthusiast write a big post about how Deakin’s work in Skyfall is more technically impressive and they wouldn’t be wrong. But there’s just something exciting and pulse pounding about No Time to Die’s visuals. It’s just beautiful to look at.
  • edited May 2022 Posts: 2,871
    The more I think about the more I believe NTTD is the best looking film in the Craig-verse. Sure, you could probably have a cinematography enthusiast write a big post about how Deakin’s work in Skyfall is more technically impressive and they wouldn’t be wrong. But there’s just something exciting and pulse pounding about No Time to Die’s visuals. It’s just beautiful to look at.

    I've said it before, but for me that's the problem. If you notice the cinematography above everything else it's not doing its job correctly and isn't telling the story. Forget the technical elements, Deakin's work immerses you in the story but doesn't outshine it.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,507
    The more I think about the more I believe NTTD is the best looking film in the Craig-verse. Sure, you could probably have a cinematography enthusiast write a big post about how Deakin’s work in Skyfall is more technically impressive and they wouldn’t be wrong. But there’s just something exciting and pulse pounding about No Time to Die’s visuals. It’s just beautiful to look at.

    You've described the visuals of NTTD perfectly. Visually it's very exciting
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,958
    007HallY wrote: »
    The more I think about the more I believe NTTD is the best looking film in the Craig-verse. Sure, you could probably have a cinematography enthusiast write a big post about how Deakin’s work in Skyfall is more technically impressive and they wouldn’t be wrong. But there’s just something exciting and pulse pounding about No Time to Die’s visuals. It’s just beautiful to look at.

    I've said it before, but for me that's the problem. If you notice the cinematography above everything else it's not doing its job correctly and isn't telling the story. Forget the technical elements, Deakin's work immerses you in the story but doesn't outshine it.

    Counterpoint: OHMSS.
  • Posts: 2,871
    echo wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    The more I think about the more I believe NTTD is the best looking film in the Craig-verse. Sure, you could probably have a cinematography enthusiast write a big post about how Deakin’s work in Skyfall is more technically impressive and they wouldn’t be wrong. But there’s just something exciting and pulse pounding about No Time to Die’s visuals. It’s just beautiful to look at.

    I've said it before, but for me that's the problem. If you notice the cinematography above everything else it's not doing its job correctly and isn't telling the story. Forget the technical elements, Deakin's work immerses you in the story but doesn't outshine it.

    Counterpoint: OHMSS.

    OHMSS has some lighting flares but I wouldn't say the cinematography outshines the story and is very effective at immersing you in the world of the film. NTTD is far more stylised.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson Moderator
    Posts: 2,161
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Yes, that'll be the reason they won't give it up fully especially as money changed hands. Its part of their ideas pool for future Bond films niw. For Eon there is no such thing as a bad idea unless it is truly awful, merely an idea to be deferred to another era and Bond actor. We've seen examples of this sort of thing across the Bond film series and most recently in NTTD where the idea to kill off all of SPECTRE first appeared in an unused script for TSWLM, albeit in a different and more politicised form. Still, an idea is an idea forever and little is ever thrown away by Eon short of making Dr No a monkey!

    Good post.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited May 2022 Posts: 3,389
    I've watched the beginning of NTTD, I laughed at Craig's walk in the gunbarrel, he walks so fast, his walk was rushed, he's walking like a cartoon. It's like "Ok, I need to finish this now."
    Or he's like chasing something but he's not allowed to run, so he walked fast.
    Or he's briskly walking because he's afraid of being late to work.
    He walks like a businessman too, not a spy.

