No Time To Die: Production Diary

1140214031405140714082507

Comments

  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,185
    bondjames wrote: »
    I can imagine P&W polishing Hodge's script, possibly. After all, they are sort of the in-house writers and are most familiar with Bond, and particularly this interpretation.

    I am still expecting something like that to be honest. P&W have been officially announced already (prematurely?) so they are not out of the picture yet
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    edited March 2018 Posts: 5,185
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Here is one of several that has him responding to questions about a Bond film in the #MeToo era.

    https://pagesix.com/2018/03/15/danny-boyle-will-write-next-bond-girl-role-to-fit-metoo-era/

    He could have literally given the same answer, word for word, if asked if Bond 25 will Deal with Brexit or the Russians, or what Brand of vodka he will drink. Its a non answer is what it is
  • Posts: 12,242
    It really is. The whole #MeToo thing with Bond is complete clickbait. We don’t really know anything yet.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Dennison wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    I said this on February 26

    I stand by what I said right after the awards show fiasco, within a month or so Daniel Craig will be displayed in some way and he will look great. At this point he’s eating clean , in the gym and any cosmetic work he may, or may not have had done will have subsided or reversed to a degree.

    It was Harry Morgan's fault

    https://www.thejc.com/news/the-diary/bond-star-daniel-craig-blames-wife-rachel-weisz-s-affection-for-jewish-food-for-his-weight-gain-1.459430

    The jews are behind everything.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited March 2018 Posts: 10,586
    Dennison wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    I said this on February 26

    I stand by what I said right after the awards show fiasco, within a month or so Daniel Craig will be displayed in some way and he will look great. At this point he’s eating clean , in the gym and any cosmetic work he may, or may not have had done will have subsided or reversed to a degree.

    It was Harry Morgan's fault

    https://www.thejc.com/news/the-diary/bond-star-daniel-craig-blames-wife-rachel-weisz-s-affection-for-jewish-food-for-his-weight-gain-1.459430

    The jews are behind everything.
    Now, now.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 4,619
    Germanlady wrote: »
    As I said, Major, you’re wasting your time.

    Why would you say that? The intensity in which negativity and pessimism is spread by some, is showing results. Your following is growing more and more. Being in the B 25 hate wagon is the place to be, if you want to fit in. So, be happy and dont complain. If you want to be a Bond fan these days, being against everything that was and might be in stock, has to be the attitude.
    Well, if for nothing else, I hope 25 will be great and 26, with who ever, a stinker. Now that would be fun as far as I am concerned.
    Germanlady, you are wasting your time.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I think fans expressing desires for a return to a more independent, mission centric approach as opposed to a personal story based narrative associated with a particular actor's arc are being quite reasonable at this stage of the cycle.
    What traditionalists here really want is not simply a mission centric Bond film, they want a mission centric traditional Bond film. Boyle could easily deliver a radical, but mission centric Bond film that's unlike any Bond film we have ever seen. I doubt such a movie would satisfiy the traditionalists.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    I think fans expressing desires for a return to a more independent, mission centric approach as opposed to a personal story based narrative associated with a particular actor's arc are being quite reasonable at this stage of the cycle.
    What traditionalists here really want is not simply a mission centric Bond film, they want a mission centric traditional Bond film. Boyle could easily deliver a radical, but mission centric Bond film that's unlike any Bond film we have ever seen. I doubt such a movie would satisfiy the traditionalists.
    Well that would certainly work fine for me.

    I've mentioned previously that I would honestly prefer that the loose ends in the Craig narrative be tied off with B25, and therefore would actually be open to a continuity story for his B25 swansong. Why? Well, because it is my hope that if they tied off his story properly (as opposed to ham fistedly, as they did in SP) then perhaps I could look at his entire arc with more positivity than I do now (viewing all 4 Craig films in a row is quite a chore for me these days because of how it presently ends).

    Having said that, a one-off story focused purely on a mission and without any connection to the past (or any personal b/s) would work fine for me too, although in such case I don't understand why they just didn't recast rather than soldier on with the old fella.

