No Time To Die: Production Diary

18938948968988992563

Comments

  • Posts: 13,883
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.
  • Honestly, I think the smartest and most surprising thing Eon could do with a YOLT adaptation would be to have Shatterhand NOT turn out to be Blofeld.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Honestly, I think the smartest and most surprising thing Eon could do with a YOLT adaptation would be to have Shatterhand NOT turn out to be Blofeld.
    I would be absolutely okay with that.

  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    A lot of not well thought out decisions made on SPECTRE.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    edited August 2017 Posts: 1,187
    The Sun claims that Daniel and Sam Mendes had creative differences

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/4179212/james-bond-daniel-craig-sam-mendes-role-change/amp/
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 10,654
    That fits what they're selling. And they drop in the kitchen sink with the slashed wrists and doing it for the money comments. So I'm not buying.
  • The Sun claims that Daniel and Sam Mendes had creative differences

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/4179212/james-bond-daniel-craig-sam-mendes-role-change/amp/

    "A source." In other words: we made this all up, like everybody else has been doing.

    But it's at least a believable story. There were creative differences between Waltz and Mendes on set. And then there was that strange Charlie Rose interview where Craig almost appeared to be laying blame on Mendes, saying he just zoned out and put it all in Sam's hands, after which Mendes abruptly cuts in and changes course. Not saying there's any truth to the Sun's story. Just saying if there was it wouldn't be a shock.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    The Sun claims that Daniel and Sam Mendes had creative differences

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/4179212/james-bond-daniel-craig-sam-mendes-role-change/amp/

    "A source." In other words: we made this all up, like everybody else has been doing.

    But it's at least a believable story. There were creative differences between Waltz and Mendes on set. And then there was that strange Charlie Rose interview where Craig almost appeared to be laying blame on Mendes, saying he just zoned out and put it all in Sam's hands, after which Mendes abruptly cuts in and changes course. Not saying there's any truth to the Sun's story. Just saying if there was it wouldn't be a shock.
    I'm just reporting the news when I do these things. I don't endorse.

  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    My reaction at the news so far

    danielcraig-satsukimitchell-beach-kissing-photos-12292008-03-860x675.jpg
  • mattjoesmattjoes Mitchell
    Posts: 5,780
    My reaction at the news so far

    danielcraig-satsukimitchell-beach-kissing-photos-12292008-03-860x675.jpg

    "Throw it down the toilet... cut out the middleman."
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Why does Bond have to die at the end. Why cant he just retire
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,160
    Precisely.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Why does Bond have to die at the end. Why cant he just retire

    It is a ludicrous thought. A non-option for me. If I knew beforehand I would certainly not spend my money.

    So you wouldnt pay to watch a bond film that ends with bond in love and retiring after killing blofeld, but you would watch a film about Blofeld killing bond?
  • Posts: 11,297
    Killing off Bond is stupid. Period. One of the biggest points of his character is to be able to survive anything. I'd be pretty pissed off if they actually kill his character in the next film; I have a hard time imagining that being done tastefully.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Birdleson wrote: »
    And killing Bond off is beyond arrogant. Distastefully so. Fleming didn't end up doing it, Broccoli and Saltzman never did, Maubam didn't. Yet this or some future hotshot generation or studio thinks that they are so goddmaned special that they have artistic licence to do so; because they are the thing of the moment. No effing way.
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Killing off Bond is stupid. Period. One of the biggest points of his character is to be able to survive anything. I'd be pretty pissed off if they actually kill his character in the next film; I have a hard time imagining that being done tastefully.

    Agreed. So lets say craig returns for 2 more both revolving around ohmss and yolt how should Craigs now old bond character end his arc. Like spectre where he drives off into the sunset?
  • Posts: 187
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Bond will never die in the movies. That would hurt the franchise BIG TIME

    But if the rumors are true and EON might be selling the series than maybe it can happen

    Say what now? Where is this coming from?
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 2,998
    Birdleson wrote: »
    No. Just end the damned thing like any other old Bond film. Bond, with or without a temporary floozy, completes his mission. Ready for the next one. End Craig.

    Exactly. It doesn't need some lousy trick ending.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Birdleson wrote: »
    No. Just end the damned thing like any other old Bond film. Bond, with or without a temporary floozy, completes his mission. Ready for the next one. End Craig.

    Exactly. It doesn't need some lousy trick ending.

    And that's correct but, I just feel like we started the Craig movies when he becomes a double o and because of all the continuity and bs with spectre and blofeld, they will have to somewhat reboot with the next actor. it would be cool if Craigs bond character came full circle
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,340
    Birdleson wrote: »
    And killing Bond off is beyond arrogant. Distastefully so. Fleming didn't end up doing it, Broccoli and Saltzman never did, Maubam didn't. Yet this or some future hotshot generation or studio thinks that they are so goddmaned special that they have artistic licence to do so; because they are the thing of the moment. No effing way.

    Fleming, Broccoli Saltzman and Maubam never gave Bond and Blofeld the personal connection either. If you think its beyond possible, think again. I wouldn't put anything past the current team at the moment.
  • Posts: 4,619
    Killing of Bond is not the only way to create a proper ending for Bond's story.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,160
    Killing off Bond is just as stupid as the Codename Theory.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Given the circumstances
    Posts: 7,340
    Killing of Bond is not the only way to create a proper ending for Bond's story.

