No Time To Die: Production Diary

18988999019039042507

Comments

  • edited August 2017 Posts: 17,241
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    I would just call the movie "007".

    Thank Christ you don't work for EON then. (I hope. If you do and are just floating this idea to see what the fan community thinks - it's bollocks).

    Why on earth just «007»? Actually -in 2017, this wouldn't surprise me at all, and it's frightening. Bond, with it's history of some decent titles even after Fleming, should not go for the simplicity of such a title.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    bondsum wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    It doesn't surprise me that B25 will take some of its influence from OHMSS, especially as it's now considered to be one of the very best Bond movies made. But do I really want to see another OHMSS watered-down clone? Absolutely not. Unfortunately, Madeleine Swann is no Contessa Teresa Draco, and Léa Seydoux is no Diana Rigg. Surely if Eon had plans to go down this route from get-go then Broccoli and Mendes should have cast an actress a lot more closer to Craig's age and with a bit of pizzazz about her. Léa Seydoux just isn't in the same league as Rigg or her character. This was just one aspect of SPECTRE that I just didn't buy into: Bond falling in love with Mr White's young and incredibly bland daughter. Did I care when Blofeld kidnapped her at the climax of the movie with the intention of blowing her to pieces - no, I didn't - and neither will I care if she's killed in B25. Problem was that Léa Seydoux just didn't win me over the same way as Diana Rigg's did when she sold her Tracy role to me. And you know what really infuriated me about all the hype around the Swann character being an "independent woman" in the PR rounds? Remember, “She’s his equal,” Seydoux told Yahoo Movies, “because she doesn’t need him. She saves him.” Yadda yadda yadda. (Haven't we heard this every time there's a new Bond movie?) Funny, as I also don't recall Swann having saved Bond at all, but I do remember Tracy Draco saving Bond in OHMSS in a breathtaking action-packed less hamfisted way as SPECTRE purports to have done. Honestly, between the protracted waiting time between the last Bond film to the latest one, I'm beginning to not give a damn about Bond anymore.

    I agree. I mean let's face it, two of Craig's best films have similar kind of deeper drama. The loss of Vesper Lynd in CR, which really could be seen as Craig's OHMSS. And the loss of 'mother' 'M' in SF. Both films are, together with OHMSS, the most dramatic Bond outings.

    What Craig needs now is a 'fun' film, with trendsetting action. Hence I really felt....adament to write something by myself. I just urgen the official Bond writers to find the 'fun' again! Be creative, get inspired, look at us Bond fans in here!!!
    You make a very valid point @Gustav_Graves. Both CR and SF do carry a lot of the same dramatic senses of loss that OHMSS does. Most notably SF with the death of M as a substitute Tracy. Which makes me somewhat apprehensive of not wanting to see the same trope repeated again with the lackluster Madeleine Swann. I think Eon have painted themselves into a corner with this continuous timeline thing and it'll be difficult to just simply drop Swann, like she'd never existed, and start with a fresh story and a new heroine.

    I think the continuous timeline-thing isn't the big issue here. Certainly not for Bond #25. The thing is, they simply have to nail it this time from a writer's perspective. That's how I see it. Neal Purvis and Robert Wade need to stop moaning saying that "the whole world is now full of Blofeld's and Silva's now, so....ehhh....we don't know what to do". That's, to me as a Bond fan, a real pain in the ass!! They need to get a proverbial kick under the butt from Babs and Michael, old-school style!

    So having said that, I kep saying all the time that there's plentiful inspiration you can draw from the original Fleming novels or even the continuation novels. What about a quick, fast, yet believable love relationship break-up during the first 30 mins of the new film?? I honestly believe that both Daniel Craig and Lea Seydoux can pull that off. They simply have to read what Tiffany Case did at the start of the novel "From Russia With Love". Or what Pussy Galore did at the start of "Trigger Mortis".

    I think it would be challenging and both great to make the viewers believe that Bond simply isn't the right man (not yet) to get into a full-blown love relationship! And with it I want to see Craig's Bond to act a bit like a real prick to Madeleine, so you actually think "Sjee man, you're fucking rude!!". By doing so you could also create an atmosphere like "Damn, glad Bond dumped her finally!".

