No Time To Die: Production Diary

1167716781680168216832563

Comments

  • Posts: 19,339
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Martin Campbell would be the logical choice but he's a bit old now, would he have the stamina for a seven months shoot, and word is he and Craig didn't hit it off filming Casino Royale. If Campbell is available, fit enough, and he can get on with Craig he would be a strong candidate.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    There used to be a Bond family and the director was a big part of that. Just think about the fact the Hunt and Glen had been a part of the crew in different capacities before they took to directing. And not just a part. Glen and especially Hunt had made considerable contributions. You knew you could trust these guys to do their job. "Creative differences" would have been out of the question. Cubby grandfatherly supervise the whole thing and everyone was loyal to a fault.

    Just look at the 80s. Five Bond films, some better than others but exceptionally fine pieces of work, one every two years, with the same names returning. Being a "veteran" didn't mean you had lost your edge, rather it meant you were reliable, like Peter Lamont, Maurice Binder and John Barry. You could be counted on to deliver the goods. Some of Barry's finest work was done in the 80s.

    We were blessed with 6 Bond films in the 60s, 5 in the 70s and another 5 in the 80s. We received 3 Bond films in the second half of the 90s alone (!). Then... only 3 in the 2000s and now it's not even sure we'll get more than 2 in the 2010s. Each new film production spends a lifetime cruising for the A++ team. See, I don't want the A++ team, I want an A++ film. I don't care if the people behind the screens aren't the biggest gets at the moment, people whose schedules must be cleared first before preproduction can commence; I want a reliable team, a "family", people who know how to put together a great Bond film. Bringing in classy names doesn't necessarily mean we're going to get a great Bond film; it mostly means an increased risk of silly delays, artistic pretentiousness and our beloved 'creative differences'.

    You know why audiences have loved Bond film and still love Bond films? Because they are Bond films. If audiences wanted the next Oscar winner, they'd go and watch the next Almodovar.

    Great post. You've probably summed up why Bond 25 is in the mess it's in!

    The franchise was a well-oiled machine during the Cubby era. It was amazing how quickly they could write the screenplay, determine the budget, cast, crew, locations, make the film, market it worldwide, then repeat the process for the next film. I doubt that format will ever return.

    I don't know if it got this bad during the Cubby/Harry era but the B Broccoli era has had:

    TND not having a completed screenplay when they started filming!

    QOS having Craig writing some of his dialogue because of the writer's strike! QOS director admitted the story could have been better.

    And now Bond 25 has ditched the director (and screenplay?) three months before shooting.

    Cubby did have Dalton signing on at the last moment. I think he was signed and the next week or so he was filming the pre-credit scene? That must have been a bit stressful. "Help, we need a Bond by next week or no film!"


    I'm beginning to think that Craig doesn't get on with anyone but himself.
  • Posts: 1,548
    I do miss Cubby Broccolli. He wouldn't have allowed this farce to happen.
  • Posts: 9,238
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    I do miss Cubby Broccolli. He wouldn't have allowed this farce to happen.
    Have you seen the man with the golden gun diamonds are forever or a view to a kill recently
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited August 2018 Posts: 6,342
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    I do miss Cubby Broccolli. He wouldn't have allowed this farce to happen.

    Right? Coz Cubby would never hire American John Gavin to play Bond, or try to cast another American actor, James Brolin as 007! No! Everything he did was pure gold! TMWTGG didn’t almost sink the franchise, and TSWLM wasn’t a film that had to save the franchise! No way! From ‘62- ‘89 it was one massive hit after another!! In fact the 80s saw each film consistently making more money that the film previously!!! L2K destroyed Batman, Lethal Weapon 2 and Indy at the box office!!

    (I love Cubby too but honestly.....)
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Risico007 wrote: »
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    I do miss Cubby Broccolli. He wouldn't have allowed this farce to happen.
    Have you seen the man with the golden gun diamonds are forever or a view to a kill recently
    Better than the last three.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Omaha, NE
    Posts: 6,528
    Risico007 wrote: »
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    I do miss Cubby Broccolli. He wouldn't have allowed this farce to happen.
    Have you seen the man with the golden gun diamonds are forever or a view to a kill recently
    Better than the last three.

    I can see a case for DAF being better than QOS. Otherwise, nah.