    Maybe, it's just me?
    Tell me if you've noticed the same.

    ezgif-2-8dd20c6531.gif
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 2022 Posts: 2,921
    Craig said there were gunbarrel takes where he was almost skipping! 😆
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,930
    I guess it is true that he doesn't fire then?
  • edited May 2022 Posts: 17,272
    Having skipped watching NTTD in the cinema, I finally made time to watch the film for the first time last night. After the disappointment with SP, I was a bit hesitant to watch this film until I was in the right mood. Anyway, instead of trying to write a longer reaction, here are a few points I made right after the film ended:
    • Dialogue: I much preferred the dialogue and interactions between the characters in NTTD compared to SP – and actually, SF too. If that's part of Phoebe Waller-Bridge's contribution to the film, I would be very happy to see her taking the script duties with Bond 26 – preferably as the main writer alone.
    • Cuba: This is the part of the film that gave me the most enjoyment. It's equal parts funny, thrilling and over the top, and that's the way I like my Bond films. Paloma was a fun inclusion as well, and it was quite alright to see a Craig era female secondary character that doesn't end up a sacrificial lamb, like Solange, Fields and Severine. Also liked the interactions between Bond and Nomi here – and the interactions between the two for the rest of the film.
    • M: I find Gareth Mallory an interesting character in that he's more flawed (in lack of a better word) than Dench's M. In NTTD this is highlighted in the plot, and that bit could have been explored further if the script had allowed it.
    • Plot and villain: The plot itself is alright, but a bit vanilla. Lyutsifer Safin never stands out to me, and the film suffers from that as a consequence.
    • Vibrant visuals: I much prefer the visuals and colour grading in NTTD than SP. At the same time, the visuals almost feel a bit dream like in certain places, which took me a bit out of the film unfortunately. As strange as it is writing this as someone who do enjoy top notch cinematography as much as everyone here, there’s a balancing act there, where to my liking, the cinematography doesn’t need to take that much of the focus.
    • OHMSS (and other) homages: I don't mind a few throwbacks to past Bond films, as that's part of the charm watching this film series, but they took the OHMSS homage thing up to 11, and that's just too much for me. It's almost like it's trying too much to make me feel like I'm watching Craig's take on OHMSS, when it should be a separate send off altogether to his Bond. I don't mind the inclusion of two past Bond cars though, but it might be time to give the DB5 a break – even though I hope to see it at some point in the next actors tenure.
    • Valdo Obruchev: When the cast news were announced, the casting of David Dencik was the one that made me most excited. We knew of course he would only play a secondary character, but I was looking forward to see him in a Bond film. I think the best Bond films manage to have that bit of comic relief throughout, and this character is that. Maybe not a favourite character from the film for many I imagine, but IMO he's needed – not only as a part of the plot.
    • The ending: I'm not sure how I feel about the ending. It definitely works in context of the Craig era, but it still leaves me a bit cold. I think the fact that I'm not sure how I stand about the ending is a plus, as I expected to be more bothered about it. That's something, I guess.
    • Highlights: The highlights for me are very small, but worth mentioning. He only gets a very brief cameo, but having Hugh Dennis (!) featuring in a Bond film made the film worth watching alone. More cameos like this please! It's also fun to see the Norwegian children's TV character Fantorangen on TV in the cabin. Can't think of many more internationally famous equivalents, but he's similar to what I imagine Basil Brush was/is for kids in the UK.
    • Ørland Air Base: I've never been at the air base, but I rented a small house in short driving distance from the Ørland air base when I worked in Ørland for 6-7 months some years ago. Fun to see such a small and unexpected location included in the plot of a big film like this.

    Summary: I really didn't know what to expect from NTTD. Key elements of the plot was known to me before watching the film, but that didn't bother me much. Unlike SP and SF i found some highlights in NTTD, which is a big plus. However, I don't think this is a film I will feel the need to revisit any time soon though, as it only gave me that "Bond feel" in certain places. At times it felt like I was watching an action film featuring Daniel Craig, not a Bond film with Daniel Craig – something I do feel watching CR or QoS. I will be placing NTTD at 23rd, ahead of SF (24) and SP (25) for now. It's not bad, it just doesn't give me that thrill of watching a Bond film.

    5/10
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited May 2022 Posts: 3,389
    @Torgeirtrap great write up, agreed with every statements though I didn't see your opinion on Madeleine.
  • edited May 2022 Posts: 17,272
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    @Torgeirtrap great write up, agreed with every statements though I didn't see your opinion on Madeleine.