    Something like that has NEVER been done before in a Bond film. And by maintaining this kind of continuity, you could actually re-focus very fast on Bond's mission during the remainder of the 120 mins of the film; you could re-focus on the standalone quality of the story! Tada! It's simple. Neal Purvis & Robert Wade simply need to become as inspired as we Bond fans are!!

    I don't go to a Bond film to watch this soap opera shite.

    If we're going get rid of the Madeline elephant in the room then by all means have one line with MP that it didn't work but I don't want to have to sit through this mundane break up.

    Apart from anything else it serves to do nothing narratively for the story if we spend the first 30 mins watching this rubbish play our before Bond gets on with the mission.

    Then in hindsight you also think many of Ian Fleming's stories are 'soap opera shite' as well. Since I got that inspiration from the novels. Thank you for burning down a nice idea. It could work, and I honestly believe that.

    Well I just looked it up and in a 337 page book Fleming covers it in half a page when Bond is having breakfast in his flat and another half page of chat with M - a total of one whole page. That's less than a third of 1% of the 'running time' of the book which in a 120 min film would come in somewhere around the 20 second mark which is exactly the way to deal with it. We really do not need Lea Seydoux brought back for half an hour of slanging matches with Bond like something out of Eastenders that doesnt serve the plot in any way.

    Somewhere during the first 30 mins of the film you could spend less than 10 mins on such a scene. Perhaps 6 mins. That's what I said, Sadly you make it sound like I want to create a 30 min episode of Eastenders. Which is wrong. In "Trigger Mortis" it's nicely done by the way.

    30 mins, 10 mins, now 6 mins? Keep hacking away and you'll get down to what Fleming did and mention it in passing in a couple of lines.

    You keep quoting 'Trigger Mortis' like it was a long undiscovered Fleming manuscript but that highlights the problem with your idea perfectly. The whole Pussy Galore episode in that book served no purpose to the story and smacked of Mendes-esque fanwankery because she is the most famous Bond girl so if we mention she's in it that will drum up a bit of publicity. Very overrated book.

    It might work I suppose if we have the first 30 mins intercut between Blofeld escaping and Bond and Madeline breaking up but if Madeline then disappears and is never seen it again then it's pointless. It only works if Madeline is later kidnapped/killed by Blofeld but then of course that makes a mockery of them breaking up in the first place.

    They either bring her back and she's integral to the whole story or they give her a brief mention during the chat with MP scene/ignore her completely.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,425
    peter wrote: »
    IF DC stays on board, I'd like to see how they're going to show us what he's been up to in between films.

    After all, he left the Service. So where is he, and how does he get back into "the game"?

    I think Fleming's Bond would have busted up with Maddy long ago. And because he's stubborn and had doubts about his job in the past, he's probably living out his pension by drinking, seducing married women, and gambling his days away.

    But he'd be bored and a little unfocused.

    Meanwhile, some of his senses would be dull. And he doesn't realize that he's been tracked down from someone in his past.

    I mentioned this a couple months back, but it's Camille who's tracked him down. She needs his help. Whatever that may be, it shakes Bond out of his doldrums, and this meeting between them's the catalyst to the bigger story.

    So, no mention of Maddy. It'd be a way of bringing in an exceptional Bond girl. And, IF they're doing a two-part send-off for Craig (I can't see it happening, but I've been wrong many times before), with links to YOLT and OHMSS (still don't see it), I could see Bond falling in love with Camille, and I could see her death having an impact (since she and Craig were good together on screen, and as an actress, I find her stronger than Lea).

    Only my two cents, have at it.

    Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!

    No more stuff from Bond, M or anyone else's past coming back to haunt them please.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,946
    peter wrote: »
    IF DC stays on board, I'd like to see how they're going to show us what he's been up to in between films.