    Of course not, but were talking about the Craig era here. We've already had M killed, Bond family home, and Bro-feld. What's to say they won't be that one step "bolder".
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    To shake things up Bond will end B25 in bed with a lady.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Killing of Bond is not the only way to create a proper ending for Bond's story.

    Of course not, but were talking about the Craig era here. We've already had M killed, Bond family home, and Bro-feld. What's to say they won't be that one step "bolder".

    People said Trump and brexit would never happen. Weve entered an era of suprises
  • Posts: 1,150
    Remember there were rumblings on this board in the run up to Spectre that Bond would be killed off. There was a board member here who claimed they had inside info and that given the way Spectre ends it was going to make it 'impossible for Craig to return.'

    What ever came of that boardie? I doubt they're still here.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,425
    The Sun claims that Daniel and Sam Mendes had creative differences

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/4179212/james-bond-daniel-craig-sam-mendes-role-change/amp/

    "A source." In other words: we made this all up, like everybody else has been doing.

    But it's at least a believable story. There were creative differences between Waltz and Mendes on set. And then there was that strange Charlie Rose interview where Craig almost appeared to be laying blame on Mendes, saying he just zoned out and put it all in Sam's hands, after which Mendes abruptly cuts in and changes course. Not saying there's any truth to the Sun's story. Just saying if there was it wouldn't be a shock.
    [/quote]


    I'm sure there's a bit of truth in this. The SP set was clearly not the happiest of places. The slashing wrists comment must relate to Craig having a bad time on set. And as we know Waltz has all but said he had serious creative differences with Mendes.

    The fact Mendes hasn't done a commentary on SP is also telling.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I confidently expect by the end of the day some shitty blog or tabloid rag, having lifted comments from here, will report:

    'James Bond to Die in New Film'

    Studio bosses plan to kill off James Bond in the next film in the series as Daniel Craig bows out of the role with a bang which will shock fans. A source on reputable Bond site 'MI6 Community' states the title will be 'Everything or Nothing (and Craig's Bond dies at the end).'

    Another source responded 'That's a neat idea. I suppose if the Craig era is it's own self contained story, there's no reason he can't die at the end of it.'

    EON, the producers of the Bond films have not commented officially but with what is almost certain to be Daniel Craig's final film as 007 they will want him to bow out in spectacular style.

    However the idea has proved to be controversial among the fan community and many have reacted negatively to these reports with one fan commenting 'Killing Bond off is beyond arrogant. Distastefully so. Fleming didn't end up doing it, Broccoli and Saltzman never did.'

    The Craig era has not been scared to shake things up though memorably killing off Judi Dench's M in box office smash Skyfall so could they really be planning for Bond to live and let die this time round?'


    Once this story gets posted then some mug will post a link to it here and this thread will go into a frenzy like a load of chavs fighting over Primark tat at the January sales.
  • Posts: 13,883
    Walecs wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    00Ralf wrote: »
    I can't see it being called Shatterhand, really. Shatterhand only means something to us, Bond-fans, and I'm sure EoN is/will be aware of potential marketing issues when deciding on the name. In German-speaking countries a title like that would only envoke "Winnetou and Old Shatterhand" associations and nothing more, as Karl May is a national treasure over here.

    I'm hoping for an enigmatic Fleming YOLT/LALD-style phrase-title, personally. I'm a bit tired of the single word S-titles.

    No idea what you're on about with the German thing but I can't really see it working either.

    If they cast Waltz then we all know Blofeld is back so to then use the name Shatterhand is totally redundant. It would be a bit stupid to have Bond wandering round Japan saying to himself 'Who on earth could this mysterious Dr Guntram Shatterhand be?' and all the audience shout back 'It's Blofeld mate because we've all seen Waltz's name on the poster.'
    You mean like when they called the last film Spectre, and then let Bond wonder through half of it trying to figure out what it was (even though he was told it was called Quantum by Green two films ago and should have realized this was the same operation when he ran into White again), only for its name to be revealed instead as 'Spectre' by Madeleine? I honestly wouldn't put anything past them.

    Also expecting us to be shocked when Oberhauser revealed he was Blofeld.

    Have you read the debates here before the movie was released? A large number of people believed Max Denbigh was going to be Blofeld. Or M. Or Lucia Sciarra even. I had no issue then and have no issue now with a Jekyll and Hyde or Dracula twist, but you'd be surprised at the number of people who expected something else.

    Yeah, I remember those theories. People even thought that Andrew Scott actually delivered the "You came across me so many times yet you never saw me" line in the trailer, even though that line was dubbed by Waltz's voice actors in foreign versions of the trailer.

    Admittedly, when I walked into the theater back in 2015 I was not 100% sure that Waltz played Blofeld (though I expected it), but that's because I considered EON smarter and I thought they would surprise us. How wrong I was.

    I wonder why people expected to be surprised as if there absolutely HAS to be a twist they hadn't seen coming up. That's why I always considered it a Jekyll and Hyde twist.
  • Posts: 11,119
    I am thinking of writing an open letter to the writers...
Sign In or Register to comment.