No Time To Die: Production Diary

1181718181820182218232563

Comments

  • The thing that worries me is that P&W are going back to their old script. Many of us assume that it is Shatterhand.

    As much as I would want Spectre/Blofeld to return, I'm really not interested in seeing Waltz or Seydoux back. Whilst I certainly enjoyed Spectre, I just don't think those characters are interesting enough to sustain my interest for a second time.

    I think the idea of a new Cold War and Bond going up against the Russians is much more interesting.

    Personally, I hope P&W are writing a new script that incorporates ideas from their treatment and Hodge's draft. Then I hope Fukunaga can be left to work on the script and overhaul it to his own tastes.

    I really want Cary's fingerprints all over the film as he's a terrific filmmaker. Though I've read some interviews with him recently were he suggested he much prefers bringing on other writers to develop his ideas.

    What do we think Fukunaga is doing today?
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,063
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 3,494
    TDKR didn't felt like an ambiguous ending to me. Bruce left with Selina leaving his legacy in the hands of Blake. The whole point of the movie was "Batman can be anyone" so Wayne's decision to disappear faking his death seemed coherent with this whole theme, especially because fulfilled Alfred's desire to see him leaving a normal life leaving Gotham forever. Plus, Nolan films has been always conceived as a self-contained trilogy with a begin, a middle and an end.

    On the other hand SP finale was precisely conceived as a more ambiguous end that could've fit almost every possible further development. They even cut the "we have all the time in the world" final line to keep things even more "uncertain"...
  • Posts: 4,422
    We often forget that Bond is undercover and he is meant to blend in. I much prefer a low key ending where, after the mission is completed, he just walks away and disappears into a crowd. I know this is not traditional re older Bonds but, somehow with the more downbeat, dark DC Bond, it just feels right IMHO

    I don't think DC can pull off a "Keeping the British End Up" climax. It could be excruciating (although strangely in keeping with a post Brexit environment)
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    I agree that Waltz should be brought back so Blofeld can be redeemed. The script had many issues, but Waltz was perfectly cast as Blofeld. I, too, have no interest in Madeleine's character.
    Getafix wrote: »
    any reference to Jamaica is long overdue. every Bond should have at least one film set there IMO. it's Bond's spiritual home

    +1
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 830
    Waltz could have made a great blofeld, however that opportunity is already past. Bond 25 should have little connection to sp. Blofeld/ spectre can be reintroduced in 10 years. Hard separation, like qos- sf, yolt- ohmss, or avtak- tld.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    matt_u wrote: »
    TDKR didn't felt like an ambiguous ending to me. Bruce left with Selina leaving his legacy in the hands of Blake. The whole point of the movie was "Batman can be anyone" so Wayne's decision to disappear faking his death seemed coherent with this whole theme, especially because fulfilled Alfred's desire to see him leaving a normal life leaving Gotham forever. Plus, Nolan films has been always conceived as a self-contained trilogy with a begin, a middle and an end.
    Actually that's not really true. The Nolan Bat films were never originally devised as a trilogy. They made it up as they went along, which makes what he achieved with them all the more remarkable.

    They did in fact keep the last one ambiguous. There was for a time a chance that Bale could return, but he said he'd only do it if Nolan came back too, and that didn't happen. It's true that they brought in Blake, but once again it could have been as a future Robin for all we know. Things were kept vague. Moreover, Wayne was in hiding for 8 years prior anyway, as was Batman. He returned in the last one because of the League of Shadows and so one could argue that they left open the prospect that he could do so once again.

    If you go back and read the discussion on this thread from a couple of years ago (prior to Craig announcing his return), you will see that quite a few members saw the SP ending as similar to the TDKR finale, at least in terms of the ambiguous nature of his leaving with his girl to settle down to a life away from solving the world's problems after defeating the organization that caused him so much trouble.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 4,422
    Within any story, when your hero rides off into the sunset with their heart throb, (whether it's on the back of a horse or in an an Aston) that is the fairy tale ending with the emphasis on ENDING. "And they all lived happily ever after." SP has done Bond no favours in this area.

    Hunt knew this in OHMSS and turned his back on the fairy tale ending and, instead, gave us one of THE most iconic scenes within the history of Bond and set things up for a superb next installment.
  • Posts: 2,107
    Getafix wrote: »
    any reference to Jamaica is long overdue. every Bond should have at least one film set there IMO. it's Bond's spiritual home

    Hear hear!

    And Naval uniform, worn by Bond.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 2,066
    talos7 wrote: »
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.

    I agree, he has said both he would and he wouldn't, he also said he wasn't Blofeld or the head of Spectre. He may very well return. I want him too, as he deserves redemption, as he is truly capable of doing it.
  • talos7 wrote: »
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.

