No Time To Die: Production Diary

19359369389409412507

Comments

  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,425
    The nagging concern is of course primarily Purvis and Wade. However, although I've never read YOLT, my understanding is that that the majority of the novel remains untapped. One has to hope that P+W have been tasked with mining the original Fleming for material. This could therefore be the most Fleming-based film since CR.

    So plot will not be down to P+W this time around - instead it will be largely taken care of by Mr. I. Fleming.

    Quite an enticing prospect.

    EON have allowed themselves plenty of time to develop the script. Presumably DC is insisting that they nail a decent script well in advance. He's had enough nasty surprises on the writing front with previous entries.

    Hopefully P+W will just flesh out Fleming's plot and then some script polishers will be brought in to add some class dialogue.

    I'd prefer if P+W weren't involved but this approach could still produce a half decent outcome.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Getafix wrote: »
    The nagging concern is of course primarily Purvis and Wade. However, although I've never read YOLT, my understanding is that that the majority of the novel remains untapped. One has to hope that P+W have been tasked with mining the original Fleming for material. This could therefore be the most Fleming-based film since CR.

    So plot will not be down to P+W this time around - instead it will be largely taken care of by Mr. I. Fleming.

    Quite an enticing prospect.

    EON have allowed themselves plenty of time to develop the script. Presumably DC is insisting that they nail a decent script well in advance. He's had enough nasty surprises on the writing front with previous entries.

    Hopefully P+W will just flesh out Fleming's plot and then some script polishers will be brought in to add some class dialogue.

    I'd prefer if P+W weren't involved but this approach could still produce a half decent outcome.

    That's the way I see it ,and I think Daniel sees it the same way,he will want it done correctly from start to finish.

    Happy times indeed,i feel a lot more positive now...very very happy.

  • edited August 2017 Posts: 11,425
    It does feel like 2 films are required though really. Madeleine has to die obviously.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    I've said before that after SP being divisive he might want one more to go out on a high note so this doesn't surprise me really.

    I was hoping for a fresh start but the more I think about it the more I can get behind this. It's only one more after all, and Daniel Craig doing YOLT in a film with the same passion and fire behind it that CR, SF and SP CR, QoS and SF had seems too good an opportunity to pass up really.

    I'm also excited because SP would've been a great ending but they were hesitant to ever call it as much. This time he's said this is it. So they'll be selling it as his last one, the big finale (maybe even the last EON Bond film if rumours are true? 25 is a nice round number) and with that in mind I can't wait to see how they end it. I have a feeling they're going to knock it out of the park again. The Craig films have been getting better and better since SF imo and I think this one has a chance of surprassing the Dalton films for me if they do YOLT justice.

    I saw no passion in SPECTRE. Mendes himself said he had done anything he wanted to do with a Bond film with Skyfall, Craig was confident with the role but it was not his best performance as Bond, and Newman lazily recycled his score from Skyfall.

    Forster, on the other hand, truly cared about QoS and he got Bond way more than Mendes did. Craig looked much better in QoS. And we all know Arnold loves scoring Bond. SPECTRE's script is clearly weaker than QoS', even though SPECTRE disguises it because a lot of money is put on the screen.
  • Posts: 1,031
    Four films of continuity heavy, personal/dramatic films then a run of the mill Bond on a mission one with nothing to do with them tacked onto the end?
    Blofeld + SPECTRE returning and "a run of the mill Bond on a mission" film are not the only two options. How about this? Madeleine is back, Bond is no longer a 00 agent, and at the same time NO Blofeld + NO SPECTRE. They could easily make a movie that is very much connected to the end of Spectre (Bond leaving MI6 for good, together with Swann), that is very unusual (Bond no longer a 00 agent for the entire duration of the movie), and at the same time does not feature Blofeld again.

    Well he wasn't a 00 agent for most of Licence to Kill, so not all that unusual.
  • Posts: 1,031
    Getafix wrote: »
    The nagging concern is of course primarily Purvis and Wade. However, although I've never read YOLT, my understanding is that that the majority of the novel remains untapped. One has to hope that P+W have been tasked with mining the original Fleming for material. This could therefore be the most Fleming-based film since CR.

    So plot will not be down to P+W this time around - instead it will be largely taken care of by Mr. I. Fleming.

