› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…14791480148214841485…2507

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Benny wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    The beauty of Bond is that you don't need to craft the storylines in advance. How could you anticipate the trends anyway? Octopussy has a strong influence of Indiana Jones to it, but if the script was written in 1973 there would be no way of predicting Indiana Jones would happen. Bond is best when it's capturing the moment.

    Where are the strong influences of Indiana Jones in Octopussy?
    I think there are hints of it in the adventure element in India (Bond fighting during the street festival as well as escaping Kamal in the jungle). Certainly in comparison to prior to Bond films up to that time it seems more Indy'esque. I also see a bit of Indy in the mine sequence in AVTAK, Afghanistan in TLD and the truck/lorry chase at the end of LTK. I realize the irony, given that Indy was supposedly created by Spielberg/Lucas as a response to Bond.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    RC7 wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    People saying they dont want Bond to be owned by Marvel and Bond is not a super hero have perhaps missed the point. Its nothing to do with the that. It's the way the content is managed and presented to the public.

    Consumers today have a short attention span and we live in a culture that moves fast with the online media having an appetite for constant titbits to keep the momentum going. This applies not only to movies but other products and brands.

    I think any brand is making things really hard for themselves: to effective drop off of the radar and then have to rebuild the interest every 4 or 5 years. Compared to an alternative business model where you never actual leave the media arena.

    When you consider that Iron Man came out in 2008 and, in ten years, they have done a superb job of building the brand to the point where it now outguns Star Wars in terms of opening weekend.

    Put it another way: If you had a brand new movie series to launch and manage, which team would you rather handle your product? The team at Marvel or EON?

    The studios have made ‘Brand’ and $$$ so central to their M.O. that they’ve (very cleverly) fooled fans into becoming brand prophets, who don’t only tow the party line, but actively spread the word. You’re a good example. The argument between fans now is about social media ‘buzz’, opening weekends, brand diversification, spin offs, crossovers...

    This used to be the domain of brand managers, but they’ve now brainwashed people like yourself into doing it for them. For some fans it’s now less and less about the personal experience and more about the shared, (perceived) success. Targets have been hit, the $$$ are rolling in, everything has been wrapped up in a nice little bow and we can all celebrate a mediocre film cleverly masquerading as a great film, because there’s so much going on to divert attention.

    Must be the same kind of fans, that declared Skyfall sacrosanct because of its 1 billion box office. But you’re right - I always felt quite sorry for them as well.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    patb wrote: »
    I think it's easy to assume that Bond is passed from generation to generation but, in my personal experience, I see no evidence of this. I do wonder if EON have done any research regarding how younger movie fans percieve Bond. My gut reaction is that the franchise is regarded as being old, "fuddy duddy" and uncool by young fans who prefer the lighter action, wit and fun of other series. And I'm not sure if this will be helped by an actor over 50 playing the key role.

    The idea that an "audience will always watch a new Bond film" is exactly the type of arrogance that competitors will lap up. If Bond is to survive, it has to grab the imagination and engage young fans.

    Young audiences only want to watch young actors?
  • patbpatb
    edited May 2018 Posts: 4,617
    Its far easier for an audience to enjoy a film if they can relate to a character and their situation. "Sometimes, the old ways are the best." means little to a 13 year old for example. And Harry Potter hits the spot because the main character is broadly the same as the target audience. My kids loved Spiderman - Homecoming as it showed a younger character at school.

    So, I love the DC Bond because I can relate to his middle aged grumpiness. But I know that there is a bigger audience out there. It's not about me, its about the global market. Have not looked at global stats but in the UK, the main market is 15-28. If you loose that market, you are going to struggle.

    @bondjames is spot on. A 51 year old Bold will struggle with that market. (perhaps they will bring in an appretice to help?). But they do need a younger Bond sooner rather than later and, with that, a tone that (yes as with Marvel) has room for both light and darkl moments, a spirit of adventure whilst also having characters to care about. Obviously, this could alienate many older fans, including myself. But we should all realise that movies are not made to please individuals. They are there to please the mass market.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    Robert Downey Jr. is how old again? Imho the character resonates with the audience or not is not necessarily down to age. But to agility or believeability of course so there is a stopping point. DC has reached that point pretty soon, it will be his last one.
  • bondsumbondsum
    edited May 2018 Posts: 3,333
    RC7 wrote: »
    The studios have made ‘Brand’ and $$$ so central to their M.O. that they’ve (very cleverly) fooled fans into becoming brand prophets, who don’t only tow the party line, but actively spread the word. You’re a good example. The argument between fans now is about social media ‘buzz’, opening weekends, brand diversification, spin offs, crossovers...