    I thought Waltz gave such a blank performance in SP. He sleepwalked through the film and collected the cheque. I think it was clear that Mendes and Waltz wanted to do something more subtle and quieter with Blofeld (after the flamboyance of Silva in SF). But it just came across as limp and disinteresting.

    Madeleine as a character was woefully uninteresting, however Lea Seydoux did a terrific job. she made that character soulful and her performance was loaded with pathos. However, whatever that character had to offer has been utilised now. I feel there is nothing much left to say for Madeleine Swann.

    I don't want Fukunaga to deal with Mendes's leftovers.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited September 2018 Posts: 3,494
    bondjames wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    TDKR didn't felt like an ambiguous ending to me. Bruce left with Selina leaving his legacy in the hands of Blake. The whole point of the movie was "Batman can be anyone" so Wayne's decision to disappear faking his death seemed coherent with this whole theme, especially because fulfilled Alfred's desire to see him leaving a normal life leaving Gotham forever. Plus, Nolan films has been always conceived as a self-contained trilogy with a begin, a middle and an end.
    Actually that's not really true. The Nolan Bat films were never originally devised as a trilogy. They made it up as they went along, which makes what he achieved with them all the more remarkable.

    They did in fact keep the last one ambiguous. There was for a time a chance that Bale could return, but he said he'd only do it if Nolan came back too, and that didn't happen. It's true that they brought in Blake, but once again it could have been as a future Robin for all we know. Things were kept vague. Moreover, Wayne was in hiding for 8 years prior anyway, as was Batman. He returned in the last one because of the League of Shadows and so one could argue that they left open the prospect that he could do so once again.

    If you go back and read the discussion on this thread from a couple of years ago (prior to Craig announcing his return), you will see that quite a few members saw the SP ending as similar to the TDKR finale, at least in terms of the ambiguous nature of his leaving with his girl to settle down to a life away from solving the world's problems after defeating the organization that caused him so much trouble.

    Let's put it this way. After the success of BB and TDK, Rises was conceived as an ideal thematic ending of Nolan's Trilogy. I never thought about a possible fourth Nolan film simply because Wayne's story arc was completely fulfilled in Rises. Maybe he'd do another one in 10 years, with a super old Batman. That's the reason why the ending didn't felt ambiguous to me. In SP was different, because Bond left on a similar OHMSS fashion plus the big baddie of his era was still alive. So to me SP finale felt far more open than Rises. I'd say that SP finale felt exactly like the TDK finale - even if the implications are obviously different - in which Joker was left alive and Batman decided to quit his "job".

    Given the fact that 25 will be 99,9% Craig's last, now I predict they'd go for a more Rises route than, for example, a Logan route.
    talos7 wrote: »
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.

    I thought Waltz gave such a blank performance in SP. He sleepwalked through the film and collected the cheque.

    Not my opinion. His performance was probably the most important reason why the character didn't felt like a complete waste. Even if the writing was lazy, he was able to perfectly handle all the deformations of Blofeld's twisted psyche. I largely spoke about this in the "Controversial opinions on Bond films" so I don't want to repeat myself.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    matt_u wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    TDKR didn't felt like an ambiguous ending to me. Bruce left with Selina leaving his legacy in the hands of Blake. The whole point of the movie was "Batman can be anyone" so Wayne's decision to disappear faking his death seemed coherent with this whole theme, especially because fulfilled Alfred's desire to see him leaving a normal life leaving Gotham forever. Plus, Nolan films has been always conceived as a self-contained trilogy with a begin, a middle and an end.
    Actually that's not really true. The Nolan Bat films were never originally devised as a trilogy. They made it up as they went along, which makes what he achieved with them all the more remarkable.

    They did in fact keep the last one ambiguous. There was for a time a chance that Bale could return, but he said he'd only do it if Nolan came back too, and that didn't happen. It's true that they brought in Blake, but once again it could have been as a future Robin for all we know. Things were kept vague. Moreover, Wayne was in hiding for 8 years prior anyway, as was Batman. He returned in the last one because of the League of Shadows and so one could argue that they left open the prospect that he could do so once again.

    If you go back and read the discussion on this thread from a couple of years ago (prior to Craig announcing his return), you will see that quite a few members saw the SP ending as similar to the TDKR finale, at least in terms of the ambiguous nature of his leaving with his girl to settle down to a life away from solving the world's problems after defeating the organization that caused him so much trouble.

    Let's put it this way. After the success of BB and TDK, Rises was conceived as an ideal thematic ending of Nolan's Trilogy. I never thought about a possible fourth Nolan film simply because Wayne's story arc was completely fulfilled in Rises. Maybe he'd do another one in 10 years, with a super old Batman. That's the reason why the ending didn't felt ambiguous to me. In SP was different, because Bond left on a similar OHMSS fashion plus the big baddie of his era was still alive. So to me SP finale felt far more open than Rises. I'd say that SP finale felt exactly like the TDK finale - even if the implications are obviously different - in which Joker was left alive and Batman decided to quit his "job".