    After all, he left the Service. So where is he, and how does he get back into "the game"?
    Since when? Madeleine doesn't want to be with him because of 'his life' then sticks around anyway (or not, as far as i'm concearned they're just driving off for a good shag), and the remarks by Q are only in gest, obviously. Why else would they let him into his workshop first and repair the DB5 in the first place? MI6 by any means isn't an organisation you just walk into when you quit.
    peter wrote: »
    I think Fleming's Bond would have busted up with Maddy long ago. And because he's stubborn and had doubts about his job in the past, he's probably living out his pension by drinking, seducing married women, and gambling his days away.

    But he'd be bored and a little unfocused.

    Meanwhile, some of his senses would be dull. And he doesn't realize that he's been tracked down from someone in his past.

    I mentioned this a couple months back, but it's Camille who's tracked him down. She needs his help. Whatever that may be, it shakes Bond out of his doldrums, and this meeting between them's the catalyst to the bigger story.

    So, no mention of Maddy. It'd be a way of bringing in an exceptional Bond girl. And, IF they're doing a two-part send-off for Craig (I can't see it happening, but I've been wrong many times before), with links to YOLT and OHMSS (still don't see it), I could see Bond falling in love with Camille, and I could see her death having an impact (since she and Craig were good together on screen, and as an actress, I find her stronger than Lea).

    Only my two cents, have at it.
    Bond has ended in the doldrums of lacklustre times many times in the books (and yes, did as you say, hang about, drink, gamble, etc.) so showing that isn't too bad. It'd actually make an interesting start. And Camille showing up for something else could be interesting too, allthough i'd rather see him go after some South American clandestine organisation where he'd find her to help him.

    Again, I really don't understand why people even consider Madeleine's return. Just because she thought she loved him, sort of? Or tried to claim him (at which point he walked off to do his job) or because he didn't shoot an unarmed psychopath who was trying to get under his skin? Bond doesn't shoot unarmed people, read TMWGG to find out in what kind of trouble he gets because of that.

    There's so many girls he's ended films with in a similar fashion, why should Madeleine be more then that?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited August 2017 Posts: 8,250
    @Getafix , not to haunt him, but she's the catalyst to the story.

    After all, she's in Bolivian Intelligence. She's in the same field as Bond, and in what I imagined above, it wouldn't be so far fetched to have her need Bond's help. There's no melodrama here, just an intel officer who shared an adventure with this man Bond. And now she needs him.

    It would be no different than Felix showing up.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,250
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondsum wrote: »
    Ah yes, Swan's strong independent woman saved Bond with his own explosive watch. Thanks for reminding me @FoxRox. But as you quite rightly pointed out, it was Bond that had to save her sorry independent ass from getting blown up at the very end. The French actress also had this to say about her multilayered character: “I think she is distinct from all the others. She’s not really a Bond girl – she’s a real character,” said one of the most bland actresses to ever grace a recent Bond movie in living memory. She's got a nerve, I'll give her that much, and she's clearly never watched a Bond picture otherwise she'd never made such an asinine remark. Just how can anyone warm to an actress that hasn't even bothered to do her homework? Beats me, but I'm sure there'll be some here on the forums that think she's everything that she says she is and defend her.

    On a serious note, I really wished that Broccoli and co had the cojones to move on without Craig, especially as he's not too concerned about reprising his role unless he's given an incredibly long sabbatical to recharge his creative juices. It kind of reminds me of the late Roger Moore years when Cubby was too scared to replace Moore for fear of poor BO results. But at least with RM he didn't dictate to Eon when the next movie should be made, he quickly signed on and got the ball moving swiftly. The same cannot be said of the current star.
    Excellent post. Nothing to add to this.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,250
    I'm not sure we can assume Craig is dictating the start of productions on these films? I thought, up until very recently, that distribution was holding up the start of B25? And the long hiatus between QoS and SF also seemed out of DC's control?...

    So, you may be tired of DC in the role, gentlemen, but bashing him for holding up productions of the Bond films seems wholly unfair.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,969
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.

