No Time To Die: Production Diary

1186118621864186618672507

Comments

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Glad to know The Rhythm Section is doing well.
  • Posts: 6,822
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I saw FALLOUT only a couple months ago and I barely remember it. I enjoyed it while watching, but it didn't stick with me.
    I'll still take Bond over Ethan whatshisname any day.

    +1
    I thought that of all the MI movies. Enjoyable enough while watching but instantly forgettable! They certainly don't have Bonds endurability!

  • edited November 2018 Posts: 15,825
    octofinger wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I don’t think there’s any reason to be worried about Fukunaga helping write for this other project. There’s still plenty of time until March, and I’m sure he’s been working on the script/story material for Bond 25 in the meantime. No cause for alarm I don’t think.
    This.

    Don't know why is everyone freaking out.

    I don't think anyone is freaking out, exactly, but I do think at this stage that some wariness is fair. For better or worse I think the press might refer to this, so far, as a "troubled production." After a long lag, ownership woes, striking sets, cutting a director loose . . . I think a bit of anxiety about the state of things is perfectly warranted.

    True. There have been more than enough setbacks on B25 already that we really don't need to read about Fukanaga working on another project so close to Bond's projected start date. Granted, it is still a few months away, but I'd assume the Bond film should be in pre-production as we speak.

    I also don't think Craig should have committed to another film so close to the new Bond production. Who knows? Perhaps he blew all of the money he's made on the previous Bonds, is down to his last dollar, can't even afford to go see a matinee himself, and Rachel Weiss is on his arse about getting work immediately??
    That's pretty much what would make me lose focus on Bond. I take that back................ I'd still be focused on Bond. I'd be practicing my gunbarrel walk in front of a mirror at the very least.

    Kidding aside, until we get an announcement , say, shortly before Christmas that Cary Fukanaga has left the Bond film, lightning has struck twice and that B25 will be delayed indefinitely no need to seriously start worrying. Things will work out.
  • Glad to know The Rhythm Section is doing well.

    What became of the production delay? I thought there was an injury that set principal shooting back by several weeks?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    octofinger wrote: »
    Glad to know The Rhythm Section is doing well.
    What became of the production delay? I thought there was an injury that set principal shooting back by several weeks?
    Oh they completed filming back in August. After Blake Lively's hand injury, they halted production up until June, and completed filming after two months. It's just that I was expecting to see the filming getting marketed by now.
  • Outstanding. For several reasons, I really hope this film does well. I'd like EON to have a win, of course, but I also think it's in all our best interests to have the genre doing well.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Precisely. I wish them the best of luck.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    octofinger wrote: »
    Outstanding. For several reasons, I really hope this film does well. I'd like EON to have a win, of course, but I also think it's in all our best interests to have the genre doing well.

    Just the opposite. If the film does well financially then expect the Broccolis to be occupied adapting the next three novels in the series, for the good part of the next decade. We'd be lucky to get 2 Bond films before 2030. No thanks.
  • LeChiffre wrote: »
    Seeing as Bond can no longer outdo MI franchise for stunts and action I just hope Fukanaga has some decent script to work with

    The only mission impossible stunt which was outdone was Burj khalifa sequence. I have seen much better helicopter/foot/bike/boat/car chase in bond films. Casino Royale parkour sequence/ quantum of solace car chase/plane sequence/skyfall bike chase were rated best in years.
    Are you serious about a Bond film having a better helicopter sequence than the one at the finale of FALLOUT? Forget Burj Khalifa - the helicopter stunt at the end of FALLOUT was the most spectacular action sequence of the entire M:I series! And here you say that Bond films have done better helicopter stunts than that one. Which one exactly? Look, I love Bond films but this is a ridiculous statement to make.

    No ridiculous is what people think that helicopter stunt was anywhere near QOS Airdog fight. If anyone remember what happened in Spectre bond was trying to save Madeline instead risking her life by crashing the plane. Same thing happened in fallout instead of trying to save detonator his great plan was to smash both helicopter, he could have shoot the rotor like what happened in Spectre ending. But let's move on to bond25 some like it some Don't.

