No Time To Die: Production Diary

1106910701072107410752507

Comments

  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    QBranch wrote: »
    Norway is that gonna happen.

    It Canada happen.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,575
    Sorry folks. Seems I started something I can't Finnish.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    At least France Oberhauser will be back.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    Come on, guys. Back on Topeka.
  • Posts: 17,756
    Czech-ing through these comments is great fun! :-D
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Spain in the arse.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited October 2017 Posts: 4,585
    nikos78 wrote: »
    Having seen both "'71" and most of Villeneuve's filmography (including "BR 2049") I'm inclined to say that I'd prefer Demange for B25. Villeneuve is a great visual master but I feel that with him we'd get more of the Mendes style: this kind of pristine but overly rigid and sluggishly edited compositions that look stunning but are best fitted to a period drama, rather than an action movie- even one that wants to take itself seriously.

    My ideal example of Bond taking itself seriously (not that it has to, but since the Craig era demands so) is Casino Royale. Campbell for me is the ideal Bond director 'cause he knows how to balance character, plot and filmic energy- the latter of which I felt was missing from both SF ans SP. Since we 've got a specific name list to speculate on, I feel Demange has got what it takes to bring back the nerve and energy needed, plus a more naturalistic visual style that would be very welcome by me.

    OK. A few points, here...

    No offense to Demange, but it is highly unlikely that a director with an unproven track record, who has never tackled a production like a Bond film, will be handed the reigns when it is DC's last film and when a brand new distributor is on board. Not gonna happen.

    The elevation of Campbell into a mythic figure is really puzzling. I would say to Bond fans who are clamoring for Campbell to be careful what you wish for. CR is a great film. But it is a flawed film and has not aged well at all. In terms of production design, SF and SP beat it by a wide margin, and I suspect both films will age much better. Let's not forget that CR includes the following:

    An overly long parkour scene that also borders on nonsense. Thanks, Martin.
    An embassy set that is so fake it looks better suited for 60s filmmaking. Thanks, Martin.
    A Ford Fusion ad; one of the worst filmed vehicle shots in Bond history. Thanks, Martin.
    An attempt to make downtown Prague look like downtown Miami by placing a few palm trees along the street. Ugh!. Thanks, Martin.
    An overly long Miami airport action sequence that includes a 747 taking out police cars. Thanks, Martin.
    The worst line and line delivery during DC's tenure: "I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood." Ugh. Thanks, Martin.
    And it would seem that in order to include his drawn-out action sequences, he cut much of the material for the PTS. This was actually BETTER:



    I am not trying to berate Campbell here. But the affection bestowed his way is really out of proportion to what he brought to the table. He was the first director in about forty years to be working with Fleming's material. That's a huge benefit. In fact, almost all of the above-mentioned issues occur in the first half of the film, NOT based on the novel. So what does that say?

    I say leave Campbell where he is.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    All of your points are completely subjective (I only agree with the Ford ad, personally) but I do believe that Campbell has had his two. Nor is he a guarantee of success (have you seen his other films?).
  • Posts: 17,756
    If Campbell ever does another one, fine. If not, I'm fine with that as well, personally. At least you know what to expect – which can also be a positive thing.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    jake24 wrote: »
    All of your points are completely subjective (I only agree with the Ford ad, personally) but I do believe that Campbell has had his two. Nor is he a guarantee of success (have you seen his other films?).

    I love No Escape. (Any other fans around here?)
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    mattjoes wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    All of your points are completely subjective (I only agree with the Ford ad, personally) but I do believe that Campbell has had his two. Nor is he a guarantee of success (have you seen his other films?).

    I love No Escape. (Any other fans around here?)
    Campbell didn't direct No Escape. But I do really like the film!
  • Posts: 150
    TripAces wrote: »
    nikos78 wrote: »
    Having seen both "'71" and most of Villeneuve's filmography (including "BR 2049") I'm inclined to say that I'd prefer Demange for B25. Villeneuve is a great visual master but I feel that with him we'd get more of the Mendes style: this kind of pristine but overly rigid and sluggishly edited compositions that look stunning but are best fitted to a period drama, rather than an action movie- even one that wants to take itself seriously.