    This is the problem. There's the group which want a soft reboot with a new actor. There's the group which want Blofeld and Madeline back, a complete sequel to SP. There's the group which wants Madeline back, but wants Blofeld to stay in jail for a few films. There's the group which wants Blofeld back, but no mention of Madeline ever again. Then there's also the group which wants Craig back for a standalone mission, with no mention of either Blofeld or Maddy.

    Whatever EON decide, they are going to disappoint most people.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.

    This is the problem. There's the group which want a soft reboot with a new actor. There's the group which want Blofeld and Madeline back, a complete sequel to SP. There's the group which wants Madeline back, but wants Blofeld to stay in jail for a few films. There's the group which wants Blofeld back, but no mention of Madeline ever again. Then there's also the group which wants Craig back for a standalone mission, with no mention of either Blofeld or Maddy.

    Whatever EON decide, they are going to disappoint most people.
    Which is precisely why they shouldn't have gone down this idiotic direct continuity angle to begin with.
  • Posts: 11,119
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.

    Just........this almost ambivalent hate towards that role........I will probably never understand it. As a Bond-girl Madeleine Swann was way more believable than many of the Brosnan-chicks (Christmas Jones, Jinx, Wai 'Oeeh haa!' Lin, Natalya 'boring' Simonova)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.

    Just........this almost ambivalent hate towards that role........I will probably never understand it. As a Bond-girl Madeleine Swann was way more believable than many of the Brosnan-chicks (Christmas Jones, Jinx, Wai 'Oeeh haa!' Lin, Natalya 'boring' Simonova)
    No hate towards the role. Just severe disappointment at the forgettable performance from the actress who was supposed to capture Bond's heart. It's so pathetic that some have to even defend it by saying Bond isn't the one in love, but rather it's Maddy. Well then what was Smith whining about then? Just a complete disgrace all round. As bad as wanting us to believe that international man of mystery James Bond would have falled for that plank of wood Paris Carver.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,119
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.

    This is the problem. There's the group which want a soft reboot with a new actor. There's the group which want Blofeld and Madeline back, a complete sequel to SP. There's the group which wants Madeline back, but wants Blofeld to stay in jail for a few films. There's the group which wants Blofeld back, but no mention of Madeline ever again. Then there's also the group which wants Craig back for a standalone mission, with no mention of either Blofeld or Maddy.

    Whatever EON decide, they are going to disappoint most people.

    Bond fans certainly starting to sound as radical and resentful as many 'Trekkies'.....which for decades didn't really happen within the Bond fan community (It's funny to see how hateful Trekkies are about the re-designed Klingons from next month's new Star Trek TV Series "Star Trek: Discovery").

    You know? I understand the resentment. But even an experienced EON-employee would investigate more options and its nuanced then simply saying "Never bring Madeleine back!" or "Get rid of Craig!". Would be nice if there's some creative cross-pollination andddd some realism about certain outcomes in this discussion.

    I mean, I at least take the time to write a frikkin' story treatment. And not many people in here at first have a respectful bit of criticism towards that. It's just a big middlefinger more or less. Sadly only the bad things or the disagreements are being noticed from ideas. whereas in essence I think everyone in here has a bit of some truth.

    So ask yourself this: "If EON is adament at bringing Madeleine back, what would be the best way to do it?" Instead of "No!". And in return I could perhaps answer the question "How would you tackle the developments from SP without bringing back Madeleine Swann? A little leaflet? Or ignoring her completely, making Bond look like an Alzheimer patient?"
  • Posts: 1,162
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I can see Babs wanting Craig for Bond 26 in 2022 for the 60th anniversary. He will be 54 but who cares? He would probably still look great at 54.

    Firstly there's no way to say this predict this. Secondly I'm not really convinced he looks great right now. This is a very obviously aging man. Look at the press photos of Roger Moore celebrating his 50th birthday when doing TSWLM and then to photos of Craig at any given public event and then dare to deny it. To some of you it must look as if I am constantly trying to piss on Craig tenure, but fact is a great deal of people here on this forum have elevated him to very unrealistic standards and I really don't feel these sentiments are shared by a broader public.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,119
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I can see Babs wanting Craig for Bond 26 in 2022 for the 60th anniversary. He will be 54 but who cares? He would probably still look great at 54.

