No Time To Die: Production Diary

1183118321834183618372585

Comments

  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 2,988
    Univex wrote: »
    Thought he would come out of the water...

    What if that’s how Bond dies? He drowns! :D
  • Posts: 5,200
    Univex wrote: »
    Thought he would come out of the water...

    What if that’s how Bond dies? He drowns! :D

    :) Like his beloved. Nah, this all dying angle is getting tiresome. What can we discuss from here to March that doesn't involve some hypothetical long shot? Maybe the merits of the director? The possibility of some crew members being brought in? The composer? Anything?
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,499
    I'd like some underwater action in Bond 25. Good commercial. Right idea.
  • Univex wrote: »
    Thought he would come out of the water...

    Nope. It's a metaphor for Craig's film career post-Bond.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 5,200
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Thought he would come out of the water...

    Nope. It's a metaphor for Craig's film career post-Bond.

    I take it he is not to your liking? And yes, I know his choices have been very, very poor, but you're quite the negativist @Escalus5. You don't like Fukunaga, right? You probably don't like Craig. So, maybe this one (B25) is not for you (?) I don't know, swimming against the current much? Still, all good, cheers for the all the "realist" (philosophically you'd be a negativist) ;) inputs. Say, is there anything to your liking in all of this pre production rumble? Just curious. Oh, and my bad if I'm wrong. If so, my apologies. Again, cheers.
  • Posts: 10,274
    I would definitely like some aquatic action in Bond 25. I’m not too worried about the whole Bond dying scenario, which I think is quite unlikely. I’ll cross that bridge later if I have to.

    It is a little odd that there will have been a 5-year gap (not technically quite that much, but 2015-2020 still looks pretty big) with the same Bond actor in place from the last film. I still want Craig to get his last Bond film, but I do hope they are already beginning to look into who can replace him so we don’t have to wait a long time for Bond 26.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 5,200
    And to think Danny boy has been training like hell to get fit. He'll have to maintain it for a long period of time. Or maybe he'll just tone it down a notch in the gym department and then pick it up latter on.

    How old will Craig be in 2020? Actually that's fine, he'll be a seasoned agent in top form, which is something we haven't had in the series, well, not in top form anyway.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 10,274
    He’ll turn 52 in 2020, but 51 while the film is shooting. 50s is where it begins to push it for playing Bond, but I’m confident Craig can still sell it one last time. Still has nothing on Moore in AVTAK!
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,009
    Universal, Imax Extend Multiyear Film-Slate Deal
    https://hollywoodreporter.com/news/universal-imax-extend-multi-year-film-slate-deal-1145701

    Imax and Universal Pictures has inked a new multiyear film-slate deal that will digitally supersize select titles from the studio.

  • Posts: 4,619
    Top five longest gap between Bond films (gaps between UK release dates):

    LTK / GE: 2354 days
    SP / Bond25: 1572 days
    DAD / CR: 1457 days
    QOS / SF: 1456 days
    SF / SP: 1095 days
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 8,121
    FoxRox wrote: »
    He’ll turn 52 in 2020, but 51 while the film is shooting.
    So he'll be 54 in 2022.

  • Posts: 10,274
    FoxRox wrote: »
    He’ll turn 52 in 2020, but 51 while the film is shooting.
    So he'll be 54 in 2022.

    Yes...?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 8,121
    Just an observation.
  • I find it quite shocking that some folks are seriously cool with Bond being killed ESPECIALLY if there’s more Bond films in the future. I see comments like “well I’d be okay with it if we get a quality film out of it”. Really??!! We’re so desperate that we need to kill our hero in order to get a quality film??! Does it not smell of extreme desperation to anyone?!! If Bond’s death is the only thing that can guarantee a quality film then I’m afraid it’s time to hang things up for good and just end the series. Clearly we’ve run out of ideas and running on fumes. I never thought asking for an entertaining quality film and keeping Bond alive (James Bond Will Return...) was too much to ask for. Or is that just too “old hat” nowadays and not daring enough?? I’m sorry but I prefer “old hat” if the alternative is crazy ideas. We already got a crazy idea with Bro-Feld and how did that turn out?

    Bottom line - Bond DOES NOT die. James Bond will return....

    Even if it was the last film in the series Bond should NOT die. Sorry but my heroes don’t die. That’s the whole point of the series - that Bond prevails against all odds. Only Father Time can take him (and I don’t need to see that either).
  • Posts: 10,274
    Ok.