    Ma man
    TripAces wrote: »
    The amount of anxiety and Bond-hating on these boards is becoming tiresome. If you prefer MI and Ethan Hunt, then I am sure there are fan sites for that franchise where you can profess your devotion. Comapring the franchises is one thing, but using MI to denegrate Bond makes no sense.
    No one is denegrating Bond. I’ll take Bond anyday over M:I/Hunt. I do have to wonder though when someone claims that a subpar scene in QOS like the DC-3 dogfight is superior to the superb helicopter sequence at the end of FALLOUT. I don’t think anyone outside of this board would make such a claim. I’m sure even many Bond fans (myself included) have no choice but to admit that Bond has dropped the ball when it comes to action, compared to the M:I franchise.

    Look, let’s take spectre for example, the car chase is boring and sucks. Fair enough. But the helicopter stunt is very inventive and cool, something an audience hasn’t seen before, and that alone is cooler than anything in fallout. However saying that, the action as a whole was probably better in fallout than spectre. But now that I think about it, the plane sequence in spectre is probably better than the helicopter sequence in fallout
    I’ll grant you that the opening helicopter stunt in SP is pretty cool, though I disagree that it’s so great that it’s one of the best PTS’s (if not the best) of the entire series. I easily prefer the action in the PTS of SF. But no matter how cool that helicopter stunt is it still doesn’t hold a candle to the helicopter finale in FALLOUT. At this stage it’s pretty much the greatest action sequence I have ever seen in any movie. So freakin’ tense! Especially when Cavill takes out that huge mother of a gun and starts blasting away at Hunt and his copter! I could barely stay in my seat during that whole sequence. I went back to see the movie again JUST for that scene alone, not to say that the whole film wasn’t already incredible. Keep in mind that I say all this as a HUGE Bond fan, not M:I fan. I didn’t even care for the franchise before GHOST PROTOCOL came along.

  • Walecs wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    If you enjoy MI films, that's fine. I don't watch them, but I saw the first two. I still feel they have not been a fair comparison to Bond yet they are brought up time and again. Just because of the stunts? Well, I don't look at Bond to "out-stunt" other films. I want the action to be awesome, yes, and to fit the story and bigger is definitely not always, or even often, better.

    If you’ve only seen the first two then you really can’t judge. What’s been discussed, at length, in other topics is how the most recent three MI films compare to the most recent three Bond films . The MI films have excelled, and in turn exceeded Bond,in virtually every category, not only stunt work.

    But still ... MI films comparing to Bond films? You feel the stories and lead character are comparable enough? Just wondering. I don't care about stunts being better. I never thought Bourne or Ethan Hunt were comparable to Bond. I can enjoy some Bourne, but still Bond is different for me. I don't feel Bond films are ever threatened by MI films. I get you are saying that the MI films for you were better in several categories. We all have our own opinions, of course. I just don't get comparing them to Bond. Especially main character.

    Exactly. In Fallout everybody says Ethan Hunt is the world's only hope and he can't even settle down because if he doesn't save the world no one else can. That, to me, was beyond ridiculous and even erased any tension from the movie. If the hero is invincible suspense is reduced to zero.

    Bond is human, he has flaws and makes mistakes, and that makes him much more compelling than Ethan. In Goldfinger M tells Bond that if he can't accomplish the mission 008 will be sent on his stead. The You Know My Name song further reiterates this as Bond is "nothing so divine, just next in line". And he is not invincible, he fails. He was tricked by Vesper and couldn't protect Tracy or M. He is somewhat relatable, which is why I love Bond so much in the first place. He always reminds me that things are tough and life is hard, even to him, but that's not the reason to ever let yourself down.
    I find it odd that folks think that Bond is more human than Hunt. From his inception back in ‘96 Hunt was never presented as some suave super spy with a fancy gadget, car, quip, martini, and girl on his elbow. Yet that’s exactly how Bond was presented from the get-go with Connery back in the 60s. He was the ultimate in male fantasy wish fulfillment. The ultimate savior of the world from the ticking bomb doomsday senario! Perhaps things have changed somewhat with Craig but at its core this is what “movie Bond” was all about. Whereas Hunt is actually the guy who worries about his relationships and has all these human hangups that Bond is traditionally too cool to have.

