SPECTRE Leaks Discussion (allowed on ONLY this thread) MAJOR PLOTLINE SPOILERS!

17778808283112

Comments

  • edited June 2015 Posts: 3,164
    Welcome to the forums!

    The Dec 1 script says the blackout is JUST at the CNS.

    Going off slightly....I have a feeling what was being filmed yesterday at Horse Guards Parade was a new ending sequence probably replacing Bond breaking into Q's lab again where he gives Bond the DB5 keys. Tanner and Q in civvie outfits especially have me intrigued. I feel this is great because M/MP/Tanner really get left out after the Westminster Bridge sequence, so a coda like this with the team together with Bond/Swann would be nice. And I think they're making it less "final" as that script was, maybe M/MP/Tanner/Q recovering British intelligence after C's takeover.
  • aaron819aaron819 Switzerland
    Posts: 1,208
    Lea is holding the script here:

    Spectre-13.jpg
  • leas_moleleas_mole love is the promise of suffering
    Posts: 574
    Yes her name is on it! She was filming Dolan's new film in Montreal last week so maybe there have been a few tweaks since she returned on set.

    Dr. Swann looks really windswept there!
  • Posts: 4,622
    A possible new ending.
    That is interesting.
    I wonder do Bond and Swann still drive off together?
    Probably, as we did see London DB5 scenes filmed.
    I wonder if Bond still tosses his gun in the river and quits?
  • Posts: 1,552
    I don't think he explicitly quits in the script, it's just heavily implied
  • Posts: 940
    I posted it in the Timeline thread but I learnt tonight from crew that there is a Safehouse scene, filmed at Drummond's building near Admiralty Arch. This definitely suggests tweaks and changes with the 3rd act of the script. I presume this location has potentially replaced the army barracks.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 3,164
    slyfox wrote: »
    I posted it in the Timeline thread but I learnt tonight from crew that there is a Safehouse scene, filmed at Drummond's building near Admiralty Arch. This definitely suggests tweaks and changes with the 3rd act of the script. I presume this location has potentially replaced the army barracks.

    Ah that makes more sense - I was just going off the daylight photos and turns out all the characters were involved are in the scene at night! So scratch what I said about the ending - this obviously replaces the barracks and looks like Tanner and Q will be more involved with the final act (while previously it was Bond, Swann, MP and M) - them arriving in civvies there (as MI6 has obviously been disbanded with C's takeover)
  • Do you think the scene where Bond shoots Stockmann in the head will be in the movie? Or are they keeping him for Bond 25?
  • Posts: 3,167
    There is no one called Stockman in SP! That was the old script.
  • Posts: 95
    antovolk wrote: »
    Welcome to the forums!

    The Dec 1 script says the blackout is JUST at the CNS.

    Going off slightly....I have a feeling what was being filmed yesterday at Horse Guards Parade was a new ending sequence probably replacing Bond breaking into Q's lab again where he gives Bond the DB5 keys. Tanner and Q in civvie outfits especially have me intrigued. I feel this is great because M/MP/Tanner really get left out after the Westminster Bridge sequence, so a coda like this with the team together with Bond/Swann would be nice. And I think they're making it less "final" as that script was, maybe M/MP/Tanner/Q recovering British intelligence after C's takeover.

    Thanks! Glad to be here!

    And glad to hear about the blackout. I think we're seing a bit of a change to the ending - going by what was leaked (certainly a bit different from what I read) but in a great way. They really seem to be utilizing London in a way no other Bond has done so. Sam has a great eye for his films.
  • Posts: 669
    I hope all this means that the ending has been changed/tweaked enough so that Bond doesn't throw his gun in the river at the end. I really hated that moment.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 108
    I hope all this means that the ending has been changed/tweaked enough so that Bond doesn't throw his gun in the river at the end. I really hated that moment.

    I'd be very surprised if that has gone. That moment seems to have been a constant throughout the development of this script and in many ways is what this film is about.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Bond throwing or not throwing away his gun in no way indicates we won't see Bond or Craig-Bond again in 2017 (Yes, I'm convinced Bond 25 will have a 2017 release).
  • timmer wrote: »
    A possible new ending.
    That is interesting.
    I wonder do Bond and Swann still drive off together?
    Probably, as we did see London DB5 scenes filmed.
    I wonder if Bond still tosses his gun in the river and quits?