    Oh, I never made a note about Madeleine after watching the film. She definitely works much better here than in SP, but even so, it's not a character I've managed to like. There's just something…missing. Can't really put my finger on what.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited May 2022 Posts: 3,389
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    @Torgeirtrap great write up, agreed with every statements though I didn't see your opinion on Madeleine.

    Oh, I never made a note about Madeleine after watching the film. She definitely works much better here than in SP, but even so, it's not a character I've managed to like. There's just something…missing. Can't really put my finger on what.

    Agreed, when you compare her to Vesper or Tracy or even Octopussy, she really fell short.
    She's also not one of my favorites, but she's a much more fleshed out character here than in SP, it's really improved.

    As for what's missing, I think the chemistry, they have no chemistry at all, and maybe she's cold, she lacked the warmth that the other Bond girls have.

    She's not really that interesting (maybe, it's just me).

    This is actually the film I'm most torn into, I don't know, it's a pretentious film for me.
    They've tried to make a bombastic end for Craig, but it didn't reached our expectations, which is sad really, it's still performed well at the box office though.

    But I really felt that the movie was just made as a cash grab, I don't even know if Barbara's heart was in it too, especially that Craig was leaving, I don't think she's really that enthusiastic to make a farewell film for him, but that's how I feel (based on her interviews and statements), I don't think she cared for the movie, she just gave it to Craig like "Ok, this is your film, I will give it to you, whatever happens, I will leave it you now, I'm out of it", thus the explanation for Craig's creative control over the film, all of what happened in the film was his decision.
  • Posts: 17,272
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    @Torgeirtrap great write up, agreed with every statements though I didn't see your opinion on Madeleine.

    Oh, I never made a note about Madeleine after watching the film. She definitely works much better here than in SP, but even so, it's not a character I've managed to like. There's just something…missing. Can't really put my finger on what.

    Agreed, when you compare her to Vesper or Tracy or even Octopussy, she really fell short.
    She's also not one of my favorites, but she's a much more fleshed out character here than in SP, it's really improved.

    About on what's missing, I think the chemistry, they have no chemistry, and maybe she's cold, she lacked the warmth that the other Bond girls have, she's not really that interesting (as for me).

    This is actually the film I'm most torn into, I don't know, it's a pretentious film for me.
    They've tried to make a bombastic end for Craig, but it didn't reached our expectations, which is sad really, it's still performed well at the box office though.

    But I really felt that the movie was just made as a cash grab, I don't even know if Barbara's heart was in it too, especially that Craig was leaving, I don't think she's really that enthusiastic to make a farewell film for him, but that's how I feel (based on her interviews and statements), I don't think she cared for the movie, she just gave it to Craig like "Ok, this is your film, I will give it to you, whatever happens, I will leave it you now, I'm out of it", thus the explanation for Craig's creative control over the film, all of what happened in the film was his decision.

    It would be interesting to learn how much the direction of the film took was tailored to Craig's wishes, if at all – or if this was Fukunaga's vision alone. I haven't heard or read any statements and interviews from Barbara about NTTD, so I won't even try to speculate how she approached this final Craig film.

    But as with you @MI6HQ, I'm torn. I definitely get what they were aiming for in the send off to Craig's Bond, but with the exception of a few moments here and there it lacks quite a lot to make a lasting impression on me.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited May 2022 Posts: 3,389
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    @Torgeirtrap great write up, agreed with every statements though I didn't see your opinion on Madeleine.

    Oh, I never made a note about Madeleine after watching the film. She definitely works much better here than in SP, but even so, it's not a character I've managed to like. There's just something…missing. Can't really put my finger on what.

    Agreed, when you compare her to Vesper or Tracy or even Octopussy, she really fell short.
    She's also not one of my favorites, but she's a much more fleshed out character here than in SP, it's really improved.

    About on what's missing, I think the chemistry, they have no chemistry, and maybe she's cold, she lacked the warmth that the other Bond girls have, she's not really that interesting (as for me).

    This is actually the film I'm most torn into, I don't know, it's a pretentious film for me.
    They've tried to make a bombastic end for Craig, but it didn't reached our expectations, which is sad really, it's still performed well at the box office though.

