No Time To Die: Production Diary

1175617571759176117622585

Comments

  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 1,853
    Two things that truly need to happen once Daniel Craig leaves, to make James Bond fresher. First get rid of Purvis and Wade. See my previous posts, for my opinions. Second, hire a action director, no more artsy drama directors.
    P.S. Where I get controversial: start adapting books not by Ian Fleming. I would rather that happen with new writers than a "original" screenplay by Purvis and Wade. I would say start with Colonel Sun, but P & W have already butchered the good material with it. My list for adaptations in no particular order. For Special Services, Icebreaker, Nobody Lives Forever for John Gardner. The Union Trilogy as a whole shot for one actor, filmed if possible, back-to-back-to-back style together. Also The Man With The Red Tattoo, all by Raymond Benson. Even though they aren't liked much, Devil May Care and Solo for the ending of a James Bond, but made modern. For a reboot, I would start with Carte Blanche. It's a good place for a new cinematic Bond to start. Sorry about my rambling, I didn't expect to go this far with this post. My opinions, at this point for me any writer for James Bond is fresher than Pervis and Wade. Take a chance EON!
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I was only four when I was first exposed to Bond. I never caused anyone problems, either. ;)
  • MaxCasino wrote: »
    Two things that truly need to happen once Daniel Craig leaves, to make James Bond fresher. First get rid of Purvis and Wade. See my previous posts, for my opinions. Second, hire a action director, no more artsy drama directors.
    P.S. Where I get controversial: start adapting books not by Ian Fleming. I would rather that happen with new writers than a "original" screenplay by Purvis and Wade. I would say start with Colonel Sun, but P & W have already butchered the good material with it. My list for adaptations in no particular order. For Special Services, Icebreaker, Nobody Lives Forever for John Gardner. The Union Trilogy as a whole shot for one actor, filmed if possible, back-to-back-to-back style together. Also The Man With The Red Tattoo, all by Raymond Benson. Even though they aren't liked much, Devil May Care and Solo for the ending of a James Bond, but made modern. For a reboot, I would start with Carte Blanche. It's a good place for a new cinematic Bond to start. Sorry about my rambling, I didn't expect to go this far with this post. My opinions, at this point for me any writer for James Bond is fresher than Pervis and Wade. Take a chance EON!

    @MaxCasino I agree that there is so much great stuff to mine from the non-Fleming books. Do we know why they haven’t done this? Is it because they don’t have the rights? Or because they only consider Fleming “canon”?
  • Posts: 444
    First Bond film I ever saw was the Christmas Day TV premiere of DAF in 1978 at the tender age of 5. To my embarrassment as I came to see subsequent Connery films on TV for the next few years I never immediately twigged it was the same actor as the 'old bloke who climbed through the roof and fell on the toilet'.

    Probably like most teen fans nothing can eclipse that first time when you become a hardcore fan, collecting the films and the Fleming novels and buying up all the factual books on the film series and properly absorbing yourself in the mythology.

    I think Bond actors and films which come after that first awakening - regardless of what generation we are from - will always suffer from undue criticism and a lack of emotional attachment.

    The 6 year gap after LKT seemed like an eternity back in the day, I had really come to think we would never see another film but there were (and are) always the first 16 films to treasure. Whilst I'm appreciative we got more, like with the revived Dr Who, it's too distant and distinct from the original to be viewed as a continuation. They're nice optional extras, take them or leave them. I'll take the Craig films and leave the Brozza efforts but that's just my subjective opinion. I personally don't desperately need a 25th EON Bond film in my life but will be glad to have one if we get it.

    That's not to say I'm a sycophant whom would settle for sloppy seconds or a rush job from EON. I absolutely want them to make the best film they can, make the film they want to make, but if it's not entirely to my favour I wont be too butthurt because it will never tarnish or delete the back catalogue.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited September 2018 Posts: 1,853
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Two things that truly need to happen once Daniel Craig leaves, to make James Bond fresher. First get rid of Purvis and Wade. See my previous posts, for my opinions. Second, hire a action director, no more artsy drama directors.
    P.S. Where I get controversial: start adapting books not by Ian Fleming. I would rather that happen with new writers than a "original" screenplay by Purvis and Wade. I would say start with Colonel Sun, but P & W have already butchered the good material with it. My list for adaptations in no particular order. For Special Services, Icebreaker, Nobody Lives Forever for John Gardner. The Union Trilogy as a whole shot for one actor, filmed if possible, back-to-back-to-back style together. Also The Man With The Red Tattoo, all by Raymond Benson. Even though they aren't liked much, Devil May Care and Solo for the ending of a James Bond, but made modern. For a reboot, I would start with Carte Blanche. It's a good place for a new cinematic Bond to start. Sorry about my rambling, I didn't expect to go this far with this post. My opinions, at this point for me any writer for James Bond is fresher than Pervis and Wade. Take a chance EON!