    Given the fact that 25 will be 99,9% Craig's last, now I predict they'd go for a more Rises route than, for example, a Logan route.
    Fair enough. I can see the differences between the two endings (SP & TDKR) but still believe they have a lot of similarities.

    The thing with the Craig films is we've already had two in succession which can serve as appropriate (even if not ideal) endings, at least imho. Namely SF and SP.

    So if EON really want to create some kind of Craig specific sendoff then I think they should ideally try for something which hasn't been done before. So ideally a) no deaths, even if equivocal; b) no heading off with the girl where nobody but a few know where he is; and c) no full 360's back to DN. What I'm saying is I hope they will surprise me should they attempt this. Otherwise just don't bother.
  • Posts: 2,107
    When the movie's out, of course we won't be hearing of miss Swann. It's been five years afterall!
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,166
    talos7 wrote: »
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.

    I thought Waltz gave such a blank performance in SP. He sleepwalked through the film and collected the cheque. I think it was clear that Mendes and Waltz wanted to do something more subtle and quieter with Blofeld (after the flamboyance of Silva in SF). But it just came across as limp and disinteresting.

    Waltz implied that he and Mendes had differing ideas for the character. Which is seemingly quite clear from the two different versions of the same speech used in the teasers/trailers.

  • talos7 wrote: »
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.

    I thought Lea Seydoux was one of SP's strengths.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited September 2018 Posts: 2,541
    SharkBait wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    any reference to Jamaica is long overdue. every Bond should have at least one film set there IMO. it's Bond's spiritual home

    Hear hear!

    And Naval uniform, worn by Bond.

    Agreed, I said this on another thread as well that DC should wear that uniform at least once


    SP ending felt more like OHMSS ending than TDKR, BLOFELD was cast perfectly and can return imo, but seydoux need to be for a few minutes of scenes or come up in discussion that it didn't work out for her and bond rather than another Killing lover incident.
  • Posts: 10,537
    No one should have to deal with Mendes’s leftovers. As far as I’m concerned, the slate is clean, regardless of Craig still being in the role. It’s been years since SP, and given the series’ history, there’s no reason for them to feel tied to any previous continuity. It’d be unwise I think not to take advantage of that clean slate.
  • matt_u wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    TDKR didn't felt like an ambiguous ending to me. Bruce left with Selina leaving his legacy in the hands of Blake. The whole point of the movie was "Batman can be anyone" so Wayne's decision to disappear faking his death seemed coherent with this whole theme, especially because fulfilled Alfred's desire to see him leaving a normal life leaving Gotham forever. Plus, Nolan films has been always conceived as a self-contained trilogy with a begin, a middle and an end.
    Actually that's not really true. The Nolan Bat films were never originally devised as a trilogy. They made it up as they went along, which makes what he achieved with them all the more remarkable.

    They did in fact keep the last one ambiguous. There was for a time a chance that Bale could return, but he said he'd only do it if Nolan came back too, and that didn't happen. It's true that they brought in Blake, but once again it could have been as a future Robin for all we know. Things were kept vague. Moreover, Wayne was in hiding for 8 years prior anyway, as was Batman. He returned in the last one because of the League of Shadows and so one could argue that they left open the prospect that he could do so once again.

    If you go back and read the discussion on this thread from a couple of years ago (prior to Craig announcing his return), you will see that quite a few members saw the SP ending as similar to the TDKR finale, at least in terms of the ambiguous nature of his leaving with his girl to settle down to a life away from solving the world's problems after defeating the organization that caused him so much trouble.

    Let's put it this way. After the success of BB and TDK, Rises was conceived as an ideal thematic ending of Nolan's Trilogy. I never thought about a possible fourth Nolan film simply because Wayne's story arc was completely fulfilled in Rises. Maybe he'd do another one in 10 years, with a super old Batman. That's the reason why the ending didn't felt ambiguous to me. In SP was different, because Bond left on a similar OHMSS fashion plus the big baddie of his era was still alive. So to me SP finale felt far more open than Rises. I'd say that SP finale felt exactly like the TDK finale - even if the implications are obviously different - in which Joker was left alive and Batman decided to quit his "job".

    Given the fact that 25 will be 99,9% Craig's last, now I predict they'd go for a more Rises route than, for example, a Logan route.

    Totally agree.

    TDKR was clearly Nolan’s rather earnest (and faltered) attempt to tie up the trilogy. There was a clear attempt to bring a conclusion to Bruce Wayne’s arc.

    SP always left a number of loose ends. The principle ones being Blofeld and Madeleine. Each time I saw the film there was a general sense walking out of the theatres from audiences that Blofeld would return and kill Madeleine and Bond would go for revenge, blah blah blah blah.