    So in my opinion you have it backwards. But hey I don’t want my Bond to have these foibles. I want my Bond to be the ultimate suave hero, savior of the world.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Walecs wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    If you enjoy MI films, that's fine. I don't watch them, but I saw the first two. I still feel they have not been a fair comparison to Bond yet they are brought up time and again. Just because of the stunts? Well, I don't look at Bond to "out-stunt" other films. I want the action to be awesome, yes, and to fit the story and bigger is definitely not always, or even often, better.

    If you’ve only seen the first two then you really can’t judge. What’s been discussed, at length, in other topics is how the most recent three MI films compare to the most recent three Bond films . The MI films have excelled, and in turn exceeded Bond,in virtually every category, not only stunt work.

    But still ... MI films comparing to Bond films? You feel the stories and lead character are comparable enough? Just wondering. I don't care about stunts being better. I never thought Bourne or Ethan Hunt were comparable to Bond. I can enjoy some Bourne, but still Bond is different for me. I don't feel Bond films are ever threatened by MI films. I get you are saying that the MI films for you were better in several categories. We all have our own opinions, of course. I just don't get comparing them to Bond. Especially main character.

    Exactly. In Fallout everybody says Ethan Hunt is the world's only hope and he can't even settle down because if he doesn't save the world no one else can. That, to me, was beyond ridiculous and even erased any tension from the movie. If the hero is invincible suspense is reduced to zero.

    Bond is human, he has flaws and makes mistakes, and that makes him much more compelling than Ethan. In Goldfinger M tells Bond that if he can't accomplish the mission 008 will be sent on his stead. The You Know My Name song further reiterates this as Bond is "nothing so divine, just next in line". And he is not invincible, he fails. He was tricked by Vesper and couldn't protect Tracy or M. He is somewhat relatable, which is why I love Bond so much in the first place. He always reminds me that things are tough and life is hard, even to him, but that's not the reason to ever let yourself down.
    I find it odd that folks think that Bond is more human than Hunt. From his inception back in ‘96 Hunt was never presented as some suave super spy with a fancy gadget, car, quip, martini, and girl on his elbow. Yet that’s exactly how Bond was presented from the get-go with Connery back in the 60s. He was the ultimate in male fantasy wish fulfillment. The ultimate savior of the world from the ticking bomb doomsday senario! Perhaps things have changed somewhat with Craig but at its core this is what “movie Bond” was all about. Whereas Hunt is actually the guy who worries about his relationships and has all these human hangups that Bond is traditionally too cool to have.

    So in my opinion you have it backwards. But hey I don’t want my Bond to have these foibles. I want my Bond to be the ultimate suave hero, savior of the world.
    +1. Well said.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,983
    I’m in the middle of a MI marathon , starting with 3 , and I’m loving it, Hunt and Bond are two different characters but I’m a fan of both.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    Back on topic, please.
  • Blofeld0064Blofeld0064 Milford, Michigan
    edited November 2018 Posts: 243
    jake24 wrote: »
    Back on topic, please.

    No need in fighting it anymore as long as there isn't anything in the news regarding B25 everyone is going to continue being off topic. This seems to be an continuing cycle.
  • Walecs wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    If you enjoy MI films, that's fine. I don't watch them, but I saw the first two. I still feel they have not been a fair comparison to Bond yet they are brought up time and again. Just because of the stunts? Well, I don't look at Bond to "out-stunt" other films. I want the action to be awesome, yes, and to fit the story and bigger is definitely not always, or even often, better.

    If you’ve only seen the first two then you really can’t judge. What’s been discussed, at length, in other topics is how the most recent three MI films compare to the most recent three Bond films . The MI films have excelled, and in turn exceeded Bond,in virtually every category, not only stunt work.

