› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…16541655165716591660…2507

Comments

  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    edited August 2018 Posts: 1,261
    And why did Craig have creative fall-outs with two of the three directors he worked with as Bond, Campbell and Mendes? I never recall Connery to refuse to work with eiter Young, Hamilton, or Gilbert. The main problem with Connery was, that he was fed up with being Bond when it came to do YOLT. And Sir Rog never had troubles with directors, but then Moore, was an easy-to-handle-actor. And I know Dalton and Glen had a feud, when it came to do the COLUMBUS movie in 1991, but not during TLD and LTK. Same with Brosnan. I like Craig as Bond, but maybe the influence he was and is given by BB and MGW might be also a problem. They should maybe do away with it with the next Bond actor.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Okay is Hodge's script in our out? So far only the Guardian from what I know says the script has been thrown out.
  • CatchingBulletsCatchingBullets facebook.com/catchingbullets
    Posts: 292
    A FAREWELL TO ARMS - What Boyle bailing at the 007th hour may mean for Bond 25...

    https://markoconnell.co.uk/a-farewell-to-arms-boyle-bails-from-bond-at-the-007th-hour/
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    I'm trying to see the light at the end of the tunnel here. When they hired Boyle, I saw progress as well as an interesting creative angle. Now it feels like we're back at square one.
  • Escalus5Escalus5
    edited August 2018 Posts: 628
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    And I know Dalton and Glen had a feiud, when it came to do the COLUMBUS movie, but not during TLD and LTK. Same with Brosnan. I like Craig as Bond, but maybe the influence he was and is given by BB and MGW might be also a problem. They should maybe do away with it with the next Bond actor.

    Dalton and Glen actually feuded toward the end of production on LTK. They never worked together on CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS: THE DISCOVERY; Dalton left the production when the Salkinds hired Glen without consulting him (Dalton had stipulated in his contract that he would have a say in who directed).

    But yes, Craig may be a big part of the problem here. He did not get along with Campbell (and could well have vetoed the idea of inviting him back for QOS) or Mendes.

  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,261
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    If Campbell is no good director, then what made CR so nearly universally praised must have been the script then ... written by P&W.

    I think they all worked together very well and that‘s what made CR so good. In my opinion they (Campbell and P&W) get too much criticism. In fact I think P&W wrote the parts of the script of SP that worked.

    Anyway ... if a former Bond director returns I hope for Forster or Campbell, honestly. But not Mendes. I praise Mendes for Skyfall and I kinda hate him for what he in large parts did to the wonderful movie SPECTRE could have been.

    Yes, amazing, two bad screenwriters (plus the "leftist" Paul Haggis), one incompetent director, and it's one of the most popular entries in the fracnhise. As Mr Henslow put it: "It's a mystery!"
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2018 Posts: 23,883
    talos7 wrote: »
    PeterGreenhill wrote: »
    According to this Guardian article, the Hodges script is dumped. Purvis and Wade's will be polished. Craig may go off the project and the earliest we see the film is late 2020:

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/aug/22/danny-boyle-james-bond-daniel-craig

    All right then, a relaunch with a new actor.

    Campbell +. Hemsworth + Arnold
    I can go for this, but would prefer no Arnold.
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    My vote would be Hiddleston with Susanne Bier directing and Steven Knight writing.
    I'd be perfectly fine with this also. Hiddleston and Bier make a good team.
    ---

    It's obviously too early to speculate about a recast at this point, even though it would be my preference. Let's see what they do in the next month or so in terms of fixing this mess. I hope they take their time and get this right rather than rush to churn out some half a$$#d effort. That never works well.

    As I said earlier, a possible issue now is buzz. Would this be seen as another tainted and stained production before release? There's too much at stake for that. I wish them well
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    I have a feeling these difference had to do with Craig IMO. As history has shown us Babs will do anything and everything to make Craig happy. Don’t be surprised if Craig has these produces kissing his feet
  • PussyNoMorePussyNoMore
    Posts: 520
    An interesting hiatus for the franchise and one that PussyNoMore welcomes.
    Given the competitive set and the success of the long form, the time is right to look at the whole thing.
    eon have clung on to this superhero blockbuster nonsense for way too long to the detriment of allowing somebody to bring Fleming's Bond, preferably in period guise, to the big and, or small screen !
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,399
    It's like that article said, Craig has been in the role for a long time, and the films don't seem to be as fresh anymore. How we ever got into this predicament in the first place is beyond me, but we only have three options now. Either they rush something out to meet the release date, and Craig most likely won't "end on a high" like some had hoped, OR they push back the release six months to a year and focus on giving Craig that "proper" sendoff, OR they cut there loses and act quickly, ditching Craig and searching for a new actor and director to start a new era.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    And why did Craig have creative fall-outs with two of the three directors he worked with as Bond, Campbell and Mendes? I never recall Connery to refuse to work with eiter Young, Hamilton, or Gilbert. The main problem with Connery was, that he was fed up with being Bond when it came to do YOLT. And Sir Rog never had troubles with directors, but then Moore, was an easy-to-handle-actor. And I know Dalton and Glen had a feud, when it came to do the COLUMBUS movie in 1991, but not during TLD and LTK. Same with Brosnan. I like Craig as Bond, but maybe the influence he was and is given by BB and MGW might be also a problem. They should maybe do away with it with the next Bond actor.