    Quite an enticing prospect.

    EON have allowed themselves plenty of time to develop the script. Presumably DC is insisting that they nail a decent script well in advance. He's had enough nasty surprises on the writing front with previous entries.

    Hopefully P+W will just flesh out Fleming's plot and then some script polishers will be brought in to add some class dialogue.

    I'd prefer if P+W weren't involved but this approach could still produce a half decent outcome.

    What are you doing on here, get off and read YOLT now!
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,277
    The full interview in a decent quality.

  • Posts: 4,023
    P&W are still writing it and the narrative still needs digging out of an abyss.

    Sorry to piss on everyone's cornflakes but nothing's really changed. Craig coming back was always more likely than not and my faith in EON has only ever been lower after DAD and still is.

    The proof will be in the pudding and nothing less than a pudding with strawberries and salted caramel chunks on top and dripping in an indulgent chocolate sauce will do this time round.

    If they deliver a CR rivalling film DC stands a very good chance of going down as the best Bond of all or at least with a tenure on a par with Sean's - but that's a monumentally big if.

    It's a bit like Liverpool's result last night. It's all there if they keep their heads but history tells us not to underestimate their capacity to royally fuck it up.

    Please don't compare upcoming 007 to Liverpool FC, as I am now preparing for a monumental clusterfart starring Rory "Lovren" Kinnear.
  • Posts: 4,619
    Getafix wrote: »
    Madeleine has to die obviously.
    What? No. They have already partially ruined the arc of Craig's Bond with nu-Blofeld (him being Bond's step-brother + retconning CR, QOS and SF), killing off Bond's first love since Vesper would ruin Bond's arc even more.
  • Posts: 1,162
    RC7 wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @noSolaceleft: why? Honestly, why? You've got some very good points, and you have a strong voice, and that's good, my friend.

    But at other times, it feels you're picking fights-- and that's not a slag at being constructively critical. It is calling you out when it feels like you're stirring the pot.

    @RC7 is from the entertainment world. He knows what he's speaking of-- whether you agree or disagree, he knows the machinations of the industry, and, of course, may even get tidbits of real info circling the industry.

    I too, but to a lesser extent, also come from this world-- I was the writer of the terribly, poorly, produced and executed shit-fest DEAD MARY (and a few other credits). @RC7 is genuine, he knows of what he speaks, and I don't think he's trying to knock anyone down a peg.

    So, @noSolaceleft, we can and will respect you. But make the effort....

    I'm a DC fan. You are, to a certain extent (sounds like only CR).

    I want DC to end on the high note he started with (all be it in a very different way, since he's older and can do so with a "present" take on his characterization); you want change.

    No matter how much I'd like to see DC kick ass in one final film, I do get your point (and others), on why they want change.

    It's being able to disagree with respect. And I do respect your opinions, which run opposite to mine; but I DO have an issue with your behaviour, at times.

    We don't have to be enemies in regards to our points of view (and, yes, I am in therapy!).

    I was solely referring to these lines of RC7:" We're Bond fans. Stiff upper lip. Put up and shut up. We have a duty not to join the ranks of these whining fuckers."
    And even so I came out of the Biergarten last night I see no reason to refrain. This is - at best -laughable.Being a fan it's not an act of duty! I am a Bond fan cause I happen to enjoy some of the movies in the franchise very very much and I am not willing to give up on my right to expect quality work from EON for my money and if they are not able to deliver I say no reason why not to be frank about it. Again, I am not an employee of them and I also don't serve in their army!

    Ok, you're German and may have missed the underlying facetiousness of my comment. Get back to the beer garden and drink yourself into a state of acceptance. It'll all be fine.

    facetiousness?
    Yeah, sure. Go and kid yourself.
  • Posts: 1,031
    RC7 wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @noSolaceleft: why? Honestly, why? You've got some very good points, and you have a strong voice, and that's good, my friend.

    But at other times, it feels you're picking fights-- and that's not a slag at being constructively critical. It is calling you out when it feels like you're stirring the pot.

    @RC7 is from the entertainment world. He knows what he's speaking of-- whether you agree or disagree, he knows the machinations of the industry, and, of course, may even get tidbits of real info circling the industry.

