No Time To Die: Production Diary

1172417251727172917302507

Comments

  • edited September 2018 Posts: 6,709
    Nolan would probably want even more creative freedom than Boyle would have gotten, but it would be far less risky to give him that freedom. He has directed several big budget spectacles that turned out to be huge crowd-pleasers. Also, it's pretty likely Nolan would deliver a script EON would completely be happy with, as he (unlike Hodge) has a lot of experience wrtining the kind of movies Bond movies are.

    I'm a big Nolan fan. Huge, really. And I really think he would give us something different from what as clearly been a series of films influenced by his - well, two anyway. I believe he would honour Bond's legacy like no one could. Plus, I would hope he'd write it from top to bottom, him and his brother. The only thing that would worry me would be the casting. That being said, it's an EON show, and I think it's being passed on to new the new gen. Gregg seemed very keen. And I think that's the way to go with these family things. I don't believe they'll sell. So, you see, Mr. PP, that our tastes are maybe aligned. I just wish you weren't so angst ridden all of the time ;) And this is about Bond 25, and I think we'll both agree that Nolan won't get near it. Unfortunately.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 1,661
    Based on all the information (be it fact or rumour) here's my idea how this has all panned out.

    After the release of SPECTRE Daniel Craig decides to quit. He's tired of the role. He believes he's taken the character as far as he can. Craig wants to move on with his career. He tells Eon that he doesn't want to come back but Barbara Broccoli believes she can change his mind. She tells him "don't worry, we won't fast-track Bond 25 into production. Take your time to think it over."

    Craig agrees to think it over. It takes him over a year and a half to make up his mind. "I'll return but I need to retain co-producer credit. I have say regarding hiring the director, the writers, the plot, and key cast." Barabra says "of course, whatever you want, Daniel!" Craig is happy to return because he believes he has enough control over the content of the film.

    Meanwhile Purvis and Wade come up with a draft Bond 25 screenplay. Barbara and MG like bits of it but not fully impressed.

    Danny Boyle meets up with Craig and Craig suggests he should direct Bond 25. Boyle's natural reaction is no "it's not my sort of thing, I prefer smaller films" but Craig says "consider it." Boyle gives it some thought. He contacts his long-term screenwriting friend John Hodge. They come up with a 'great idea' for Bond 25 and present a first draft or outline to Eon and Craig. The producers/Craig love the idea. It's a departure from previous Bond films. Boyle and Doyle are officially hired to write/direct Bond 25. Boyle arranges his schedule to accommodate Bond 25. The Purvis and Wade screenplay is left dormant.

    Hodge's screenplay goes through various rewrites. A few months pass and Craig tells Barbara that he's unhappy with bits of the storyline. Perhaps the storyline is too modest, not ambitious enough. Perhaps Craig believes his Bond should die and Hodge won't compromise. Perhaps the 'great idea' which impressed Eon a few months earlier doesn't gel with Craig's version of Bond and it's been scaled down. Hodge believes the heart of his storyline has been taken away. Hodge tells Boyle "this isn't what I signed up for. Eon and Craig have stripped away too much of my storyline. When I mention this to the producers and Craig they just ignore me. They don't respect what I wrote."

    Boyle believes he can convince Eon/Craig to keep most of Boyle's screenplay. "Don't worry, John, I'll sort it out."

    Pre-production continues and the tension mounts. Craig and Boyle argue over the casting of the main villain. Parts of Boyle's last rewrite are rejected by Craig. Craig tells Barbara that "the story is not right, we need a new writer. Hodge isn't up to the task." Barbara agrees with Craig. Hodge finds out that his last rewrite is not good enough. He is upset and fed up, and leaves before he's fired. The other scenario is he's fired.

    Boyle finds out Hodge has gone. Boyle and Hodge were a team - both of them work on Bond 25 or both go. Their storyline for Bond 25 is a joint effort. Boyle asks Eon to reinstate Hodge but Craig is adamant Hodge's work is not to an acceptable standard. Eon say they won't reinstate Hodge nor use his screenplay. Boyle has no other option but to leave.

    The producers and Craig are left with no director and a first draft Purvis and Wade screenplay.



  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,996
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    "Tense situation behind the scenes, finding a director prepared to be ruled over by Mr Craig.”

    I guess the decision to make him a producer has kind of backfired. I thought he was just the hired actor but now he chooses the director and can fire the writer? Meh, whatever. Seems pretty clear Craig and Boyle didn't get on. Clash of personalties or ideas.

