No Time To Die: Production Diary

160616365662507

Comments

  • Posts: 6,601
    But what mean is, some are discussing it with stamping feet and all, as IF it was true already. Relax, its not and there is no indication for it either.

    I suppose, they will give DC a deadline until which he has to decide and will work from then.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Relax.

    This.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited February 2016 Posts: 11,139
    Germanlady wrote: »
    The way you do ot, I call it a fully grown rant amd that is out of plave at this point. Thats allI said and no, I didnt expect you to agree .

    It's hardly out of place. EoN do need to get on with things and use their time better. Since CR, they've had 2 years, 4 years and 3 year gaps in between films and have failed to muster a decent script and in the process havn't made the very best and optimal use of their acting talent, especially Craig. I don't give a shit if Bond 25 comes out in 2018 or 2019 but what I do care about is, if we're made to wait this long in between films, EON need to make damn sure things are in place to make the best possible movie and it would help if they knew what the situation was with their lead actor. If Craig is coming back then great, if he can't commit for a 2018 release then Aufwiedersehen and EoN can start the casting process for a new actor and also get a script going. Again, EoN's only production priority is Bond; its just one IP.

    After QoS and with the whole MGM restructuring they allegedly still got on with things and made preparations when they didn't even know wtf was happening or how things would turn out. The same principle needs to be applied here and fortunately it's not even a matter of finances and funding; which brings me to SP. The entire preproduction process for this movie was a shambles. Mendes pissing about with if he'd return or not and then EoN waiting a year for him to be ready to return and then the whole scripting process with Logan writing what was said to be garbage and only for EoN to rehire the guys they fired to try and save the script...all this mess with more than enough time to accommodate...and all of this isn't even taking into account the Sony leaks incident.

    Bottom line is, EoN need to get it together and start thinking more seriously as a business and not priorotising and placing certain talent on a pedestal if it means compromising on time. If the last 3 Bond films were of CR standard then I'd be endorsing EoN's every move but that's not the case now, is it?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    The thing is though given that Babs is actually @Germanlady in disguise and she thinks that holding onto Craig is the most important thing then it wouldn't surprise me if we slipped to 2019.

    They need to say to Dan we start filming on Jan 2nd 2018 and we need to know by say Jan 2017 if you are in or not. If you can't commit then thanks for everything but we will need to recast.

    But I think certainly Babs and especially the new studio would rather wait for Dan than recast. If you've just signed a deal with EON I'm sure you would prefer a banker with Dan as your first film rather than risk a new Bond.
  • Gregg Wilson told the press they were brainstorming for Bond 25, thinking about what is going to concern people for the next years. I am sure thar at the end of this year they will start writing and a release at late 2018 is prefectly possible, at least if Craig stays.
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 725
    Since about 98% of what gets posted here is speculation, none of us know the status of so many major issues that will impact when 25 finally comes out. MGM is going to be desperate for money in negotiations for a new studio, where I'd think EON wants autonomy on all major decisions. Then the studio will have its own terms. This could make for a protracted contracting effort.

    Then there is the big issue of the actor playing Bond. Othello could have been easily absorbed with a sure 2018 date. But Purity is another matter. It is a great wild man role. Franzen is regarded as one of, if not the, big deal young American author and Ruden is a basterd, but one of the best producers in the business. A 20 ep series with a very dramatic role as the charismatic Wolf, a thinly vailed Assange character, must have been too juicy for Craig to turn down, and the shooting schedule could, along with his injuries, very easily mean the end of Craig's Bond.

    Add to that the effort to get a good director and a script written for another huge beast of a movie. Someone posted how many huge franchises now have long breaks between films. These films are just too damn big. EON may be desperate for a rest as it has to be a killer to produce these Bonds. They should scale Bond 25 back in budget and action, and aim to make a great thriller, but I wouldn't bet on it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    I hate that. When they made Diamonds are forever it wasn't because the world was afraid of the destructive capacity of precouis stones. JUST COME UP WITH SOMETHING and GET ON WITH IT, EON!!
  • I don´t see a Netflix/Showtime/FX 20 episode season. Maybe it´s going to be a 12-13 ep series or a couple of 10 ep. seasons. Othelo will be running just this fall and they have whole of next year to produce Purity and writting Bond 25. If Craig stays, late 2018 should be the time for Bond 25.
  • Posts: 725
    I don´t see a Netflix/Showtime/FX 20 episode season. Maybe it´s going to be a 12-13 ep series or a couple of 10 ep. seasons. Othelo will be running just this fall and they have whole of next year to produce Purity and writting Bond 25. If Craig stays, late 2018 should be the time for Bond 25.