    As much as I like Craig’s Bond, I do hope his fifth is his last. I think going past that, especially with how delays have been in his time as Bond, is pushing a bit too far.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,372
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ok.

    As much as I like Craig’s Bond, I do hope his fifth is his last. I think going past that, especially with how delays have been in his time as Bond, is pushing a bit too far.
    I was (and still am) over the moon when he announced he was coming back. But I definitely don't want to see him as Bond past B25.
  • Posts: 10,274
    jake24 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ok.

    As much as I like Craig’s Bond, I do hope his fifth is his last. I think going past that, especially with how delays have been in his time as Bond, is pushing a bit too far.
    I was (and still am) over the moon when he announced he was coming back. But I definitely don't want to see him as Bond past B25.

    In the same boat. Love that he will get a fifth - only the third Bond actor to do it! But going past that is definitely too far.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    Posts: 7,252
    I have to wonder what makes Fukunaga the ideal choice for Bond 25. I don't doubt he is talented, although I haven't seen much to verify that. But even the , I don't specifically what it is that makes him a fit for this franchise. All I am reading is that he looks stylish in a suit, and therefore can bring a sense of style to 007? He is young, and represents a more modern mindset perhaps, but that has its dangers too. Too me the man seems far too self serious from what interviews I have seen. I fear we might not be done with the naval-gazing just yet, and in 2020 that might not be as successful as it was in 2012, or even 2015. To my eyes it looks like Bond is becoming stagnant, like it did with DAF, AVTAK and DAD previously. I don't see what this film has going for it that those films didn't. I don't blame people for getting hyped, and hoping for the best. I wish I could believe that B25 was going to finally address some of the issues that have been lingering for a while now. Unfortunately, I just can't
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,192
    I have to wonder what makes Fukunaga the ideal choice for Bond 25. I don't doubt he is talented, although I haven't seen much to verify that. But even the , I don't specifically what it is that makes him a fit for this franchise. All I am reading is that he looks stylish in a suit, and therefore can bring a sense of style to 007? He is young, and represents a more modern mindset perhaps, but that has its dangers too. Too me the man seems far too self serious from what interviews I have seen. I fear we might not be done with the naval-gazing just yet, and in 2020 that might not be as successful as it was in 2012, or even 2015. To my eyes it looks like Bond is becoming stagnant, like it did with DAF, AVTAK and DAD previously. I don't see what this film has going for it that those films didn't. I don't blame people for getting hyped, and hoping for the best. I wish I could believe that B25 was going to finally address some of the issues that have been lingering for a while now. Unfortunately, I just can't

    Have you seen any of Fukunaga's work?
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited September 2018 Posts: 879
    I have to wonder what makes Fukunaga the ideal choice for Bond 25. I don't doubt he is talented, although I haven't seen much to verify that. But even the , I don't specifically what it is that makes him a fit for this franchise. All I am reading is that he looks stylish in a suit, and therefore can bring a sense of style to 007? He is young, and represents a more modern mindset perhaps, but that has its dangers too. Too me the man seems far too self serious from what interviews I have seen. I fear we might not be done with the naval-gazing just yet, and in 2020 that might not be as successful as it was in 2012, or even 2015. To my eyes it looks like Bond is becoming stagnant, like it did with DAF, AVTAK and DAD previously. I don't see what this film has going for it that those films didn't. I don't blame people for getting hyped, and hoping for the best. I wish I could believe that B25 was going to finally address some of the issues that have been lingering for a while now. Unfortunately, I just can't

    First off, I hereby recommend you go and watch some of his films/tv-productions. Secondly, he's a bit of a shapeshifter, a chameleon if you will. I know it's very easy to compare new talent to the greats, but to me it looks like he has a similar eye and vision Kubrick had. Kubrick tried everything, from comedy to horror and in ways Fukunaga has done the same, successfully like Kubrick. Whatever he makes ranges from good to excellent and it seems he's able to channel that inner quality he has into whatever piques his interest. Critics/audiences their opinions back this up. He stated he's always wanted to make a Bond film, so I reckon we're quite safe in that regard.
    Mendes, often we view things quite similarly. I'd say worry less and start viewing some of his stuff. You'll come to the conclusion, most likely anyway, the man is deeply talented and is indeed a breath of fresh air for the Bond franchise. We're actually quite lucky to have him aboard.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 214
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    The Craig era has been it's own time-line, and I can't imagine a completely new actor playing Bond as if he experienced Vesper and everything that followed thereafter.

