No Time To Die: Production Diary

1135813591361136313642507

Comments

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,456
    I don't think so at all. Simply because I don't think there will be another Craig James Bond movie. I just can't see any new distributor/investor coming on board with the way he looks these days.
    Even if he now goes for eight months into the heaviest of workouts and trainings there's still no way to guarantee that he will really look good after that. I for myself, can't believe it from the way he looks on recent pictures. I'm not even talking about his body, but his face has had it.

    He will be nearly a year older in Bond 25 compared with the BAFTA's last month.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 1,162
    See.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Although I was impressed with Craig throwing himself into the train fight scene in SPECTRE, in just about every other action scene post-QOS I've been annoyed with the filmmakers' tendency to use a stuntman and then digitally replace his face with Craig's. It's not always the fact that they've used a stuntman that annoys me -- it's rather the incredibly shoddy digital effects that make it look like Craig's head is wobbling around on someone else's body. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening motorcycle chase from SKYFALL, which (to me) is embarrassingly bad.
    I agree. They really shouldn't do that going forward, or if they must they should at least try to hide it better.

    For me the worst offense was the run in SP prior to the building collapse. Bloody awful and the fact that this was in the PTS just pulled me right out of the film. Craig doesn't run like that, and they should have known that some of us would have picked up on it. The helicopter had something similar. It's just cheap. Better not to do the stunt than make it so obvious. This is not Marvel. It's meant to be grounded in reality. Give me the CR staircase fight any day of the week over these fancy but poorly conceptualized and enhanced digitized sequences.
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    edited March 2018 Posts: 308
    bondjames wrote: »
    @NoSolaceleft, they can fix that. Given his age (and perhaps continued smoking), he looks better at certain times than at other times. It's just the way it goes. They will just have to be more careful with him, that's all. As someone said many pages back, don't film him in the cold (when wrinkles are more apparent), and use certain lighting etc. etc.

    I agree that it means going out of one's way, but this seems to be the path they have chosen for better or worse, so let's hope for the best and not an AVTAK embarrassment.

    AVTAK would have been better if they changed the story so it was more suited for an aging Bond, like SF. But honestly, I can enjoy the film and can look through Roger's appearance. It's a different time now though. But I believe Craig will indeed look better once he is prepared for filming.
  • Posts: 1,031
    Jeffrey wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    @NoSolaceleft, they can fix that. Given his age (and perhaps continued smoking), he looks better at certain times than at other times. It's just the way it goes. They will just have to be more careful with him, that's all. As someone said many pages back, don't film him in the cold (when wrinkles are more apparent), and use certain lighting etc. etc.

    I agree that it means going out of one's way, but this seems to be the path they have chosen for better or worse, so let's hope for the best and not an AVTAK embarrassment.

    AVTAK would have been better if they changed the story so it was more suited for an aging Bond, like SF. But honestly, I can enjoy the film and can look through Roger's appearance. It's a different time now though. But I believe Craig will indeed look better once he is prepared for filming.

    Just had another look at the BAFTA photos of him. Don't know if it's just the lighting, but he looks ill in those photos. His skin complexion is so pale.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Jeffrey wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    @NoSolaceleft, they can fix that. Given his age (and perhaps continued smoking), he looks better at certain times than at other times. It's just the way it goes. They will just have to be more careful with him, that's all. As someone said many pages back, don't film him in the cold (when wrinkles are more apparent), and use certain lighting etc. etc.

    I agree that it means going out of one's way, but this seems to be the path they have chosen for better or worse, so let's hope for the best and not an AVTAK embarrassment.

    AVTAK would have been better if they changed the story so it was more suited for an aging Bond, like SF. But honestly, I can enjoy the film and can look through Roger's appearance. It's a different time now though. But I believe Craig will indeed look better once he is prepared for filming.
    Oh definitely. I agree that Craig will be able to clean up. Do you remember his introduction as Bond on the boat? I'll never forget that moment. When I saw him on the news I thought EON had lost their marbles. However, when I saw the first photo of him holding the PPK (with the long hair) I knew he could pull it off.

