No Time To Die: Production Diary

11141151171191202507

Comments

  • tanaka123 wrote: »
    Do people know the difference between net and gross? Do I need to explain? Do people study economics?

    Well, we are talking about a science where people think an expert's advice is "you need twice the budget + marketing to do some benefit". The real expert's advice is "I don't know" :)
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 2,015
    jake24 wrote: »
    Good points. I've been wondering that for a while.

    The leaks will tell you what some producers think of the fans' reaction.
    IIRC, we're supposed to love the idea that Bond and Blofeld were brothers :)
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    jake24 wrote: »
    Good points. I've been wondering that for a while.

    The leaks will tell you what some producers think of the fans' reaction.
    IIRC, we're supposed to love the idea that Bond and Blofeld were brothers :)

    You have to be joking? I haven't studied the leaks in depth but please tell me there's not an e-mail from EON to Sony saying 'We've just come up with a killer twist that is going to have the fans wetting their knickers in excitement'?

    Mind you the alternative is just as troubling. If they said 'We've got this twist which is a total disgrace and all the fans will despise it but f**k em we start shooting tomorrow' it suggests either utter contempt or total incompetence.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,116
    Just sad. After such a high and confidence in the sustainability of the series with SF even if you didn't like that film to everything in question now is just disheartening.

    During the 50th anniversary Bond could do no wrong and everyone seemed pumped for the future.

    Now is like hope or don't hope Mickey Mouse gets Bond or wow Batman would have been an awesome Bond. Yea yea so would have that hobbit or Yoki or Nad Max..

    It's just eh ~X(
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 4,325
    Yes DC's Bonds have been hugely financially successful, but I do think they need to think long and hard about the direction they want to take from here on in. General audiences reacted very positively to the formula shakeup and quality of Skyfall and were less so with the return to type with Spectre. I think it's fair to say that Spectre's success is on the coattails of Skyfall. I feel that if they continue in a Spectre like trajectory general audiences will get bored of Mr Bond and box offices returns will go back to between say about $300-500 million.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    It's difficult to go back to formula once you've shaken it up yourself. I think some members of the audience (count me among them) will be less forgiving of that now in comparison to how they may have felt during the Brosnan era.

    I think they just need to focus on good storytelling. That's what some of us have been advocating strongly on here for some time. It really shouldn't be all that difficult, and yet it apparently is. They also have to rein in some of their directors, who have had a tendency recently to go on self aggrandizing tangents.
  • Posts: 1,631
    I don't think the formula (as much as I despise the checklist approach that EON has often taken) is what made Spectre "underperform" with audiences. I think it just boils down to it not being a particularly good movie.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    For me, it was the combination of 'too obvious' and 'poorly done' formula (the worst kind) in combination with poor story that disappointed. I realize others didn't see it that way, which is fine.

    As I said in my previous post, I think the director needs to take most of the blame, because I believe he is the one who had tangents in mind regarding relationships that shouldn't have been there etc. rather than focusing the writers on keeping the plot & action simple, direct and yet exciting. Campbell is a master at doing this.
  • Posts: 1,092
    I disagree. SP, IMO, was a shock to audiences who are not familiar with "formula" Bond. With the dawn of the Craig era, a series of 3 Bond films highly different from the 20 that came before them, common audience members became accustomed to Bond films being a certain way. They were stripped down, less "normal" Bond films. Then when SP came in and went back to the cliched Bond of the past a lot of people didn't know how to react.

    When was the last time a Bond film like this came out? TWINE? TND? 20 years almost. Most younger audience members don't get it. Many negative reviews about SP went along the lines of saying it wasn't like SF, didn't fit Craig's Bond, etc.
  • Posts: 1,631
    SF is really the only DC film that is all that different from the majority of its predecessors. Both CR and QOS rely on the same formula that was the foundation of the Brosnan films. Really, with only a few tweaks to the dialogue, CR could have been a Brosnan film and not been all that different. They do subvert the checklist in CR a bit, but it's still very much there.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I can't speak for the general public. I can only speak for myself (as a life long fan of the series, including some of the most formulaic entries). To me, this is not about it being formula. Just poorly done formula. Or formula that has been done better before. There is a difference, and I realize it's in the eye of the beholder.

    I felt the same way about TND when it was released to be honest. Been there done that, bigger and better before I felt at the time. Having said that, my appreciation of that film has increased recently, post-SP, because I believe it does the formula better than the latest film.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    I can't speak for the general public. I can only speak for myself (as a life long fan of the series, including some of the most formulaic entries). To me, this is not about it being formula. Just poorly done formula. Or formula that has been done better before. There is a difference, and I realize it's in the eye of the beholder.

    I felt the same way about TND when it was released to be honest. Been there done that, bigger and better before I felt at the time. Having said that, my appreciation of that film has increased recently, post-SP, because I believe it does the formula better than the latest film.

    Yes I agree. The audience old and new pretty much knows the formula so don't think that's a shock. The execution was what failed.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I can't speak for the general public. I can only speak for myself (as a life long fan of the series, including some of the most formulaic entries). To me, this is not about it being formula. Just poorly done formula. Or formula that has been done better before. There is a difference, and I realize it's in the eye of the beholder.