    I agree. We don't knowwhen they will film, and when the eps will air. If Craig wants to do 25, I guess it will work, but 20 eps is a lot of production time. Weird how Craig went from no film work between SF and SP (unwisely I thought) to a demanding play and big TV series.. They won't have all of 2017 to shoot Purity though as Bond will start up that fall. But as you note, we don't know anything about the production schedule for Purity other than it is a possible 20 ep series.
  • smitty wrote: »
    I don´t see a Netflix/Showtime/FX 20 episode season. Maybe it´s going to be a 12-13 ep series or a couple of 10 ep. seasons. Othelo will be running just this fall and they have whole of next year to produce Purity and writting Bond 25. If Craig stays, late 2018 should be the time for Bond 25.

    I agree. We don't knowwhen they will film, and when the eps will air. If Craig wants to do 25, I guess it will work, but 20 eps is a lot of production time. Weird how Craig went from no film work between SF and SP (unwisely I thought) to a demanding play and big TV series.. They won't have all of 2017 to shoot Purity though as Bond will start up that fall. But as you note, we don't know anything about the production schedule for Purity other than it is a possible 20 ep series.
    They may start shooting Bond 25 on December 2017, even on January 2018, if it´s not as complicated as SP. I think a 10-13 ep. season may be filmed in about 4 months.
  • Posts: 725
    I don't know. I think Craig's decision to do Purity is what makes me think he is done with Bond.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    It's not exactly conclusive. Katniss did Silver Linings Playbook in between HG movies.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
  • Posts: 9,730
    Daniel Craig's Barbers gay roommate's half sisters best friend told me Craig is still 007.

    So did Greg Wilson in a recent interview and I put his stock above Mark Strong
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 6,601
    The thing is though given that Babs is actually @Germanlady in disguise and she thinks that holding onto Craig is the most important thing then it wouldn't surprise me if we slipped to 2019.

    They need to say to Dan we start filming on Jan 2nd 2018 and we need to know by say Jan 2017 if you are in or not. If you can't commit then thanks for everything but we will need to recast.

    But I think certainly Babs and especially the new studio would rather wait for Dan than recast. If you've just signed a deal with EON I'm sure you would prefer a banker with Dan as your first film rather than risk a new Bond.

    Hm, I have said several times now that I (surprisingly) want DC to end his run now.
    I feel, Bond and him have done all there is for each other and its time to move on.

    You may be right, that Babs is the more obsessed from the two of us.

    I agree though, that mark Strong wouldn't spill the beans but its always possible to read between the lines and jump to conclusions. AS we know its a common practise.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Risico007 wrote: »
    So did Greg Wilson in a recent interview and I put his stock above Mark Strong
    Honestly, I wouldn't. Eon has a long history of obfuscation and misdirection when it comes to anything Bond.

    Strong is indeed a very close friend of Craig's and he's a pretty straight up chap. Not a joker generally. He's probably just telling it based on where he knows Craig's head is at.
  • Posts: 6,601
    bondjames wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    So did Greg Wilson in a recent interview and I put his stock above Mark Strong
    Honestly, I wouldn't. Eon has a long history of obfuscation and misdirection when it comes to anything Bond.

    Strong is indeed a very close friend of Craig's and he's a pretty straight up chap. Not a joker generally. He's probably just telling it based on where he knows Craig's head is at.

    I agree, he KNOWS more then Gregg W. probably but i doubt, he would TELL anybody. Its not his job to make the big announcement and he knows well enough, how the press operates.
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 389
    It´s going to be hard for some people here, but Craig may have ended his run as James Bond. If that happens, it´s fine for me. He was unfairly bashed when he was chosen, but he has become a very successful and recognized James Bond. He has starred my favorite movie of the franchise (CR) and I find all the rest of his movies vey enjoyable, yes even QoS.
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 725
    I also read Greg Wilson's comment differently. It sounded to me that Craig was still Bond until EON was ready to say he wasn't.

    So if true, Strong better get some body guards because EON will want to kill him. EON and MGM would have wanted to have had total and confidential control over the screen testing of actors and eventual announcement of the next Bond. They do not want their hands forced. On this decision they want total control, not buzz. Elba could very well be forced on them now. He's too old, and he will be hell to negotiate with over money and his already full film schedule. But I wouldn't't underestimate the demands in the US press to get him the role. The recent blow up over the lack of diversity in the Oscar noms will only add fuel to the this push. EON could do an end run on Elba by casting a young black actor. I also wouldn't be surprised to see Stong "clarify" his remarks quickly.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited February 2016 Posts: 9,117
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »

    'rumours were enhanced even further when bookmakers suspended betting on Tom Hardy becoming the next incarnation of Ian Fleming's spy.'