    Perhaps after the next guy, they will go back to soft re-boots.

    So, having an ending that puts a firm end to the DC time-line shouldn't be unexpected. And if this is the case, a FRWL-type conclusion, or YOLT, would be wholly appropriate to this era and it cleans the slate for the next guy.

    I 100% agree, Peter. I can see Craig wanting his ending to be something unique and, for the wider audience, very surprising. The SP ending, obviously designed as a potential Craig farewell, didn't have great impact. I think Craig knows that.

    I understand your point. But it should be all about Ian Fleming’s James Bond and not Daniel Craig.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    Posts: 7,252
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    The Craig era has been it's own time-line, and I can't imagine a completely new actor playing Bond as if he experienced Vesper and everything that followed thereafter.

    Perhaps after the next guy, they will go back to soft re-boots.

    So, having an ending that puts a firm end to the DC time-line shouldn't be unexpected. And if this is the case, a FRWL-type conclusion, or YOLT, would be wholly appropriate to this era and it cleans the slate for the next guy.

    I 100% agree, Peter. I can see Craig wanting his ending to be something unique and, for the wider audience, very surprising. The SP ending, obviously designed as a potential Craig farewell, didn't have great impact. I think Craig knows that.

    I understand your point. But it should be all about Ian Fleming’s James Bond and not Daniel Craig.

    Very well said.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,432
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    The Craig era has been it's own time-line, and I can't imagine a completely new actor playing Bond as if he experienced Vesper and everything that followed thereafter.

    Perhaps after the next guy, they will go back to soft re-boots.

    So, having an ending that puts a firm end to the DC time-line shouldn't be unexpected. And if this is the case, a FRWL-type conclusion, or YOLT, would be wholly appropriate to this era and it cleans the slate for the next guy.

    I 100% agree, Peter. I can see Craig wanting his ending to be something unique and, for the wider audience, very surprising. The SP ending, obviously designed as a potential Craig farewell, didn't have great impact. I think Craig knows that.

    I understand your point. But it should be all about Ian Fleming’s James Bond and not Daniel Craig.

    Very well said.

    They’ve been taking liberties with Fleming from Day 1. It’s the laziest argument I see trotted out.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited September 2018 Posts: 4,010
    I have to wonder what makes Fukunaga the ideal choice for Bond 25. I don't doubt he is talented, although I haven't seen much to verify that. But even the , I don't specifically what it is that makes him a fit for this franchise. All I am reading is that he looks stylish in a suit, and therefore can bring a sense of style to 007? He is young, and represents a more modern mindset perhaps, but that has its dangers too. Too me the man seems far too self serious from what interviews I have seen. I fear we might not be done with the naval-gazing just yet, and in 2020 that might not be as successful as it was in 2012, or even 2015. To my eyes it looks like Bond is becoming stagnant, like it did with DAF, AVTAK and DAD previously. I don't see what this film has going for it that those films didn't. I don't blame people for getting hyped, and hoping for the best. I wish I could believe that B25 was going to finally address some of the issues that have been lingering for a while now. Unfortunately, I just can't

    If it was announced that Craig was standing down and that Fukunaga had reached a deal alongside EON that Aidan Turner would be taking over in a tweaked script to introduce the new Bond you'd be all over this and think he was the best director ever.

    Your hot air isn't fooling me or others, you hate Craig just let it flow through you and admit it.

  • edited September 2018 Posts: 444
    I'm not particularly familiar with Fukunaga's work but from the clips I've seen it certainly looks like he'll produced something visually arresting.

    It's still very early days of course, who knows how the film will turn out, but it does feel like the news of this appointment has come at the right time. For this forum and Bond fans and followers at large it's lifted spirits and dare I say created a little hype now for Bond 25.

    I don't care if it's called Shatterhand and features Blofield as there's a sense that we might have a gritty, visceral thriller in which Bond might go to hell and back to bring him down.

    I'm sure Craig means he wants to go out on a creative high rather than the film end on a air-punching heroic high but even still I don't quite think they'd go for the downer of Bond fatally injured at the end of it. If they do it it'll need to be pretty dramatic and bloody well done but it's a risk.