    @MaxCasino I agree that there is so much great stuff to mine from the non-Fleming books. Do we know why they haven’t done this? Is it because they don’t have the rights? Or because they only consider Fleming “canon”?

    I imagine that the leaders of the cinematic Bond have more power than the literary Bond. I don't entirely think that Fleming is the only cannon for EON, as Spectre made Bond and Blofeld brothers, and lifted an entire scene from a non Fleming book: the torture scene is straight out of Colonel Sun. So much that Amis' estate was credited. I still think that The Union Trilogy (and possibly TMWTRT), could be filmed LOTR style, for one actor, possibly different directors and writers for each one.
    P.S. AVTAK owes a lot to John Gardner as much as Goldfinger: The elevator scenes.
  • Posts: 5,732
    I was four. Thunderball on TV. Bond punches the grieving widow. I've been doing the same since.

    Not. Good.
  • Posts: 8,484
    peter wrote: »
    I was four. Thunderball on TV. Bond punches the grieving widow. I've been doing the same since.

    Not. Good.

    I see you at the same meetings wearing the same disguise but I swear I am there only for Mrs. Peacocks brownies and home made ice cream
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CAModerator
    Posts: 30,339
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I was three when I saw the GF/DN double-feature at the drive-in and I never forgot the experience. And yes, it screwed me up good.

    What was your initial impression/ which did you prefer?

    Definitely GF. Not Bond so much, but Odd Job and his hat taking out Tilly, and Odd Job's death (along with the Golden Girl) were immediately seared into my brain. I'll never for get that. and being afraid of Odd Job and thinking that he was behind the screen. All I remember from DN was the black gloved hands and the de-radiation shower; and it took me a few years to realize where I had seen those bits (when I saw DN on television when I was 11 or so).
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 8,459
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    P.S. AVTAK owes a lot to John Gardner as much as Goldfinger: The elevator scenes.
    No less the horse racing scheme, @MaxCasino, recalling Licence Renewed.

    These kind of overlaps of content are inevitable over time. Sometimes it's better to do it in a deliberate, controlled way.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    Posts: 7,293
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I was three when I saw the GF/DN double-feature at the drive-in and I never forgot the experience. And yes, it screwed me up good.

    What was your initial impression/ which did you prefer?

    Definitely GF. Not Bond so much, but Odd Job and his hat taking out Tilly, and Odd Job's death (along with the Golden Girl) were immediately seared into my brain. I'll never for get that. and being afraid of Odd Job and thinking that he was behind the screen. All I remember from DN was the black gloved hands and the de-radiation shower; and it took me a few years to realize where I had seen those bits (when I saw DN on television when I was 11 or so).

    Interesting. Suppose it makes sense Goldfinger would leave more of an impression on a child that age.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited September 2018 Posts: 1,853
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    P.S. AVTAK owes a lot to John Gardner as much as Goldfinger: The elevator scenes.
    No less the horse racing scheme, @MaxCasino, recalling Licence Renewed.

    These kind of overlaps of content are inevitable over time. Sometimes it's better to do it in a deliberate, controlled way.
    From Wikipedia:
    Some key plot elements in Licence Renewed may have had some influence on subsequent Bond films; most notably Anton Murik's plot of a nuclear disaster with the aid of an infamous terrorist which was the basis of The World Is Not Enough. Other key elements from Renewed that appeared in future Bond films were Anton's cheating at horse racing, which Max Zorin did in A View to a Kill, and the obsession with weapons, not unlike Brad Whitaker in The Living Daylights.

    I think EON liked John Gardener in the 80s more than they realized and would admit.
  • Posts: 5,732
    Risico007 wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I was four. Thunderball on TV. Bond punches the grieving widow. I've been doing the same since.

    Not. Good.

    I see you at the same meetings wearing the same disguise but I swear I am there only for Mrs. Peacocks brownies and home made ice cream

    you're talking pot brownies-- correct??

    And BTW-- first rule of grieving-widow-punching-- do not to talk about grieving-window-punching...
  • Cowley wrote: »
    First Bond film I ever saw was the Christmas Day TV premiere of DAF in 1978 at the tender age of 5. To my embarrassment as I came to see subsequent Connery films on TV for the next few years I never immediately twigged it was the same actor as the 'old bloke who climbed through the roof and fell on the toilet'.