    But still ... MI films comparing to Bond films? You feel the stories and lead character are comparable enough? Just wondering. I don't care about stunts being better. I never thought Bourne or Ethan Hunt were comparable to Bond. I can enjoy some Bourne, but still Bond is different for me. I don't feel Bond films are ever threatened by MI films. I get you are saying that the MI films for you were better in several categories. We all have our own opinions, of course. I just don't get comparing them to Bond. Especially main character.

    Exactly. In Fallout everybody says Ethan Hunt is the world's only hope and he can't even settle down because if he doesn't save the world no one else can. That, to me, was beyond ridiculous and even erased any tension from the movie. If the hero is invincible suspense is reduced to zero.

    Bond is human, he has flaws and makes mistakes, and that makes him much more compelling than Ethan. In Goldfinger M tells Bond that if he can't accomplish the mission 008 will be sent on his stead. The You Know My Name song further reiterates this as Bond is "nothing so divine, just next in line". And he is not invincible, he fails. He was tricked by Vesper and couldn't protect Tracy or M. He is somewhat relatable, which is why I love Bond so much in the first place. He always reminds me that things are tough and life is hard, even to him, but that's not the reason to ever let yourself down.
    I find it odd that folks think that Bond is more human than Hunt. From his inception back in ‘96 Hunt was never presented as some suave super spy with a fancy gadget, car, quip, martini, and girl on his elbow. Yet that’s exactly how Bond was presented from the get-go with Connery back in the 60s. He was the ultimate in male fantasy wish fulfillment. The ultimate savior of the world from the ticking bomb doomsday senario! Perhaps things have changed somewhat with Craig but at its core this is what “movie Bond” was all about. Whereas Hunt is actually the guy who worries about his relationships and has all these human hangups that Bond is traditionally too cool to have.

    So in my opinion you have it backwards. But hey I don’t want my Bond to have these foibles. I want my Bond to be the ultimate suave hero, savior of the world.
    +1. Well said.
    Going by your avatar am I correct in assuming you’re a Steve McGarrett/Jack Lord fan? I believe that’s a shot from Hawaii Five-O. My favorite TV show! :)

  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited November 2018 Posts: 2,541

    He didn't say much about bond still very secretive.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Walecs wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    If you enjoy MI films, that's fine. I don't watch them, but I saw the first two. I still feel they have not been a fair comparison to Bond yet they are brought up time and again. Just because of the stunts? Well, I don't look at Bond to "out-stunt" other films. I want the action to be awesome, yes, and to fit the story and bigger is definitely not always, or even often, better.

    If you’ve only seen the first two then you really can’t judge. What’s been discussed, at length, in other topics is how the most recent three MI films compare to the most recent three Bond films . The MI films have excelled, and in turn exceeded Bond,in virtually every category, not only stunt work.

    But still ... MI films comparing to Bond films? You feel the stories and lead character are comparable enough? Just wondering. I don't care about stunts being better. I never thought Bourne or Ethan Hunt were comparable to Bond. I can enjoy some Bourne, but still Bond is different for me. I don't feel Bond films are ever threatened by MI films. I get you are saying that the MI films for you were better in several categories. We all have our own opinions, of course. I just don't get comparing them to Bond. Especially main character.

    Exactly. In Fallout everybody says Ethan Hunt is the world's only hope and he can't even settle down because if he doesn't save the world no one else can. That, to me, was beyond ridiculous and even erased any tension from the movie. If the hero is invincible suspense is reduced to zero.

    Bond is human, he has flaws and makes mistakes, and that makes him much more compelling than Ethan. In Goldfinger M tells Bond that if he can't accomplish the mission 008 will be sent on his stead. The You Know My Name song further reiterates this as Bond is "nothing so divine, just next in line". And he is not invincible, he fails. He was tricked by Vesper and couldn't protect Tracy or M. He is somewhat relatable, which is why I love Bond so much in the first place. He always reminds me that things are tough and life is hard, even to him, but that's not the reason to ever let yourself down.
    I find it odd that folks think that Bond is more human than Hunt. From his inception back in ‘96 Hunt was never presented as some suave super spy with a fancy gadget, car, quip, martini, and girl on his elbow. Yet that’s exactly how Bond was presented from the get-go with Connery back in the 60s. He was the ultimate in male fantasy wish fulfillment. The ultimate savior of the world from the ticking bomb doomsday senario! Perhaps things have changed somewhat with Craig but at its core this is what “movie Bond” was all about. Whereas Hunt is actually the guy who worries about his relationships and has all these human hangups that Bond is traditionally too cool to have.