    I too, but to a lesser extent, also come from this world-- I was the writer of the terribly, poorly, produced and executed shit-fest DEAD MARY (and a few other credits). @RC7 is genuine, he knows of what he speaks, and I don't think he's trying to knock anyone down a peg.

    So, @noSolaceleft, we can and will respect you. But make the effort....

    I'm a DC fan. You are, to a certain extent (sounds like only CR).

    I want DC to end on the high note he started with (all be it in a very different way, since he's older and can do so with a "present" take on his characterization); you want change.

    No matter how much I'd like to see DC kick ass in one final film, I do get your point (and others), on why they want change.

    It's being able to disagree with respect. And I do respect your opinions, which run opposite to mine; but I DO have an issue with your behaviour, at times.

    We don't have to be enemies in regards to our points of view (and, yes, I am in therapy!).

    I was solely referring to these lines of RC7:" We're Bond fans. Stiff upper lip. Put up and shut up. We have a duty not to join the ranks of these whining fuckers."
    And even so I came out of the Biergarten last night I see no reason to refrain. This is - at best -laughable.Being a fan it's not an act of duty! I am a Bond fan cause I happen to enjoy some of the movies in the franchise very very much and I am not willing to give up on my right to expect quality work from EON for my money and if they are not able to deliver I say no reason why not to be frank about it. Again, I am not an employee of them and I also don't serve in their army!

    Ok, you're German and may have missed the underlying facetiousness of my comment. Get back to the beer garden and drink yourself into a state of acceptance. It'll all be fine.

    facetiousness?
    Yeah, sure. Go and kid yourself.

    Chill.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Dennison wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @noSolaceleft: why? Honestly, why? You've got some very good points, and you have a strong voice, and that's good, my friend.

    But at other times, it feels you're picking fights-- and that's not a slag at being constructively critical. It is calling you out when it feels like you're stirring the pot.

    @RC7 is from the entertainment world. He knows what he's speaking of-- whether you agree or disagree, he knows the machinations of the industry, and, of course, may even get tidbits of real info circling the industry.

    I too, but to a lesser extent, also come from this world-- I was the writer of the terribly, poorly, produced and executed shit-fest DEAD MARY (and a few other credits). @RC7 is genuine, he knows of what he speaks, and I don't think he's trying to knock anyone down a peg.

    So, @noSolaceleft, we can and will respect you. But make the effort....

    I'm a DC fan. You are, to a certain extent (sounds like only CR).

    I want DC to end on the high note he started with (all be it in a very different way, since he's older and can do so with a "present" take on his characterization); you want change.

    No matter how much I'd like to see DC kick ass in one final film, I do get your point (and others), on why they want change.

    It's being able to disagree with respect. And I do respect your opinions, which run opposite to mine; but I DO have an issue with your behaviour, at times.

    We don't have to be enemies in regards to our points of view (and, yes, I am in therapy!).

    I was solely referring to these lines of RC7:" We're Bond fans. Stiff upper lip. Put up and shut up. We have a duty not to join the ranks of these whining fuckers."
    And even so I came out of the Biergarten last night I see no reason to refrain. This is - at best -laughable.Being a fan it's not an act of duty! I am a Bond fan cause I happen to enjoy some of the movies in the franchise very very much and I am not willing to give up on my right to expect quality work from EON for my money and if they are not able to deliver I say no reason why not to be frank about it. Again, I am not an employee of them and I also don't serve in their army!

    Ok, you're German and may have missed the underlying facetiousness of my comment. Get back to the beer garden and drink yourself into a state of acceptance. It'll all be fine.

    facetiousness?
    Yeah, sure. Go and kid yourself.

    Chill.

    Exactly. Do what the man says, @noSolaceleft.
  • Posts: 1,453
    Getafix wrote: »
    Madeleine has to die obviously.
    What? No. They have already partially ruined the arc of Craig's Bond with nu-Blofeld (him being Bond's step-brother + retconning CR, QOS and SF), killing off Bond's first love since Vesper would ruin Bond's arc even more.