    Probably like most teen fans nothing can eclipse that first time when you become a hardcore fan, collecting the films and the Fleming novels and buying up all the factual books on the film series and properly absorbing yourself in the mythology.

    I think Bond actors and films which come after that first awakening - regardless of what generation we are from - will always suffer from undue criticism and a lack of emotional attachment.

    The 6 year gap after LKT seemed like an eternity back in the day, I had really come to think we would never see another film but there were (and are) always the first 16 films to treasure. Whilst I'm appreciative we got more, like with the revived Dr Who, it's too distant and distinct from the original to be viewed as a continuation. They're nice optional extras, take them or leave them. I'll take the Craig films and leave the Brozza efforts but that's just my subjective opinion. I personally don't desperately need a 25th EON Bond film in my life but will be glad to have one if we get it.

    That's not to say I'm a sycophant whom would settle for sloppy seconds or a rush job from EON. I absolutely want them to make the best film they can, make the film they want to make, but if it's not entirely to my favour I wont be too butthurt because it will never tarnish or delete the back catalogue.
    I’m of the same opinion as you. When I was younger I was chomping at the bit to see the newest Bond film. But these days maybe I’m more jaded or just fully realize that no matter what “incredible” film they give us next it will never soar to the heights that GF or YOLT or LALD or TSWLM or OP soared for me. Those films and most of the others from the classic period of Bond (the Cubby period) are just seared in my mind and that same magic just can’t be recaptured in this day and age. The world has changed too much. All the best Bonds are behind us. So if all of a sudden they stopped making these movies it wouldn’t be the end of the world for me. We already have more movies than any other franchise in movie history. 24 is more than enough. Hey, that’s also my favorite TV show :)

  • edited September 2018 Posts: 2,105
    I was four or five. Messed me up real good. Wasn't much older when I already saw mild movies like the first Robocop.

    Anyway for me Craig's run has been 4/4.
    Shame about all the delays and behind the scenes mess.
  • Posts: 5,732
    SharkBait wrote: »
    I was four or five. Messed me up real good. Wasn't much older when I already saw mild movies like the first Robocop.

    Anyway for me Craig's run has been 4/4.
    Shame about all the delays and behind the scenes mess.
    Messed me up real good

    Messed YOU up real good?? You shanked me in Ms. Taylor's Junior Kindergarten class, you ass$#$#!
  • Posts: 5,732
    On a serious note: because of the wonderful @4EverBonded , an original Bond fan-- there from the beginning....

    She was courteous enough to invite me to read SirHenry's original thread.

    I'd advise us all to take a peek over there.

    You will be blown away. As I wrote on that thread:

    "To all true Bond fans: please trust me: required reading. We may not all agree, but we are all fans, and look how this group of "originals" handled themselves.

    There's just an amazing respect with this bunch of wonderful personalities (which, reading the B25 thread again today was shameful. Everyone has a right to their feelings and opinions, and not one poster said differently, not one-- until one did-- to create what??-- only he can answer).

    This thread is polite discourse, and should be aspired to.

    Wonderful fans; articulate, passionate and open".

    When you have the time, please take a peek and look how it was done with class (not trying to whip up descent and "teams"; I haven't seen such respectful discourse too often, but these guys nailed it (they could teach Washington a thing or three about passionate debate)...

    I hope you read their words, and the legacy they leave behind-- especially Sir Henry, who I'm learning was, and still is, a Legend.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Cowley wrote: »
    First Bond film I ever saw was the Christmas Day TV premiere of DAF in 1978 at the tender age of 5. To my embarrassment as I came to see subsequent Connery films on TV for the next few years I never immediately twigged it was the same actor as the 'old bloke who climbed through the roof and fell on the toilet'.

    Probably like most teen fans nothing can eclipse that first time when you become a hardcore fan, collecting the films and the Fleming novels and buying up all the factual books on the film series and properly absorbing yourself in the mythology.

    I think Bond actors and films which come after that first awakening - regardless of what generation we are from - will always suffer from undue criticism and a lack of emotional attachment.

    The 6 year gap after LKT seemed like an eternity back in the day, I had really come to think we would never see another film but there were (and are) always the first 16 films to treasure. Whilst I'm appreciative we got more, like with the revived Dr Who, it's too distant and distinct from the original to be viewed as a continuation. They're nice optional extras, take them or leave them. I'll take the Craig films and leave the Brozza efforts but that's just my subjective opinion. I personally don't desperately need a 25th EON Bond film in my life but will be glad to have one if we get it.