    So in my opinion you have it backwards. But hey I don’t want my Bond to have these foibles. I want my Bond to be the ultimate suave hero, savior of the world.
    +1. Well said.
    Going by your avatar am I correct in assuming you’re a Steve McGarrett/Jack Lord fan? I believe that’s a shot from Hawaii Five-O. My favorite TV show! :)
    Yes, sir! :D
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited November 2018 Posts: 2,541
    Bond never had much gadgets or fancy cars upuntil goldfinger as far as I remember that is why I like Dr no & FRWL more than I like goldfinger. Ghost protocol did have a lot of fancy gadgets and BMW car just like bond Ethan also fall for ladies in mi2, mi3 with his wife , mi 5 with ilsa. Another scene I remember fallout that remind me of bond was opening scene of book which was out of Thunderball.
  • Walecs wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    If you enjoy MI films, that's fine. I don't watch them, but I saw the first two. I still feel they have not been a fair comparison to Bond yet they are brought up time and again. Just because of the stunts? Well, I don't look at Bond to "out-stunt" other films. I want the action to be awesome, yes, and to fit the story and bigger is definitely not always, or even often, better.

    If you’ve only seen the first two then you really can’t judge. What’s been discussed, at length, in other topics is how the most recent three MI films compare to the most recent three Bond films . The MI films have excelled, and in turn exceeded Bond,in virtually every category, not only stunt work.

    But still ... MI films comparing to Bond films? You feel the stories and lead character are comparable enough? Just wondering. I don't care about stunts being better. I never thought Bourne or Ethan Hunt were comparable to Bond. I can enjoy some Bourne, but still Bond is different for me. I don't feel Bond films are ever threatened by MI films. I get you are saying that the MI films for you were better in several categories. We all have our own opinions, of course. I just don't get comparing them to Bond. Especially main character.

    Exactly. In Fallout everybody says Ethan Hunt is the world's only hope and he can't even settle down because if he doesn't save the world no one else can. That, to me, was beyond ridiculous and even erased any tension from the movie. If the hero is invincible suspense is reduced to zero.

    Bond is human, he has flaws and makes mistakes, and that makes him much more compelling than Ethan. In Goldfinger M tells Bond that if he can't accomplish the mission 008 will be sent on his stead. The You Know My Name song further reiterates this as Bond is "nothing so divine, just next in line". And he is not invincible, he fails. He was tricked by Vesper and couldn't protect Tracy or M. He is somewhat relatable, which is why I love Bond so much in the first place. He always reminds me that things are tough and life is hard, even to him, but that's not the reason to ever let yourself down.
    I find it odd that folks think that Bond is more human than Hunt. From his inception back in ‘96 Hunt was never presented as some suave super spy with a fancy gadget, car, quip, martini, and girl on his elbow. Yet that’s exactly how Bond was presented from the get-go with Connery back in the 60s. He was the ultimate in male fantasy wish fulfillment. The ultimate savior of the world from the ticking bomb doomsday senario! Perhaps things have changed somewhat with Craig but at its core this is what “movie Bond” was all about. Whereas Hunt is actually the guy who worries about his relationships and has all these human hangups that Bond is traditionally too cool to have.

    So in my opinion you have it backwards. But hey I don’t want my Bond to have these foibles. I want my Bond to be the ultimate suave hero, savior of the world.
    +1. Well said.
    Going by your avatar am I correct in assuming you’re a Steve McGarrett/Jack Lord fan? I believe that’s a shot from Hawaii Five-O. My favorite TV show! :)
    Yes, sir! :D
    Right ooooon, bruddah! :) Book ‘em Danno!

  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    I don't think anybody really thinks that MI as a whole is better than the Bond series. It clearly isn't.

