No Time To Die: Production Diary

1136013611363136513662507

Comments

  • Posts: 12,525
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    P&W probably developed a concept or outline & babs used that as a base starter for hodge & Boyle. If Boyle is helming expect a smaller budget & fewer a list stars. Waltz & Madeline are likely out. Craig is getting a standalone send off.

    I hope it is also smaller budget. Small for Bond has never failed IMO.
  • Posts: 1,407
    jake24 wrote: »
    Surely I'm not the only one who thinks Boyle's films are completely ill-suited for Bond?

    So were Martin Campbell's pre Bond films though
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 684
    FoxRox wrote: »
    So... Bond 25 will almost definitely be standalone then, if all this is true, right?
    I suppose it doesn't necessarily mean that Bond 25 is any more likely to abandon the continuity with a different writer, but that this 'news' would seem to substantiate the rumors of Boyle/Hodge going to Eon with the idea (especially at a late stage) might point more in that direction—or at least in a direction where picking up the continuity isn't the focus. Here's hoping.
    jake24 wrote: »
    Surely I'm not the only one who thinks Boyle's films are completely ill-suited for Bond?
    I totally see where you're coming from. But I think there's a chance he'll find a good balance between his own vision and what the franchise demands.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Looks like I got my birthday wish! Finally some news.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,396
    Strog wrote: »
    I'm more glad to have new blood writing the screenplay than to have Boyle directing, but I'm fine with him as a choice. That said, I hope this script works out. Eon is in a tight spot if not.

    I agree. If the script is good, Boyle will be fine and the film will have energy--and it helps that they have a long collaborative history.

    They have to reboot with B26 anyway. James Bond will return.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,441
    jake24 wrote: »
    Surely I'm not the only one who thinks Boyle's films are completely ill-suited for Bond?

    I agree I have not commented on the possibility of Boyle doing Bond upto now as it's underwhelming for me, I like some of Boyle's films though never did I think he would be a good Bond director.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    What is it about Boyle that makes some of you think him unsuitable? Too drama oriented?
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,256
    Does he have an likely choice for a composer?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    bondjames wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Surely I'm not the only one who thinks Boyle's films are completely ill-suited for Bond?
    I wondered if you were joking earlier. I haven't seen any of his films so can't comment. He does seem like a left field choice, but then again so was Mendes. It does suggest something new is in the works conceptually.
    Nothing I've seen from him has in any way proven that he'd make a good Bond film (and that includes directing Craig as Bond in Happy and Glorious). Endless talent out there, and they decide on quite arguably one of the laziest options out there. I would have much preferred a Demange-directed thriller written by Purvis & Wade, if I'm being honest.
  • Posts: 12,525
    I'm not worried really. Campbell, Mendes, and Forster wouldn't have been any of my first choices pre-Bond, but I enjoyed all their films a lot barring SP. I'm just happy this almost guarantees P&W are out and we are getting something fresh.
  • Posts: 1,680
    The next one may be divisive but it won't be stale , or formula driven akin to spectre. Spectre is Craig's most traditional bond like outing but we wont be seeing that again imo. I'm wondering what there gonna do with Oberhauser as they probably won't leave his fate unknown for the fans
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    jake24 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Surely I'm not the only one who thinks Boyle's films are completely ill-suited for Bond?
    I wondered if you were joking earlier. I haven't seen any of his films so can't comment. He does seem like a left field choice, but then again so was Mendes. It does suggest something new is in the works conceptually.
    Nothing I've seen from him has in any way proven that he'd make a good Bond film (and that includes directing Craig as Bond in Happy and Glorious). Endless talent out there, and they decide on quite arguably one of the laziest options out there. I would have much preferred a Demange-directed thriller written by Purvis & Wade, if I'm being honest.
    I guess I'll finally have to see some of his films. Nothing about them really interested me (not really my genre), but I'll give something a go.

    Re: picking him - they seem to have basically run out of options and time, after backing away from Demange for some reason.
  • Posts: 12,837
    None of his films scream Bond but not many of his other films are really alike. He's shown a lot of variety, definitely the strongest CV out of the directors so far imo. How many of the others really had already done films like Bond anyway?