    Indeed. I have read in certain places that Brosnan had a couple of battles with Tamahori and Spottiswoode whilst he was Bond, but Babs and co always ended up siding with the director, for better or worse. It definitely seems that they have flipped it around for Craig, though.

    Thank the lord this is his last movie. I shall be looking forward to Bond 26 a lot more than I am this.
  • TR007TR007
    Posts: 1,165
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    And I know Dalton and Glen had a feiud, when it came to do the COLUMBUS movie, but not during TLD and LTK. Same with Brosnan. I like Craig as Bond, but maybe the influence he was and is given by BB and MGW might be also a problem. They should maybe do away with it with the next Bond actor.

    Dalton and Glen actually feuded toward the end of production on LTK. They never worked together on CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS: THE DISCOVERY; Dalton left the production when the Salkinds hired Glen without consulting him (Dalton had stipulated in his contract that he would have a say in who directed).

    But yes, Craig may be a big part of the problem here. He did not get along with Campbell (and could well have vetoed the idea of inviting him back for QOS) or Mendes.

    Whoa. This is the first I'm hearing of Craig having disputes with Campbell. What happened there?
  • Pierce2DanielPierce2Daniel
    edited August 2018 Posts: 4,409
    Danny Boyle left the film over a dispute in casting

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/22/danny-boyle-quits-bond-dispute-films-russian-villain/

    Boyle wanted to cast Tomasz Kot as the villain but Craig vetoed it. So Boyle bailed.

    Eon are also unhappy with the overly political tone of the script and its Russia themes. Though, this is disputed.

    Apparently, Boyle was sacked.

    It seems as though Barbara never wanted John Hodge on the movie. They may go back to the P&W script which is described as more traditional.

    0005L8VJ3ERLR20S-C122-F4.jpg
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    Danny Boyle left the film over a dispute in casting


    Boyle wanted to cast Tomasz Kot as the villain but Craig vetoed it. So Boyle bailed.

    Eon are also unhappy with the overly political tone of the script and its Russia themes.

    0005L8VJ3ERLR20S-C122-F4.jpg

    Source?
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    Danny Boyle left the film over a dispute in casting


    Boyle wanted to cast Tomasz Kot as the villain but Craig vetoed it. So Boyle bailed.

    Eon are also unhappy with the overly political tone of the script and its Russia themes.

    Apparently Boyle was sacked

    0005L8VJ3ERLR20S-C122-F4.jpg

    Politics ruin everything
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2018 Posts: 8,399
    P + W script it is then.
  • JeffreyJeffrey The Netherlands
    Posts: 308
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    P + W script it is then.

    Or some rewriting... (if its even true).
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    Wasn’t it rumored somewhere that P & W script was an adaptation of YOLT?
  • skullkrusherskullkrusher
    Posts: 212
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    Danny Boyle left the film over a dispute in casting


    Boyle wanted to cast Tomasz Kot as the villain but Craig vetoed it. So Boyle bailed.

    Eon are also unhappy with the overly political tone of the script and its Russia themes.

    0005L8VJ3ERLR20S-C122-F4.jpg

    Source?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/22/danny-boyle-quits-bond-dispute-films-russian-villain/
  • Escalus5Escalus5
    edited August 2018 Posts: 628
    TROO7 wrote:
    Whoa. This is the first I'm hearing of Craig having disputes with Campbell. What happened there?

    This came up earlier in the thread (I'll see if I can find the post and add it here as an edit). Basically Campbell was a strict taskmaster on CR, and Craig did not like his approach. Campbell wanted to direct QOS but was not asked back; he suspects it was because of Craig.

    This was not reported by the press -- it was included in a Facebook post by someone in the industry who spoke to Campbell at an event, so make of that what you will.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Wasn’t it rumored somewhere that P & W script was an adaptation of YOLT?

    Just speculation among members here.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    Here is a link to the story on the villain casting:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/22/danny-boyle-quits-bond-dispute-films-russian-villain/

    The article mentions that the Purvis/Wade script was already finished. Hmm. That's the first I have heard of that. If so, that adds a wrinkle to this story.