    That's not to say I'm a sycophant whom would settle for sloppy seconds or a rush job from EON. I absolutely want them to make the best film they can, make the film they want to make, but if it's not entirely to my favour I wont be too butthurt because it will never tarnish or delete the back catalogue.
    I’m of the same opinion as you. When I was younger I was chomping at the bit to see the newest Bond film. But these days maybe I’m more jaded or just fully realize that no matter what “incredible” film they give us next it will never soar to the heights that GF or YOLT or LALD or TSWLM or OP soared for me. Those films and most of the others from the classic period of Bond (the Cubby period) are just seared in my mind and that same magic just can’t be recaptured in this day and age. The world has changed too much. All the best Bonds are behind us. So if all of a sudden they stopped making these movies it wouldn’t be the end of the world for me. We already have more movies than any other franchise in movie history. 24 is more than enough. Hey, that’s also my favorite TV show :)
    You guys make some interesting points. I've been a fan since childhood but still get that buzz for a new film in a beloved franchise. The most excited I remember ever being coming out of a theatre was after GE. It really was a special experience. The PTS just blew me away - coolness personified. Since then, CR and SF have really impressed me as well, but not to the same extent. I really liked CR, but it didn't grab me emotionally like GE did. In fact, I'd say that SF probably had more of an impact on me.

    So I think I can still be mesmerized by a Bond film, if it hits the right spots. I hope it happens again one day soon. This year it was Fallout which had that 'jaw drop' (*I must tell everyone about it*) effect on me.

    Looking back on the catalogue though I really like the films pre-1989 the most. They are quite special to me and have the highest rewatch value. I don't really dislike any of them too much, so you have a point.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    bondjames wrote: »
    @doubleoego, I value your insights and comments on this forum and hope you continue to express yourself as valiantly and honestly as you have done. What you write makes a lot of sense.

    There's been a fair share of amateur psycho analysis written here over the past few weeks about specific members, the forum and the thread in general. I don't share that opinion of any of our members here. I can appreciate why some are especially frustrated, and in my view, you have every reason to feel that way. I share much of your concerns.

    I say let's give them a month or so and see whether we get that director announcement. We don't really know what happened behind the scenes here and there's all sorts of rumours out there, much of it contradictory. First it was a casting disagreement, then it was Bond dying, then it was Craig being an a$$#0!*. Some or all of this may be true, but we just don't know for sure at this point.

    Perhaps we can give them the benefit of the doubt and hope that they had the good sense, after the SP debacle, to have a back up plan in place - especially given Boyle's known unfamiliarity and previously stated trepidation with this sort of production.

    Like other members I anxiously await a director announcement soon. They know that expectations are high and that they have to deliver, especially after this wait. I expect nothing less than a kick 'a' entry for release in October/November 2019.

    Cheers @bondjames. I appreciate the support. I'm in full agreement with you here. I'm looking forward to new announcements, especially who'll be directing and I sincerely hope we do get a smashing entry in Bond 25. I want that feeling I once had during the 2006-2008 period. Pure excitement for engaging visceral Bond films.
  • Posts: 11,621
    bondjames wrote: »
    Cowley wrote: »
    First Bond film I ever saw was the Christmas Day TV premiere of DAF in 1978 at the tender age of 5. To my embarrassment as I came to see subsequent Connery films on TV for the next few years I never immediately twigged it was the same actor as the 'old bloke who climbed through the roof and fell on the toilet'.

    Probably like most teen fans nothing can eclipse that first time when you become a hardcore fan, collecting the films and the Fleming novels and buying up all the factual books on the film series and properly absorbing yourself in the mythology.

    I think Bond actors and films which come after that first awakening - regardless of what generation we are from - will always suffer from undue criticism and a lack of emotional attachment.

    The 6 year gap after LKT seemed like an eternity back in the day, I had really come to think we would never see another film but there were (and are) always the first 16 films to treasure. Whilst I'm appreciative we got more, like with the revived Dr Who, it's too distant and distinct from the original to be viewed as a continuation. They're nice optional extras, take them or leave them. I'll take the Craig films and leave the Brozza efforts but that's just my subjective opinion. I personally don't desperately need a 25th EON Bond film in my life but will be glad to have one if we get it.

