No Time To Die: Production Diary

1155815591561156315642507

Comments

  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    bondsum wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    He didn't bleed after the train fight either and that certainly was how the old films were done. It was the big "new" in CR that he looked according to the events. They should stick to that. Everything else is laughable now.
    You seem to be forgetting that Dalton bled a lot in LTK. I wouldn't call "Everything else is laughable now" that proceeded CR either. Well, only the Roger Moore and perhaps some of the Brosnan movies.

    Precisely. And Connery:Bond didn't exactly come out of the Train fight unscathed. And of course, TB, where Bond was shot in the lower calf. Bond has bled throughout the films, they just didn't shout from the rooftops about it until the Craig era.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited June 2018 Posts: 3,157
    Germanlady wrote: »
    But people on this side always ask for them to listen to the hardcore fans. They did that with whatever result. But they did. In a way, SP was a Moore film with DC. Just stop there and continue, what you started @ Babs and Co.

    No fans asked for a rushed and pathetic love story, the Scooby Gang, rehasing half of Skyfall score and the "daddy loved you more" story angle, though. As @bondsum said, we have no baring on Bond movies.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,599
    Over the past few months of watching SP on t.v., I've had such a bipolar feeling towards it. One viewing I'll hate it and the next viewing I'll love it.

    However, I do not want to see another Bond film like it again. That's what you get with four friggin writers.
  • Posts: 1,548
    I want to see Bond out stunt Mission Impossible! Tough act to follow though.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    I want to see Bond out stunt Mission Impossible! Tough act to follow though.
    It's basically Impossible. ;) At least while Tom is around.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    I want to see Bond out stunt Mission Impossible! Tough act to follow though.
    Go back to then Glen era then mate because you'll be waiting a long time.
  • Posts: 4,619
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.
  • Posts: 11,425
    NicNac wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    foolish of Craig if that's indeed what he said.

    He should have realised that the reason Moore's humour worked so well was that it was tailored to him. The lack of a recurring screenwriter who 'gets' the actor doesn't help.

    The dodgy humour started in SF. Popping cuffs is apparently Craig's equivalent of Brosnan's tie straightening (because it was so cool and funny first time round).

    I don't know what Mendes saw in Craig's CR performance that made him want to totally change the character in SF and SP.

    I don't agree with that. I think Craig's major strength is that he actually has thought the character through.
    He gave his younger Bond a degree of arrogance and cockiness in CR which lead him to make mistakes, but get where he needed to be through sheer bloody mindedness.

    In QOS he's bitter and aloof because of Vesper. More accepting of death, certainly more casual about his own life.

    In SF it's definitely the same man, a few years later, seasoned for sure. Then he feels let down, abandoned by the one person he trusts above all others. He goes after Silva knowing this is his last chance. But his casual approach to life and his world weariness (00s have a short life expectancy - he knows that, he said that) is showing. How is this not the same man who sat on a train with Vesper, as a smug young 00?

    In SP his anger only now shows through in the fights. He controls his demons better, he's more relaxed, more self confident, but those demons are still there.

    Unlike Brosnan whose biggest weakness is that he played 4 slightly different versions of Bond, Craig nails the characters development over a number of years. Yes he is a tormented soul (as Bond was in the books), but that is the character in this time line. He has to see it through now. If anyone wants a fluffy Bond who gets his mission from M in scene 1 and jokes his way through the mission, shagging girls and toppling mega rich psychos then maybe you will be in luck next time.

    If that happens, no one will cheer louder than me, but Craig has been superb playing this tortured soul version of Bond.

    the character development is not that neat IMO.

    Any way looking forward to the mental health issues in B25
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.
    He must’ve seen my comment on the actor thread. Lol!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    Well that's the main nugget of confirmation as to whether or not he's been spewing BS this entire time. If Cumberbatch is officially signed on, that'll get announced or it won't (though I hope not).
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 212
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.

    He has also mentioned Golshifteh Farahani

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golshifteh_Farahani
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 5,767
    NicNac wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    foolish of Craig if that's indeed what he said.

    He should have realised that the reason Moore's humour worked so well was that it was tailored to him. The lack of a recurring screenwriter who 'gets' the actor doesn't help.

    The dodgy humour started in SF. Popping cuffs is apparently Craig's equivalent of Brosnan's tie straightening (because it was so cool and funny first time round).

    I don't know what Mendes saw in Craig's CR performance that made him want to totally change the character in SF and SP.

    I don't agree with that. I think Craig's major strength is that he actually has thought the character through.
    He gave his younger Bond a degree of arrogance and cockiness in CR which lead him to make mistakes, but get where he needed to be through sheer bloody mindedness.