    I know some will have an emotional breakdown if this happens, but do not be surprised if Mendes is brought in to "save the day." That's the only type of scenario in which I can see him returning. I'd be OK with it if Mendes sticks to the script and doesn't turn it into another self-indulgent project like SP. I like Mendes as a director, though he seems full of himself--which means he'd be apt to saying, "You need ME to come in their and save Bond 25? Of course you do."
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited August 2018 Posts: 17,756
    "Craig has a big say in all the casting decisions. None of the Bond girls have been chosen without his say so," the source said.
    If this is in any way true, then Craig has way to much to say in the production side of things. I really hope the next guy won't have that luxury.
    The 41-year-old Polish actor stars in Cold War, a love story set in 1950s Europe, and was described as a "left-field" decision for a Bond enemy.
    Also, How do they mean "left-field"?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    "Craig has a big say in all the casting decisions. None of the Bond girls have been chosen without his say so," the source said.
    If this is in any way true, then Craig has way to much to say in the production side of things. I really hope the next guy won't have that luxury.

    Only as much as Tom Cruise in M:I, but I guess that doesn’t suit certain agendas.
  • TroyTroy
    Posts: 342
    PeterGreenhill wrote: »
    According to this Guardian article, the Hodges script is dumped. Purvis and Wade's will be polished. Craig may go off the project and the earliest we see the film is late 2020:

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/aug/22/danny-boyle-james-bond-daniel-craig

    The article talks about Boyle’ film having an usual theme - such as Bond incarcerated. And Boyle talks about updating Bind to the “MeToo” era. Love to know what that could be.

    Maybe they were going to update the basic FRWL story by having a Russian honey trap get Bond jailed for sexual assault? And, maybe replaced by Elba as acting-007, but is really a Russian agent.

    Sound good? or worth sacking the Director for coming up with such nonsense?

  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,473
    If true, the modern Cold War idea sounds pretty awesome in theory. A shame if they’re not able to keep that idea at least, and Boyle was simply fired over one casting choice. My guess though is that that was more of a final straw, and the producers generally felt that he wanted too much control.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    sounds like There has been a serious lack of professionalism by someone.

    Someone's been throwing the toys out of the pram.

    pretty sorry state of affairs for everyone involved really
  • Benjamin_Weekly69Benjamin_Weekly69 London
    Posts: 727
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    PeterGreenhill wrote: »
    If Craig leaves then forget 3rd December for start of shooting. Even if he stays can they knock the Purvis/Wade script into shape and have a competent director in place to meet the 3rd December deadline? Also the production has been geared around the Hodges script, the Purvis/Wade script is unrelated..........big change of direction for the production.

    But do we want that?
    At the end of the day I want a good bond film and this whole rushing thing can’t be can it?
    talos7 wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Well, Hemsworth can't act, can't carry a movie, and has no box office draw if he's not playing Thor.

    Other than that -- no, I have no doubts.

    Obviously we have different appraisals. Lol.

    Isn’t he Australian?
    We know how that went last time...
    You are kidding. right? So ALL Australians are the same? It was because he was an Aussie that Lazenby didn’t ultimately work out?
    Actually, considering his virtual lack of any acting experience, he was quite good; had he done more films, he would have grown into the rol nicely.

    No but in the same way a black shouldn’t play bond, I don’t think an American/ Australian should either.

    Australia is in the commonwealth.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    One can only speculate when commenting on speculations.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Benjamin_Weekly69 wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    PeterGreenhill wrote: »
    If Craig leaves then forget 3rd December for start of shooting. Even if he stays can they knock the Purvis/Wade script into shape and have a competent director in place to meet the 3rd December deadline? Also the production has been geared around the Hodges script, the Purvis/Wade script is unrelated..........big change of direction for the production.

    But do we want that?
    At the end of the day I want a good bond film and this whole rushing thing can’t be can it?
    talos7 wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    Well, Hemsworth can't act, can't carry a movie, and has no box office draw if he's not playing Thor.

    Other than that -- no, I have no doubts.

    Obviously we have different appraisals. Lol.

    Isn’t he Australian?
    We know how that went last time...
    You are kidding. right? So ALL Australians are the same? It was because he was an Aussie that Lazenby didn’t ultimately work out?
    Actually, considering his virtual lack of any acting experience, he was quite good; had he done more films, he would have grown into the rol nicely.

    No but in the same way a black shouldn’t play bond, I don’t think an American/ Australian should either.

    Australia is in the commonwealth.

    And Lazenby was an Aussie so we've had Aussie Bond already - another taboo broken
Sign In or Register to comment.