    Boyle will bring a new (and perhaps energetic) flavour to the direction, and that would make a welcome change if nothing else.
  • Posts: 4,619
    @bondjames What i'm hoping is that CR, SF and Bond 25 will work as a loose trilogy, as CR and SF are among my very favourite movies and I desperately want to ignore QOS and SP.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    I'd be fine with that too @PanchitoPistoles.

    I still personally see SF as a standalone, no matter what retro-rubbish they foisted on us in SP.

    If B25 is a standalone too then I may just end up viewing CR, QoS (I don't mind this one because it's essentially a CR continuation), SF & B25 for a Craig run and just ignore SP entirely (like I normally ignore TWINE when going through Brosnan's films).
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    Hopefully there will be some real news, soon. Craig fan or not - we‘ll all appreciate a new Bond movie - even if some just go and see it to rant about it :-D (just kidding)

    I am and remain truly excited it Boyle will really do it (the Hodge script could still fall through) and if so what the „cinema gold“ thing will be like. I doubt a period piece (which might become an option for B26).
  • Posts: 12,242
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'd be fine with that too @PanchitoPistoles.

    I still personally see SF as a standalone, no matter what retro-rubbish they foisted on us in SP.

    If B25 is a standalone too then I may just end up viewing CR, QoS (I don't mind this one because it's essentially a CR continuation), SF & B25 for a Craig run and just ignore SP entirely (like I normally ignore TWINE when going through Brosnan's films).

    I agree with SF being standalone. CR is as well. Even QOS often times feel like it. Contrary to popular opinion, I don't think SP really makes Craig's first few any less standalone. It just makes SP not standalone. After all, they make references to past Bond films in the older ones too (FRWL referencing Dr. No's death, OHMSS with the pictures and gadget montage, etc.). These little things need not make the previous films less standalone.
  • AgentJamesBond007AgentJamesBond007 Vesper’s grave
    Posts: 2,630
    For what its worth, Craig looks 100% better here.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    FoxRox wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'd be fine with that too @PanchitoPistoles.

    I still personally see SF as a standalone, no matter what retro-rubbish they foisted on us in SP.

    If B25 is a standalone too then I may just end up viewing CR, QoS (I don't mind this one because it's essentially a CR continuation), SF & B25 for a Craig run and just ignore SP entirely (like I normally ignore TWINE when going through Brosnan's films).

    I agree with SF being standalone. CR is as well. Even QOS often times feel like it. Contrary to popular opinion, I don't think SP really makes Craig's first few any less standalone. It just makes SP not standalone. After all, they make references to past Bond films in the older ones too (FRWL referencing Dr. No's death, OHMSS with the pictures and gadget montage, etc.). These little things need not make the previous films less standalone.
    The last time I viewed CR I didn't enjoy it as much because when I saw White I thought of SP. The silly hanging photos thing went through my mind towards the end as well. The same thing happened with my most recent viewing of QoS. It hasn't affected my viewings of SF yet though and I really think that's because Bardem sells Silva's personal conflict with Dench's M so well.

    I think I'm just going to have to avoid SP going forward in order to continue to enjoy the earlier Craig entries as much as I used to. Just forget it exists.
  • Posts: 12,242
    I just don’t let it bother me. Like I said, references to past Bond films/villains are nothing new, even if it’s done lazily in SP. The other films remain just as good for me.
  • Posts: 15,785
    For what its worth, Craig looks 100% better here.


    He most certainly does. I think he looks back to his old self.
  • Posts: 725
    The amazing twist is that M is actually evil and sends Bond on a mission to hurt innocent people. It will examine whether Bond is a blunt instrument or his own master. M being shorthand for the term.
  • Posts: 12,242
    I take it Sam Mendes is having a surprise return then? :)
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,889
    The amazing twist is that M is actually evil and sends Bond on a mission to hurt innocent people. It will examine whether Bond is a blunt instrument or his own master. M being shorthand for the term.