    That's not to say I'm a sycophant whom would settle for sloppy seconds or a rush job from EON. I absolutely want them to make the best film they can, make the film they want to make, but if it's not entirely to my favour I wont be too butthurt because it will never tarnish or delete the back catalogue.
    I’m of the same opinion as you. When I was younger I was chomping at the bit to see the newest Bond film. But these days maybe I’m more jaded or just fully realize that no matter what “incredible” film they give us next it will never soar to the heights that GF or YOLT or LALD or TSWLM or OP soared for me. Those films and most of the others from the classic period of Bond (the Cubby period) are just seared in my mind and that same magic just can’t be recaptured in this day and age. The world has changed too much. All the best Bonds are behind us. So if all of a sudden they stopped making these movies it wouldn’t be the end of the world for me. We already have more movies than any other franchise in movie history. 24 is more than enough. Hey, that’s also my favorite TV show :)
    You guys make some interesting points. I've been a fan since childhood but still get that buzz for a new film in a beloved franchise. The most excited I remember ever being coming out of a theatre was after GE. It really was a special experience. The PTS just blew me away - coolness personified. Since then, CR and SF have really impressed me as well, but not to the same extent. I really liked CR, but it didn't grab me emotionally like GE did. In fact, I'd say that SF probably had more of an impact on me.

    So I think I can still be mesmerized by a Bond film, if it hits the right spots. I hope it happens again one day soon. This year it was Fallout which had that 'jaw drop' (*I must tell everyone about it*) effect on me.

    Looking back on the catalogue though I really like the films pre-1989 the most. They are quite special to me and have the highest rewatch value. I don't really dislike any of them too much, so you have a point.

    I was pretty thrilled after GOLDENEYE as well. After six long years the franchise returned and embraced the elements and formula that made Bond a success in the first place.
    I love the fact that the Brosnan era celebrated the cinematic Bond formula.
    As much as I love Craig, with each new film I've now grown accustomed to being disappointed with at least something: whether it be the gun-barrel, the film not concluding with Bond getting the leading lady, a lack of the Bond theme throughout, etc
    I expect there to be something in B25 that will piss me off as well. Never felt like that during the Brosnan era, yet there were times when his films seemed to force the formula.
    DAD was certainly the least favorite film as I left the cinema, but I daresay it felt more like a classic Bond film than, say QoS.
    The Bonds I watch the most are the 1962-89 Cubby era. The most variety in tone, style, thrills and humor, yet each is undeniably Bond.
  • Posts: 10,274
    Part of what has made the Craig era (through his first 3) so special for me is that they have shaken things up and made the series feel unique and fresh, especially with CR and QoS focusing on Bond's earliest missions and not including Moneypenny or Q. SF I think hit a really nice balance between old and new, with some more classic Bond familiarity than Craig's first two, but still plenty of new ideas and elements to make it different.

    With SP, I think they tried too hard to make it a classic-feeling Bond film, and it didn't always mesh with Craig's style so well. They forced the light-heartedness, classic elements, and storyline too much and it shows. It has some good moments to be sure but it lacks the energy and excitement Craig's first 3 brought to the table, as they are very unique films in the franchise. I'm hopeful Bond 25 can be as exciting and original as Craig's first 3. If it's to be a classic-type film, it hopefully will go over a lot smoother and also be more standalone than SP turned out.
  • Posts: 11,425
    first one I saw at the cinema was TLD - awesome. GE was a massive disappointment after the end of the Cubby era.

    QOS actually feels closer to the early Connery films in spirit than anything else since 1989 IMO. Short, fresh and breezy and not too hung up on the heritage or some psycho babble.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,682
    TripAces wrote: »
    Some much needed Craig positivity: Even though Craig is not my favorite Bond he seems quite 'lovely' in this video and the kid is great, too. Just try to imagine your younger self meeting Bond... Mindblowing

    I loved this moment but couldn't get past the enormous elephant in the room: what parents let a kid this young watch all of those Bond films? While about 75% of any Bond film (except for LTK and QoS) is pretty tame, the other 25% is completely inappropriate.

    Wow mr. Parent here.

