No Time To Die: Production Diary

18658668688708712507

Comments

  • Posts: 2,483
    jake24 wrote: »
    As much as I love Brozza, those pictures certainly don't do him any favours.

    When you turn 64 you may look upon such photos with a different eye.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Dennison wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Looks are very subjective. It's not worth focusing on it at this juncture. As long as the man can still do the job, that's all that matters. Just don't go breaking any knees and screwing up the film on account of it again.

    Like Pierce Brosnan did ...
    Precisely. It's a young man's game.
  • Posts: 1,031
    Why are we talking about hamlet or Hamlet?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Troll in the dungeon.
  • Posts: 6,601
    1,2,3...
  • Posts: 12,506
    Hope I am looking as good as Brosnan when I reach that age!
  • Posts: 1,162
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    Hope I am looking as good as Brosnan when I reach that age!

    Don't we all?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,586
    jake24 wrote: »
    As much as I love Brozza, those pictures certainly don't do him any favours.

    When you turn 64 you may look upon such photos with a different eye.
    Don't get me wrong, Brosnan looks fantastic for his age. But those picrures wouldn't be the ones I would use to convince others that he can still play the part. Check out Brosnan less than two years ago with Dame Shirley Bassy:

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/04/29/19/2824E75300000578-3061332-image-a-2_1430332811350.jpg
  • edited July 2017 Posts: 9,737
    back on the actual news has anyone seen 71' Yann's only other film so far (I fear putting bond 25 in such an inexperienced director might be bad)
  • Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    I've always said that they got the right balance of humour/style for his Bond in CR/SF. That's Craig at his best. I'm thinking the early casino scenes in the first film (even when Vesper walks in and when he goes up to her at the bar), the first Q meet at the museum or the psych evaluation. That's his take on classic Bond. Trying to shoehorn him into the traditional 'one liner' approach (including the office briefing) just reminded me that others before him have done it far better. They've got to put him in unique places to avoid reminding people of his predecessors imho, because he is a different animal to them. He is a reboot Bond in every way.

    It's all a matter of opinion. I personally think that for all of Daniel Craig's four films the writers (John Logan, Jezz Butterworth, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Paul Haggis) wisely avoided writing campy 'one liners'. But I also ask myself the question now: How would you write a good one liner then, if all we can do these days is complain about them?

    I also disagree with you saying "that others before him have done it far better". In my personal opinion, the acting skills of Pierce Brosnan made his one liners sound way more a pastiche of the past than with Daniel Craig. Badly written or not, Craig knows how to act, even in the two Bond movies that didn't receive universal aclaim.

    I especially disagree with you calling Daniel Craig a "reboot Bond in every way". I find that actually a bit belittling and it ignores his wonderful acting skills. He portrayed a fully rounded Bond character from the start of "Casino Royale" until the end credits of "SPECTRE". To me he started off as a rogue, blunt instrument, became even more angry and vengeful in QOS, together with his emotions. Then he got his character more in check during the PTS of SF, he resurrected once more and was chasing perhaps the most influential villain of his reign, and then in SP he actually showed the swagger, style and bits of believable and credible humour that we eventually know the Bond character for.

    That's how I see it. And regardless of the stories, Daniel Craig so far gave us a Bond that truly evolved. By letting him be himself on set, by not writing too many one liners ("Yes Maam", "Right Sir", "Will do Sir"), by adding a bit more grunchy one liners, instead of cheesy ones ("Io sono Topolino!"), letting the environment create some humour for him (falling on a sofa, and his subsequent funny, yet natural smirk) he was very much the 'Daniel Craig James Bond', and certainly not a 'Reboot Bond'.

    So what do I expect Daniel Craig to do in Bond #25? Dear Daniel? Take the humour again a bit further. If you can have fun in "Logan Lucky", man you sure can have more fun in simply 'living' your mission :-). I'm ccertainly not afraid that it won't work, because Daniel actually can act. Give us a better story than SP, more riveting, trendsetting and unique action sequences, and your wonderful smirky smile! Do your mission this time, let the story be entirely 'capsuled' around a proper mission in which you....follow orders this time.....and I am sure Bond #25 will be another fine, wonderful entry in the franchise :-).
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Dear EON / Purvis & Wade,

    Bond 25, Pick it up 2 years after Spectre, no mention of what happened in Spectre. Quite simply Bond does not wish to discuss or bring up the past. Just have MI6 operational, and Bond in service and on a mission. No back story, no Team MI6 to give high profile supporting cast their time on screen, just give us a CR type adventure and drop a bombshell twist at the end of it. Thanks.

