No Time To Die: Production Diary

136373941422507

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yeah Bamigboye hasn't reported anything on Bond since he broke the 'polite turmoil' news about the catastrophic situation with SP's script.
  • Posts: 9,767
    Walecs wrote: »
    Back in 2013, the Sun reported that Bond 24 would be titled Devil May Care.
    Yes and I am waiting for the next bond title rumor hopefully we get a few more this time around
  • Posts: 5,767
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    Back in 2013, the Sun reported that Bond 24 would be titled Devil May Care.
    Yes and I am waiting for the next bond title rumor hopefully we get a few more this time around
    How about "Blofeld"? Haha.

  • fjdinardo wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @fjdinardo, don't see why we would, as at the absolute minimum, we're a solid year and a half, two years from filming. They may have directors in mind at this point, but from what I understand, a script isn't even being worked on yet, so I wouldn't expect an announcement for quite some time.

    Gotcha i say that because wasn't Mendes announced as Director of Spectre in March 2013?

    July of 2013, but there were reports he might return earlier than that.
  • jake24 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The Sun and The Daily Mail are not exactly the most reliable sources.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The Sun and The Daily Mail are not exactly the most reliable sources.
    If it's written by Baz Bamigboye of the Daily Mail then it is almost completely accurate. But this isn't. Otherwise your right about both.

    On a side note, wasn't another Daily Mail columnist responsible for revealing to the public that Waltz would be playing Blofeld? They even mentioned Franz Oberhauser at one point.

    The Mail on Sunday had the story about how Waltz was really playing Blofeld, even though he'd be announced as playing Oberhauser.

    The Sun's main scoop about Skyfall was that Bond would have a "beard." It was more like a lot of stubble, but OK. However, the Sun wasn't a major source of scoops proven correct about Skyfall or SPECTRE.
  • doubleoego wrote: »
    Yes but prior to the actual filming of SP, when filming 2 films back to back was brought up, he flat out denied it and talked about how there was no such mention or remote discussion of shooting 2 films back to back.

    Now there's this rumor of the same back to back filming which allegedly the studio is pushing for. For SP I can see why Sony wanted it and you cant blame them for pushing for it but the studio now is pushoh for 2 films and tge qyestion is,which studio? Sony are no longer tge studio behind Bond as tgeyre contract ended with SP...unless theyve reached a deal tgat us yet to be announced but wtf knows.

    Craig made the comment about how you "can't" do a two parter in October 2012. That's when it had been reported Bond 24 and 25 would have a two-part story arc but before the November 2012 announcement by MGM that John Logan had, indeed, been hired to write both.
  • Posts: 14,816
    jake24 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The Sun and The Daily Mail are not exactly the most reliable sources.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The Sun and The Daily Mail are not exactly the most reliable sources.
    If it's written by Baz Bamigboye of the Daily Mail then it is almost completely accurate. But this isn't. Otherwise your right about both.

    On a side note, wasn't another Daily Mail columnist responsible for revealing to the public that Waltz would be playing Blofeld? They even mentioned Franz Oberhauser at one point.

    The Mail on Sunday had the story about how Waltz was really playing Blofeld, even though he'd be announced as playing Oberhauser.

    The Sun's main scoop about Skyfall was that Bond would have a "beard." It was more like a lot of stubble, but OK. However, the Sun wasn't a major source of scoops proven correct about Skyfall or SPECTRE.

    I wonder how much of it was speculation about Blofeld being back.
  • H
    Ludovico wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The Sun and The Daily Mail are not exactly the most reliable sources.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The Sun and The Daily Mail are not exactly the most reliable sources.
    If it's written by Baz Bamigboye of the Daily Mail then it is almost completely accurate. But this isn't. Otherwise your right about both.

    On a side note, wasn't another Daily Mail columnist responsible for revealing to the public that Waltz would be playing Blofeld? They even mentioned Franz Oberhauser at one point.

    The Mail on Sunday had the story about how Waltz was really playing Blofeld, even though he'd be announced as playing Oberhauser.

    The Sun's main scoop about Skyfall was that Bond would have a "beard." It was more like a lot of stubble, but OK. However, the Sun wasn't a major source of scoops proven correct about Skyfall or SPECTRE.

    I wonder how much of it was speculation about Blofeld being back.

    Here's the story:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845621/You-weren-t-expecting-007-BLOFELD-S-Bond-having-kittens-evil-foe-returns-double-Oscar-winner-Christoph-Waltz-tipped-play-him.html

    Excerpt:

    Waltz’s involvement in the new film – which has the working title ‘Bond 24’ – will be confirmed at a press conference to be held in the first week of December. Eon productions, which owns the James Bond film franchise, will announce the star is playing an unknown character called Franz Oberhauser, son of the late Hans Oberhauser, a ski instructor who acted as a father figure to Bond.