    He's a strange cat. Sometimes he looks like crap and sometimes he looks pretty good. It will be more difficult for him now, but as a professional I expect him to do what's necessary.

    That's not my problem with him coming back. It's all the rubbish around his tenure, and particularly what has transpired over the past couple of years. It's all been about him when it really should have been about Bond. He really has become a bit of an unwelcome distraction.

    They have decided to proceed with him again despite my wishes, so all I can do at present is hope for the best for B25. If it's to be him then I really hope they get it over with for 2019. I wouldn't want to see him as Bond in 2020.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I also hope,although I know that this probably wont happen,in that they don't make him co-producer this time.
    I still think the fact he had power in decisions and possibly writing etc affected the film,even ignoring the apparent bust-up he had with Mendes.

    He took his eye off the real side of his job,the convincing acting that we saw in the 1st 3 films.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I also hope,although I know that this probably wont happen,in that they don't make him co-producer this time.
    I still think the fact he had power in decisions and possibly writing etc affected the film,even ignoring the apparent bust-up he had with Mendes.

    He took his eye off the real side of his job,the convincing acting that we saw in the 1st 3 films.
    Fully agree. He has indeed been given too much power to shape the series, and he suffers from a bit of hubris. You can see it in the interviews. A man's got to know his limitations, and he doesn't. It is he who mentioned injecting more 'Moore' prior to SP. Some have defended him and said he wasn't trying to do that, but it is exactly what he was trying to do by his own admission. Now, I respect the fact that he was trying to cater to some fans who miss the lighter tone, but that's not his game and he's hopefully realized that. If not, then please go.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Dennison wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    vzok wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    LFS wrote: »
    I am not a fan of the path the producers are on, it´s not the path that led to a franchise surviving for over 50 years.

    Except the last two Bond films are two of the most commercially successful (in terms of gross) ever. With Skyfall being THE most successful Bond film ever.

    So a lot of people watched them. A lot of people watch the Kardashians, doesn't make them quality tv though.
    But maybe as long as a lot of people watch them then EON will think they are succeeding, SP included.

    From a financial perspective then yes. They are fundamentally in business to make money.

    But when the films are creative disappointments, it'll add up and those once big numbers start to dwindle. Just look at WB and their DCEU. Justice League couldn't crack $700M world wide. No property is completely safe. Protect the brand and make good shit.

    Spectre was arguably only a 'creative' disappointment in the US.

    And with the US still being the biggest movie market, that is a cause for concern. In any case, the film was highly problematic and it just shows the US largely were the ones to most see through the BS.
  • Posts: 1,031
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I also hope,although I know that this probably wont happen,in that they don't make him co-producer this time.
    I still think the fact he had power in decisions and possibly writing etc affected the film,even ignoring the apparent bust-up he had with Mendes.

    He took his eye off the real side of his job,the convincing acting that we saw in the 1st 3 films.
    Fully agree. He has indeed been given too much power to shape the series, and he suffers from a bit of hubris. You can see it in the interviews. A man's got to know his limitations, and he doesn't. It is he who mentioned injecting more 'Moore' prior to SP. Some have defended him and said he wasn't trying to do that, but it is exactly what he was trying to do by his own admission. Now, I respect the fact that he was trying to cater to some fans who miss the lighter tone, but that's not his game and he's hopefully realized that. If not, then please go.

    He's actually said that it was always their (I'm assuming he means him, BB and MGW) intention to get Bond back to the Bond of before, which they couldn't do at the point of CR because of Austin Powers.
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    Posts: 308
    bondjames wrote: »
    Jeffrey wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    @NoSolaceleft, they can fix that. Given his age (and perhaps continued smoking), he looks better at certain times than at other times. It's just the way it goes. They will just have to be more careful with him, that's all. As someone said many pages back, don't film him in the cold (when wrinkles are more apparent), and use certain lighting etc. etc.

    I agree that it means going out of one's way, but this seems to be the path they have chosen for better or worse, so let's hope for the best and not an AVTAK embarrassment.