    It's funny that in 2018 some are talking about the end of SP being the perfect closure to the Craig era because when I left the cinema in 2015 there was a palpable sense to me of it feeling like the second act of a three parter. Yes Bond had quit but Blofeld's gaze at Bond as he walked off suggested unfinished business. Time will tell as to whether any of the strands from SP are carried on. It would dishearten some people if it did but there's not reason why things can't be done 'right' this time.
  • Posts: 5,715
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    The Craig era has been it's own time-line, and I can't imagine a completely new actor playing Bond as if he experienced Vesper and everything that followed thereafter.

    Perhaps after the next guy, they will go back to soft re-boots.

    So, having an ending that puts a firm end to the DC time-line shouldn't be unexpected. And if this is the case, a FRWL-type conclusion, or YOLT, would be wholly appropriate to this era and it cleans the slate for the next guy.

    I 100% agree, Peter. I can see Craig wanting his ending to be something unique and, for the wider audience, very surprising. The SP ending, obviously designed as a potential Craig farewell, didn't have great impact. I think Craig knows that.

    I understand your point. But it should be all about Ian Fleming’s James Bond and not Daniel Craig.

    It's not as if DC is bigger than Bond. But this re-boot WAS unique. And DC is as big as Bond in THIS time-line. THIS Bond needs a conclusion to this time-line, opening it clean for the next guy.

    Since '06, this has been a unique era precisely because of the re-boot. And now it must reach its conclusion.

    This is something the other Bonds didn't need.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    edited September 2018 Posts: 214
    RC7 wrote: »
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    The Craig era has been it's own time-line, and I can't imagine a completely new actor playing Bond as if he experienced Vesper and everything that followed thereafter.

    Perhaps after the next guy, they will go back to soft re-boots.

    So, having an ending that puts a firm end to the DC time-line shouldn't be unexpected. And if this is the case, a FRWL-type conclusion, or YOLT, would be wholly appropriate to this era and it cleans the slate for the next guy.

    I 100% agree, Peter. I can see Craig wanting his ending to be something unique and, for the wider audience, very surprising. The SP ending, obviously designed as a potential Craig farewell, didn't have great impact. I think Craig knows that.

    I understand your point. But it should be all about Ian Fleming’s James Bond and not Daniel Craig.

    Very well said.

    They’ve been taking liberties with Fleming from Day 1. It’s the laziest argument I see trotted out.

    Please don’t missunderstand. Focus on Bond and not on how to make Daniel Craig look good - that was my point.
  • Posts: 5,200
    Can anyone explain to me how and when did this "They're gonna kill him" thing start? Who said so? Any reliable sources?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,372
    Univex wrote: »
    Can anyone explain to me how and when did this "They're gonna kill him" thing start? Who said so? Any reliable sources?
    Just tabloid stuff. I doubt there's any truth to it
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,010
    peter wrote: »
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    The Craig era has been it's own time-line, and I can't imagine a completely new actor playing Bond as if he experienced Vesper and everything that followed thereafter.

    Perhaps after the next guy, they will go back to soft re-boots.

    So, having an ending that puts a firm end to the DC time-line shouldn't be unexpected. And if this is the case, a FRWL-type conclusion, or YOLT, would be wholly appropriate to this era and it cleans the slate for the next guy.

    I 100% agree, Peter. I can see Craig wanting his ending to be something unique and, for the wider audience, very surprising. The SP ending, obviously designed as a potential Craig farewell, didn't have great impact. I think Craig knows that.

    I understand your point. But it should be all about Ian Fleming’s James Bond and not Daniel Craig.

    It's not as if DC is bigger than Bond. But this re-boot WAS unique. And DC is as big as Bond in THIS time-line. THIS Bond needs a conclusion to this time-line, opening it clean for the next guy.

    Since '06, this has been a unique era precisely because of the re-boot. And now it must reach its conclusion.

    This is something the other Bonds didn't need.

    Thank you exactly what I was saying, some here don't want to accept this but this is a self contained era.

    No I'm sure some would like as the first 20 but films have moved on since then and the model is different. Bond may have been immune from this at one time but the DC era was a new start and no fanboy tinkering will get it to line up with the previous era.

    No I am certainly not supporting the code name theory but this era is coming to an end accept it.
Sign In or Register to comment.