    But senior sources believe the casting is a double bluff worthy of 007 himself and that Waltz is actually playing Blofeld. One Hollywood source, who asked not to be named, said: ‘Christoph Waltz is playing Blofeld in the next Bond film. The tone of the 007 films has changed significantly in recent years and the producers have changed the character to fit in with the new-look 007.’


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845621/You-weren-t-expecting-007-BLOFELD-S-Bond-having-kittens-evil-foe-returns-double-Oscar-winner-Christoph-Waltz-tipped-play-him.html#ixzz3wOD21smX
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


    That's a lot to get right for just speculation.
  • Posts: 14,816
    I agree. That's pretty much spot on.
    The Daily Mail was accurate. Scary.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    After the announcement that the film was being called SP, maintaining the "i'm not Blofeld" shtick was such a stupid and pointless subterfuge and as someone else said, the name reveal meant nothing within the context if the movie as it was an indirect notification to the audience. So pathetic.
  • Posts: 14,816
    It was a Jekyll and Hyde twist. But it fooled some people here.
  • RC7RC7
    edited January 2016 Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote: »
    After the announcement that the film was being called SP, maintaining the "i'm not Blofeld" shtick was such a stupid and pointless subterfuge and as someone else said, the name reveal meant nothing within the context if the movie as it was an indirect notification to the audience. So pathetic.

    It was to keep the focus on Oberhauser; the story dictates that the viewer is focused on the fact this character is someone from Bond's past. If you announce he's Blofeld and then launch into a film that is concerned with a character simultaneously named Oberhauser you muddy the narrative and have people subconsciously trying to figure out how exactly Oberhauser is Blofeld. Not only does that clutter your narrative, it means the viewer is one step ahead of Bond, which should not be encouraged. Let's not forget, unlike Into Darkness, Blofeld was (and for a decent portion of the movie is) Franz Oberhauser. It's not a ruse in the same ilk. Whether one likes the dual identity narrative is open for debate, and heck has it been debated, but in the context of the story it was correct to steer the viewers towards Oberhauser.
  • The audience was one step ahead of Bond in From Russia With Love and that worked out fine.
  • Posts: 9,767
    Personally I didn't mind the Obberhauser to Blofeld nor did I mind the brother angle. Again Goldeneye did it first and some might argue better.

    As for Bond 25 I hope Craig and Waltz Return
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,782
    Well if Waltz is coming back as Blofeld I'm certainly all for it. I for one don't want a repeat of Pleasance-Savalas-Gray. There should be one actor to play Blofeld or no Blofeld at all!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The audience was one step ahead of Bond in From Russia With Love and that worked out fine.

    In the context of SP it doesn't work, which is my point. There are lots of films that flop between the audience, or the character knowing more. The story of SP is about Oberhauser, the reveal is for nostalgic rather than narrative heft. Knowing he is Blofeld to kick off with adds no value, because in the world of the film it means jack shit. The film builds to the birth, if you will, of Blofeld. He'll be full on ESB in B25.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 2,115
    You're calling the movie SPECTRE. It's not a reveal at all that it's run by Blofeld.

    If, hypothetically, they called the movie something else and the name SPECTRE wasn't uttered until later, maybe. Or if Oberhauser was a front man and Blofeld turned out to be somebody , OK.

    As it is, SPECTRE is exactly like Star Trek Into Darkness with its Khan "reveal." It's silly.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    You're calling the movie SPECTRE. It's not a reveal at all that it's run by Blofeld.

    If, hypothetically, they called the movie something else and the name SPECTRE wasn't uttered until later, maybe. Or if Oberhauser was a front man and Blofeld turned out to be somebody , OK.

    As it is, SPECTRE is exactly like Star Trek Into Darkness with its Khan "reveal." It's silly.

    You're wandering. In the world of the film the name Blofeld means nothing, so it shouldn't to the audience. That's the reason for it not being flagged, whether people assume it should be or not. Whether you think it's silly is irrelevant, as I've said, it's about it's context in the film. It is perfectly downplayed when it arrives. Whether the Oberhauser/Blofeld connection itself is 'silly' is another matter entirely.
  • Posts: 1,092
    Back to back... with Craig guaranteed to be in a total of 6 Bond films... holy smokes, my brain just exploded!!! That would be awesome, I don't care how hard it would be. We'd get him for another film and nobody would complain he's too old for Bond 26. We'd get it no matter what. Too cool to even think about. I get too excited. >:)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Back to back... with Craig guaranteed to be in a total of 6 Bond films... holy smokes, my brain just exploded!!! That would be awesome, I don't care how hard it would be. We'd get him for another film and nobody would complain he's too old for Bond 26. We'd get it no matter what. Too cool to even think about. I get too excited. >:)

    I feel the same way. :D
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 2,115
    RC7 wrote: »
    You're calling the movie SPECTRE. It's not a reveal at all that it's run by Blofeld.