    Kind Regards

    Sir Hils.
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,277
    Dear EON / Purvis & Wade,

    Bond 25, Pick it up 2 years after Spectre, no mention of what happened in Spectre. Quite simply Bond does not wish to discuss or bring up the past. Just have MI6 operational, and Bond in service and on a mission. No back story, no Team MI6 to give high profile supporting cast their time on screen, just give us a CR type adventure and drop a bombshell twist at the end of it. Thanks.

    Kind Regards

    Sir Hils.

    I'm into that.

    I was thinking yesterday, of course, totally out of the blue. WHAT IF, Nicolas Winding Refn's "The Avenging Silence", written by P&W, turns out to be BOND 25 working/secret title? We haven't heard anything from this movie...that would blown our minds. :D
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited July 2017 Posts: 10,586
    Dear EON / Purvis & Wade,

    Bond 25, Pick it up 2 years after Spectre, no mention of what happened in Spectre. Quite simply Bond does not wish to discuss or bring up the past. Just have MI6 operational, and Bond in service and on a mission. No back story, no Team MI6 to give high profile supporting cast their time on screen, just give us a CR type adventure and drop a bombshell twist at the end of it. Thanks.

    Kind Regards

    Sir Hils.

    I'm into that.

    I was thinking yesterday, of course, totally out of the blue. WHAT IF, Nicolas Winding Refn's "The Avenging Silence", written by P&W, turns out to be BOND 25 working/secret title? We haven't heard anything from this movie...that would blown our minds. :D
    You know, I was semi-joking when I posted that earlier, but that is certainly an interesting prospect! Unlikely, but would certainly be a shock if true.
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,277
    jake24 wrote: »
    You know, I was semi-joking when I posted that earlier, but that is certainly an interesting prospect!

    Haha, so you also came up with that Jake? I haven't seen it. Anyway, I'm joking too, of course. But would be amazing.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    I've always said that they got the right balance of humour/style for his Bond in CR/SF. That's Craig at his best. I'm thinking the early casino scenes in the first film (even when Vesper walks in and when he goes up to her at the bar), the first Q meet at the museum or the psych evaluation. That's his take on classic Bond. Trying to shoehorn him into the traditional 'one liner' approach (including the office briefing) just reminded me that others before him have done it far better. They've got to put him in unique places to avoid reminding people of his predecessors imho, because he is a different animal to them. He is a reboot Bond in every way.

    It's all a matter of opinion. I personally think that for all of Daniel Craig's four films the writers (John Logan, Jezz Butterworth, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Paul Haggis) wisely avoided writing campy 'one liners'. But I also ask myself the question now: How would you write a good one liner then, if all we can do these days is complain about them?

    I also disagree with you saying "that others before him have done it far better". In my personal opinion, the acting skills of Pierce Brosnan made his one liners sound way more a pastiche of the past than with Daniel Craig. Badly written or not, Craig knows how to act, even in the two Bond movies that didn't receive universal aclaim.

    I especially disagree with you calling Daniel Craig a "reboot Bond in every way". I find that actually a bit belittling and it ignores his wonderful acting skills. He portrayed a fully rounded Bond character from the start of "Casino Royale" until the end credits of "SPECTRE". To me he started off as a rogue, blunt instrument, became even more angry and vengeful in QOS, together with his emotions. Then he got his character more in check during the PTS of SF, he resurrected once more and was chasing perhaps the most influential villain of his reign, and then in SP he actually showed the swagger, style and bits of believable and credible humour that we eventually know the Bond character for.

    That's how I see it. And regardless of the stories, Daniel Craig so far gave us a Bond that truly evolved. By letting him be himself on set, by not writing too many one liners ("Yes Maam", "Right Sir", "Will do Sir"), by adding a bit more grunchy one liners, instead of cheesy ones ("Io sono Topolino!"), letting the environment create some humour for him (falling on a sofa, and his subsequent funny, yet natural smirk) he was very much the 'Daniel Craig James Bond', and certainly not a 'Reboot Bond'.