    But I really felt that the movie was just made as a cash grab, I don't even know if Barbara's heart was in it too, especially that Craig was leaving, I don't think she's really that enthusiastic to make a farewell film for him, but that's how I feel (based on her interviews and statements), I don't think she cared for the movie, she just gave it to Craig like "Ok, this is your film, I will give it to you, whatever happens, I will leave it you now, I'm out of it", thus the explanation for Craig's creative control over the film, all of what happened in the film was his decision.

    It would be interesting to learn how much the direction of the film took was tailored to Craig's wishes, if at all – or if this was Fukunaga's vision alone. I haven't heard or read any statements and interviews from Barbara about NTTD, so I won't even try to speculate how she approached this final Craig film.

    But as with you @MI6HQ, I'm torn. I definitely get what they were aiming for in the send off to Craig's Bond, but with the exception of a few moments here and there it lacks quite a lot to make a lasting impression on me.

    It was Craig's idea to kill the character off, he's the reason for Boyle's departure, he didn't liked Boyle's idea.
    Crag has been given a Creative control over this film.

    And now, based on the behind the scenes photos of NTTD, it seemed like Craig and Fukunaga was arguing, here's the article from Express.co.uk:

    https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1127896/James-Bond-25-set-photos-Daniel-Craig-Cary-Fukunaga-Jamaica

    And not just that, here's also the article from the same news site (Express.co.uk) and it shows the creative control that Craig had on the film and Barbara didn't cared after all.
    He became demanding on the set.

    https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1120850/James-Bond-25-set-demands-Daniel-Craig-Jamaica-Barbara-Broccoli

    Sorry for the late response, I'm using my old tablet, it's really slow and I'm fixing those typographical errors.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,958
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    @Torgeirtrap great write up, agreed with every statements though I didn't see your opinion on Madeleine.

    Oh, I never made a note about Madeleine after watching the film. She definitely works much better here than in SP, but even so, it's not a character I've managed to like. There's just something…missing. Can't really put my finger on what.

    Agreed, when you compare her to Vesper or Tracy or even Octopussy, she really fell short.
    She's also not one of my favorites, but she's a much more fleshed out character here than in SP, it's really improved.

    As for what's missing, I think the chemistry, they have no chemistry at all, and maybe she's cold, she lacked the warmth that the other Bond girls have.

    She's not really that interesting (maybe, it's just me).

    This is actually the film I'm most torn into, I don't know, it's a pretentious film for me.
    They've tried to make a bombastic end for Craig, but it didn't reached our expectations, which is sad really, it's still performed well at the box office though.

    But I really felt that the movie was just made as a cash grab, I don't even know if Barbara's heart was in it too, especially that Craig was leaving, I don't think she's really that enthusiastic to make a farewell film for him, but that's how I feel (based on her interviews and statements), I don't think she cared for the movie, she just gave it to Craig like "Ok, this is your film, I will give it to you, whatever happens, I will leave it you now, I'm out of it", thus the explanation for Craig's creative control over the film, all of what happened in the film was his decision.

    That's not how producing works.
  • edited May 2022 Posts: 727
    It’s interesting to me that Craig brought in elements of his own personality to James Bond in this film. It’s sorta like Chris Hemsworth and Thor. Where he was more Thor-ish in the first movies but gradually became more and more Hemsworthish. Dropping the seriousness and the Shakespeare tone and becoming more comedic. Even getting a haircut to resemble the actor more.
  • Bentley007Bentley007 Manitoba, Canada
    Posts: 565
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Interesting that the idea of giving Bond a child came from the revered Boyle/Hodges collaboration.

    Did it? I hadn't heard anything about the Boyle/Hodge script, other than Bond was going to spend a lot of the film in a prison/gulag

    Yes, the article is on the main page. It appears that the child from Boyle/Hodges got grafted onto the P&W script. I wonder if the original P&W script ended like the Fleming novel?

    That's news to me thanks for the update mate. I wasn't excited to see a Boyle Bond film and I was relieved when he left, but I'd love to know what was in his script
    Straw poll:
    Which would you rather have access to, The Boyle/Hidge Script or the Fleming Moonraker Screenplay?
  • Posts: 2,895
    Fleming of course.