    Reading between the lines, Baz Bamgboye item many be suggesting any new director will have to watch their mouth and not speak out. Just follow orders. I'm wondering if this is a PR blunder for Eon and MGM? There may be many directors reluctant to direct Bond 25 for fear of Craig and Babs ordering them about! Perhaps.

    I think Craig has too much power. Fair enough, if Babs and MG give him the power he's not going to say no. Well, I suppose he could but if he's a co-producer then he's got a huge amount of power and if the power isn't directed in a productive way it can backfire - Boyle/Hodge's leaving the film.

    What also seems clear is that you're jumping to far too many conclusions.

    How do you know Craig and Boyle, 'didn't get on'? Please do tell what inside info you have that this is the case.

    Craig is the best thing to happen to Bond in many years. And with him we got 3 very good Bond films and 1 disappointing one. Not bad going.

    Looking forward to 25 and if it's as good as Craig's first 3 i'll be happy.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 2018 Posts: 8,392
    simnew wrote: »
    This whole episode highlights the need to actually go back to stand alone films. And Craig with his thuggish Bond is an impediment to that I suspect.

    In my view the best thing they could have done is started with a fresh actor and a new lighter more fun approach. Mission Impossible films are beginning to look like masterpieces in the context of what has been happening with Bond recently.

    Maybe it really is time to close the chapter on James Bond as These latest films really don’t have a lot in common with their forebears. The problem is that if you base everything on current affairs then the story will seem quite ordinary. If you base the story on a fantasy it can become more timeless and we have lost the surprise factor in the latest films along with a lot of the style and surprise that the earlier films had.

    I agree wholeheartedly. What are they doing, hanging around for a director, when they can just recast and start afresh? Yes, it might mean a longer wait, but at the end we'll get a new, exciting film instead of what they will be able to cobble together with Craig. Bond actors never go out on a high, not the ones who are around for more than a film or two. You could say that Craig can buck the trend, but the publicity and news coming out of EON aren't exactly encouraging are they? Writers sacked, Boyle and Hodge out, and film haven't even started yet! The chances of Bond 25 being a masterpiece with 50/1 year old Craig not really interested is very slim. So if the best Bond 25 can hope for is something on par with SP, what's even the point in continuing with it?SP is not good, but if Craig quits now, he will be held in much higher regard than if he goes out on a stinker. He would be much better spending the time with his new child.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 1,661
    Said in hindsight, Eon/Craig (if he has power over choosing director/writer) screwed up going with Hodge/Boyle. They're not a natural fit for James Bond films! Heck, you could argue Sam Mendes wasn't a natural fit for Bond but Mendes wasn't too bothered about the story. Clearly Hodge/Boyle are more er... 'sensitive' types. What I mean is, the pay cheque isn't the only consideration. If their vision is compromised they will walk (or be fired!).

    It does take a certain amount of 'balls' (pardon the expression!) for a director to quit a Bond film. It's never happened before. Most directors/writers would just accept all the creative changes and be happy for the work and money. Boyle appears to be different.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Said in hindsight, Eon/Craig (if he has power over choosing director/writer) screwed up going with Hodge/Boyle. They're not a natural fit for James Bond films! Heck, you could argue Sam Mendes wasn't a natural fit for Bond but Mendes wasn't too bothered about the story. Clearly Hodge/Boyle are more er... 'sensitive' types. What I mean is, the pay cheque isn't the only consideration. If their vision is compromised they will walk (or be fired!).

    It does take a certain amount of 'balls' (pardon the expression!) for a director to quit a Bond film. It's never happened before. Most directors/writers would just accept all the creative changes and be happy for the work and money. Boyle appears to be different.

    Yes, and they are left with a first draft and no director. Each day that passes without an announcement, the project becomes less certain.
  • Posts: 9,843
    Again the sky is not falling and there are plenty of directors who would happily jump on board..

    Heck some have even made a career of it
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Getafix wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    You know, I remember a member from years ago (circa 2006?) who had some issues with Craig and claimed to be better suited himself to play Bond. He was bald, btw, and a true delusional guy, obsessive on his points, to the point of being anti-social and passive aggressive.
    I do remember that moron. He wasn't passive aggressive, he was full on 100% aggressive. Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Btw, Gustav_Graves and Germanlady are members I truly miss. I do not miss the pompousness and arrogance of the Colonel at all.

    And these were my final words on the Colonel.

    Getafix wrote: »
    I think what happened with Boyle is going to make it much harder for EON to hire big name directors.
    That's a very good point, and I do agree that it's generally true for big name directors but I think Nolan is an exception. Giving Boyle a lot of creative freedom was always a risky move by EON, because he has never directed a truly big budget movie before (his biggest movie yet is The Beach), and he has never done anything like a Bond movie.