    This used to be the domain of brand managers, but they’ve now brainwashed people like yourself into doing it for them. For some fans it’s now less and less about the personal experience and more about the shared, (perceived) success. Targets have been hit, the $$$ are rolling in, everything has been wrapped up in a nice little bow and we can all celebrate a mediocre film cleverly masquerading as a great film, because there’s so much going on to divert attention.
    A brilliant post and so apt to the generation that easily buys into the hype.
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Young audiences only want to watch young actors?
    I don't think audiences are given much of a choice nowadays. It's either PG13 horror with young teens or very little else. Of course, some of the Marvel actors aren't what I'd call particularly young. Robert Downey Jr. is now 53.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    Fair point: The character he plays has the attitude of an 18 year old. He has not grown up. (although we see him growing up, thats his arc). His quick wit, cocky banter and light touch was exactly what younger audiences wanted. IHe has now evolved into a father figure as they have brought younger characters in.

    Can we ever imagine a Bond with the attitude of Stark? Now thats in interesting question. I dont think so but there is always stuff to learn.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    Robert Downey Jr. is how old again? Imho the character resonates with the audience or not is not necessarily down to age. But to agility or believeability of course so there is a stopping point.
    patb wrote: »
    Fair point: The character he plays has the attitude of an 18 year old. He has not grown up. (although we see him growing up, thats his arc). His quick wit, cocky banter and light touch was exactly what younger audiences wanted.
    I absolutely agree. RDJ as Stark is one in a million. A perfect storm. There is a reason why I rate all 3 Iron Man films relatively highly, and he is it. They built the entire MCU on his back. The way he portrays Stark is extremely compelling. I could never have guessed 10 years ago that Iron Man would be one of my favourite characters (I don't even think I've read more than a handful of his comics).
    patb wrote: »
    He has now evolved into a father figure as they have brought younger characters in.

    Can we ever imagine a Bond with the attitude of Stark? Now thats in interesting question. I dont think so but there is always stuff to learn.
    It's possible. With the right script, the right cast and the right performance. Perhaps that is what they intend with the alleged 'mentor' angle. Perhaps that is the 'arc' which justifies a 50+ year old (and visibly aging) Craig returning when other choices could have been made.

    Let's hope so. Let's hope it's worth it. They'd better get it right and he'd better bring his 'A' game this time.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    There's also an appetite to see more of Robert Downey Jr in the further adventures of Sherlock Holmes, so he's not completely wed to his Stark character.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @bondsum, I've read somewhere that he is the new Perry Mason. If true, I can't wait for it.
  • patbpatb
    edited May 2018 Posts: 4,617
    Something that is a cross over between Bond and Stark is charm. Stark gets away with many one liners and come backs because of the smooth charm and confidence that he puts one. As we have seen him develop and get into scrapes, we see "the mask drop" and see a more sensitive guy.

    Charm is something that can get a character a long way. By defintion, people like charming people. Thats what charm is. The re-imagining of Bond that @bondjames refers to needs as massive injection of charm IMHO And there are very few leading men who can pull that off.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    That should be interesting @bondjames. I trust it won't be for television like the original?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @bondsum, I'm not sure if it's tv based. It could very well be, but given the way tv series have evolved over the years, I wouldn't be entirely against that. It's a highly credible medium these days.

    @patb, I completely agree on the charm element. It's essential for the character of Bond in the world we live in today. In fact, I think it's the only way his key attributes and 'bad' behaviour can survive - if it's laced with a bit of natural insouciance, grace and charm. That's another reason why I want a recast pronto - because I think now is the time to start fresh, given the changes in the world. Waiting one film longer in order to allow a 'high' seems selfish, unnecessary and in my view could harm the character's positioning for the longer term.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    @bondjames perhaps they just got Stark in "under the wire" before it was too late?

    http://www.indiewire.com/2018/03/black-panther-writer-tony-stark-sxsw-1201938017/

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    @bondjames perhaps they just got Stark in "under the wire" before it was too late?

    http://www.indiewire.com/2018/03/black-panther-writer-tony-stark-sxsw-1201938017/
    @patb, this individual is stating the obvious. I disagree with him naturally. Vehemently in fact. I think it's possible, if delivered with a velvet glove rather than a fist. Connery showed that 50+ years ago in the midst of the sexual revolution and it's still true today imho. It's not so much what you do, but how you do it in this case, again imho.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited May 2018 Posts: 4,588
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    Also one more thing: The MCU actors totally embrace their characters off-screen ... in social media, appearances in youth programmes and so on. It keeps the momentum even during the movies. I haven‘t heard Chris Hemsworth, Robert Downey Jr. complain being tired of their characters. Maybe it‘s just a part of their contract - but it comes off naturally and funny (like the Thor workplace video etc.)

    And Craig and all did that with Bond after SF, too ... what the hell happened during the SP that made everybody so tired is somewhat amazing. But I think this has a huge influence at the current mood many seem to be in.

    James Bond will return.

    DC is more than happy to embrace the character off screen.