    Good to see you here @Torgeirtrap -- your opinions on the film tally with many of mine.
  • edited May 2022 Posts: 17,272
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    MI6HQ wrote: »
    @Torgeirtrap great write up, agreed with every statements though I didn't see your opinion on Madeleine.

    Oh, I never made a note about Madeleine after watching the film. She definitely works much better here than in SP, but even so, it's not a character I've managed to like. There's just something…missing. Can't really put my finger on what.

    Agreed, when you compare her to Vesper or Tracy or even Octopussy, she really fell short.
    She's also not one of my favorites, but she's a much more fleshed out character here than in SP, it's really improved.

    About on what's missing, I think the chemistry, they have no chemistry, and maybe she's cold, she lacked the warmth that the other Bond girls have, she's not really that interesting (as for me).

    This is actually the film I'm most torn into, I don't know, it's a pretentious film for me.
    They've tried to make a bombastic end for Craig, but it didn't reached our expectations, which is sad really, it's still performed well at the box office though.

    But I really felt that the movie was just made as a cash grab, I don't even know if Barbara's heart was in it too, especially that Craig was leaving, I don't think she's really that enthusiastic to make a farewell film for him, but that's how I feel (based on her interviews and statements), I don't think she cared for the movie, she just gave it to Craig like "Ok, this is your film, I will give it to you, whatever happens, I will leave it you now, I'm out of it", thus the explanation for Craig's creative control over the film, all of what happened in the film was his decision.

    It would be interesting to learn how much the direction of the film took was tailored to Craig's wishes, if at all – or if this was Fukunaga's vision alone. I haven't heard or read any statements and interviews from Barbara about NTTD, so I won't even try to speculate how she approached this final Craig film.

    But as with you @MI6HQ, I'm torn. I definitely get what they were aiming for in the send off to Craig's Bond, but with the exception of a few moments here and there it lacks quite a lot to make a lasting impression on me.

    It was Craig's idea to kill the character off, he's the reason for Boyle's departure, he didn't liked Boyle's idea.
    Crag has been given a Creative control over this film.

    And now, based on the behind the scenes photos of NTTD, it seemed like Craig and Fukunaga was arguing, here's the article from Express.co.uk:

    https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1127896/James-Bond-25-set-photos-Daniel-Craig-Cary-Fukunaga-Jamaica

    And not just that, here's also the article from the same news site (Express.co.uk) and it shows the creative control that Craig had on the film and Barbara didn't cared after all.
    He became demanding on the set.

    https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1120850/James-Bond-25-set-demands-Daniel-Craig-Jamaica-Barbara-Broccoli

    Sorry for the late response, I'm using my old tablet, it's really slow and I'm fixing those typographical errors.

    Who knows what might and might not have happened behind the scenes, but I wouldn't take The Express as gospel, @MI6HQ. If Craig became demanding on set, it would hardly be the first actor to behave so, nor the first actor to have some creative control over the final product (just look at Tom Cruise!). But again, I don't know; I only followed parts of the production. :-)
    Revelator wrote: »
    Good to see you here @Torgeirtrap -- your opinions on the film tally with many of mine.

    Thanks @Revelator! I'm looking forward to catching up on everyone's opinion of NTTD. It looks to be a divisive film from what I've managed to read up on so far.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 203
    More amusing in this express articles is the hinting that Craig might be persuaded back for 26.

    Which… is amusingly still doable, if unlikely to happen at this juncture.
    I really would not be surprised if we did get a new ‘man with the golden gun’ and a Heracles is cured story. It’s doable.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Bentley007 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Interesting that the idea of giving Bond a child came from the revered Boyle/Hodges collaboration.

    Did it? I hadn't heard anything about the Boyle/Hodge script, other than Bond was going to spend a lot of the film in a prison/gulag

    Yes, the article is on the main page. It appears that the child from Boyle/Hodges got grafted onto the P&W script. I wonder if the original P&W script ended like the Fleming novel?

    That's news to me thanks for the update mate. I wasn't excited to see a Boyle Bond film and I was relieved when he left, but I'd love to know what was in his script
    Straw poll:
    Which would you rather have access to, The Boyle/Hidge Script or the Fleming Moonraker Screenplay?