    I felt the same way about TND when it was released to be honest. Been there done that, bigger and better before I felt at the time. Having said that, my appreciation of that film has increased recently, post-SP, because I believe it does the formula better than the latest film.

    Yes I agree. The audience old and new pretty much knows the formula so don't think that's a shock. The execution was what failed.

    There's not a problem in doing the formula as this is what has kept people coming back for 50 years.

    The problem is Mendes confuses 'doing the Bond formula' with 'fanboy homages'.

    Take the Rog era. They recycle the same formula ad infinitum but the difference they don't directly copy from earlier films.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Rogers era is the only era I feel that had a consistent tone & quality among the films.

    Even AVTAK is a decent enough film.

    LALD, TSWLM, MR & FYEO are all great films.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Tuck91 wrote: »

    TSWLM, MR, FYEO & OP are all great films.

    Fixed.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Rogers era is the only era I feel that had a consistent tone & quality among the films.

    Even AVTAK is a decent enough film.

    LALD, TSWLM, MR & FYEO are all great films.

    I don't. I think the further along the Moore era gets, the more comedic it gets. He's pretty cold and ruthless throughout a large portion of LALD and TMWTGG.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited April 2016 Posts: 9,117
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Rogers era is the only era I feel that had a consistent tone & quality among the films.

    Even AVTAK is a decent enough film.

    LALD, TSWLM, MR & FYEO are all great films.

    I don't. I think the further along the Moore era gets, the more comedic it gets. He's pretty cold and ruthless throughout a large portion of LALD and TMWTGG.

    JW (twice), feeble gags throughout the boat chase (wedding, guy driving the oyster van, comedy sheriff falling in the water), sumo wrestlers arse, kung fu schoolgirls etc etc.

    These 'comedy' movements are no better or worse than any others in the Rog era and just as plentiful.

    He's also pretty cold and ruthless in as large portions of FYEO and OP.
  • Posts: 2,483
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Yes DC's Bonds have been hugely financially successful, but I do think they need to think long and hard about the direction they want to take from here on in. General audiences reacted very positively to the formula shakeup and quality of Skyfall and were less so with the return to type with Spectre. I think it's fair to say that Spectre's success is on the coattails of Skyfall. I feel that if they continue in a Spectre like trajectory general audiences will get bored of Mr Bond and box offices returns will go back to between say about $300-500 million.

    How, exactly, did SF "shake up" the formula?

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,043
    Skyfall's follow up needed to return to more a formula the problem is that SP wanted it's cake and to eat it as well. Mendes stuck all those homages in but couldn't help but push the personal angle again with Bond.

    Why not go for a personal angle with other characters in the film instead of Bond, SF should have been a full stop with Bond's past.

    As I said before if they wanted a deeper element they should have looked into the past of White and ESB instead that would have made much more sense than the half baked foster brother bollocks we got.

    Still goes down as the single worst crime in the series for me, SP was particularly pedestrian at times but this element really marks it out as something that can't be pushed aside like so many of it's champions would like us to do, it's left this era with a real awful legacy.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Shardlake wrote: »

    As I said before if they wanted a deeper element they should have looked into the past of White and ESB instead that would have made much more sense than the half baked foster brother bollocks we got.

    Still goes down as the single worst crime in the series for me, SP was particularly pedestrian at times but this element really marks it out as something that can't be pushed aside like so many of it's champions would like us to do, it's left this era with a real awful legacy.

    Absofuckinglutey.

    The double take pigeon? The slide whistle? The CGI tsunami? Yep they're all shit and embarassing but they can be forgotten in an instant and don't have any bearing on the rest of the film.

    Stepbrothergate on the other hand not only pisses on the character of Blofeld but is also not something you can just forget straight after it has happened because it is integral to the plot. And not content with impacting on the film its in it also leaves a legacy that when Blofeld returns (which clearly he will) the scriptwriter surely has to address it in some way?

    Is it possible we can just forget it ever happened and have Blofeld and Bond putting on faux chumminess a la Charles Gray without any mention required of the past or are they going to have to finish what they started?

    Although does Bond even give the slightest toss about getting revenge for Hannes Oberhauser as in the book because so far he has had no reaction to Franz murdering him? He barely gives a shrug that the guy is responsible for Vesper and M either.

    The whole thing is a shocking mess and I genuinely feel sorry for the scriptwriter who ends up with job of trying to unpick it all and turn it to something even vaguely coherent.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    You two are priceless.
    Stepbrothergate is a mere look at a photo and one dialogue by Waltz, that could very well be omitted with not much consequence to the movie.
    Your darling Skyfall on the other hand produces various plotgates of gigantic proportions that seriously hurt the movie.
    It's hilarious how you praise SF to Heaven and ridicule SP for some minor issues.
    Truly hilarious.
    You are just disappointed and hurt by the fact that EON didn't take Skyfall as the blueprint for anything to follow, and probably even more by the fact that Spectre was almost as successful as Skyfall.
    Deal with the fact, that enough people liked SP and many even are glad EON went back to the formula that was established and worked for 40 years.
    Skyfall was, like QOS a one-time experiment. Both worked in their ways but both shouldn't be repeated.
  • Posts: 832
    They don't seem to be too ambitious at continuing the series. The fact that the studio is devoted to only ONE film series, and is only able to produce a film every four years raises some serious questions.
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Skyfall's follow up needed to return to more a formula the problem is that SP wanted it's cake and to eat it as well. Mendes stuck all those homages in but couldn't help but push the personal angle again with Bond.