    So what do I expect Daniel Craig to do in Bond #25? Dear Daniel? Take the humour again a bit further. If you can have fun in "Logan Lucky", man you sure can have more fun in simply 'living' your mission :-). I'm ccertainly not afraid that it won't work, because Daniel actually can act. Give us a better story than SP, more riveting, trendsetting and unique action sequences, and your wonderful smirky smile! Do your mission this time, let the story be entirely 'capsuled' around a proper mission in which you....follow orders this time.....and I am sure Bond #25 will be another fine, wonderful entry in the franchise :-).
    Disagree all you want. It's my opinion and I stand by it. You're welcome to your own.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    Risico007 wrote: »
    back on the actual news has anyone seen 71' Yann's only other film so far (I fear putting bond 25 in such an inexperienced director might be bad)

    As good as 71 and his other shows may be, I'm slightly confused how he's a candidate to be director of a multi million if not billion dollar franchise. Villeneuve is a 1000x better choice.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    Dear EON / Purvis & Wade,

    Bond 25, Pick it up 2 years after Spectre, no mention of what happened in Spectre. Quite simply Bond does not wish to discuss or bring up the past. Just have MI6 operational, and Bond in service and on a mission. No back story, no Team MI6 to give high profile supporting cast their time on screen, just give us a CR type adventure and drop a bombshell twist at the end of it. Thanks.

    Kind Regards

    Sir Hils.

    I'm into that.

    I was thinking yesterday, of course, totally out of the blue. WHAT IF, Nicolas Winding Refn's "The Avenging Silence", written by P&W, turns out to be BOND 25 working/secret title? We haven't heard anything from this movie...that would blown our minds. :D

    I've been saying this since it was first mentioned!
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    I think there's only two options with this next movie. A) Mention something to Bond like blah blah that's why Madeline left you you can't stay away from the spy life it's who you are and bam we get a mission just James Bond no team, just a classic bond movie with the hot girls, some mild gadgets, badass cars and some action.

    B) Madeline gets kidnapped or killed and Blofeld escapes prison. Huge twist at the ending maybe Madeline was bad all a long or something crazy.

    Keep in mind this is not traditional James Bond anymore this is a rebooted series so they need to go out with a bang. I rank the movies entertaining wise as CR, SP, Qos and then SF. CR and SP had a lot of great cinematography and every scene was to the point. I don't like when they make the movie boring and drag it on. Love when they just make everything to the point and simple. James Bond is a pretty simple character no need for a backstory or anything, kinda like Dr who. You can have a new actor and keep the story rolling with no problems. Just my take.. I think Craig is back but for one more then we get a younger Bond.
  • edited July 2017 Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I've always said that they got the right balance of humour/style for his Bond in CR/SF. That's Craig at his best. I'm thinking the early casino scenes in the first film (even when Vesper walks in and when he goes up to her at the bar), the first Q meet at the museum or the psych evaluation. That's his take on classic Bond. Trying to shoehorn him into the traditional 'one liner' approach (including the office briefing) just reminded me that others before him have done it far better. They've got to put him in unique places to avoid reminding people of his predecessors imho, because he is a different animal to them. He is a reboot Bond in every way.

    It's all a matter of opinion. I personally think that for all of Daniel Craig's four films the writers (John Logan, Jezz Butterworth, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Paul Haggis) wisely avoided writing campy 'one liners'. But I also ask myself the question now: How would you write a good one liner then, if all we can do these days is complain about them?

    I also disagree with you saying "that others before him have done it far better". In my personal opinion, the acting skills of Pierce Brosnan made his one liners sound way more a pastiche of the past than with Daniel Craig. Badly written or not, Craig knows how to act, even in the two Bond movies that didn't receive universal aclaim.

    I especially disagree with you calling Daniel Craig a "reboot Bond in every way". I find that actually a bit belittling and it ignores his wonderful acting skills. He portrayed a fully rounded Bond character from the start of "Casino Royale" until the end credits of "SPECTRE". To me he started off as a rogue, blunt instrument, became even more angry and vengeful in QOS, together with his emotions. Then he got his character more in check during the PTS of SF, he resurrected once more and was chasing perhaps the most influential villain of his reign, and then in SP he actually showed the swagger, style and bits of believable and credible humour that we eventually know the Bond character for.