    My ideal example of Bond taking itself seriously (not that it has to, but since the Craig era demands so) is Casino Royale. Campbell for me is the ideal Bond director 'cause he knows how to balance character, plot and filmic energy- the latter of which I felt was missing from both SF ans SP. Since we 've got a specific name list to speculate on, I feel Demange has got what it takes to bring back the nerve and energy needed, plus a more naturalistic visual style that would be very welcome by me.

    OK. A few points, here...

    No offense to Demange, but it is highly unlikely that a director with an unproven track record, who has never tackled a production like a Bond film, will be handed the reigns when it is DC's last film and when a brand new distributor is on board. Not gonna happen.

    The elevation of Campbell into a mythic figure is really puzzling. I would say to Bond fans who are clamoring for Campbell to be careful what you wish for. CR is a great film. But it is a flawed film and has not aged well at all. In terms of production design, SF and SP beat it by a wide margin, and I suspect both films will age much better. Let's not forget that CR includes the following:

    An overly long parkour scene that also borders on nonsense. Thanks, Martin.
    An embassy set that is so fake it looks better suited for 60s filmmaking. Thanks, Martin.
    A Ford Fusion ad; one of the worst filmed vehicle shots in Bond history. Thanks, Martin.
    An attempt to make downtown Prague look like downtown Miami by placing a few palm trees along the street. Ugh!. Thanks, Martin.
    An overly long Miami airport action sequence that includes a 747 taking out police cars. Thanks, Martin.
    The worst line and line delivery during DC's tenure: "I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood." Ugh. Thanks, Martin.
    And it would seem that in order to include his drawn-out action sequences, he cut much of the material for the PTS. This was actually BETTER:



    I am not trying to berate Campbell here. But the affection bestowed his way is really out of proportion to what he brought to the table. He was the first director in about forty years to be working with Fleming's material. That's a huge benefit. In fact, almost all of the above-mentioned issues occur in the first half of the film, NOT based on the novel. So what does that say?

    I say leave Campbell where he is.

    Well, respectfully I guess we agree to disagree. I consider your points barely noticeable details. Campbell proved his skills long before he handled Fleming material, with "Goldeneye". Moreover, my point is that it was exactly his handling thar brought that material alive so effectively. Equal emphasis on plot and action and exemplary internal and external rhythm of shots, something that Mendes lacked (DB10 reveal, anyone?). Anyway, I guess that's all pointless since he's not doing the next one.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    1-The Mask of Zorro
    2-Vertical Limit
    3-Edge of Darkness
    4-The Professionals (TV Series, 5 episodes)

    Sounds plausible enough for me to want him to come back.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    jake24 wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    All of your points are completely subjective (I only agree with the Ford ad, personally) but I do believe that Campbell has had his two. Nor is he a guarantee of success (have you seen his other films?).

    I love No Escape. (Any other fans around here?)
    Campbell didn't direct No Escape. But I do really like the film!

    The other No Escape, the one starring Ray Liotta.

    (Though I do love the one you mention, as well.)
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    mattjoes wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    All of your points are completely subjective (I only agree with the Ford ad, personally) but I do believe that Campbell has had his two. Nor is he a guarantee of success (have you seen his other films?).

    I love No Escape. (Any other fans around here?)
    Campbell didn't direct No Escape. But I do really like the film!

    The other No Escape, the one starring Ray Liotta.

    (Though I do love the one you mention, as well.)
    Ah, I haven't seen that.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    edited October 2017 Posts: 308
    TripAces wrote: »
    nikos78 wrote: »
    Having seen both "'71" and most of Villeneuve's filmography (including "BR 2049") I'm inclined to say that I'd prefer Demange for B25. Villeneuve is a great visual master but I feel that with him we'd get more of the Mendes style: this kind of pristine but overly rigid and sluggishly edited compositions that look stunning but are best fitted to a period drama, rather than an action movie- even one that wants to take itself seriously.

    My ideal example of Bond taking itself seriously (not that it has to, but since the Craig era demands so) is Casino Royale. Campbell for me is the ideal Bond director 'cause he knows how to balance character, plot and filmic energy- the latter of which I felt was missing from both SF ans SP. Since we 've got a specific name list to speculate on, I feel Demange has got what it takes to bring back the nerve and energy needed, plus a more naturalistic visual style that would be very welcome by me.