    Firstly there's no way to say this predict this. Secondly I'm not really convinced he looks great right now. This is a very obviously aging man. Look at the press photos of Roger Moore celebrating his 50th birthday when doing TSWLM and then to photos of Craig at any given public event and then dare to deny it. To some of you it must look as if I am constantly trying to piss on Craig tenure, but fact is a great deal of people here on this forum have elevated him to very unrealistic standards and I really don't feel these sentiments are shared by a broader public.

    Since when are Bond fans frikkin' pageant lovers? To use the adage 'Beauty comes from the inside'. Not from Brosnan's hairy chest.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I can see Babs wanting Craig for Bond 26 in 2022 for the 60th anniversary. He will be 54 but who cares? He would probably still look great at 54.

    Firstly there's no way to say this predict this. Secondly I'm not really convinced he looks great right now. This is a very obviously aging man. Look at the press photos of Roger Moore celebrating his 50th birthday when doing TSWLM and then to photos of Craig at any given public event and then dare to deny it. To some of you it must look as if I am constantly trying to piss on Craig tenure, but fact is a great deal of people here on this forum have elevated him to very unrealistic standards and I really don't feel these sentiments are shared by a broader public.
    I was just thinking the other day that the youngest looking Bond actors (by far) when they started their tenure were Moore and Brosnan. Ironically they were also the oldest when they started (45 and 42 respectively).
    So ask yourself this: "If EON is adament at bringing Madeleine back, what would be the best way to do it?"
    Just quickly reveal in the post titles sequence that Bond found out what a boring whiny fart she really was and dumped her. He missed the thrill of the kill. One small mention by MP in the office is all that's required (or warranted) given the lame impression she left.
  • Posts: 1,162
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'd rather B25 not be a remake of OHMSS.

    Well its not like P and W have the ability to make original stories without the help of an original Fleming novel

    May I refer you to TWINE, still the only script of them of which we know they were allowed to do it alone and not had it seriously altered afterwards cause some directors rather prefered to thrive on their own agenda, logic be damned. Just saying.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I can see Babs wanting Craig for Bond 26 in 2022 for the 60th anniversary. He will be 54 but who cares? He would probably still look great at 54.

    Firstly there's no way to say this predict this. Secondly I'm not really convinced he looks great right now. This is a very obviously aging man. Look at the press photos of Roger Moore celebrating his 50th birthday when doing TSWLM and then to photos of Craig at any given public event and then dare to deny it. To some of you it must look as if I am constantly trying to piss on Craig tenure, but fact is a great deal of people here on this forum have elevated him to very unrealistic standards and I really don't feel these sentiments are shared by a broader public.

    Since when are Bond fans frikkin' pageant lovers? To use the adage 'Beauty comes from the inside'. Not from Brosnan's hairy chest.
    Do you have to degrade and put down Brosnan in every single "comparison" post you make?
  • Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    So ask yourself this: "If EON is adament at bringing Madeleine back, what would be the best way to do it?"
    Just quickly reveal in the post titles sequence that Bond found out what a boring whiny fart she really was and dumped her. He missed the thrill of the kill. One small mention by MP in the office is all that's required (or warranted) given the lame impression she left.

    I would delete "boring whiny fart" though.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    So ask yourself this: "If EON is adament at bringing Madeleine back, what would be the best way to do it?"
    Just quickly reveal in the post titles sequence that Bond found out what a boring whiny fart she really was and dumped her. He missed the thrill of the kill. One small mention by MP in the office is all that's required (or warranted) given the lame impression she left.

    I would delete "boring whiny fart" though.
    Fair enough. An exaggerated extraneous embellishment from me, betraying my true feelings.
  • Posts: 11,119
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    So ask yourself this: "If EON is adament at bringing Madeleine back, what would be the best way to do it?"
    Just quickly reveal in the post titles sequence that Bond found out what a boring whiny fart she really was and dumped her. He missed the thrill of the kill. One small mention by MP in the office is all that's required (or warranted) given the lame impression she left.