    Think I might hasten down Paddy Power then and have a cheeky tenner on Hardy not being the next Bond. If they've closed the book I should get pretty good odds.

    Oh look - they havent closed it:

    http://www.paddypower.com/bet/hollywood/james-bond?ev_oc_grp_ids=21573

    Who writes this crap?

    PS - Craig Fairbrass 50/1 =))
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 1,092
    I read an article just today that said Craig wants to come back but it's dependent on what his wife decides. Just a rumor of course and there's good and bad to be had from it. Good that he wants to return and lame/bad that his wife would have the final say. She doesn't want him getting hurt but I'm sure another $20 million dollar payday would make her happy as well.

    That Mark Strong thing is bollocks just based on the fact he has a film, Grimsby, coming out soon. He's trying to bump up the marketing for it and knows saying something about Bond will ramp up the hits and interest in what he's doing. It happens all the time in Hollywood.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,567
    A lot of suggestion that Eon should get tough with Craig and give him an ultimatum (which I agree with in principle). Don't forget that they are perfectly capable of making big decisions like that. They dropped Brosnan at a time when he was hugely popular. That was a much bigger call than it would be to move forward without Craig. They had never done that before - dropping their star from the series, so it was a step in to the unknown.

    Connery and Moore did not suffer such treatment, even Lazenby was offered a way back. Dalton? The jury is out on whether he jumped or was pushed, but he wasn't as popular as Brosnan anyway so it didn't create a stir.

    But with Brozzer BB and MW basically sacked their popular star. Don't think they haven't got the balls to do it again, and yes I know BB has championed Craig all along. But she isn't stupid.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    NicNac wrote: »
    A lot of suggestion that Eon should get tough with Craig and give him an ultimatum (which I agree with in principle). Don't forget that they are perfectly capable of making big decisions like that. They dropped Brosnan at a time when he was hugely popular. That was a much bigger call than it would be to move forward without Craig. They had never done that before - dropping their star from the series, so it was a step in to the unknown.

    Connery and Moore did not suffer such treatment, even Lazenby was offered a way back. Dalton? The jury is out on whether he jumped or was pushed, but he wasn't as popular as Brosnan anyway so it didn't create a stir.

    But with Brozzer BB and MW basically sacked their popular star. Don't think they haven't got the balls to do it again, and yes I know BB has championed Craig all along. But she isn't stupid.

    Personally I think Babs is so smitten with Dan that if he said he wants to come back but only in 2019 she would go for that.

    I guess it depends on what sort of pressure the new studio can bring to bear on EON. They will no doubt want a film out ASAP and will ask the question if monumental productions like Star Wars and Avengers can do 2 or 3 years turnarounds why can something like Bond?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    NicNac wrote: »
    A lot of suggestion that Eon should get tough with Craig and give him an ultimatum (which I agree with in principle). Don't forget that they are perfectly capable of making big decisions like that. They dropped Brosnan at a time when he was hugely popular. That was a much bigger call than it would be to move forward without Craig. They had never done that before - dropping their star from the series, so it was a step in to the unknown.

    Connery and Moore did not suffer such treatment, even Lazenby was offered a way back. Dalton? The jury is out on whether he jumped or was pushed, but he wasn't as popular as Brosnan anyway so it didn't create a stir.

    But with Brozzer BB and MW basically sacked their popular star. Don't think they haven't got the balls to do it again, and yes I know BB has championed Craig all along. But she isn't stupid.

    Personally I think Babs is so smitten with Dan that if he said he wants to come back but only in 2019 she would go for that.

    I guess it depends on what sort of pressure the new studio can bring to bear on EON. They will no doubt want a film out ASAP and will ask the question if monumental productions like Star Wars and Avengers can do 2 or 3 years turnarounds why can something like Bond?
    Agreed. I'm quite sure comparisons with other bankable major franchises will be part of such discussions with the studios. This is first and foremost a business, and Craig remaining somewhat disinterested and two minded about the whole thing won't help matters because it adds a huge layer of uncertainty, which no studio would want.

    I keep coming back to one of his final quotes in SP as Bond "and besides....I've got better things to do". Symbolic, no? No doubt he does, and that's fine by me. He's done a bang up job and Mendes and he gave themselves a perfect 'out' with the vague ending of SP.