    People are getting a bit nostalgic now for the Cubby era. That was a different time when directors were complacent enough to do three to five Bond films. Funnily, Hamilton turned down TB on the grounds that he didn't want to "repeat himself", a recurring motif with nearly every director since Campbell turned down TND. Campbell, like Hamilton, did come back for CR, but it didn't turn out to be the start of a three film run.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,206
    Maybe this guy is the solution:

    uwe-boll_1049771.jpg

    *duckandhide*

    :-):)
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,206
    I would still believe, that Philipp Noyce could be the right choice. He knows how to direct a blockbuster spy action movie, he has proved thgis several time. But don't know whether he'd be available, IF they consider him.

    https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0637518/

    220px-Phillip_Noyce_by_Gage_Skidmore.jpg
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Omaha, NE
    Posts: 6,528
    Edgar Wright is probably the name I'd find most exciting attached to a Bond film since ever. Would make it ironic too given he left ANT-MAN during pre-production.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,206
    And another names, which just sprang into my mind, is Tomas Alfredsson,. TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY was excellent. Okay, SNOWMAN was a flop, but then Alfredsson later admiited, that the shooting had to happen on very short notice, and during shooting they realized, that about 20 percent of the screenplay was not there, i.e. not finished. Taken, that this was a very high profile production with Martin Scosese being the producer, is still a mystery. Talking about troubled and hampered movies...
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,216
    I would still believe, that Philipp Noyce could be the right choice. He knows how to direct a blockbuster spy action movie, he has proved thgis several time. But don't know whether he'd be available, IF they consider him.

    https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0637518/

    220px-Phillip_Noyce_by_Gage_Skidmore.jpg

    Great choice. Noyce is a great action director.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 597
    Edgar Wright is probably the name I'd find most exciting attached to a Bond film since ever. Would make it ironic too given he left ANT-MAN during pre-production.

    Wright will never commit to a Bond movie, especially after the Marvel debacle. I'm surprised that Broccoli would even approach him.

    He likes to build his projects from the ground up, and his demands for creative control would never work with EON.
  • Posts: 5,735
    Interesting choice, Noyce. Quiet liked The Quiet American. Although, didn't he direct that godawful Saint movie?
  • Posts: 597
    I like Noyce but would prefer Roger Donaldson if they're going for a veteran. Donaldson was already offered one of the Brosnan movies (may have been TWINE).
  • Posts: 5,735
    Or Peter Weir.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Omaha, NE
    Posts: 6,528
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Edgar Wright is probably the name I'd find most exciting attached to a Bond film since ever. Would make it ironic too given he left ANT-MAN during pre-production.

    Wright will never commit to a Bond movie, especially after the Marvel debacle. I'm surprised that Broccoli would even approach him.

    He likes to build his projects from the ground up, and his demands for creative control would never work with EON.

    From what I understand Eon is not tight on controlling their filmmakers as Marvel notoriously does, they do give more leeway. That’s why I think there was much more going on with Boyle than just simple casting of the villain. Given that Craig has been wanting to do Bond with a lighter touch, I think Wright has the correct sensibilities.

    I’m still not expecting for it to happen though. If I were Eon, I’d offer Wright to help fix the current film with the promise of working on the next one to launch the new Bond actor. But that’s just me.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 219
    Daniel Craig plays Bond and is co-producing. How much creative freedom will the director have? They have to find a director who is willing to do what Craig wants. Not an easy task if you go for a top name I guess.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Omaha, NE
    Posts: 6,528
    Heavily disagree on Noyce though. His Tom
    Clancy films aged poorly. The only saving grace of one of those films was Henry Czerny delightfully eating a carrot as he watched a missile hit a house.

    Wish Tom Cruise bring him back as Kittridge for another MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE flick.
  • PussyNoMore is a huge Fleming fan and is not particularly keen on the movies with the exception of a couple of the early Connerys and OHMSS.
    That said, he is enjoying this thread enormously with the informed opinions that are being passionately expressed by real film fans.
    Looking through the many comments and thinking about them within the context of the market scene it is clear that the time has come for a completely new strategy.
    Craig’s Bond totally lacks the humour and lightness of touch of his predecessors and as a consequence he comes across as an actor that was hired to play the lead in a serious thriller but who finds himself having to act his way through the farcical situations that have become the hallmark of the franchise.
    Meanwhile the market has changed and spy fantasy has segmented into the brutal and hard nosed (as typified by Bourne) and the absurd (as typified by The Kingsman) with the result that Bond is left in the middle which is a terrible place to be in any market and which is completely out of keeping with the times.
    Doubtless Boyle had plans to change this and give us something new, different and better but when the doctor arrived, the patient didn’t like the medicine and we are where we are.
    The only option now is to appoint a journeyman director (Campbell being the obvious choice) and to bring the project in on schedule.
    When that is done, The Pussy thinks the thing will be indiscernible from previous efforts and will take less than Spectre. Then, and only then, will they find the courage to change the formula, move away from the formula and give the franchise the complete reboot that it so badly needs.
  • Posts: 4,619
    So EON held an emergency meeting for the crew today. I wonder if it will leak what they were told.
  • Posts: 191
    Sigh. Maybe Craig should bow out. This is a mess. Sounds like they need a brand new script as well as director. This is NOT gonna be in cinemas in 2019, is it. Maybe not even 2020. Can't believe I'm saying this, but maybe they should instead think about a BIG reboot. Pay off Craig, re-cast and start all over again. I am seriously against this, but, at the moment, don't really any quick fix to this. Is Hiddleston free?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    SonofSean wrote: »
    Sigh. Maybe Craig should bow out. This is a mess. Sounds like they need a brand new script as well as director. This is NOT gonna be in cinemas in 2019, is it. Maybe not even 2020. Can't believe I'm saying this, but maybe they should instead think about a BIG reboot. Pay off Craig, re-cast and start all over again. I am seriously against this, but, at the moment, don't really any quick fix to this. Is Hiddleston free?
    Curiously, yes.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,216
    Heavily disagree on Noyce though. His Tom
    Clancy films aged poorly.
    The only saving grace of one of those films was Henry Czerny delightfully eating a carrot as he watched a missile hit a house.