    I'm so happy with this news. He's a great director, one of my favourites, and I think he could really deliver something special. He can do tense/hard hitting, he can do funny, and almost all his films are distinctly British. If he can do a decent job with the action scenes then we're in for something good.

    I'm actually properly excited for Bond 25 now which I can't say I was before.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited March 2018 Posts: 10,592
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I'm not worried really. Campbell, Mendes, and Forster wouldn't have been any of my first choices pre-Bond, but I enjoyed all their films a lot barring SP. I'm just happy this almost guarantees P&W are out and we are getting something fresh.
    bondjames wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Surely I'm not the only one who thinks Boyle's films are completely ill-suited for Bond?
    I wondered if you were joking earlier. I haven't seen any of his films so can't comment. He does seem like a left field choice, but then again so was Mendes. It does suggest something new is in the works conceptually.
    Nothing I've seen from him has in any way proven that he'd make a good Bond film (and that includes directing Craig as Bond in Happy and Glorious). Endless talent out there, and they decide on quite arguably one of the laziest options out there. I would have much preferred a Demange-directed thriller written by Purvis & Wade, if I'm being honest.
    I guess I'll finally have to see some of his films. Nothing about them really interested me (not really my genre), but I'll give something a go.

    Re: picking him - they seem to have basically run out of options and time, after backing away from Demange for some reason.


    We should bear in mind that this isn't 100% as of yet (even Baz has stated that his hiring is contingent on Hodge's script being greenlit). Eon have however trapped themselves. With Demange likely ousted (as well as the original story outline), the entire production is reliant on Hodge's draft. If Eon/Craig don't like it then they will have been completely trapped. My excitement for Craig's last has decreased substantially. What a waste.
  • Posts: 12,837
    I hadn't thought of it that way. I'm more excited for Hodge/Boyle's take than I would have been for Purvis and Wade but if they can't get it sorted out between them then what? A delay? Hope it doesn't come to that.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 684
    In addition to P&W being out I also like the idea that this might mean a smaller budget (and the restrictions that implies).
    talos7 wrote: »
    Does he have an likely choice for a composer?

    A. R. Rahman has done 127 HOURS and SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE for him. Daniel Pemberton (who did THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E.) did his latest, STEVE JOBS. He doesn't seem married to any composer, though. I wouldn't be surprised to find Arnold return.
    bondjames wrote: »
    What is it about Boyle that makes some of you think him unsuitable? Too drama oriented?
    You can kind of get an idea of his visual sensibility from this:



    Which is at times sort of unnecessarily eccentric. His style doesn't scream Bond but as others have noted Forster, Mendes, etc. were in the same camp.
    jake24 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I'm not worried really. Campbell, Mendes, and Forster wouldn't have been any of my first choices pre-Bond, but I enjoyed all their films a lot barring SP. I'm just happy this almost guarantees P&W are out and we are getting something fresh.
    bondjames wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Surely I'm not the only one who thinks Boyle's films are completely ill-suited for Bond?
    I wondered if you were joking earlier. I haven't seen any of his films so can't comment. He does seem like a left field choice, but then again so was Mendes. It does suggest something new is in the works conceptually.
    Nothing I've seen from him has in any way proven that he'd make a good Bond film (and that includes directing Craig as Bond in Happy and Glorious). Endless talent out there, and they decide on quite arguably one of the laziest options out there. I would have much preferred a Demange-directed thriller written by Purvis & Wade, if I'm being honest.
    I guess I'll finally have to see some of his films. Nothing about them really interested me (not really my genre), but I'll give something a go.

    Re: picking him - they seem to have basically run out of options and time, after backing away from Demange for some reason.


    We should bear in mind that this isn't 100% as of yet (even Baz has stated that his hiring is contingent on Hodge's script being greenlit). Eon have however trapped themselves. With Demange likely ousted (as well as the original story outline), the entire production is reliant on Hodge's draft. If Eon/Craig don't like it then they will have been completely trapped. My excitement for Craig's last has decreased substantially. What a waste.
    Yes. Or at least suddenly find themselves with two scripts and possibly zero directors.
  • Posts: 12,525
    True. We still have to hope for a good script.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Would someone please explain the seemingly huge appeal of a small-budget Bond? I have never been able to wrap my head around it.
  • Posts: 12,525
    jake24 wrote: »
    Would someone please explain the seemingly huge appeal of a small-budget Bond? I have never been able to wrap my head around it.