    Why not go for a personal angle with other characters in the film instead of Bond, SF should have been a full stop with Bond's past.

    As I said before if they wanted a deeper element they should have looked into the past of White and ESB instead that would have made much more sense than the half baked foster brother bollocks we got.

    Still goes down as the single worst crime in the series for me, SP was particularly pedestrian at times but this element really marks it out as something that can't be pushed aside like so many of it's champions would like us to do, it's left this era with a real awful legacy.

    Its really dumb, but I really don't think its that big of a deal.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited April 2016 Posts: 9,117
    You two are priceless.
    Stepbrothergate is a mere look at a photo and one dialogue by Waltz, that could very well be omitted with not much consequence to the movie.
    Your darling Skyfall on the other hand produces various plotgates of gigantic proportions that seriously hurt the movie.
    It's hilarious how you praise SF to Heaven and ridicule SP for some minor issues.
    Truly hilarious.
    You are just disappointed and hurt by the fact that EON didn't take Skyfall as the blueprint for anything to follow, and probably even more by the fact that Spectre was almost as successful as Skyfall.
    Deal with the fact, that enough people liked SP and many even are glad EON went back to the formula that was established and worked for 40 years.
    Skyfall was, like QOS a one-time experiment. Both worked in their ways but both shouldn't be repeated.

    This is a bit rich coming from someone who can't type more than three words without being able to resist the urge to insert the phrase 'SP is the best film ever made'.

    Feel free to quote me praising 'my darling SF to heaven' if you can. You might find it easier to find me slating the ludicrous improbability of Silva's clairvoyant plan which I have done numerous times down the years.

    I enjoy SP and it's certainly top half (possibly too 10) but that doesn't stop me employing my critical faculties to point out its flaws - which are many.

    Unlike you who, in your position on your knees as SP's fluffer, can't stop telling us how phenomenal it is in every single post you make.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Yes DC's Bonds have been hugely financially successful, but I do think they need to think long and hard about the direction they want to take from here on in. General audiences reacted very positively to the formula shakeup and quality of Skyfall and were less so with the return to type with Spectre. I think it's fair to say that Spectre's success is on the coattails of Skyfall. I feel that if they continue in a Spectre like trajectory general audiences will get bored of Mr Bond and box offices returns will go back to between say about $300-500 million.

    How, exactly, did SF "shake up" the formula?

    Swilring it round and then firing it like a howitzer
  • Posts: 4,325
    You two are priceless.
    Stepbrothergate is a mere look at a photo and one dialogue by Waltz, that could very well be omitted with not much consequence to the movie.
    Your darling Skyfall on the other hand produces various plotgates of gigantic proportions that seriously hurt the movie.
    It's hilarious how you praise SF to Heaven and ridicule SP for some minor issues.
    Truly hilarious.
    You are just disappointed and hurt by the fact that EON didn't take Skyfall as the blueprint for anything to follow, and probably even more by the fact that Spectre was almost as successful as Skyfall.
    Deal with the fact, that enough people liked SP and many even are glad EON went back to the formula that was established and worked for 40 years.
    Skyfall was, like QOS a one-time experiment. Both worked in their ways but both shouldn't be repeated.

    I agree.

  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    edited April 2016 Posts: 1,261
    html5
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    Fluffer!
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @TheWizardOfIce

    It's actually only every other post I tell you how phenomenal Spectre is.
    And by the way, without fluffers there would be no porn at all. So I take it as a compliment. Somebody has to do it :))
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,423
    Murdock wrote: »
    Top 5 composer wish list.

    Joe Kramer (MI: Rogue Nation)
    Michael Giacchino (The Incredibles, MI3/Ghost Protocol)
    Henry Jackman & Matthew Margeson (Kingsman)
    Alan Silvestri (Judge Dredd, Back to the Future Trilogy, The Avengers)
    Danny Elfman (Batman, Mission: Impossible)

    And if none of them accept the job, David Arnold.

    I've been championing Giacchino for the Bond job for ages. He worked on the scores for the Medal of Honour games on the PS1, he done a bang up job on the T.V series Alias, plus, that scene in Up where the two progess through their lives, with no music... Really choked me up. And I'm a cynical old despot!


  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    @TheWizardOfIce

    It's actually only every other post I tell you how phenomenal Spectre is.
    And by the way, without fluffers there would be no porn at all. So I take it as a compliment. Somebody has to do it :))

    Except the final act of SP is akin to Razzle's Reader's Wives section - yes it just about does the job but afterwards you feel ashamed of yourself for enjoying it even slightly.
Sign In or Register to comment.