    In QOS he's bitter and aloof because of Vesper. More accepting of death, certainly more casual about his own life.

    In SF it's definitely the same man, a few years later, seasoned for sure. Then he feels let down, abandoned by the one person he trusts above all others. He goes after Silva knowing this is his last chance. But his casual approach to life and his world weariness (00s have a short life expectancy - he knows that, he said that) is showing. How is this not the same man who sat on a train with Vesper, as a smug young 00?

    In SP his anger only now shows through in the fights. He controls his demons better, he's more relaxed, more self confident, but those demons are still there.

    Unlike Brosnan whose biggest weakness is that he played 4 slightly different versions of Bond, Craig nails the characters development over a number of years. Yes he is a tormented soul (as Bond was in the books), but that is the character in this time line. He has to see it through now. If anyone wants a fluffy Bond who gets his mission from M in scene 1 and jokes his way through the mission, shagging girls and toppling mega rich psychos then maybe you will be in luck next time.

    If that happens, no one will cheer louder than me, but Craig has been superb playing this tortured soul version of Bond.
    Bond having some rough experiences in CR and QoS is one thing, but SF more or less verbatim repeating the character difficulties from the previous two films results in Bond being a grumpy loser who doesn´t get his act together, which in turn ridicules the British Secret Service.

  • Posts: 9,853
    Shrugs we will see if this is true or not

    Personally I like Benedict much more then Angelina Jolie
  • Posts: 3,164
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.

    yeah that's now crossed the line for me into 'he must be trolling'
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    In other news, Helena Bonham Carter is our next rumored contender for villain of B25.

    https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/969023/James-Bond-25-villain-Helena-Bonham-Carter-Angelina-Jolie-Daniel-Craig
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    Did we? I checked out the last couple pages but didn't see it mentioned.
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 3,164
    Cashley's rep aside, Golshifteh would be quite an inspired choice for the protege (if that story element is true also). Her only real big break was Paterson with Adam Driver, which she was pretty great in. People have been calling for her to get more high profile stuff since.

    (inb4 someone mentions how 'PC-pandering' this casting would be)
  • Posts: 6,017
    The same news appeared on CBR :

    https://cbr.com/james-bond-25-helena-bonham-carter-rumor/

    But there is a big mistake in the news :

    " Although both Naomie Harris and Judy Dench has been female powerhouses in the latest era of the franchise, there is yet to be a woman to face off against Bond in any form of villainous capacity."

    Really ? What about Fiona (TB), Helga Brandt (YOLT) Rosa Klebb, Irma Bunt, Elektra, Xenia, and so on ? Granted, the male to female ratio of Bond villains is more to the side of the males, but that doesn't mean that female villains have not been present.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    Gerard wrote: »
    The same news appeared on CBR :

    https://cbr.com/james-bond-25-helena-bonham-carter-rumor/

    But there is a big mistake in the news :

    " Although both Naomie Harris and Judy Dench has been female powerhouses in the latest era of the franchise, there is yet to be a woman to face off against Bond in any form of villainous capacity."

    Really ? What about Fiona (TB), Helga Brandt (YOLT) Rosa Klebb, Irma Bunt, Elektra, Xenia, and so on ? Granted, the male to female ratio of Bond villains is more to the side of the males, but that doesn't mean that female villains have not been present.

    The quote says "latest era of the franchise," so none of those count.
  • Posts: 12,514
    I say Valenka still counts, but that's about it.

    Also, highly doubt the Cumberbatch thing too. It comes from CashleyPersia so I automatically doubt it highly.
  • Posts: 12,526
    Interesting to see if David Arnold comes back onboard with Danny Boyle? If he does? Hopefully we may get a rendition of the 007 theme after so many years?!!!
  • Posts: 11,425
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.

    He has also mentioned Golshifteh Farahani

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golshifteh_Farahani

    interesting casting. she seems Boyles type as well
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 11,425
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.

    He has also mentioned Golshifteh Farahani

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golshifteh_Farahani

    interesting casting. she seems Boyles type as well.

    young enough to be Craig's daughter practically. are we starting to stray into Rog territory now. will Dan cook her a quiche?

  • Posts: 3,164
    Getafix wrote: »
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.

    He has also mentioned Golshifteh Farahani

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golshifteh_Farahani

    interesting casting. she seems Boyles type as well.

    young enough to be Craig's daughter practically. are we starting to stray into Rog territory now. will Dan cook her a quiche?

    or maybe he doesn't sleep with her at all. imagine that lol
  • Posts: 12,514
    We are indeed in Rog territory if the next Bond girl is younger than 30. However, I have a feeling we may get something like SF again without a long-term, traditional Bond girl. Or maybe even like Camille in QOS, who was much more like an ally than a romantic partner.
  • AgentJamesBond007AgentJamesBond007 Vesper’s grave
    edited June 2018 Posts: 2,634
    Getafix wrote: »
    Latest from CashleyPersia: Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JamesBond/comments/8ohahk/benedict_cumberbatch_in_bond_25/

    This is very likely BS.

