› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…12421243124512471248…2507

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    talos7 wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Why does everyone think Hinx is alive?

    I think the possibility exist because we didn't see a dead body.
    Yes, being yanked out of a train by a rope tied around your neck and throat would kill most people, but Hinx is a Bond villain so all bets are off concerning his death being a certainty

    It's tough to rule anyone's survivability out after Bond got shot twice and fell hundreds of feet, landing headfirst in water.

    Hell, maybe Dario will return in B25, bandaged together in a million tiny pieces.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    echo wrote: »
    Why does everyone think Hinx is alive?

    Wishful thinking/hoping it leads to semi-adaptation of You Only Live Twice novel/feeling it might make Bond 25 more interesting.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    I hope Hinx didn't make it... Let's move on and get back to the more grounded battles Craig has had (his first and second kill in CR; Dimitrios, Carlos, stairwell fight, Mitchell, Slade, Patrice x 2, Silva's thugs, even Sciarra, and assassinating SPECTRE's thugs to save Donna Lucia). They're more exciting than trying to create the magic of the past SUPER-HENCHMAN (Odd Job and Jaws (13 years apart)).

    DC's Bond is more comfortable fighting the realistic psychopaths-- come up with a modern-day Red Grant, for example...
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I hope he does come back. He was the only villain who Craig's Bond couldn't easily defeat.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Murdock wrote: »
    I hope he does come back. He was the only villain who Craig's Bond couldn't easily defeat.
    My thoughts exactly, Captain!
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,206
    Murdock wrote: »
    I hope he does come back. He was the only villain who Craig's Bond couldn't easily defeat.

    I do as well and can see him with a horribly scared throat as a result of being violently yanked off of the train; he has also been left mute and is none too happy about it.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    talos7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    I hope he does come back. He was the only villain who Craig's Bond couldn't easily defeat.

    I do as well and can see him with a horribly scared throat as a result of being violently yanked off of the train; he has also been left mute and is none too happy about it.
    I can imagine Bond saying "He was always lost for words, anyway.", right after killing him.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,206
    That would work.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    This might add fuel to the tabloid fire re a female spin off or the whole female Bond nonsense.
    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jan/01/women-fronted-films-top-three-highest-grossing-2017
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    I hope he does come back. He was the only villain who Craig's Bond couldn't easily defeat.
    My thoughts exactly, Captain!

    Mine too.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,466
    The idea of making James Bond a woman is just ridiculous. Create a separate series for that kind of thing. I'm definitely concerned for the future of this franchise if they plan on drastically changing the idea of James Bond just to be PC and fit the times or whatever. His main character - male, misogynistic spy - should always remain. That is James Bond.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    I think he should be a dog. James Woof!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    mattjoes wrote: »
    I think he should be a dog. James Woof!

    James Hound?
    latest?cb=20110821191814
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited January 2018 Posts: 5,767
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    dominicgreene wrote: »
    CASINOROYALE wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    CASINOROYALE wrote: »
    sorry but do we really want to watch a woman spy shag a bunch of random guys? Wouldn’t work.

    you might want to check out Red Sparrow when that comes out in March.

    Between that (which I hope will turn into a franchise as the 2nd book is fantastic), Rhythm Section (as we all know also an EON production) and Atomic Blonde, yes the industry is putting original (be it truly original or ones originally women in their respective mediums - in this case novels/comics) female spy characters on screen.

    But the reason why the call for a female Bond is still there is the same for female versions of Ghostbusters, Ocean's Trilogy and others - they're all huge global brands.

    And saying 'oh but why don't you make a male Wonder Woman then' also doesn't work because it's a false equivalency, that's completely forgetting the power balance between genders...

    There’s a difference between a woman spy and a female James Bond. I have no interest in watching Atomic Blonde or any other female led spy film. I turned off ghostbusters during the first ten minutes. It was god awful!

    Lately I have been watching a lot of old school films or movies I hadn’t seen before. It’s been awhile since a decent movie has been made without all the bs CGI. It’s kinda the same for action and horror.. 80s-90s horror is better than any horror I have seen today.

    I’d rather re watch some Connery Bond films vs any recent action film released.

    It’s kinda sad.

    CGI is amazing. People unnecessarily hate on it, but I don't see how it's so bad. CGI, when done right, is amazing.
    There are great films coming out today. Rose tinted glasses.
    Also, Atomic Blonde was good. Ghostbusters was bad.


    Bad CGI is my problem - I tend to complain about CGI without clarifying I mean the bad/obvious CGI, but hell, most movies these days inject some CGI that they didn't spend enough time fine tuning. When it rears its ugly head in the action scenes, I become so detached to anything unfolding.