    AVTAK would have been better if they changed the story so it was more suited for an aging Bond, like SF. But honestly, I can enjoy the film and can look through Roger's appearance. It's a different time now though. But I believe Craig will indeed look better once he is prepared for filming.
    Oh definitely. I agree that Craig will be able to clean up. Do you remember his introduction as Bond on the boat? I'll never forget that moment. When I saw him on the news I thought EON had lost their marbles. However, when I saw the first photo of him holding the PPK (with the long hair) I knew he could pull it off.

    He's a strange cat. Sometimes he looks like crap and sometimes he looks pretty good. It will be more difficult for him now, but as a professional I expect him to do what's necessary.

    That's not my problem with him coming back. It's all the rubbish around his tenure, and particularly what has transpired over the past couple of years. It's all been about him when it really should have been about Bond. He really has become a bit of an unwelcome distraction.

    They have decided to proceed with him again despite my wishes, so all I can do at present is hope for the best for B25. If it's to be him then I really hope they get it over with for 2019. I wouldn't want to see him as Bond in 2020.

    Haha, I remember and I get your point. It took a little time before I was convinced too. I wasn't totally convinced after that first photo I must admit. :-P
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 19,339
    Indeed.

    This photo horrified me at the time,from the Sun I think,with the 'Bland,James Bland' headline :

    https://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1463423/daniel-craig-as-james-bond.jpg?w=736

    The naff looking watch and bow-tie,the unshaven look and the almost greasy hair.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Dennison wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I also hope,although I know that this probably wont happen,in that they don't make him co-producer this time.
    I still think the fact he had power in decisions and possibly writing etc affected the film,even ignoring the apparent bust-up he had with Mendes.

    He took his eye off the real side of his job,the convincing acting that we saw in the 1st 3 films.
    Fully agree. He has indeed been given too much power to shape the series, and he suffers from a bit of hubris. You can see it in the interviews. A man's got to know his limitations, and he doesn't. It is he who mentioned injecting more 'Moore' prior to SP. Some have defended him and said he wasn't trying to do that, but it is exactly what he was trying to do by his own admission. Now, I respect the fact that he was trying to cater to some fans who miss the lighter tone, but that's not his game and he's hopefully realized that. If not, then please go.

    He's actually said that it was always their (I'm assuming he means him, BB and MGW) intention to get Bond back to the Bond of before, which they couldn't do at the point of CR because of Austin Powers.
    Oh. Well then he should hopefully realize he's not the man for that, at least imho. It doesn't work for him. He comes across like he's acting it rather than embodying it. He is a very distinct Bond of his own interpretation and he should stick to that. Roger Moore knew to stay within his comfort zone and that's why his interpretation is authentic. Craig seems to think you can 'act' Bond. You can't. Brosnan realized that after it was too late. You must live and breathe it.

    Ironically, I think he was closest to the classic cinematic template (at least in terms of nonchalant demeanour) in CR. That film fit him like a glove and Campbell was able to coax out the right level of insouciance while also bringing some of the grit that had been missing during Brozza's run.
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Indeed.

    This photo horrified me at the time,from the Sun I think,with the 'Bland,James Bland' headline :

    https://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1463423/daniel-craig-as-james-bond.jpg?w=736

    The naff looking watch and bow-tie,the unshaven look and the almost greasy hair.
    Ironically, that was the photo which made me think he could do it.

    This is what horrified me.
    J7vY0AV.jpg
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 11,425
    Dennison wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    While I understand the dissatisfaction around SP, it is all a bit OTT. As others have pointed out it’s one of the most successful Bond films ever (following from the most successful one). If it hadn’t been from Craig’s stupid wrist slash comments the vibes around SP would be largely positive. I’m sure most film goers barely registered brothergate and EON have every opportunity to sweep it under the carpet.

    The UK press were very enthusiastic about Spectre on its release.

    Indeed. The UK press went cock-a-hoop over SP. 5 star reviews all round from what I remember. It’s no wonder EON are more than happy for Craig to do another.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Getafix wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    While I understand the dissatisfaction around SP, it is all a bit OTT. As others have pointed out it’s one of the most successful Bond films ever (following from the most successful one). If it hadn’t been from Craig’s stupid wrist slash comments the vibes around SP would be largely positive. I’m sure most film goers barely registered brothergate and EON have every opportunity to sweep it under the carpet.