    If Eon really go down the route of bringing back Blofeld, I really hope they avoid this angle. Plus, it’ll be close to 5 years by the time Bond 25 comes out, who even wants to remember such a middling Bond film as SP by then? Let the film fade away.

    The world has changed in such a profound way since 2015. Arguably we haven’t had a more interesting time since Putin began his quest to become a real life Bond villain. Why waste your time on regurgitating SP? The moment has come and gone.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    FoxRox wrote: »
    It’s been years since SP, and given the series’ history, there’s no reason for them to feel tied to any previous continuity. It’d be unwise I think not to take advantage of that clean slate.
    Quite right.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 2,991
    Just a thought of ending B25. It would never happen but the towards the end Bond receives a message from Strangways about coming down to Jamaica to do some fishing and how he has a matter to discuss with Bond regarding a mysterious island.

    Full circle

    That sounds incredible! I would love that!
  • Bond dying is not something that interests me.

    I just want a Bond movie that feels surprising and dynamic (like Skyfall and CR), instead of just going through the motions ploddingly (Spectre). A movie that looks great and has memorable elements (mainly a memorable villain).

    They just need that element to bring some degree of freshness to the proceedings (in CR it was Bond becoming 007, in SF it was trials and tribulations of M). I get the sense brothergate was supposed this element in SP but it failed to me. That doesn't mean they can't try something else this time around though.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    edited September 2018 Posts: 1,499
    I'm surprised at the love for Madeleine. I couldn't stand her or Seydoux's performance for that matter. Also, I'm just being a prick here, but I didn't even find her attractive apart from during the dinner scene on the train. She's just too ordinary looking. The same could be said of Maryam d'Abo but I don't wanna speak against @barryt007 woman.

    At least Kara had chemistry with Dalton. More than I can say for Craig and Seydoux.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Remington wrote: »
    I'm surprised at the love for Madeleine. I couldn't stand her or Seydoux's performance for that matter. Also, I'm just being a prick here, but I didn't even find her attractive apart from during the dinner scene on the train. She's just too ordinary looking. The same could be said of Maryam d'Abo but I don't wanna speak against @barryt007 woman.

    At least Kara had chemistry with Dalton. More than I can say for Craig and Seydoux.
    Pretty much.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,063
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.

    I thought Waltz gave such a blank performance in SP. He sleepwalked through the film and collected the cheque. I think it was clear that Mendes and Waltz wanted to do something more subtle and quieter with Blofeld (after the flamboyance of Silva in SF). But it just came across as limp and disinteresting.

    Waltz implied that he and Mendes had differing ideas for the character. Which is seemingly quite clear from the two different versions of the same speech used in the teasers/trailers.

    Indeed, given another crack at I think he would have a different take on the role; any difference
    In his personality and behavior could be attributed to the injuries sustained in SP.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 2,066
    talos7 wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Waltz could redeem himself, he was horribly misused; Seydoux, on the other hand was miscast and should not be brought back.

    I thought Waltz gave such a blank performance in SP. He sleepwalked through the film and collected the cheque. I think it was clear that Mendes and Waltz wanted to do something more subtle and quieter with Blofeld (after the flamboyance of Silva in SF). But it just came across as limp and disinteresting.

    Waltz implied that he and Mendes had differing ideas for the character. Which is seemingly quite clear from the two different versions of the same speech used in the teasers/trailers.

    Indeed, given another crack at I think he would have a different take on the role; any difference
    In his personality and behavior could be attributed to the injuries sustained in SP.

    How about giving him a gold tooth like in YOLT? That would be a true homage.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,302
    It does irritate me that the reason Mendes directed Spectre was because he felt like he had some weird ownership over Mallory, Q and Moneypenny. Judge the situation dispassionately for god sakes man.

    Be interesting to see how much we get (if any at all) of Madeleine And Blofeld and if we don't, if both characters we're included in earlier drafts.

    'Fuku' must like the story though which has me excited AF
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 2,066
    DCisared wrote: »
    It does irritate me that the reason Mendes directed Spectre was because he felt like he had some weird ownership over Mallory, Q and Moneypenny. Judge the situation dispassionately for god sakes man.

    Be interesting to see how much we get (if any at all) of Madeleine And Blofeld and if we don't, if both characters we're included in earlier drafts.

    'Fuku' must like the story though which has me excited AF

    Not to mention Mr. Hinx, possibly. Maybe we'll get his first name.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Just a thought of ending B25. It would never happen but the towards the end Bond receives a message from Strangways about coming down to Jamaica to do some fishing and how he has a matter to discuss with Bond regarding a mysterious island.

    Full circle

    I love this idea so much that I might be disappointed if it won't be used (and it probably won't).
Sign In or Register to comment.