    On the contrary, if Madeleine is also a victim of getting too close to Bond and his world, Bond will know that, however hard he might try and want it, he cannot and will not ever be able to live a normal life. The curse of being a double agent and he can never escape it - and that is actually a powerful character arc.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    Madeleine has to die obviously.
    What? No. They have already partially ruined the arc of Craig's Bond with nu-Blofeld (him being Bond's step-brother + retconning CR, QOS and SF), killing off Bond's first love since Vesper would ruin Bond's arc even more.
    Oh dear. Hearing more and more about this brother and Maddy is not leaving me enthused. Hopefully they use the four year gap to deliver a decent gritty standalone. As unlikely as that may be, it would be my preference, rather than being reminded of the sordid past.
  • Posts: 6,601
    no Solace is German? I apologize for him and go finding another nationality for myself.

    Reg D.C. - I had wished, he wouldn't do it, because when it goes wrong, his legacy will be in jeopardy. As it is, I hope, they won't allow him too much power, as his decisions are not ALWAYS for the best. Having said that, I am looking forward to all the hoopla going with it. First best luck for LL.


  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,965
    I dunno, I thought that 'go back to the beergarden' quite solid advice. I'd follow it up in a jiffy.

    Oh, and madeleine was in love with Bond, we don't know about it the other way, which I don't believe. He just put a little bit of humanity back into him. You really think they let him walk into MI6 if he'd quit the service? He's just going off on holiday.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 252
    antovolk wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    There's a Nolan interview in the latest Playboy where he talks about talking to BB/MGW and he said he'd love to do it but "you'd need to be needed....it has to need reinvention, it has to need you."
    Do you have a link to that? I'd like to include it on the timeline.

    http://i.imgur.com/JS36OJE.jpg

    I'd be happy to have him onboard if only for the fact he wouldn't tolerate hacks like P&W and would write it himself.

    EON don't seem interested at the moment so why not give it to Nolan to do a trilogy as he likes?

    Could he really come up with anything worse than the stepbrother fiasco?

    Certainly not! But I would argue that the last thing the franchise - at this point in its history - is another director who feels compelled to give the movie his "special" touch. There was a time when Bond himself had a special touch and I want this state of affairs to be restored!

    I feel anyone following the comic book cinematic universes (Marvel/DC) will kinda understand this issue more. Seems most people on here would prefer a more Marvel-esque approach with MGW/BB acting as Feige?

    I guess my personal take is - I want more directors putting their own spin on Bond. Like Mendes. I do feel the idea that the brand is over everything else is a bit played out, and Marvel, while enjoyable, sure, has pretty much made that single producer driven house style franchise idea a bit dull to me tbh.

    I think it depends on the director.
  • Posts: 2,107
    Finally actual news from reliable source. Good to see him back for a fift Bond. Now, go make another Casino Royale.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    There's a Nolan interview in the latest Playboy where he talks about talking to BB/MGW and he said he'd love to do it but "you'd need to be needed....it has to need reinvention, it has to need you."
    Do you have a link to that? I'd like to include it on the timeline.

    http://i.imgur.com/JS36OJE.jpg

    I'd be happy to have him onboard if only for the fact he wouldn't tolerate hacks like P&W and would write it himself.

    EON don't seem interested at the moment so why not give it to Nolan to do a trilogy as he likes?

    Could he really come up with anything worse than the stepbrother fiasco?

    Certainly not! But I would argue that the last thing the franchise - at this point in its history - is another director who feels compelled to give the movie his "special" touch. There was a time when Bond himself had a special touch and I want this state of affairs to be restored!

    I feel anyone following the comic book cinematic universes (Marvel/DC) will kinda understand this issue more. Seems most people on here would prefer a more Marvel-esque approach with MGW/BB acting as Feige?

    I guess my personal take is - I want more directors putting their own spin on Bond. Like Mendes. I do feel the idea that the brand is over everything else is a bit played out, and Marvel, while enjoyable, sure, has pretty much made that single producer driven house style franchise idea a bit dull to me tbh.

    I think it depends on the director.
    I'm open to a director's 'special touch' but only as long as it's a one-off and EON delivers on a two year schedule. If they're going for 3+ years, then I'd rather they stick to the script.