    I would delete "boring whiny fart" though.
    Fair enough. An exaggerated extraneous embellishment from me, betraying my true feelings.

    That's certainly a trait EON is looking for :-P.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    "If EON is adament at bringing Madeleine back, what would be the best way to do it?

    Opposite to this, a simple way to write her out would be:

    M16 place her in a witness protection program that even Bond doesn't know the whereabouts of to protect her from Spectre agents at large. Just a quick line about this in the first third of the film, job done.

  • Posts: 1,162
    Getafix wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    IF DC stays on board, I'd like to see how they're going to show us what he's been up to in between films.

    After all, he left the Service. So where is he, and how does he get back into "the game"?

    I think Fleming's Bond would have busted up with Maddy long ago. And because he's stubborn and had doubts about his job in the past, he's probably living out his pension by drinking, seducing married women, and gambling his days away.

    But he'd be bored and a little unfocused.

    Meanwhile, some of his senses would be dull. And he doesn't realize that he's been tracked down from someone in his past.

    I mentioned this a couple months back, but it's Camille who's tracked him down. She needs his help. Whatever that may be, it shakes Bond out of his doldrums, and this meeting between them's the catalyst to the bigger story.

    So, no mention of Maddy. It'd be a way of bringing in an exceptional Bond girl. And, IF they're doing a two-part send-off for Craig (I can't see it happening, but I've been wrong many times before), with links to YOLT and OHMSS (still don't see it), I could see Bond falling in love with Camille, and I could see her death having an impact (since she and Craig were good together on screen, and as an actress, I find her stronger than Lea).

    Only my two cents, have at it.

    Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!

    No more stuff from Bond, M or anyone else's past coming back to haunt them please.

    YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES!
  • Posts: 11,119
    Getafix wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    IF DC stays on board, I'd like to see how they're going to show us what he's been up to in between films.

    After all, he left the Service. So where is he, and how does he get back into "the game"?

    I think Fleming's Bond would have busted up with Maddy long ago. And because he's stubborn and had doubts about his job in the past, he's probably living out his pension by drinking, seducing married women, and gambling his days away.

    But he'd be bored and a little unfocused.

    Meanwhile, some of his senses would be dull. And he doesn't realize that he's been tracked down from someone in his past.

    I mentioned this a couple months back, but it's Camille who's tracked him down. She needs his help. Whatever that may be, it shakes Bond out of his doldrums, and this meeting between them's the catalyst to the bigger story.

    So, no mention of Maddy. It'd be a way of bringing in an exceptional Bond girl. And, IF they're doing a two-part send-off for Craig (I can't see it happening, but I've been wrong many times before), with links to YOLT and OHMSS (still don't see it), I could see Bond falling in love with Camille, and I could see her death having an impact (since she and Craig were good together on screen, and as an actress, I find her stronger than Lea).

    Only my two cents, have at it.

    Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!

    No more stuff from Bond, M or anyone else's past coming back to haunt them please.

    YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES!

    I will hunt your past. Trust me. That's even worse.
  • Posts: 787
    bondsum wrote: »
    Ah yes, Swan's strong independent woman saved Bond with his own explosive watch. Thanks for reminding me @FoxRox. But as you quite rightly pointed out, it was Bond that had to save her sorry independent ass from getting blown up at the very end. The French actress also had this to say about her multilayered character: “I think she is distinct from all the others. She’s not really a Bond girl – she’s a real character,” said one of the most bland actresses to ever grace a recent Bond movie in living memory. She's got a nerve, I'll give her that much, and she's clearly never watched a Bond picture otherwise she'd never made such an asinine remark. Just how can anyone warm to an actress that hasn't even bothered to do her homework? Beats me, but I'm sure there'll be some here on the forums that think she's everything that she says she is and defend her.