    That's how I see it. And regardless of the stories, Daniel Craig so far gave us a Bond that truly evolved. By letting him be himself on set, by not writing too many one liners ("Yes Maam", "Right Sir", "Will do Sir"), by adding a bit more grunchy one liners, instead of cheesy ones ("Io sono Topolino!"), letting the environment create some humour for him (falling on a sofa, and his subsequent funny, yet natural smirk) he was very much the 'Daniel Craig James Bond', and certainly not a 'Reboot Bond'.

    So what do I expect Daniel Craig to do in Bond #25? Dear Daniel? Take the humour again a bit further. If you can have fun in "Logan Lucky", man you sure can have more fun in simply 'living' your mission :-). I'm ccertainly not afraid that it won't work, because Daniel actually can act. Give us a better story than SP, more riveting, trendsetting and unique action sequences, and your wonderful smirky smile! Do your mission this time, let the story be entirely 'capsuled' around a proper mission in which you....follow orders this time.....and I am sure Bond #25 will be another fine, wonderful entry in the franchise :-).
    Disagree all you want. It's my opinion and I stand by it. You're welcome to your own.

    This is a discussion forum @bondjames :-). No need to be grumpy. Always curious what others think...
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Villeneuve would be a great choice.
  • Posts: 22
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Wow, quantum Art, 2 post and already knowing enough to make such a comment? Remarkable. Getafix knows me a long time and can make such a statement. But you? Or are you someone we all know underva new name? Wouldn't happen for the first time. But no, I don't think it's too harsh.

    You're right on the latter, Glad to see you haven't changed over the years :)
  • Posts: 1,092
    Villeneuve would be a great choice.

    Yes, indeed. He's pretty amazing and getting better with each film he directs. I'm looking forward to Blade Runner 2049.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I've always said that they got the right balance of humour/style for his Bond in CR/SF. That's Craig at his best. I'm thinking the early casino scenes in the first film (even when Vesper walks in and when he goes up to her at the bar), the first Q meet at the museum or the psych evaluation. That's his take on classic Bond. Trying to shoehorn him into the traditional 'one liner' approach (including the office briefing) just reminded me that others before him have done it far better. They've got to put him in unique places to avoid reminding people of his predecessors imho, because he is a different animal to them. He is a reboot Bond in every way.

    It's all a matter of opinion. I personally think that for all of Daniel Craig's four films the writers (John Logan, Jezz Butterworth, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Paul Haggis) wisely avoided writing campy 'one liners'. But I also ask myself the question now: How would you write a good one liner then, if all we can do these days is complain about them?

    I also disagree with you saying "that others before him have done it far better". In my personal opinion, the acting skills of Pierce Brosnan made his one liners sound way more a pastiche of the past than with Daniel Craig. Badly written or not, Craig knows how to act, even in the two Bond movies that didn't receive universal aclaim.

    I especially disagree with you calling Daniel Craig a "reboot Bond in every way". I find that actually a bit belittling and it ignores his wonderful acting skills. He portrayed a fully rounded Bond character from the start of "Casino Royale" until the end credits of "SPECTRE". To me he started off as a rogue, blunt instrument, became even more angry and vengeful in QOS, together with his emotions. Then he got his character more in check during the PTS of SF, he resurrected once more and was chasing perhaps the most influential villain of his reign, and then in SP he actually showed the swagger, style and bits of believable and credible humour that we eventually know the Bond character for.

    That's how I see it. And regardless of the stories, Daniel Craig so far gave us a Bond that truly evolved. By letting him be himself on set, by not writing too many one liners ("Yes Maam", "Right Sir", "Will do Sir"), by adding a bit more grunchy one liners, instead of cheesy ones ("Io sono Topolino!"), letting the environment create some humour for him (falling on a sofa, and his subsequent funny, yet natural smirk) he was very much the 'Daniel Craig James Bond', and certainly not a 'Reboot Bond'.

    So what do I expect Daniel Craig to do in Bond #25? Dear Daniel? Take the humour again a bit further. If you can have fun in "Logan Lucky", man you sure can have more fun in simply 'living' your mission :-). I'm ccertainly not afraid that it won't work, because Daniel actually can act. Give us a better story than SP, more riveting, trendsetting and unique action sequences, and your wonderful smirky smile! Do your mission this time, let the story be entirely 'capsuled' around a proper mission in which you....follow orders this time.....and I am sure Bond #25 will be another fine, wonderful entry in the franchise :-).
    Disagree all you want. It's my opinion and I stand by it. You're welcome to your own.