    The bond films are fine for any child to watch.
  • Danny Boyle hints reason behind him quitting as Bond director was because he was 'hampered' by being such a 007 fan
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6127899/Danny-Boyle-hints-pulled-directing-25th-Bond-movie-big-fan.html

    4FAC66BF00000578-0-image-a-8_1536013980028.jpg

    It seems like an odd excuse but Boyle seems to be playing the diplomat. Though this interview was conducted days before Boyle exited. But it does hint at his reservation.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 4,619
    Although I think it’d be impossible for a Bond aficionado to write or direct a Bond film.
    No, it wouldn't. Christopher Nolan will show you that it's very much possible, Danny boy.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited September 2018 Posts: 894
    Shardlake wrote: »
    .
    TR007 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    EoN have made many subpar Bond films and I'm not really buying giving them any slack. Irrespective of the cause for delays of the Craig era, the one thing this era has had over any other Bond era is time; and they've squandered it! EoN aren't some green production company, they're OGs in the game and quote frankly their outdated and to be frank rather silly and limiting business model is crushing any real potential for growth. I love the films that came before but I don't give a damn about that when it comes to the here and now and what's expected to come. Relying on past glories means nothing when they can't even get preproduction going properly with ample time twice in a row in the space of over half a decade.

    When it comes down to it, EoN have a job to do, I'm not interested in people citing good work they've done before years ago, what about Now? It's often thrown about how EoN do well in cycles (which is a bs strategy in and of itself) and this whole rubbish about them needing more time will result in a better film which has also been proven to be nonsense. The simple fact is, they need to be doing a much better job. End of.

    You seem to say this same thing over and over. I understand you're obvioulsy quite frustrated.

    But for the foreseeable future, Barbra is going nowhere, so the very serious question I have for you @doubleoego is, without taking the piss: why are you still here? You're very upset and have expressed this many times, and you clearly have no faith in the future. So why not wash your hands of it all and move on? Enjoy the Bond films of the past, but give up until a re-cast? or until EoN is swallowed-up by a studio?

    Why stick around in the present and remain so angry? This company, the producers, the lead actor, are no longer a part of your tastes.

    And since Babs et al aren't going to leave, or change on your behalf, then what's the use of screaming into the wind?

    I ask this with all sincerity.

    I'm more concerned than I am angry and I'm here because I'm a fan. I'm interested in what the producers are doing with this movie series and i'm within my rights to comment, critique and criticise. However, with all the berating I give EoN one thing I always do is express their capability of doing and being better. It's within them and that's what's frustrating. I've never declared EoN as having no hope for future films; I've only expressed my opposition to their current lack of quality care and duty towards these projects even more so because of the experience they have. I'm not like some fans here who constantly give EoN a free pass. I'm not accepting that. Being a fan is more than just blind praise or constant criticism, there's a balance to it all that in the end offers some sort of belief and encouragement for better output. But I'm not subscribing to any excuses. My concerns and frustrations are not mine alone and if EoN aren't going to change, working this ever growing and increasingly saturated market and with the way they do things currently, before long the next documentary won't be about how Bond survived the odds but instead it'll be an inside look on what killed the Bond films. (Heaven forbid).

    Babs will always get major points from me for CR, which is one of the high points of the seires. It was not an obvious decision to sack Brosnan nor to reboot the series nor to get rid of Moneypenny and Q nor to cast Craig, but she and MGW did all of that and the result speaks for itself.

    Hear, hear!
    +1

    Better make that 2

    hMahGe8.jpg
  • Posts: 11,425
    Danny Boyle hints reason behind him quitting as Bond director was because he was 'hampered' by being such a 007 fan
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6127899/Danny-Boyle-hints-pulled-directing-25th-Bond-movie-big-fan.html

    4FAC66BF00000578-0-image-a-8_1536013980028.jpg

    It seems like an odd excuse but Boyle seems to be playing the diplomat. Though this interview was conducted days before Boyle exited. But it does hint at his reservation.

    Could allude to all sorts of things I suppose, such as Boyle not wanting to kill off Bond.

    It's worrying really, as it suggests EON are planning on taking more liberties with the literary character than they have done already. Perhaps they haven't learnt their lessons from SP and brothergate after all.
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,035
    If EON is attempting to kill off Bond then I hope MGM puts the kibosh on it. It's a moronic idea.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Murdock wrote: »
    If EON is attempting to kill off Bond then I hope MGM puts the kibosh on it. It's a moronic idea.
    +1
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited September 2018 Posts: 894
    " The problem came in when they were making the final decisions about casting pre-production. Craig, 50, is known to have a hand in casting decisions made on the Bond films, and his name was included in the announcement that Boyle had quit. The source explained: ‘Craig has a big say in all the casting decisions. None of the Bond girls have been chosen without his say so."

    I'm not sure whether I like or dislike this piece of information. Also, the commenters at DM seem to like *cough* Boyle quite a bit
  • Posts: 5,767
    Astonishing how easily people believe all kinds of rumours….
Sign In or Register to comment.