    More simple to build a great film with a small budget - Bond or not. Something like DN again would be fantastic I think; it was very simplistic, but perfect.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Strog wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    What is it about Boyle that makes some of you think him unsuitable? Too drama oriented?
    You can kind of get an idea of his visual sensibility from this:



    Which is at times sort of unnecessarily eccentric. His style doesn't scream Bond but as others have noted Forster, Mendes, etc. were in the same camp.
    Thanks. That seems like a good way of putting it from those samples. Quite avant garde and certainly up the arty farty creek they've been exploring as of late. This could really be a culmination of the Craig era. Something trippy even.

    This will all rest on that Hodge script being up to snuff. I wonder what they have in mind.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    FoxRox wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Would someone please explain the seemingly huge appeal of a small-budget Bond? I have never been able to wrap my head around it.

    More simple to build a great film with a small budget - Bond or not. Something like DN again would be fantastic I think; it was very simplistic, but perfect.
    Fair enough. Although totally not what I envisioned for Craig's last.
  • Posts: 684
    jake24 wrote: »
    Would someone please explain the seemingly huge appeal of a small-budget Bond? I have never been able to wrap my head around it.
    For me it's just the idea that restriction possibly enhances creativity.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 12,837
    jake24 wrote: »
    Would someone please explain the seemingly huge appeal of a small-budget Bond? I have never been able to wrap my head around it.

    Well, best case scenario, it means something leaner, with maybe more emphasis on tension and story than big CGI filled setpieces. I think people just associate a smaller budget film with something a bit more stripped back and back to basics. I can see the appeal, my only worry is the stunts. We haven't had a really good jaw dropping one since CR, and I doubt halving the budget would help. But depending on what they go for it could work. If they are going the Logan route then something smaller scale would probably work better anyway.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Strog wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Would someone please explain the seemingly huge appeal of a small-budget Bond? I have never been able to wrap my head around it.
    For me it's just the idea that restriction possibly enhances creativity.
    It worked with the two Campbell entries, which were both made on a restricted budget.

    I wonder if we have another surprise in store. Smaller budget suggests reboot to me.
  • 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



    Cantillion *was* a Sony executive but left to accept a producer deal at Sony. She still worked on SPECTRE after making that move.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,256
    Then , for Bond 26, they can pivot and again go grand.
  • 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?

    He's an MGM executive.

    http://www.mgm.com/#/about/mgm-today
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Neither are with Sony anymore as far as I'm aware.

    Source?

    Glickman is listed on the MGM website with the other executives.

    http://www.mgm.com/#/about/mgm-today

    Cantillion left as a Sony executive in 2014 or so, but still did SPECTRE-related duties for Sony as part of the transition. Her name shows up in the Sony hacks.
  • Hmmmmmm. So can we assume Boyle will get the gig then? Bring it on. CHOOSE BOND!!! :D

    "as long as Bond screenplay by #JohnHodge meets approval." (part of Bamigboye tweet).
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    I did like TRAINSPOTTING, SHALLOW GRAVE, and 28DL... I did not like A LIFE LESS ORDINARY, nor THE BEACH, or SLUMDOG... These three latter films seemed slicker and flashier, and, it seemed (although I haven't looked), that at least two out of those three films seemed to be bigger budget Doyle films.

    And these slicker, flashier and bigger budget Doyle films, to me-- only to me-- seemed to lose the spirit of his grittier/character films (TS, SG and 28DL).

    Which has me conflicted if Boyle's our next man for 25:

    He's great at character and gritty, for sure, and I love a Bond that has that (CR, QoS), but when Boyle's films do this, the scope of that world seems rather small-- not good for Bond.

    But when Boyle does big and slick, the characters and grittiness seem to suffer-- not good for DC Bond.

    So I feel off-balance: neither excited, nor disappointed. But wary that Boyle's not the right man for Bond (and, if memory serves, he also agreed that this franchise was not for him either (in well published articles, easy to google)).

Sign In or Register to comment.