    Probably sacrelige but the Boyle/Hodge script. The Fleming screenplay does sound interesting (the lack of M for example), but we’ve already got his Moonraker, in a medium that he was far more comfortable writing in. The Boyle/Hodge script on the other hand will always fascinate me. Boyle is one of my favourite directors, I’ve loved most things they’ve done together, and the Russia setting and the post Me Too angle seemed very different. Even as a big fan of NTTD, I’ll always wonder what might have been there.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,930
    Bentley007 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Interesting that the idea of giving Bond a child came from the revered Boyle/Hodges collaboration.

    Did it? I hadn't heard anything about the Boyle/Hodge script, other than Bond was going to spend a lot of the film in a prison/gulag

    Yes, the article is on the main page. It appears that the child from Boyle/Hodges got grafted onto the P&W script. I wonder if the original P&W script ended like the Fleming novel?

    That's news to me thanks for the update mate. I wasn't excited to see a Boyle Bond film and I was relieved when he left, but I'd love to know what was in his script
    Straw poll:
    Which would you rather have access to, The Boyle/Hidge Script or the Fleming Moonraker Screenplay?

    Probably sacrelige but the Boyle/Hodge script. The Fleming screenplay does sound interesting (the lack of M for example), but we’ve already got his Moonraker, in a medium that he was far more comfortable writing in. The Boyle/Hodge script on the other hand will always fascinate me. Boyle is one of my favourite directors, I’ve loved most things they’ve done together, and the Russia setting and the post Me Too angle seemed very different. Even as a big fan of NTTD, I’ll always wonder what might have been there.

    Yes that was my thought too. I feel that the Moonraker script is likely to just be a slightly worse version of the story we already have, whereas I feel there's a lot about Hodge's script we don't know and I'd be very keen to find out what that is.
  • Posts: 727
    I thought the Russian scientist being so goofy and over the top was a bad idea. But it aged well given what happened soon after the movie came out.
  • Posts: 12,837
    mtm wrote: »
    Bentley007 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Interesting that the idea of giving Bond a child came from the revered Boyle/Hodges collaboration.

    Did it? I hadn't heard anything about the Boyle/Hodge script, other than Bond was going to spend a lot of the film in a prison/gulag

    Yes, the article is on the main page. It appears that the child from Boyle/Hodges got grafted onto the P&W script. I wonder if the original P&W script ended like the Fleming novel?

    That's news to me thanks for the update mate. I wasn't excited to see a Boyle Bond film and I was relieved when he left, but I'd love to know what was in his script
    Straw poll:
    Which would you rather have access to, The Boyle/Hidge Script or the Fleming Moonraker Screenplay?

    Probably sacrelige but the Boyle/Hodge script. The Fleming screenplay does sound interesting (the lack of M for example), but we’ve already got his Moonraker, in a medium that he was far more comfortable writing in. The Boyle/Hodge script on the other hand will always fascinate me. Boyle is one of my favourite directors, I’ve loved most things they’ve done together, and the Russia setting and the post Me Too angle seemed very different. Even as a big fan of NTTD, I’ll always wonder what might have been there.

    Yes that was my thought too. I feel that the Moonraker script is likely to just be a slightly worse version of the story we already have, whereas I feel there's a lot about Hodge's script we don't know and I'd be very keen to find out what that is.

    Yeah exactly, completely agree, and I’d like to know if any of the rumours flying around about it have any basis in reality. The one I find most interesting is the mother of Mathilde (if she was even called that) apparently being an old flame of Bond’s from pre CR. It sounds much trickier to make work than Madeline being the mum, and it does mean we’d lose the way they tied it nicely into the Vesper story and Bond’s trust issues, but I think that could have been a really interesting alternative take. As well as providing some obvious commentary on the consequences of Bond’s shagging around, we’d also have a glimpse into his early life, and potentially even a kid who’s old enough for him to properly interact with? I hope we get to find out more one day. And I’d still like to see Boyle direct one, but that seems very unlikely now.
Sign In or Register to comment.