    When did we see this? Pictures?
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 108
    I think that Bond throwing the gun away and driving off with Swann is the set up for Bond 25. And yes, I very much believe that means it will be a Craig-Bond film.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 4,622
    I think that Bond throwing the gun away and driving off with Swann is the set up for Bond 25. And yes, I very much believe that means it will be a Craig-Bond film.
    I think you are right here. SP sets up B25 big time, and there is no reason Craig can't continue.
    But I find Bond quiting or going rogue to be getting old.
    I think tossing gun in river and seemingly quitting is unnecessary drama, but still we know he'll be back, so blah blah blah. I'll reserve judgement until the movie is released.

    @swedenwith love. There are picture of the DB5 driving about in London, which seems to tie in with Bond and Swann driving off together at the end in the DB5.
    antovolk wrote: »
    slyfox wrote: »
    I posted it in the Timeline thread but I learnt tonight from crew that there is a Safehouse scene, filmed at Drummond's building near Admiralty Arch. This definitely suggests tweaks and changes with the 3rd act of the script. I presume this location has potentially replaced the army barracks.

    Ah that makes more sense - I was just going off the daylight photos and turns out all the characters were involved are in the scene at night! So scratch what I said about the ending - this obviously replaces the barracks and looks like Tanner and Q will be more involved with the final act (while previously it was Bond, Swann, MP and M) - them arriving in civvies there (as MI6 has obviously been disbanded with C's takeover)
    Thanks to @slyfox and @antovolk
    this helps a lot. It does seem, they are shooting the barracks scenes. I think that Dec 1st script is basically a lock, but for minor dialogue and scene tweaks.
    That script is the story. I am quite confident of that.

  • Posts: 725
    I think that Bond throwing the gun away and driving off with Swann is the set up for Bond 25. And yes, I very much believe that means it will be a Craig-Bond film.

    I do too. It just doesn't make sense that they would have "to be continued" written all over both the Swann and Blofeld story lines, only to have to kill the entire set up because they are going to recast. It's not logical that they would try to slot another actor into the same continuing story line with Swann and Blofeld, and why else would they have these two critical continuing plot points, particularly with Swann, if they knew Craig was not going to do B25. The only possible fly in the ointment would be if SP really fails at the BO. Then all bets are off.
  • DrShatterhandDrShatterhand Garden of Death, near Belfast
    Posts: 805
    While I initially quite liked the idea of M enlisting his old army buddies at the end, on rereading the December script a few days ago I realised they weren't really given anything to actually do. It would've been great to see M's old unit involved in a gun battle on Wesminster Bridge with Spectre goons or something but as it stands Bond does everything. So kinda makes sense that his MI6 'family' help out the 'cuckoo' instead.
  • Posts: 669
    I can see how some people believe that throwing the gun off the bridge is a set-up for Bond 25, but at the same time it seems to completely counteract the ending of Skyfall. One of the great things about that movie, IMO, was that it "reset" the entire Bond universe and set up Bond's future as an agent. And now, one movie later, he's throwing the gun away as a tacit way of saying "I'm giving up this life"? It seems very silly and antithetical to me.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 4,622
    I can see how some people believe that throwing the gun off the bridge is a set-up for Bond 25, but at the same time it seems to completely counteract the ending of Skyfall. One of the great things about that movie, IMO, was that it "reset" the entire Bond universe and set up Bond's future as an agent. And now, one movie later, he's throwing the gun away as a tacit way of saying "I'm giving up this life"? It seems very silly and antithetical to me.
    Agreed. Haven't we been down this road about a zillion times.
    Oh well, this is a new story. I guess Dear Bond has had enough, again. Yawn.
    But he'll be back, after Swann is blown away at start of B25, or maybe even end, but that would mean same Bond girl for two films. Can't have that.
    Unless Bond dallies in between while on mission, ala Laz at Piz Gloria, and then returns to true love, Swanny, but Ernst and Bunt blow her away, just like Tracy,in another universe, and THEN, we get a modern telling of Fleming's YOLT.
    Idle speculation though on my part.
    But I am confident that Craig will come back to battle Blofeld in B25.
  • Posts: 1,552
    Do you think the James Bond will return will have a ? at the end?
  • I can see how some people believe that throwing the gun off the bridge is a set-up for Bond 25, but at the same time it seems to completely counteract the ending of Skyfall. One of the great things about that movie, IMO, was that it "reset" the entire Bond universe and set up Bond's future as an agent. And now, one movie later, he's throwing the gun away as a tacit way of saying "I'm giving up this life"? It seems very silly and antithetical to me.