    OK. A few points, here...

    No offense to Demange, but it is highly unlikely that a director with an unproven track record, who has never tackled a production like a Bond film, will be handed the reigns when it is DC's last film and when a brand new distributor is on board. Not gonna happen.

    The elevation of Campbell into a mythic figure is really puzzling. I would say to Bond fans who are clamoring for Campbell to be careful what you wish for. CR is a great film. But it is a flawed film and has not aged well at all. In terms of production design, SF and SP beat it by a wide margin, and I suspect both films will age much better. Let's not forget that CR includes the following:

    An overly long parkour scene that also borders on nonsense. Thanks, Martin.
    An embassy set that is so fake it looks better suited for 60s filmmaking. Thanks, Martin.
    A Ford Fusion ad; one of the worst filmed vehicle shots in Bond history. Thanks, Martin.
    An attempt to make downtown Prague look like downtown Miami by placing a few palm trees along the street. Ugh!. Thanks, Martin.
    An overly long Miami airport action sequence that includes a 747 taking out police cars. Thanks, Martin.
    The worst line and line delivery during DC's tenure: "I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood." Ugh. Thanks, Martin.
    And it would seem that in order to include his drawn-out action sequences, he cut much of the material for the PTS. This was actually BETTER:

    -YouTube extended CR PTS-

    I am not trying to berate Campbell here. But the affection bestowed his way is really out of proportion to what he brought to the table. He was the first director in about forty years to be working with Fleming's material. That's a huge benefit. In fact, almost all of the above-mentioned issues occur in the first half of the film, NOT based on the novel. So what does that say?

    I say leave Campbell where he is.

    I respectfully disagree with just about everything you've said about Campbell / CR, except for the Ford bit indeed - thanks TripAces. It always reminds me of a commercial too. I think the film has aged great thus far.

    It's one of the entries I rewatch the most. I prefer the PTS that was actually used. Also - the special effects are very good (Venice collapsing house, for example) and still look good in my opinion. Better than some of the effects I've seen in later films.

    I'd love to see Campbell return. I don't think he will. Campbell may not be a guaranteed success with all of his films, but he sure has a pretty great track record when it comes to Bond.
  • Posts: 386
    Just on the whole tone thing, I agree that Craig shouldn't be expected to deliver quips and lark about. Not his bag.

    What I think you can do with his last entry is strip out the turgid personal stuff that has seriously hampered the last two movies.

    CR played the emotion card and won spectacularly. You can only do that every so often with Bond.

    QoS was clearly designed as a brutal antidote and with a little bit more script development might have joined CR on the podium of Bond classics.

    The introduction of Mendes triggered massive box office but pulled Bond away from meaningful interaction with his dangerous world. These films float along like handsome dreams. Give me the more immediate, visceral vibe of the Campbell / Forster double any day of the week.

    So what tone would suit Craig best for B25?

    I think he needs a solid spy story first and foremost. No Bond needs an engaging, gripping yarn more than Craig right now.

    If the writers were limited to watching one past entry for inspiration, I'm thinking the chilly, efficient vibe of FYEO.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I'm not bothered about Campbell returning but CR is still the best Craig entry and I couldn't disagree with @TripAces bar the Ford commercial if I tried.

    The Parkour sequence is one of the crowning glories of the Craig era, not only is it one of the best action sequences of the series but it's also one of the greatest of the 21st century.

    SF & SP might have better production values (and I'm a big fan of SF) but neither is as memorable and iconic as Casino Royale.

    This is the bar that DV or whoever gets to helm Bond 25 needs to meet.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Shardlake wrote: »
    I'm not bothered about Campbell returning but CR is still the best Craig entry and I couldn't disagree with @TripAces bar the Ford commercial if I tried.

    The Parkour sequence is one of the crowning glories of the Craig era, not only is it one of the best action sequences of the series but it's also one of the greatest of the 21st century.

    SF & SP might have better production values (and I'm a big fan of SF) but neither is as memorable and iconic as Casino Royale.

    This is the bar that DV or whoever gets to helm Bond 25 needs to meet.
    Fully agreed. CR remains the benchmark of the Craig era. A clear cut Fleming based spy thriller with little of the pretension that followed (despite my appreciation for SF and recognition of its reputation as a Mendes Bond drama par exellence).