  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    I liked those clips. Craig seems to be having a good time all right. :)
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    He always wished to have jazz hands lile RDJ. Well, he has not. He is uncomfy and acting in these sitiations, where RDJ is a natural. A lot of press depends on that. Thats his shortcoming compared to others. I like RDJ and think, he is lucky to have it.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    He gave you the films, that reflected the options of their time - good and lesser. But he certainly and proovable gave it his all every time. So what is it really, that you blame him for? That he is not blessed with jazz hands? Roger was, Pierce was ( probably to s lesser extend) but did they really give their all to the Films? Work through pain, happen only because of „I give it my all and beyond“? So - in the end its a decision, what is it you want of your Bond actor - in all fairness - and where did Daniel fail you - really?
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    Miramax, Lionsgate, MGM Drop Out Of Weinstein Company Bankruptcy Auction
    https://deadline.com/2018/04/the-weinstein-company-miramax-lionsgate-mgm-not-bidding-bankruptcy-auction-1202379770/
  • Goldeneye0094Goldeneye0094 Conyers, GA
    Posts: 464
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Miramax, Lionsgate, MGM Drop Out Of Weinstein Company Bankruptcy Auction
    https://deadline.com/2018/04/the-weinstein-company-miramax-lionsgate-mgm-not-bidding-bankruptcy-auction-1202379770/

    How does this affect bond?
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    Goldeneye0094 wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Miramax, Lionsgate, MGM Drop Out Of Weinstein Company Bankruptcy Auction
    https://deadline.com/2018/04/the-weinstein-company-miramax-lionsgate-mgm-not-bidding-bankruptcy-auction-1202379770/

    How does this affect bond?

    Are MGM looking to sell, or acquire more, or is this just more time wasting like with the Chinese investment? Do they know what they want?
  • Goldeneye0094Goldeneye0094 Conyers, GA
    Posts: 464
    If only we had an insider letting us know what is going on but for now I'm sticking to cashleypersia's word that the distribution deal has been settled
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    'The Band's Visit' has received a number of Tony Award nominations, if Barbara is attending the ceremony on 10th June, we might get a brief red carpet interview with her. I doubt it will be anything more substantial then her comments at TIFF, but maybe an update.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    Germanlady wrote: »
    He always wished to have jazz hands lile RDJ. Well, he has not. He is uncomfy and acting in these sitiations, where RDJ is a natural. A lot of press depends on that. Thats his shortcoming compared to others. I like RDJ and think, he is lucky to have it.

    Thank you @Germanlady for being honest and forthright about Craig's limitations as well as his strengths.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    RC7 wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    People saying they dont want Bond to be owned by Marvel and Bond is not a super hero have perhaps missed the point. Its nothing to do with the that. It's the way the content is managed and presented to the public.

    Consumers today have a short attention span and we live in a culture that moves fast with the online media having an appetite for constant titbits to keep the momentum going. This applies not only to movies but other products and brands.

    I think any brand is making things really hard for themselves: to effective drop off of the radar and then have to rebuild the interest every 4 or 5 years. Compared to an alternative business model where you never actual leave the media arena.

    When you consider that Iron Man came out in 2008 and, in ten years, they have done a superb job of building the brand to the point where it now outguns Star Wars in terms of opening weekend.

    Put it another way: If you had a brand new movie series to launch and manage, which team would you rather handle your product? The team at Marvel or EON?

    The studios have made ‘Brand’ and $$$ so central to their M.O. that they’ve (very cleverly) fooled fans into becoming brand prophets, who don’t only tow the party line, but actively spread the word. You’re a good example. The argument between fans now is about social media ‘buzz’, opening weekends, brand diversification, spin offs, crossovers...

    This used to be the domain of brand managers, but they’ve now brainwashed people like yourself into doing it for them. For some fans it’s now less and less about the personal experience and more about the shared, (perceived) success. Targets have been hit, the $$$ are rolling in, everything has been wrapped up in a nice little bow and we can all celebrate a mediocre film cleverly masquerading as a great film, because there’s so much going on to divert attention.
    Good point, @RC7.

  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,514
    So, with Boyle/Hodge seemingly locked in, I feel that we are going to get the most standalone Bond experience possible for the Craig era. I highly doubt they will go back to the mess Mendes left at the end of SP.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    Spectre is in the rear view mirror.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,514
    I think so. Especially considering the huge gap we’re getting in between. They can just hop right in like nothing happened I think. The shorter it takes for Boyle and his crew to complete that musical, the better for us!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Goldeneye0094 wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Miramax, Lionsgate, MGM Drop Out Of Weinstein Company Bankruptcy Auction
    https://deadline.com/2018/04/the-weinstein-company-miramax-lionsgate-mgm-not-bidding-bankruptcy-auction-1202379770/

    How does this affect bond?

    Are MGM looking to sell, or acquire more, or is this just more time wasting like with the Chinese investment? Do they know what they want?
    It's perhaps telling that MGM didn't eventually bid. Why would you, if you're perhaps looking to sell? They perhaps had an obligation to their shareholders to at least review the assets that were on sale and determine fit & potential, which is why their name is mentioned in the article.

    I will opine that in the medium term I don't see how MGM as it presently stands can remain a viable entity. The competitive pressures will necessitate either a sale and/or a merger of 'equals'. Status quo is not tenable past the next Bond film imho.
Sign In or Register to comment.