    Let's move on to new things.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I guess it depends on what sort of pressure the new studio can bring to bear on EON. They will no doubt want a film out ASAP and will ask the question if monumental productions like Star Wars and Avengers can do 2 or 3 years turnarounds why can something like Bond?

    Bond is essentially still a family business, though. Star Wars and Marvel are gargantuan by comparison. They are essentially their own studios, where EON is merely a production company. I still think Bond can operate in a space that is distanced from these two behemoths and part of me feels it needs to.

    SW will suffer fatigue very quickly, imo. Part of the joy of its appeal is in the relative scarcity of material, it used to feel reasonably precious. A trilogy that transcended mainstream cinema. Their plan going forward looks, to me, like inevitable market saturation. Do I really need to know what Han was doing in his early twenties? I'm not saying they won't have success, but I don't think the levels they are currently operating at are sustainable.

    Bond has always been a somewhat different proposition. They could do with more of a long term plan post-Craig, but the appeal for 007 is not the same as SW or Marvel. The three year turnaround seems reasonable to me if they really do want to compete. The other option is to scale back production and compete on a level just below these big hitters. I think that's creatively interesting, but it isn't to the $$$ men, so it's a tricky move going forward.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    The other option is to scale back production and compete on a level just below these big hitters. I think that's creatively interesting, but it isn't to the $$$ men, so it's a tricky move going forward.
    Actually, from a risk perspective, this is probably more palatable. One churns out a film more regularly, makes a little less money (Bond always has a box office 'floor' anyway unless one is talking about LTK), but reduce the risk that the market has moved on from your concept. If you wait 3 yrs, then you inevitably have to swing harder and hope for the big hit.

    It worked well enough for a long time before the last decade or so, and there was less competition before.
  • Posts: 725
    RC7 wrote: »
    I guess it depends on what sort of pressure the new studio can bring to bear on EON. They will no doubt want a film out ASAP and will ask the question if monumental productions like Star Wars and Avengers can do 2 or 3 years turnarounds why can something like Bond?

    Bond is essentially still a family business, though. Star Wars and Marvel are gargantuan by comparison. They are essentially their own studios, where EON is merely a production company. I still think Bond can operate in a space that is distanced from these two behemoths and part of me feels it needs to.

    SW will suffer fatigue very quickly, imo. Part of the joy of its appeal is in the relative scarcity of material, it used to feel reasonably precious. A trilogy that transcended mainstream cinema. Their plan going forward looks, to me, like inevitable market saturation. Do I really need to know what Han was doing in his early twenties? I'm not saying they won't have success, but I don't think the levels they are currently operating at are sustainable.

    Bond has always been a somewhat different proposition. They could do with more of a long term plan post-Craig, but the appeal for 007 is not the same as SW or Marvel. The three year turnaround seems reasonable to me if they really do want to compete. The other option is to scale back production and compete on a level just below these big hitters. I think that's creatively interesting, but it isn't to the $$$ men, so it's a tricky move going forward.

    All good points. Bond is not a Marvel product. It is it's own beast and it can't be compared to other franchises. Way to many differences, not to mention attempting to be more realistic while also being true to its 24 picture legacy, and trying to be original while being endlessly imitated by a glut of other spy films.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I don't think the 3 year helped them in the slightest with the final product this time around.

    Perhaps Babs/Wilson aren't quite up to the level of Cubby, because he was far more consistent in delivering a quality product on time and within budget without boxing the franchise into areas where it could be difficult to extricate oneself.

    There is also a small risk with this family business transitioning to the next generation now, and we will probably see subtle changes in what Bond is as a result, just as we did during the Cubby transition to Babs.

    Interesting times ahead.
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 725
    Comparing EON now to Cubby's output doesn't work. Cubby had the books, current EON doesn't. Cubby had no competition, current EON has tons of spy films stealing their every trope. cubby had smaller budgets with far less technology to deal with than current EON's huge budgets and vastly more complex films.. Different times, vastly different circumstances.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    smitty wrote: »
    Comparing EON now to Cubby's output doesn't work. Cubby had the books, current EON doesn't. Cubby had no competition, current EON has tons of spy films stealing their every trope. cubby had smaller budgets with far less technology to deal with than current EON's huge budgets and vastly more complex films.. Different times, vastly different circumstances.
    Indeed, they are different circumstances - that goes completely without saying.

    I still think, as the co-creator of the film behemoth, he had an innate feel for it. I don't think his successors really have shown such prowess, despite CR.
Sign In or Register to comment.