    Having just seen BR2049 I can pretty much envision what Villeneuve would deliver, should he get the assignment. It will thematic but focused on character. More SF than CR but with his well earned reputation for creating rich characters. He will be a worthy successor to Mendes.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited October 2017 Posts: 15,423
    I think you chaps are giving the "Fleming material" a bit too much credit. Royale was very good and well thought out because they actually have submitted a great deal of thought to it. When you think about it, only a portion of the premise Fleming provided for the novel was injected into the film. Every scene was altered, dialogues were heavily rewritten hardly any significant line spoken in the book made it to the film. Only the premise was there, and that in the latter half of the film.

    Royale remains the only decent Craig era film because of its structure. Its follow-up was a mess the moment it was pitched as a direct sequel, and an homage to The Bourne Supremacy/Ultimatum (that shakycam and choppy cut'n'paste editing ruined the film). It could have been a bigger adventure with more to see in vain, but failed to deliver the promise Royale gave us at the very end.

    Now, with Skyfall, despite my hatred of that film, some things did feel refreshing, yet it was uninspired, relying on its past by inserting easter eggs from the past of the franchise, and downright copying the Christopher Nolan enigma of melodrama storytelling.

    I needn't say anything about Spectre because nothing felt consistent with that film. But, I loved it mainly because it brought the old Bond tropes back, and the Bond persona from the Connery/Moore/Brosnan era made it to the final film with the attitude of the character. But, that doesn't really say much about it. Other than the pre-title sequence (which, in my opinion, is the best Bond PTS right next to Goldfinger), the whole film was mediocre at best. At best.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,722
    TripAces wrote: »

    But it is a flawed film and has not aged well at all. In terms of production design, SF and SP beat it by a wide margin, and I suspect both films will age much better.

    An overly long parkour scene that also borders on nonsense. Thanks, Martin.
    An embassy set that is so fake it looks better suited for 60s filmmaking. Thanks, Martin.
    An attempt to make downtown Prague look like downtown Miami by placing a few palm trees along the street. Ugh!. Thanks, Martin.
    An overly long Miami airport action sequence that includes a 747 taking out police cars. Thanks, Martin.
    The worst line and line delivery during DC's tenure: "I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood." Ugh. Thanks, Martin.
    And it would seem that in order to include his drawn-out action sequences, he cut much of the material for the PTS.

    These are the ramblings of a madman
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    TripAces wrote: »

    But it is a flawed film and has not aged well at all. In terms of production design, SF and SP beat it by a wide margin, and I suspect both films will age much better.

    An overly long parkour scene that also borders on nonsense. Thanks, Martin.
    An embassy set that is so fake it looks better suited for 60s filmmaking. Thanks, Martin.
    An attempt to make downtown Prague look like downtown Miami by placing a few palm trees along the street. Ugh!. Thanks, Martin.
    An overly long Miami airport action sequence that includes a 747 taking out police cars. Thanks, Martin.
    The worst line and line delivery during DC's tenure: "I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood." Ugh. Thanks, Martin.
    And it would seem that in order to include his drawn-out action sequences, he cut much of the material for the PTS.

    These are the ramblings of a madman

    Good morning @Major_Boothroyd!

    You must get that all the time.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,722
    mattjoes wrote: »

    These are the ramblings of a madman.

    Good morning @Major_Boothroyd!

    You must get that all the time.

    Frequently!

    *slams the Lotus door as 007 drives off*

  • Posts: 17,756
    Where hasn't CR aged well? I know there are not many smartphones around in that film, but that's about it for me. For fun I just watched the parkour scene on Youtube, and it looked as good as always.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Where hasn't CR aged well? I know there are not many smartphones around in that film, but that's about it for me. For fun I just watched the parkour scene on Youtube, and it looked as good as always.
    Hear hear!
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    Yes, CR is still the best of the Craig era.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    While it certainly isn't my favourite, no doubt CR is the greatest of all the Craig films in his tenure as Bond.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    edited October 2017 Posts: 3,675
    CR is perfect.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    CR is perfect.
    Some bits are too emotional for my preference, but yes... It is the highest quality of the Craig films in narrative.
Sign In or Register to comment.