    He has also mentioned Golshifteh Farahani

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golshifteh_Farahani

    interesting casting. she seems Boyles type as well.

    young enough to be Craig's daughter practically. are we starting to stray into Rog territory now. will Dan cook her a quiche?

    She's 34, turning 35 in a month, and Craig is 50. That's a 15-ish year difference. According to this, 12 films had an age difference equal to or greater than 15 years.
  • Posts: 12,837
    boldfinger wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    foolish of Craig if that's indeed what he said.

    He should have realised that the reason Moore's humour worked so well was that it was tailored to him. The lack of a recurring screenwriter who 'gets' the actor doesn't help.

    The dodgy humour started in SF. Popping cuffs is apparently Craig's equivalent of Brosnan's tie straightening (because it was so cool and funny first time round).

    I don't know what Mendes saw in Craig's CR performance that made him want to totally change the character in SF and SP.

    I don't agree with that. I think Craig's major strength is that he actually has thought the character through.
    He gave his younger Bond a degree of arrogance and cockiness in CR which lead him to make mistakes, but get where he needed to be through sheer bloody mindedness.

    In QOS he's bitter and aloof because of Vesper. More accepting of death, certainly more casual about his own life.

    In SF it's definitely the same man, a few years later, seasoned for sure. Then he feels let down, abandoned by the one person he trusts above all others. He goes after Silva knowing this is his last chance. But his casual approach to life and his world weariness (00s have a short life expectancy - he knows that, he said that) is showing. How is this not the same man who sat on a train with Vesper, as a smug young 00?

    In SP his anger only now shows through in the fights. He controls his demons better, he's more relaxed, more self confident, but those demons are still there.

    Unlike Brosnan whose biggest weakness is that he played 4 slightly different versions of Bond, Craig nails the characters development over a number of years. Yes he is a tormented soul (as Bond was in the books), but that is the character in this time line. He has to see it through now. If anyone wants a fluffy Bond who gets his mission from M in scene 1 and jokes his way through the mission, shagging girls and toppling mega rich psychos then maybe you will be in luck next time.

    If that happens, no one will cheer louder than me, but Craig has been superb playing this tortured soul version of Bond.
    Bond having some rough experiences in CR and QoS is one thing, but SF more or less verbatim repeating the character difficulties from the previous two films results in Bond being a grumpy loser who doesn´t get his act together, which in turn ridicules the British Secret Service.

    I think the problem with CR/QoS/SF is that they all have the same basic character arc. Bond becoming, or getting back to being, the Bond we know. Cue tired 2006 arrangement of the Bond theme. What I really liked about SP is how they did some interesting character stuff without repeating that. Bond is as skilled, professional and self assured as he was in any of the Connery to Brosnan movies, but the character stuff came from him questioning the path he'd gone down by being reminded of the man he used to be by the Vesper tape.

    I thought it worked really well. Reintroducing the classic Bond stuff and making him more like the original cinematic version could have been really jarring, going from staring at himself in the bathroom mirror wondering what he was doing after killing a man to cracking one liners about it a few films later. But imo they made it work by drawing attention to this change and turning it into a character point.
  • Posts: 12,514
    Bond has unique struggles in each one of Craig’s entries. Maybe they all have Bond becoming Bond as well, but there are interesting ideas explored in each film that can’t be found in another one. People complain about Craig’s Bond films being too melodramatic. I don’t see it. I think the internal struggles are handled subtly and nicely almost every time.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Where I personally have difficulties is that the 'arc' revolves around one person or actor for what has been a very long time.

    That's unusual for this series. I can appreciate how fans of his like it. If one is engaged in his 'arc', then one buys into it. If one isn't on the other hand, then I hope folks can understand that it becomes rather tiresome for others.

    What works on the written page in terms of character development is less easy to translate into the cinematic screen over a 13 to 14 year timeframe (which is quite long by any standards). If they'd churned these out a little quicker with the narrative continuity or arc (say four films over a seven year period like they did with Brozza, three films over a seven year period like they did with the Bat trilogy or even three films over a six year period as was done with the original Bourne trilogy) then I perhaps could have bought into it more readily but the gaps have unfortunately led me to lose interest in the character progression.

    I can understand that others are still fully engaged and that's fine.
  • Posts: 6,601
    How can that be? I mean, I cant believe, you lost interest? You are here practically 24/7. more then any other member. That looks like a lot of interest to me, really.
Sign In or Register to comment.