    If, hypothetically, they called the movie something else and the name SPECTRE wasn't uttered until later, maybe. Or if Oberhauser was a front man and Blofeld turned out to be somebody , OK.

    As it is, SPECTRE is exactly like Star Trek Into Darkness with its Khan "reveal." It's silly.

    You're wandering. In the world of the film the name Blofeld means nothing, so it shouldn't to the audience. That's the reason for it not being flagged, whether people assume it should be or not. Whether you think it's silly is irrelevant, as I've said, it's about it's context in the film. It is perfectly downplayed when it arrives. Whether the Oberhauser/Blofeld connection itself is 'silly' is another matter entirely.

    I'll amend one statement. It's not exactly the same Stark Into Darkness. It's worse. The title of the movie essentially gives the "reveal" away. Why build a story where this is a critical plot point when the title gives it away? Why not call it something else? Also, why make Blofeld physically look so similar to the Blofeld of the "old" film series? That's a creation of the film makers. You could pull a switch and cast and actor appear like Blofeld did in the novels.

    Also, when you've said "Austin Powers f*cked us" why then follow the Austin Powers playbook (as well as the rebooted Hawaii Five-0 television series) with how the hero has such a personal tie to the villain?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    You're calling the movie SPECTRE. It's not a reveal at all that it's run by Blofeld.

    If, hypothetically, they called the movie something else and the name SPECTRE wasn't uttered until later, maybe. Or if Oberhauser was a front man and Blofeld turned out to be somebody , OK.

    As it is, SPECTRE is exactly like Star Trek Into Darkness with its Khan "reveal." It's silly.

    You're wandering. In the world of the film the name Blofeld means nothing, so it shouldn't to the audience. That's the reason for it not being flagged, whether people assume it should be or not. Whether you think it's silly is irrelevant, as I've said, it's about it's context in the film. It is perfectly downplayed when it arrives. Whether the Oberhauser/Blofeld connection itself is 'silly' is another matter entirely.

    I'll amend one statement. It's not exactly the same Stark Into Darkness. It's worse. The title of the movie essentially gives the "reveal" away. Why build a story where this is a critical plot point when the title gives it away? Why not call it something else?

    Also, when you've said "Austin Powers f*cked us" why then follow the Austin Powers playbook (as well as the rebooted Hawaii Five-0 television series) with how the hero has such a personal tie to the villain?

    Keep skirting my point all you want.
  • Posts: 3,336
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Back to back... with Craig guaranteed to be in a total of 6 Bond films... holy smokes, my brain just exploded!!! That would be awesome, I don't care how hard it would be. We'd get him for another film and nobody would complain he's too old for Bond 26. We'd get it no matter what. Too cool to even think about. I get too excited. >:)

    Me too, if that happens i will almost explode!

  • edited January 2016 Posts: 4,622
    timmer wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    I think it's safe to say the cat died in the blast.

    Unless Blofeld and his aide took it with him/them.
    I think that's most likely. Cat goes where Blofeld goes.
    Although it does seem that cat might have got away, in YOLT volcano. It jumped out of Ernst's arms and ran off as Ernst shot Osato and prepared to kill Bond.
    Also not sure if Ernst took cat with him during Bathosub attempted escape, and weren't there two cats in DAF?
    Ernst really isn"t a responsible pet owner when you consider plight of cat in both YOLT and DAF.

    Not to mention OHMSS where the last we see of it I think is when he throws it down on the desk before the ski chase.

    It presumably either dies in the Piz Gloria explosion or escapes and finds its way down the mountain only to be savaged to death by the St Bernard.

    Someone really ought to report Ernst to the RSPCA.

    As best as I can cobble together, I think this might summarize the Blofeld cat history.

    Cat #1. FRWL and TB cat, presumably the same cat and presumably safe until
    YOLT. Cat was last seen escaping Blofeld amidst the volcano chaos. Presumably lost, wandering about the volcano island chasing mice etc.
    I'm hesitant to presume cat dead, as they do have a way of hiding themselves away and emerging later when things calm down.