    Fiennes shot down the idea of "Evil M".
    Yes, they could recast, but chances of this scenario are slim to none.
  • Posts: 12,242
    I know how it can work guys:

    The PTS is Craig paying a visit to Vesper’s grave. He puts some flowers on it, when he is abruptly summoned into a helicopter supposedly sent by MI6. As it turns out, the helicopter is sent by an unnamed villain who is a Christoph Waltz lookalike with a white cat. He taunts Bond until Bond finds a way to control the hijacked helicopter, then Bond gets the last laugh by dropping the Waltz lookalike down a chimney. The loose end is tied up. But not before Waltz lookalike offers a delicatessen in stainless steel.

    From there, Bond meets a woman who is also after revenge. Well... I bet you can guess the rest.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    edited March 2018 Posts: 732
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I know how it can work guys:

    The PTS is Craig paying a visit to Vesper’s grave. He puts some flowers on it, when he is abruptly summoned into a helicopter supposedly sent by MI6. As it turns out, the helicopter is sent by an unnamed villain who is a Christoph Waltz lookalike with a white cat. He taunts Bond until Bond finds a way to control the hijacked helicopter, then Bond gets the last laugh by dropping the Waltz lookalike down a chimney. The loose end is tied up. But not before Waltz lookalike offers a delicatessen in stainless steel.

    From there, Bond meets a woman who is also after revenge. Well... I bet you can guess the rest.
    You know what - I would laugh my arse off and enjoy such a PTS and then after the titles it starts into a serious adventure. Would not mind this "never-seen-before" ( :-D ) PTS for sure.

    I love to hate SPECTRE :-D But seriously: I am happy this did not at all affect my Bond enthusiasm - actually I appreciate Craig's first 3 entries even more than before. But I won't buy 4 movie tickets in advance like I did with SP for B25 but start with one, first :-)
  • Posts: 12,242
    SP just lacks that punch and enthusiasm present in Craig's first 3 outings. It just feels like it's there to be there most of the time. It has some really good elements (PTS, Mr. White, SPECTRE meeting, a few others perhaps), but collectively feels very meh. We need more energy and originality for Bond 25. I hope they go with my PTS idea :) I do wonder though if a FYEO-esque PTS is possible with a separate story after? Like killing Blofeld than moving on to a standalone adventure? Who knows.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I actually can view all 4 of Craig's films as independent ,which i'm quite pleased I can do,as it makes it much better viewing for me.

    But to me,SF is independent however I look at it,what they said in SP doesn't even need considering to me.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,185
    barryt007 wrote: »
    But to me,SF is independent however I look at it,what they said in SP doesn't even need considering to me.

    Same here, Silva had such a personal and clear goal for going after M. Adding Brofeld into this, who seemingly had no goal and no motivation, makes matters only confusing and unbelievable.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    When is this MGM call scheduled for again?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Tomorrow.
  • Posts: 4,400
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tomorrow.

    I think we will be getting some confirmation tomorrow. The shareholders are just as hungry for news as we are.

    Disney CEO, Bob Iger regularly reveals big news on shareholder calls. Often, the announcements from Iger are very quickly followed by press releases from Marvel/Lucasfilm, etc.

    I'm slightly concerned that the window for Boyle/EON to commit is closing very quickly...I think Eon may find themselves coming up a bit short if they don't get Danny to sign on quickly.

    Personally, I think they need to get a great script together and focus solely on that. Then they need to hire a director who can simply execute the great script. Personally, I think they should hire Ridley Scott.

    Ridley is a legend, and was once a true visionary artist. These days, he's proved himself to be a master technician. No one can make a film that looks and feels quite as good as Ridley. The film would look gorgeous and be expertly crafted. Plus Scott, works quickly and will bring the film in under budget and schedule. Only true veterans like Ron Howard, Woody Allen, Clint Eastwood and Steven Spielberg are as efficient.

    However, Ridley isn't much of a storyteller anymore. He shoots the script. If the scripts are bad or half-cooked, then the movies are poor. Give him a good script and you get a good film. He won't ask too many questions and he'd make a very competent film. But EON need to focus on the script.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tomorrow.

    I think we will be getting some confirmation tomorrow. The shareholders are just as hungry for news as we are.
    I sure hope so. At least confirmation that they are on track for November 2019 would be nice, despite the changes at the top of MGM.
    I'm slightly concerned that the window for Boyle/EON to commit is closing very quickly...I think Eon may find themselves coming up a bit short if they don't get Danny to sign on quickly.
    I am of the impression that he has the job. That's what Cashleypersia over at reddit has concluded after doing some digging among his sources.