    The UK press were very enthusiastic about Spectre on its release.

    Indeed. The UK press went cock-a-hoop over SP. 5 star reviews all round from what I remember. It’s no wonder EON are more than happy for Craig to do another.

    Word of mouth was like a match at the Emirates though.

    SF everyone was talking about it at work, on the tube etc it's the first time I ever felt such buzz for a Bond film. You were almost a social pariah it you didn't go and see it.

    Now whether that was down to the Olympics/50th/Adele bounce is irrelevant. SF had that buzz. SP was tumbleweed.

    You wonder how many of the people who went to SF and then hung around for SP will come back for more?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Positive reviews for a Bond film in London? One which followed the most successful film in the UK (at the time)? A national treasure? You don't say. That doesn't really mean much. Bond films are always an event in England. Ever since I was little anyway.

    It's true that the film did very well in the UK and Europe. It didn't quite catch on in the US or China (the two largest markets by the way). So they will have to consider how they position going forward. The distributing studio will be American.
    SF everyone was talking about it at work, on the tube etc it's the first time I ever felt such buzz for a Bond film. You were almost a social pariah it you didn't go and see it.

    Now whether that was down to the Olympics/50th/Adele bounce is irrelevant. SF had that buzz. SP was tumbleweed.
    That was the case in the US as well. I was there on work during SF's release. Same thing in Canada where I now reside. SF was watercooler stuff. A phenomenon. SP was just another Bond film.
    You wonder how many of the people who went to SF and then hung around for SP will come back for more?
    This is the key question. No doubt a lot of the initial audience for SP came over from SF's goodwill. Is there similar holdover now? We shall see.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    bondjames wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Although I was impressed with Craig throwing himself into the train fight scene in SPECTRE, in just about every other action scene post-QOS I've been annoyed with the filmmakers' tendency to use a stuntman and then digitally replace his face with Craig's. It's not always the fact that they've used a stuntman that annoys me -- it's rather the incredibly shoddy digital effects that make it look like Craig's head is wobbling around on someone else's body. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening motorcycle chase from SKYFALL, which (to me) is embarrassingly bad.
    I agree. They really shouldn't do that going forward, or if they must they should at least try to hide it better.

    For me the worst offense was the run in SP prior to the building collapse. Bloody awful and the fact that this was in the PTS just pulled me right out of the film. Craig doesn't run like that, and they should have known that some of us would have picked up on it. The helicopter had something similar. It's just cheap. Better not to do the stunt than make it so obvious. This is not Marvel. It's meant to be grounded in reality. Give me the CR staircase fight any day of the week over these fancy but poorly conceptualized and enhanced digitized sequences.

    To frame by frame I go! I never noticed this before.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Although I was impressed with Craig throwing himself into the train fight scene in SPECTRE, in just about every other action scene post-QOS I've been annoyed with the filmmakers' tendency to use a stuntman and then digitally replace his face with Craig's. It's not always the fact that they've used a stuntman that annoys me -- it's rather the incredibly shoddy digital effects that make it look like Craig's head is wobbling around on someone else's body. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening motorcycle chase from SKYFALL, which (to me) is embarrassingly bad.
    I agree. They really shouldn't do that going forward, or if they must they should at least try to hide it better.

    For me the worst offense was the run in SP prior to the building collapse. Bloody awful and the fact that this was in the PTS just pulled me right out of the film. Craig doesn't run like that, and they should have known that some of us would have picked up on it. The helicopter had something similar. It's just cheap. Better not to do the stunt than make it so obvious. This is not Marvel. It's meant to be grounded in reality. Give me the CR staircase fight any day of the week over these fancy but poorly conceptualized and enhanced digitized sequences.