    Cat #2 abandoned at Piz Gloria as described above by @Wiz. Presumably lost, wandering about frozen landscape. Assuming it avoided the dog, might have made its way down to the village, where it may have continued roaming streets as a stray or been taken in. Might also have holed up at nearby farmhouse stable, where Bond and Tracy found refuge. Cats are known to wander long distances until they get where they want to be.

    Cats 3&4. There were two two cats at the Whyte House. I will presume that 2nd cat was left at safe location while Blofeld and other cat went to oil rig. Best case scenario for oil rig cat I think, is that US navy seals might have rescued it from rig, when they touched down later to mop up.

    Cat #5 abandoned by Blofeld on London warehouse-area rooftop in FYEO. Presumably left to roam the nearby alleys.

    Which brings us to matter at hand: fate of SP cat going forward. As this is new continuity, this cat can be considered fresh Cat #1.
    There is no reason to believe it is in any distress. Blofeld presumably took it with him in the motorcade which fled the burning Morocco lair, later leaving it in safe hands in London, while he went about his insane business at the gutted Mi6 building.

    So question going forward for Bond25. When Blofeld escapes clutches of Mi6, will he make arrangement to reunite with cat? I think yes.

    All things considered, I think Blofeld is actually a reasonably responsible pet owner, if not somewhat reckless. He does have history of putting cat in harm's way.
    Circumstance beyond his control though, are what cause distress for his felines. ie he doesn't plan for his lairs to get blown to bits.

    This stuff just happens to him and cat gets caught in the carnage.
    However its not clear what arrangements he made for cat's safety in DAF. He takes off in bathosub, but what did he do with cat? We don't know. Maybe he left it in Metz's care. We did see him schluff it off earlier on the good doctor.
    Or possibly he escaped oil rig with cat, later reunited with other cat. Quite possibly the FYEO cat, 10 years later might be one of the DAF cats. We just don't know.

    So yes, one of the things to watch for in B25 is potential owner and pet reunion.

    Carry on.

    @mods if you want to move these posts to a dedicated Blofeld's cat thread, that would be fine. In the meantime had to link with @wiz's most recent posting on the matter here.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    I don't buy this at all, but damn, would it be interesting if this were to happen.
  • SerialHitmanSerialHitman Plotting my revenge
    Posts: 45
    If this did happen (I doubt it will), how long would the gap between Bond 25 and Bond 26 be? I'm guessing they would be released within a year of each other.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    You're calling the movie SPECTRE. It's not a reveal at all that it's run by Blofeld.

    If, hypothetically, they called the movie something else and the name SPECTRE wasn't uttered until later, maybe. Or if Oberhauser was a front man and Blofeld turned out to be somebody , OK.

    As it is, SPECTRE is exactly like Star Trek Into Darkness with its Khan "reveal." It's silly.

    You're wandering. In the world of the film the name Blofeld means nothing, so it shouldn't to the audience. That's the reason for it not being flagged, whether people assume it should be or not. Whether you think it's silly is irrelevant, as I've said, it's about it's context in the film. It is perfectly downplayed when it arrives. Whether the Oberhauser/Blofeld connection itself is 'silly' is another matter entirely.

    I'll amend one statement. It's not exactly the same Stark Into Darkness. It's worse. The title of the movie essentially gives the "reveal" away. Why build a story where this is a critical plot point when the title gives it away? Why not call it something else?

    Also, when you've said "Austin Powers f*cked us" why then follow the Austin Powers playbook (as well as the rebooted Hawaii Five-0 television series) with how the hero has such a personal tie to the villain?

    Keep skirting my point all you want.

    Last refuge of a scoundrel.
  • Posts: 5,745
    I could actually see the appeal for everybody.

    Producers and studios get a back to back annual release of Bond films, hyped up as the 2 part finale to Craig's Bond.

    Craig just has to put in this one last time, go a little bit farther than before, and then he's done forever. That probably sounds appealing to him. Not to mention he'll get producer credits and make a fortune for the following five generations of his family.

    I say it's probably still on the table.
  • Posts: 4,325
    If this did happen (I doubt it will), how long would the gap between Bond 25 and Bond 26 be? I'm guessing they would be released within a year of each other.

    I really doubt this will happen. But if it did my guess would be 2018 and 2019 releases. I was wondering if they might go for a summer release with the next Bond with all the Star Wars films coming out. That was the approach they took with MI:RN - but that didn't reach the BO of Spectre or the best sellling MI which is MI:2.
  • Posts: 6,601
    I thought everybody made it clear, that after 8 months shooting and all the pre production, they were done and making another one was indeed close to a death sentence. So why are we even entertaining such an idea?
Sign In or Register to comment.