    As an example, I could more readily and easily accept deviations like we've had over the past three films (which have all been somewhat experimental and 'arty' in some way shape or form) if they'd inserted a run of the mill mission centric quality formula entry in the middle
  • Posts: 12,258
    I'm 90% sure Blofeld returns; after all, if this is Craig's last, it's what most makes sense. I still think it's not a total requirement for Madeleine to come back though; they could briefly explain it didn't work out between them.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    SharkBait wrote: »
    Finally actual news from reliable source.
    Which Craig is the reliable one though? The morning one or the evening one? I'm still perplexed by the whole thing and wonder if he's just having a laugh with us.
  • Posts: 2,107
    The evening one from Stephen Colbert's late show.
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    SharkBait wrote: »
    Finally actual news from reliable source.
    Which Craig is the reliable one though? The morning one or the evening one? I'm still perplexed by the whole thing and wonder if he's just having a laugh with us.

    No,the fact Purity has been temporarily (or will It be permanently) postponed to make room for Daniel to do BOND25 is enough proof.

    And he wouldnt lie or fib about something as big as that on a show like that with the situation the way things are at the moment re Bond,he cares about the character too much.

    He is back.

    The longest serving Bond and either 5 or 6 highly successful Bond films behind him when he goes,means today is a happy day to be a fan of 007 !!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    SharkBait wrote: »
    Finally actual news from reliable source.
    Which Craig is the reliable one though? The morning one or the evening one? I'm still perplexed by the whole thing and wonder if he's just having a laugh with us.

    No,the fact Purity has been temporarily (or will It be permanently) postponed to make room for Daniel to do BOND25 is enough proof.

    And he wouldnt lie or fib about something as big as that on a show like that with the situation the way things are at the moment re Bond,he cares about the character too much.

    He is back.

    The longest serving Bond and either 5 or 6 highly successful Bond films behind him when he goes,means today is a happy day to be a fan of 007 !!
    Yes, I'm sure he's back. It's just the strange way it went down yesterday that leaves me mildly amused. He could have just avoided the morning radio shows rather than go on and say one thing (which seemed quite plausible in the way he delivered it) and then go on the evening show and say something quite different without any further follow up.

    Quite strange to say the least. Like he was having fun with all of us. The joke's on us.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    SharkBait wrote: »
    Finally actual news from reliable source.
    Which Craig is the reliable one though? The morning one or the evening one? I'm still perplexed by the whole thing and wonder if he's just having a laugh with us.

    No,the fact Purity has been temporarily (or will It be permanently) postponed to make room for Daniel to do BOND25 is enough proof.

    And he wouldnt lie or fib about something as big as that on a show like that with the situation the way things are at the moment re Bond,he cares about the character too much.

    He is back.

    The longest serving Bond and either 5 or 6 highly successful Bond films behind him when he goes,means today is a happy day to be a fan of 007 !!
    Yes, I'm sure he's back. It's just the strange way it went down yesterday that leaves me mildly amused. He could have just avoided the morning radio shows rather than go on and say one thing (which seemed quite plausible in the way he delivered it) and then go on the evening show and say something quite different without any further follow up.

    Quite strange to say the least. Like he was having fun with all of us. The joke's on us.

    Absolutely. I love the fact the tabloids were pulling articles left, right and centre. Played again by DC.
  • Posts: 150
    A very happy day indeed :)
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 19,339
    Dan is a very clever man..
    He knew the tabloids tore into him over 'that' comment ,so he has just got his own back.
    Something his alter-ego Mr Bond might well have done.

    bond-craig-647_040517025027.jpg
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    Anyone else find it strange that EON and MGM both wanted Craig to make the announcement? Would of been easier to post the news via social media or their website beforehand. Instead EON gave an exclusive to a late show. But why?

    I'm thinking that they made a deal behind the curtain. Perhaps Colbert gets JB "you heard it here first" scoops and in return he, or CBS, have to promote the film ad infinitum when it arrives? And why does Craig fancy speaking only to Colbert (he once did a Kimmel sketch though)? Craig even said that he had to tell Colbert first. I know it sounds like he's buttering him up and that stuff is omnipresent on Late Night, but Craig hates being fake. He aims to be so genuine that it is close to ironic. So there is no reason why he'd need to say it like that, unless there was some other motive...
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Has anybody checked on you know who since Craig has been confirmed and Aiden Turner won't be Bond this time?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I can t believe Craig actually slept with J. J. Abrams. That is disgusting, and I hope the media will go full throttle with it for years to come.

    Also, Stephen Colbert is the next Bond? I am so done with the series. He will be as bad as Brosnan.
Sign In or Register to comment.