    To frame by frame I go! I never noticed this before.
    Watch the legs. That's not Craig. He doesn't run by spreading his feet outward like a penguin.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Although I was impressed with Craig throwing himself into the train fight scene in SPECTRE, in just about every other action scene post-QOS I've been annoyed with the filmmakers' tendency to use a stuntman and then digitally replace his face with Craig's. It's not always the fact that they've used a stuntman that annoys me -- it's rather the incredibly shoddy digital effects that make it look like Craig's head is wobbling around on someone else's body. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening motorcycle chase from SKYFALL, which (to me) is embarrassingly bad.
    I agree. They really shouldn't do that going forward, or if they must they should at least try to hide it better.

    For me the worst offense was the run in SP prior to the building collapse. Bloody awful and the fact that this was in the PTS just pulled me right out of the film. Craig doesn't run like that, and they should have known that some of us would have picked up on it. The helicopter had something similar. It's just cheap. Better not to do the stunt than make it so obvious. This is not Marvel. It's meant to be grounded in reality. Give me the CR staircase fight any day of the week over these fancy but poorly conceptualized and enhanced digitized sequences.

    To frame by frame I go! I never noticed this before.
    Watch the legs. That's not Craig. He doesn't run by spreading his feet outward like a penguin.

    Haha! Do you by chance have a comparison scene I could use from CR/QoS/SF?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Although I was impressed with Craig throwing himself into the train fight scene in SPECTRE, in just about every other action scene post-QOS I've been annoyed with the filmmakers' tendency to use a stuntman and then digitally replace his face with Craig's. It's not always the fact that they've used a stuntman that annoys me -- it's rather the incredibly shoddy digital effects that make it look like Craig's head is wobbling around on someone else's body. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening motorcycle chase from SKYFALL, which (to me) is embarrassingly bad.
    I agree. They really shouldn't do that going forward, or if they must they should at least try to hide it better.

    For me the worst offense was the run in SP prior to the building collapse. Bloody awful and the fact that this was in the PTS just pulled me right out of the film. Craig doesn't run like that, and they should have known that some of us would have picked up on it. The helicopter had something similar. It's just cheap. Better not to do the stunt than make it so obvious. This is not Marvel. It's meant to be grounded in reality. Give me the CR staircase fight any day of the week over these fancy but poorly conceptualized and enhanced digitized sequences.

    To frame by frame I go! I never noticed this before.
    Watch the legs. That's not Craig. He doesn't run by spreading his feet outward like a penguin.

    Haha! Do you by chance have a comparison scene I could use from CR/QoS/SF?
    The ones that come to mind are the Molloka chase at the start of CR and the run on the streets of London in SF. There's also a trainer running scene in the SF teaser trailer which wasn't used in the final film. He has a very purposeful style when he runs. I run for fitness and so noticed it. I can see why others may miss it.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Although I was impressed with Craig throwing himself into the train fight scene in SPECTRE, in just about every other action scene post-QOS I've been annoyed with the filmmakers' tendency to use a stuntman and then digitally replace his face with Craig's. It's not always the fact that they've used a stuntman that annoys me -- it's rather the incredibly shoddy digital effects that make it look like Craig's head is wobbling around on someone else's body. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening motorcycle chase from SKYFALL, which (to me) is embarrassingly bad.
    I agree. They really shouldn't do that going forward, or if they must they should at least try to hide it better.

    For me the worst offense was the run in SP prior to the building collapse. Bloody awful and the fact that this was in the PTS just pulled me right out of the film. Craig doesn't run like that, and they should have known that some of us would have picked up on it. The helicopter had something similar. It's just cheap. Better not to do the stunt than make it so obvious. This is not Marvel. It's meant to be grounded in reality. Give me the CR staircase fight any day of the week over these fancy but poorly conceptualized and enhanced digitized sequences.

    To frame by frame I go! I never noticed this before.
    Watch the legs. That's not Craig. He doesn't run by spreading his feet outward like a penguin.

    Haha! Do you by chance have a comparison scene I could use from CR/QoS/SF?
    The ones that come to mind are the Molloka chase at the start of CR and the run on the streets of London in SF. There's also a trainer running scene in the SF teaser trailer which wasn't used in the final film. He has a very purposeful style when he runs. I run for fitness and so noticed it. I can see why others may miss it.