    That being said, Fallout was a much more enjoyable watch than Spectre. It had a nice carefree vibe and a whiff of the spectacle that, in my opinion, Bond has been missing since Casino Royale.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    I just don’t think that bond has dropped the ball with action. I’ve made myself very vocal on this forum about my dislike of the direction of the series after QOS, particularly in the writing department, however, one thing that I can’t fault is he inventive action sequences that these guys come up with. The idea to have a plane chasing a car and then get the wings clipped off is really insane, it’s a spectacle, something people haven’t seen or even dreamed of before, and that level of creativity is what makes bond the best at what they do.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    I just don’t think that bond has dropped the ball with action. I’ve made myself very vocal on this forum about my dislike of the direction of the series after QOS, particularly in the writing department, however, one thing that I can’t fault is he inventive action sequences that these guys come up with. The idea to have a plane chasing a car and then get the wings clipped off is really insane, it’s a spectacle, something people haven’t seen or even dreamed of before, and that level of creativity is what makes bond the best at what they do.

    I agree, the idea in principle is excellent. But was the execution really that good? I found that entire sequence underwhelming. I know that there is an often felt sentiment that Menses wasn't particularly good at shooting action scenes, and this would be a fairly good example.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited November 2018 Posts: 2,541
    I liked skyfall as a whole that film has one of the best performances in bond series by M , Silva, bond. After pts bond was supposed to look weak so naturally we couldn't have some spectacular action sequences but there was no excuse for Spectre. If spectre was directed by someone else I am sure action sequences would have been executed better than what we got.
  • Posts: 4,619
    octofinger wrote: »
    Outstanding. For several reasons, I really hope this film does well. I'd like EON to have a win, of course, but I also think it's in all our best interests to have the genre doing well.

    Just the opposite. If the film does well financially then expect the Broccolis to be occupied adapting the next three novels in the series, for the good part of the next decade. We'd be lucky to get 2 Bond films before 2030. No thanks.
    A friendly reminder that Barbara and Micky G won't be involved in Bond 26.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,539
    Gregg Wilson has been "interning" and will replace his father for 26. He will be producing future EoN Bond films with Barbara at that point.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited November 2018 Posts: 2,541
    peter wrote: »
    Gregg Wilson has been "interning" and will replace his father for 26. He will be producing future EoN Bond films with Barbara at that point.

    So that's a good thing I guess
  • Posts: 6,677
    peter wrote: »
    Gregg Wilson has been "interning" and will replace his father for 26. He will be producing future EoN Bond films with Barbara at that point.

    Yes, emphasis on "with Barbara", fortunately. The lady stays! ;)
  • Posts: 5,767
    peter wrote: »
    Gregg Wilson has been "interning" and will replace his father for 26. He will be producing future EoN Bond films with Barbara at that point.
    That is not entirely surprising, but nevertheless very interesting to get something like a confirmation.

  • edited November 2018 Posts: 11,425
    Roadphill wrote: »
    I just don’t think that bond has dropped the ball with action. I’ve made myself very vocal on this forum about my dislike of the direction of the series after QOS, particularly in the writing department, however, one thing that I can’t fault is he inventive action sequences that these guys come up with. The idea to have a plane chasing a car and then get the wings clipped off is really insane, it’s a spectacle, something people haven’t seen or even dreamed of before, and that level of creativity is what makes bond the best at what they do.

    I agree, the idea in principle is excellent. But was the execution really that good? I found that entire sequence underwhelming. I know that there is an often felt sentiment that Menses wasn't particularly good at shooting action scenes, and this would be a fairly good example.

    The action in SF and SP is poorly executed. But it's also accompanied by some of the weakest musical compositions in the history of the franchise. Look to the score for a large part of why SF and SP are just so dreary and slog to get through. Newman writes music to send people to sleep or for long journeys in elevators.

    It takes real mediocrity to write such bad scores but now Newman is gone I think the action is going to come across infinitely better.

    Plus Fukunaga has demonstrated that he directs action brilliantly. I hope he doesn't feel a need to go for gimmicky or CGI 'stunts' like Mendes did and instead focuses on beautifully choreographed and filmed solid action that is integral to the plot.
Sign In or Register to comment.