    This is a discussion forum @bondjames :-). No need to be grumpy. Always curious what others think...
    Not grumpy at all. Just stating that your comments aren't going to change my opinion or those of others who feel the same way, in case there was any doubt on your part.

    I'm always curious to hear your thoughts as well, even if I usually disagree with them.
  • Posts: 6,601
    QuantumArt wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Wow, quantum Art, 2 post and already knowing enough to make such a comment? Remarkable. Getafix knows me a long time and can make such a statement. But you? Or are you someone we all know underva new name? Wouldn't happen for the first time. But no, I don't think it's too harsh.

    You're right on the latter, Glad to see you haven't changed over the years :)

    so, who are you then? What's was your last name on here?

  • Posts: 2,483
    jake24 wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    As much as I love Brozza, those pictures certainly don't do him any favours.

    When you turn 64 you may look upon such photos with a different eye.
    Don't get me wrong, Brosnan looks fantastic for his age. But those picrures wouldn't be the ones I would use to convince others that he can still play the part. Check out Brosnan less than two years ago with Dame Shirley Bassy:

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/04/29/19/2824E75300000578-3061332-image-a-2_1430332811350.jpg

    I don't think for a second he's still qualified for the part, just that he's exceptionally fit for a man his age.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    Also,above I joked about 3 months in the gym and he's good to go. I said that tongue in cheek but the truth is he looks good. I'm sure he exercises but if needed for a role I have no doubt he could get into remarkable shape with a bit more intensity and specific nutrition.
  • Posts: 2,081
    Well, Greene could have brother.
    Well, Greene could have brother.

    It's a small world after all.

    :))
    bondjames wrote: »
    Looks are very subjective. It's not worth focusing on it at this juncture. As long as the man can still do the job, that's all that matters. Just don't go breaking any knees and screwing up the film on account of it again.

    I agree @bondjames, I was just pointing out that Craig 'in real life' and Craig Bond seem night and day sometimes. From those pics, anyone who aren't very familiar with Bond would think Craig's take on Bond would be similar to Moore in TSWLM. When you watch those trailers for Logan Lucky, I think Craig could have pulled off some OP/TSWLM style film with relative ease.

    Of course, the actor and the character are normally very different things. He definitely isn't playing himself as Bond. Like many actors who may do many serious roles/characters he seems to be a fun dude. But the real people and what they are interested in or good at in acting are a different matter. He might not even be interested in doing quite a Moore-ish Bond, or might not be very good at it if he did. He does have comedy chops, too (not at all surprisingly), but there must also be good reasons why the more "serious" actors (role/character/movie choice-wise, not their personalities) rarely do comedy stuff. How one is as a person and how they work are such different things that I'm not convinced he could do Moore "with relative ease". I suspect it looks easier than it actually is.
    Dear EON / Purvis & Wade,

    Bond 25, Pick it up 2 years after Spectre, no mention of what happened in Spectre. Quite simply Bond does not wish to discuss or bring up the past. Just have MI6 operational, and Bond in service and on a mission. No back story, no Team MI6 to give high profile supporting cast their time on screen, just give us a CR type adventure and drop a bombshell twist at the end of it. Thanks.

    Kind Regards

    Sir Hils.

    If only...
    B) Madeline gets kidnapped or killed and Blofeld escapes prison. Huge twist at the ending maybe Madeline was bad all a long or something crazy.

    I sure hope not, sounds very off-putting to me.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,494
    We might not be hearing from DC as much as we thought. According to The Hollywood Reporter, there is no press junket planned for 'Logan Lucky'.

    "Logan Lucky reviewers did not receive a press kit, which typically highlights the back story of key participants in a project, and only were given a bare-bones list of credits as they appear in the film. Also unusual, there is no press junket planned, despite the fact that the film is receiving a wide release on Aug. 18 and features a high-profile cast of movie stars that also includes Katherine Waterston, Riley Keough, Katie Holmes, Seth MacFarlane and Hilary Swank.

    A representative for Bleecker Street, the company that is releasing the film, declined comment.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,586
    I'm fairly certain this has something to do with Dan.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,494
    jake24 wrote: »
    I'm fairly certain this has something to do with Dan.

    If that's the case, then presumably he wont be promoting 'Kings' either.
Sign In or Register to comment.