    Thank you. I'll look out for that. Cool.
  • Posts: 727
    Spectre was arguably only a 'creative' disappointment in the US.

    No. The yanks, to their credit, saw through it first. I know many a people who thought Spectre was perfect but now sort of shrugs when I mention the film.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 14,003
    Dennison wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    vzok wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    LFS wrote: »
    I am not a fan of the path the producers are on, it´s not the path that led to a franchise surviving for over 50 years.

    Except the last two Bond films are two of the most commercially successful (in terms of gross) ever. With Skyfall being THE most successful Bond film ever.

    So a lot of people watched them. A lot of people watch the Kardashians, doesn't make them quality tv though.
    But maybe as long as a lot of people watch them then EON will think they are succeeding, SP included.

    SP was a stumble in the right direction, but it wasn't enough. They came close to finally making what felt like a Bond film, only to balls it up. I'm starting to feel as if they no longer know how to make Bond films.

    You saying Craig's other Bonds don't feel like Bond films?

    Yes, I am saying exactly that.

    Feel like Bond films to me.

    And a lot of other people. I am just saying what I feel, that is all.
  • Posts: 4,412
    Done some sleuthing. Barbara Broccoli spent Oscar night with Jonathan Glickman and Elizabeth Cantillon, both are Sony executives. Clearly, she is still very close with them or....they are involved in Bond 25



  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Good work. Hopefully it's a personal closeness rather than anything more. I'd rather not see Sony back, although I thought it would be them when P&W and later Craig were announced.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    edited March 2018 Posts: 7,058
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Although I was impressed with Craig throwing himself into the train fight scene in SPECTRE, in just about every other action scene post-QOS I've been annoyed with the filmmakers' tendency to use a stuntman and then digitally replace his face with Craig's. It's not always the fact that they've used a stuntman that annoys me -- it's rather the incredibly shoddy digital effects that make it look like Craig's head is wobbling around on someone else's body. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening motorcycle chase from SKYFALL, which (to me) is embarrassingly bad.
    Another example is Craig and Hinx's faces in the car chase in Rome, when they're racing along a slope by the river bank.

    barryt007 wrote: »
    I also hope,although I know that this probably wont happen,in that they don't make him co-producer this time.
    I still think the fact he had power in decisions and possibly writing etc affected the film,even ignoring the apparent bust-up he had with Mendes.
    Yeah.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 262
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Indeed.

    This photo horrified me at the time,from the Sun I think,with the 'Bland,James Bland' headline :

    https://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1463423/daniel-craig-as-james-bond.jpg?w=736

    The naff looking watch and bow-tie,the unshaven look and the almost greasy hair.

    I liked that photo. Even more than the reshooted picture.

  • neonmartinineonmartini Classified
    edited March 2018 Posts: 70
    Done some sleuthing. Barbara Broccoli spent Oscar night with Jonathan Glickman and Elizabeth Cantillon, both are Sony executives. Clearly, she is still very close with them or....they are involved in Bond 25



    I really want Sony to be involved in B25 for one more go, then MGM/Annapurna can have it back and they can take it to new heights. If Sony doesnt get B25 or exits after B25, we should nickname it the Sony Bond series...

    Wait... Glickman is an MGM exec... or did he move to Sony?
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,890
    OT: I found the 007 Elements website through guessing. 007elements.com redirects to http://007elements.soelden.com/urlaub/EN/SD/007/home (Solden's travel website).
    Then I simply edited the URL (http://007elements.soelden.com/urlaub/EN/SD/007/) where I found the ticket prices and when* they're selling lol! This isn't even meant to be made public yet.

    *Online on April 2nd.
  • neonmartinineonmartini Classified
    Posts: 70
    OT: I found the 007 Elements website through guessing. 007elements.com redirects to http://007elements.soelden.com/urlaub/EN/SD/007/home (Solden's travel website).
    Then I simply edited the URL (http://007elements.soelden.com/urlaub/EN/SD/007/) where I found the ticket prices and when* they're selling lol! This isn't even meant to be made public yet.

    *Online on April 2nd.

    I would love to go there
Sign In or Register to comment.