    Of course nobody has an issue with CGI that isn't noticeable, like artificially enlarging crowd sizes, backgrounds, landscapes, cityscapes, etc.

    Just take Bond these days: the MI6 explosion in SF was incredibly well done. It's only obviously fake in the fact that they weren't going to blow the real building up. The effects themselves were well done.
    I recently watched some youtube clips showing CGI from a variety of recent blockbusters. I was shocked how much of those scenes was CGI, and I had never noticed it before. When I say shocked I mean in the sense of what a crime it is that so much bad CGI is sold to us, when such unnoticable things are possible. Unnoticable at least at the time of release. I wonder how Marvel films are going to stand the test of time.




    talos7 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    I hope he does come back. He was the only villain who Craig's Bond couldn't easily defeat.

    I do as well and can see him with a horribly scared throat as a result of being violently yanked off of the train; he has also been left mute and is none too happy about it.
    Did he say more than "shit" in SP? Anyhow, the way Hinx was presented as kind of a Oddjob/Jaws type implies plans to keep at least a door open for a return. Otherwise they wouldn´t have turned around the tone so much and have him say "shit". For the film it could have been very effective to not announce the rope around Hinx´ neck so long before but make it all a bit more sudden and quick. Would have made for a tone more in line with the previous films and would make it look more like that was it for Hinx.



    Getafix wrote: »
    This might add fuel to the tabloid fire re a female spin off or the whole female Bond nonsense.
    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jan/01/women-fronted-films-top-three-highest-grossing-2017
    Eon once again might prove they have a sense for the Zeitgeist with The Rhythm Section. They´re very quiet about it, but from what I could gather so far, it would be a perfect template to build a series upon it. With Blake Lively they´ve got one of the hottest female properties on the planet, and she would be young enough to easily make 5-8 films over the next 10-20 years. Technically speaking.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    @boldfinger, absolutely. Hell, take SP, which has great examples of both: a large portion of Morocco was extended via CGI in some of those cityscape shots, and I think half of the train that Bond and Madeleine are on is completely CGI? Never would've known if not for that BTS video showing the computer effects. But then at the same time, they gave us that awkward video-game-looking shot of Hinx in his car during the Rome chase.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I was watching the Crown the other day and thinking how good some of the interior location shots looked. And the use the Highlands (or wherever they’ve been shooting) to better effect than Bond did in SP.

    Bond location shooting (external and internal) has deteriorated a lot since the end of the 80s IMO.
  • Pierce2DanielPierce2Daniel
    Posts: 4,409
    Gossip season is starting to brew up

    Sam Smith being wooed for another Bond
    sam_smith_1000-920x584.jpg
    http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/confidential/sam-smith-wooed-bond-article-1.3731631

    I'll pass on this one

    EON are looking for "glamorous American rising star"; Ilfenesh Hadera being eyed for role.
    686973270.jpg?w=750&h=420&quality=85&strip=all
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/5227434/meghan-markle-shortlisted-bond-girl/

    I could buy this...
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Please not another tune from whining mushmouth...
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I am sure these all are just some attention seeking “journalist’s” mind fart.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    Sam Smith to play Bond.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Will Smith to play Samantha Bond.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    For Netflix.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Fresh Smith of Netflix Air
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    Garbage rumors.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited January 2018 Posts: 5,767
    Getafix wrote: »
    I was watching the Crown the other day and thinking how good some of the interior location shots looked. And the use the Highlands (or wherever they’ve been shooting) to better effect than Bond did in SP.

    Bond location shooting (external and internal) has deteriorated a lot since the end of the 80s IMO.
    Definitely. Just look at Victoria and Abdul. Such magnificent shooting belongs in a Bond film!

  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited January 2018 Posts: 5,767
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    "EON are looking for "glamorous American rising star"; Ilfenesh Hadera being eyed for role.[/b]
    686973270.jpg?w=750&h=420&quality=85&strip=all
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/5227434/meghan-markle-shortlisted-bond-girl/

    I could buy this...
    I´m open for small bust as I am for large ones (twos), but a lady with small chest shouldn´t have fotos taken that make her look like a transgender.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    dominicgreene wrote: »
    Garbage rumors.

    Giving it another go are they?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    dominicgreene wrote: »
    Garbage rumors.

    Most people recycle their garbage these days. The press is no exception.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    What we should do is start a major discussion about an actor being cast and see how long it takes some hack to come in here, pick it up and print it as fact
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Don t you think one or more of those members that never post, but only lurk, could be journalists?
Sign In or Register to comment.