    On a serious note, I really wished that Broccoli and co had the cojones to move on without Craig, especially as he's not too concerned about reprising his role unless he's given an incredibly long sabbatical to recharge his creative juices. It kind of reminds me of the late Roger Moore years when Cubby was too scared to replace Moore for fear of poor BO results. But at least with RM he didn't dictate to Eon when the next movie should be made, he quickly signed on and got the ball moving swiftly. The same cannot be said of the current star.


    To the first paragraph, I'm not really willing to be too hard on Seydoux for her remarks - it's standard media boilerplate and maybe it helps sell a few tickets. What's she supposed to say? "Well, in this movie my character is a 2-dimensional damsel in distress with a great body and flimsy clothes. I'm mostly there to advance the plot and make James look good."

    To the second paragraph, spot on. I take no pleasure in agreeing with you - I'm a big fan of Craig and all his Bond films. But the man is not bigger than the franchise - quite the opposite, in fact. C'mon, EON: you're offering him buckets of money to play a great role every 2-3 years. It should be a no-brainer for the actor. If he's not willing to commit, there's a queue of other chaps ready to step up and commit. Get on with it!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,117
    peter wrote: »
    IF DC stays on board, I'd like to see how they're going to show us what he's been up to in between films.

    After all, he left the Service. So where is he, and how does he get back into "the game"?
    Since when? Madeleine doesn't want to be with him because of 'his life' then sticks around anyway (or not, as far as i'm concearned they're just driving off for a good shag), and the remarks by Q are only in gest, obviously. Why else would they let him into his workshop first and repair the DB5 in the first place? MI6 by any means isn't an organisation you just walk into when you quit.

    Again, I really don't understand why people even consider Madeleine's return. Just because she thought she loved him, sort of? Or tried to claim him (at which point he walked off to do his job) or because he didn't shoot an unarmed psychopath who was trying to get under his skin? Bond doesn't shoot unarmed people, read TMWGG to find out in what kind of trouble he gets because of that.

    There's so many girls he's ended films with in a similar fashion, why should Madeleine be more then that?

    Agree on this. There seem to be some people who see the end of SP as Bond irrevocably quitting the service but what is the actual evidence for this?

    He throws his gun into the river - Yes could be symbolic of him resigning could also be he's beaten Blofeld, is knackered and is going off for a rest and to shag Maddy.

    Q says 'I thought you'd gone' - Bond might have earlier said 'I'm just popping out for a loaf of bread' and this comment would be just as valid. Besides its a small thing but I think if someone I thought had resigned turned up at work I'd probably say 'What are you doing here? I thought you'd left' as in 'left the service' not 'gone'. Don't know why but its always struck me as a strange choice of words for someone you thought had left just popping up at work again, even though there's nothing wrong with gone I suppose. In any event it could just as easily be Q saying 'I thought you'd gone on that shagathon holiday with Maddy'.

    Bond and Maddy drive off into the sunset - Well (apart form the fact its sunrise as TfL wouldnt allow them to close the road for shooting at evening rush hour) what does this prove? They are off on holiday.

    Theres nothing in the film which proves either way that the 'Bond has resigned from the service' hypothesis is any more valid than the 'Bond and Maddy are off on a shagathon holiday before amicably splitting up as she cannot go back to that life and he cannot leave it so there really is no need to mention her moving forward so lets just get on with business in B25' hypothesis.

    In addition what does it matter that she said she loves Bond? Tania says 'I love you, I love you its true' and seems to mean it and at the end they sail off into the sunset in a gondola but she doesnt reappear and GF is none the worse for it.
    bondjames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.

    This is the problem. There's the group which want a soft reboot with a new actor. There's the group which want Blofeld and Madeline back, a complete sequel to SP. There's the group which wants Madeline back, but wants Blofeld to stay in jail for a few films. There's the group which wants Blofeld back, but no mention of Madeline ever again. Then there's also the group which wants Craig back for a standalone mission, with no mention of either Blofeld or Maddy.

    Whatever EON decide, they are going to disappoint most people.
    Which is precisely why they shouldn't have gone down this idiotic direct continuity angle to begin with.