    I understand your view, but I think that several things can have changed Bonds´life as a secret agent. On the one hand, old M´s video-mail mission leads Bond to disobey Mallory, which is coherent with previous movies. On the other hand, he meets Madeleine Swann, who is the first woman he loves since Vespers´death. In my opinion, the most important thing to make the plot believable is how good the Bond-Swann relationship is on screen. Mendes, Seydoux and Craig have a huge challenge, specially Sedoux, who must make the audience fell in love with her character. She is an excellent actress, Craig is quite good, too, and Mendes is amazing directing actors, so I trust the team.
  • I can see how some people believe that throwing the gun off the bridge is a set-up for Bond 25, but at the same time it seems to completely counteract the ending of Skyfall. One of the great things about that movie, IMO, was that it "reset" the entire Bond universe and set up Bond's future as an agent. And now, one movie later, he's throwing the gun away as a tacit way of saying "I'm giving up this life"? It seems very silly and antithetical to me.

    I understand your view, but I think that several things can have changed Bonds´life as a secret agent. On the one hand, old M´s video-mail mission leads Bond to disobey Mallory, which is coherent with previous movies. On the other hand, he meets Madeleine Swann, who is the first woman he loves since Vespers´death. In my opinion, the most important thing to make the plot believable is how good the Bond-Swann relationship is on screen. Mendes, Seydoux and Craig have a huge challenge, specially Sedoux, who must make the audience fell in love with her character. She is an excellent actress, Craig is quite good, too, and Mendes is amazing directing actors, so I trust the team.

    ^This. I think the majority of the script is very strong and could easily surpass Skyfall. That's even without the improvements made after filming began. Most people are concerned with the whole Blofeld/Oberhauser/foster brother subplot, but I don;t think they realize that that's not really the potentially worrying aspect of SPECTRE. The believability of Bond's decision to leave (and really the movie as a whole) is really going to hinge on how well his relationship with Madeleine is portrayed, and frankly, I'm not so sure that what was in the December draft is going to be good enough. If they kept it the way it is, then Craig and Seydoux are REALLY going to have to sell it.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Craig and Seydoux are excellent actors that have the ability to elavate the material they're working with. It also helps that they have a good director in Mendes and SP isn't just about making a good Bond film but topping and avoiding the mistakes of SF. Remember, the bare bones, cobbled together script of QoS wasn't terrible enough to hinder Craig's performance but served as a platform to elevate how his charcter was written and keep him engaging.
  • That is true, but in my opinion, regardless of how good of actors they are, they're going to have to add to what was in the script to really sell that Bond would quit for her. They may have great chemistry but nothing in their interactions on the page really makes it seem plausible that Bond would make such a drastic career decision because of her. Especially after the journey his character took in Skyfall.
  • Posts: 9,767
    JCRendle wrote: »
    Do you think the James Bond will return will have a ? at the end?

    I would love that really sets up the drama quite nicely don't you think

  • leas_moleleas_mole love is the promise of suffering
    Posts: 574
    I must admit when I read the script the Bond/Swann relationship did not scream romantic to me. At least with Bond/Vesper there were some snippets of coupley interaction whereas SP is more action driven.

    I agree that Craig and Seydoux will have to convince the audience that their relationship is believable. If we see sparks fly at the L'Americain then the chemistry is there. Léa and Daniel seem to get on really well on set so hopefully that will translate onto the screen.
  • chipstickschipsticks NOT on TheDanielCraigForum where they think know Daniel Craig personally and Léa and Monica are ugly
    Posts: 560
    I'll riot if it turns out like another Léa/Cassel =))
  • Posts: 4,619
    chipsticks wrote: »
    I'll riot if it turns out like another Léa/Cassel =))
    Don't worry, this movie is being directed by the guy who made American Beauty and Revolutionary Road. The Bond/Swann relationship will work beautifully.
  • chipstickschipsticks NOT on TheDanielCraigForum where they think know Daniel Craig personally and Léa and Monica are ugly
    edited June 2015 Posts: 560
    chipsticks wrote: »
    I'll riot if it turns out like another Léa/Cassel =))
    Don't worry, this movie is being directed by the guy who made American Beauty and Revolutionary Road. The Bond/Swann relationship will work beautifully.

    Panchito O:-) [-O<
Sign In or Register to comment.