    Wish Tom Cruise bring him back as Kittridge for another MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE flick.

    Disagree. Clear And Present Danger is a great flick, especially. Not really sure why anyone would think it has aged badly. It's got some stunning action sequences and a great story.

    Salt, meanwhile, has a dodgy story but it's got some cracking set-pieces too. Dead Calm is a well-executed slice of tension-filled shlock too. He'd do a fine job of it.

    Nevertheless, I think he's busy adapting a Dennis Lehane novel at the moment.

  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    There HAS to be some solution to this situation other than ditching Craig & starting completely fresh. As others on here have said, there’s a reason Universal made a deal. They know Craig will bring in the bucks.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 6,342
    So EON held an emergency meeting for the crew today. I wonder if it will leak what they were told.

    If there is a hiatus, it will be told in this meeting. And I don’t see how they can’t leak that since the crew will be unemployed (after gearing up for the next year of their lives).

    However, I will be shocked if there is a significant delay in shooting (if any), and I may be an optimist, or just plain thick, but I foresee the release dates being honoured.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 90
    I am kind of glad that Boyle left. I am afraid he might try to make a sjw Bond.
  • Posts: 4,364
    So EON held an emergency meeting for the crew today. I wonder if it will leak what they were told.

    I'm not really sure how much evidence there is that such meeting has taken place.

    I assume Eon are spending their time zeroing in on directors and trying to entice one of the four to commit. Out of the 4 it is only really Edgar Wright who'd want creative control, the rest will do as they are told.

    Nonetheless, for the B-team, they are all terrific talents and far more exciting names than Boyle.

    LA is just going to work this morning, news on studio movies tends to break around this time, so if there is news it'll happen tonight.

    In the meanwhile, I think Yann should really be given the job. He basically had it until Craig thought they could do better. 71 was fantastic and he's a snappy dresser. He could make a great Bond film.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger we are in this together
    Posts: 44,842
    Give it to Peyton Reed.
  • I think Vallee would be the best choice out of those.

    I didn't think of him for a Bond movie before, but now I would like to see the experiment. The success of his HBO shows is largely down to his direction I think, he has his own stamp that he puts in the material and definitely elevates it. He is rather great with actors as well. The way he uses editing and camerawork to inform the audience of the characters' state of mind is also great.

    With him you can definitely expect a stylish looking Bond movie. I think he could also make some very tense espionage sequences with great camerawork judging by his previous work.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,109
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Edgar Wright is probably the name I'd find most exciting attached to a Bond film since ever. Would make it ironic too given he left ANT-MAN during pre-production.

    Wright will never commit to a Bond movie, especially after the Marvel debacle. I'm surprised that Broccoli would even approach him.

    He likes to build his projects from the ground up, and his demands for creative control would never work with EON.

    From what I understand Eon is not tight on controlling their filmmakers as Marvel notoriously does, they do give more leeway.

    Marvel have been very relaxed with their approach since phase 2; even more so with phase 3. The real difference is, there's a better dialogue and channel of communication between the producers and the directors over at Marvel than whatever EoN have been doing lately. The debacle with Wright and Ant-Man was mainly due to Wright wanting to make his film entirely independent of having any connection with the rest of the MCU which was silly on his part. You look at what the Russos have done, Taika Watiti, Shane Black, James Gunn (recent controversy not withstanding) and especially Ryan Coogler. The level of freedom and free reign Coogler was given was hugely surprising. However, when you think about it, its not all that surprising when you consider the fact that Kevin Feige is the most competent and successful producer in Hollywood because he bothers to do his job effectively. Feige has a brand to protect and still deliver in films that keep people coming back when there's now a slew of comic book films saturating the market and films and TV shows jumping on the bandwagon in creating and for the most part failing to create their own shared universe. Even Bond tried it with SP and failed miserably. The creative process requires communication and cohesion and that's just effectively not happening with EoN's current business objectives.

Sign In or Register to comment.