    Never a truer word spoken.
    bondjames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I agree @CommanderRoss , I don't want to see or hear of Maddy ever again.

    Just........this almost ambivalent hate towards that role........I will probably never understand it. As a Bond-girl Madeleine Swann was way more believable than many of the Brosnan-chicks (Christmas Jones, Jinx, Wai 'Oeeh haa!' Lin, Natalya 'boring' Simonova)
    No hate towards the role. Just severe disappointment at the forgettable performance from the actress who was supposed to capture Bond's heart. It's so pathetic that some have to even defend it by saying Bond isn't the one in love, but rather it's Maddy. Well then what was Smith whining about then? Just a complete disgrace all round. As bad as wanting us to believe that international man of mystery James Bond would have falled for that plank of wood Paris Carver.

    I dont think Seydoux does anything wrong at all. The bottom line which is where we always end up coming back to (give it is the golden rule of film-making) is that the script is bollocks.
  • Posts: 1,162
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I can see Babs wanting Craig for Bond 26 in 2022 for the 60th anniversary. He will be 54 but who cares? He would probably still look great at 54.

    Firstly there's no way to say this predict this. Secondly I'm not really convinced he looks great right now. This is a very obviously aging man. Look at the press photos of Roger Moore celebrating his 50th birthday when doing TSWLM and then to photos of Craig at any given public event and then dare to deny it. To some of you it must look as if I am constantly trying to piss on Craig tenure, but fact is a great deal of people here on this forum have elevated him to very unrealistic standards and I really don't feel these sentiments are shared by a broader public.

    Since when are Bond fans frikkin' pageant lovers? To use the adage 'Beauty comes from the inside'. Not from Brosnan's hairy chest.

    What a ridiculous argument!
  • Posts: 1,162
    Getafix wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    IF DC stays on board, I'd like to see how they're going to show us what he's been up to in between films.

    After all, he left the Service. So where is he, and how does he get back into "the game"?

    I think Fleming's Bond would have busted up with Maddy long ago. And because he's stubborn and had doubts about his job in the past, he's probably living out his pension by drinking, seducing married women, and gambling his days away.

    But he'd be bored and a little unfocused.

    Meanwhile, some of his senses would be dull. And he doesn't realize that he's been tracked down from someone in his past.

    I mentioned this a couple months back, but it's Camille who's tracked him down. She needs his help. Whatever that may be, it shakes Bond out of his doldrums, and this meeting between them's the catalyst to the bigger story.

    So, no mention of Maddy. It'd be a way of bringing in an exceptional Bond girl. And, IF they're doing a two-part send-off for Craig (I can't see it happening, but I've been wrong many times before), with links to YOLT and OHMSS (still don't see it), I could see Bond falling in love with Camille, and I could see her death having an impact (since she and Craig were good together on screen, and as an actress, I find her stronger than Lea).

    Only my two cents, have at it.

    Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!

    No more stuff from Bond, M or anyone else's past coming back to haunt them please.

    YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES!

    I will hunt your past. Trust me. That's even worse.

    To be honest I very much prefer you getting lost in my past than crawling around in my present or future.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,586
    Roadphill wrote: »
    The idea that @Gustav_Graves shared has inspired me somewhat.

    Is this thread the place to share personal ideas for Bond 25, or even to share some ideas for improving earlier Bond films?

    Perhaps a mod could comment? I don't wish to annoy anyone by going off topic.
    The former - absolutely. The latter - not so much.
  • Posts: 11,119
    jake24 wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    The idea that @Gustav_Graves shared has inspired me somewhat.

    Is this thread the place to share personal ideas for Bond 25, or even to share some ideas for improving earlier Bond films?

    Perhaps a mod could comment? I don't wish to annoy anyone by going off topic.
    The former - absolutely. The latter - not so much.

    For that I created this topic @Roadphill :-). Sadly, some people who are criticizing each and every part of SP, are not really posting in there :-):
    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/13322/realistic-serious-story-ideas-for-bond-25-to-be-used-by-eon-productions-ltd#latest
Sign In or Register to comment.