    I read a quote a few days back from Boyle that film remains a director's medium, whereas in his opinion tv is more of a writer's medium. He indicated that this is why he was only directing the first 3 episodes of his new FX series Trust, and then handing it off to someone else. I can't find the article now. EON have waited so long to get a director that I'm pretty sure they will go with whatever Hodge comes up with and then the Execs and P&W will finesse it for Boyle.

    What surprises me to an extent is that they haven't made an official announcement. Why? My intuitive suspicion (and that's all it is at the moment) is that there is something big that's going to drop when that announcement comes. Not sure what, and not sure when, but I suspect it will come in May.
    Personally, I think they need to get a great script together and focus solely on that. Then they need to hire a director who can simply execute the great script. Personally, I think they should hire Ridley Scott.

    Ridley is a legend, and was once a true visionary artist. These days, he's proved himself to be a master technician. No one can make a film that looks and feels quite as good as Ridley. The film would look gorgeous and be expertly crafted. Plus Scott, works quickly and will bring the film in under budget and schedule. Only true veterans like Ron Howard, Woody Allen, Clint Eastwood and Steven Spielberg are as efficient.

    However, Ridley isn't much of a storyteller anymore. He shoots the script. If the scripts are bad or half-cooked, then the movies are poor. Give him a good script and you get a good film. He won't ask too many questions and he'd make a very competent film. But EON need to focus on the script.
    It's interesting that you bring up Scott, because he directed All The Money In The World, and Boyle is tackling precisely the same subject on tv with Trust. One can see the differences in approach and style by viewing the two finised products. It's quite noticeable. Boyle is more edgy and avant-garde. Scott is more traditional.
    --

    BTW, I recently realized a connection between Trust and Logan Lucky. It's Hillary Swank, who stars in both. What do people think of her as a Bond 'girl'? She's a double Oscar winner and is of the right age to play opposite our 'older' Bond.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,889
    My knee jerk reaction to Seank as a Bond girl was no; after stepping back and giving her more consideration, it’s a stronger no. I don’t see it at all. She’s a wonderful actress but not right for Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    talos7 wrote: »
    My knee jerk reaction to Seank as a Bond girl was no; after stepping back and giving her more consideration, it’s a stronger no. I don’t see it at all. She’s a wonderful actress but not right for Bond.
    I don't see her as a traditional Bond girl either, but she sort of fits into #MeToo. With her it's all about the acting.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 5,767
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tomorrow.

    I think we will be getting some confirmation tomorrow. The shareholders are just as hungry for news as we are.

    Disney CEO, Bob Iger regularly reveals big news on shareholder calls. Often, the announcements from Iger are very quickly followed by press releases from Marvel/Lucasfilm, etc.

    I'm slightly concerned that the window for Boyle/EON to commit is closing very quickly...I think Eon may find themselves coming up a bit short if they don't get Danny to sign on quickly.

    Personally, I think they need to get a great script together and focus solely on that. Then they need to hire a director who can simply execute the great script. Personally, I think they should hire Ridley Scott.

    Ridley is a legend, and was once a true visionary artist. These days, he's proved himself to be a master technician. No one can make a film that looks and feels quite as good as Ridley. The film would look gorgeous and be expertly crafted. Plus Scott, works quickly and will bring the film in under budget and schedule. Only true veterans like Ron Howard, Woody Allen, Clint Eastwood and Steven Spielberg are as efficient.

    However, Ridley isn't much of a storyteller anymore. He shoots the script. If the scripts are bad or half-cooked, then the movies are poor. Give him a good script and you get a good film. He won't ask too many questions and he'd make a very competent film. But EON need to focus on the script.
    I agree with slight caution.



    talos7 wrote: »
    My knee jerk reaction to Seank as a Bond girl was no; after stepping back and giving her more consideration, it’s a stronger no. I don’t see it at all. She’s a wonderful actress but not right for Bond.
    I think she could be a good M, or a sniper.
Sign In or Register to comment.