    Nolan would probably want even more creative freedom than Boyle would have gotten, but it would be far less risky to give him that freedom. He has directed several big budget spectacles that turned out to be huge crowd-pleasers. Also, it's pretty likely Nolan would deliver a script EON would completely be happy with, as he (unlike Hodge) has a lot of experience wrtining the kind of movies Bond movies are.

    I'm sure you're right about Nolan's experience.

    But would EON be willing to relinquish control to the extend Nolan would probably expect/require. And would they be able to come to a working agreement that avoided more 'creative differences' on B26?

    If Nolan is used to writing, producing and directing then it seems highly unlikely to me (under current arrangements) that we would be willing or able to work with EON.

    Look at the privileges EoN have afforded to Craig. I have no doubt in my mind that EoN will drop their pants for Nolan quicker than one can raise their eyebrow.

    Nolan is a good director and I for one am not always happy with his choices but he's a Bond fan and hopefully he could do something interesting with the character and to be fair, going forward EoN needs him more than he needs them.
  • Posts: 9,843
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    You know, I remember a member from years ago (circa 2006?) who had some issues with Craig and claimed to be better suited himself to play Bond. He was bald, btw, and a true delusional guy, obsessive on his points, to the point of being anti-social and passive aggressive.
    I do remember that moron. He wasn't passive aggressive, he was full on 100% aggressive. Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Btw, Gustav_Graves and Germanlady are members I truly miss. I do not miss the pompousness and arrogance of the Colonel at all.

    And these were my final words on the Colonel.

    Getafix wrote: »
    I think what happened with Boyle is going to make it much harder for EON to hire big name directors.
    That's a very good point, and I do agree that it's generally true for big name directors but I think Nolan is an exception. Giving Boyle a lot of creative freedom was always a risky move by EON, because he has never directed a truly big budget movie before (his biggest movie yet is The Beach), and he has never done anything like a Bond movie.

    Nolan would probably want even more creative freedom than Boyle would have gotten, but it would be far less risky to give him that freedom. He has directed several big budget spectacles that turned out to be huge crowd-pleasers. Also, it's pretty likely Nolan would deliver a script EON would completely be happy with, as he (unlike Hodge) has a lot of experience wrtining the kind of movies Bond movies are.

    I'm sure you're right about Nolan's experience.

    But would EON be willing to relinquish control to the extend Nolan would probably expect/require. And would they be able to come to a working agreement that avoided more 'creative differences' on B26?

    If Nolan is used to writing, producing and directing then it seems highly unlikely to me (under current arrangements) that we would be willing or able to work with EON.

    Look at the privileges EoN have afforded to Craig. I have no doubt in my mind that EoN will drop their pants for Nolan quicker than one can raise their eyebrow.

    Nolan is a good director and I for one am not always happy with his choices but he's a Bond fan and hopefully he could do something interesting with the character and to be fair, going forward EoN needs him more than he needs them.

    And what if Nolan insists on say Tom Hardy as 007....

    Now let me be clear I would be fine with either Hardy or Cillian Murphy being Bond number 7 others on this board would not so remember Nolan likes to work with people he trusts and considering he casted Hardy as a 007 wannabe in Inception (seriously I wonder through the entire shoot did Nolan say Hardy just be more like Sean Connery .... more .... more) my guess if Nolan had his choice of who to play Bond we already know who...
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Risico007 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    You know, I remember a member from years ago (circa 2006?) who had some issues with Craig and claimed to be better suited himself to play Bond. He was bald, btw, and a true delusional guy, obsessive on his points, to the point of being anti-social and passive aggressive.
    I do remember that moron. He wasn't passive aggressive, he was full on 100% aggressive. Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Btw, Gustav_Graves and Germanlady are members I truly miss. I do not miss the pompousness and arrogance of the Colonel at all.

    And these were my final words on the Colonel.

    Getafix wrote: »
    I think what happened with Boyle is going to make it much harder for EON to hire big name directors.
    That's a very good point, and I do agree that it's generally true for big name directors but I think Nolan is an exception. Giving Boyle a lot of creative freedom was always a risky move by EON, because he has never directed a truly big budget movie before (his biggest movie yet is The Beach), and he has never done anything like a Bond movie.

    Nolan would probably want even more creative freedom than Boyle would have gotten, but it would be far less risky to give him that freedom. He has directed several big budget spectacles that turned out to be huge crowd-pleasers. Also, it's pretty likely Nolan would deliver a script EON would completely be happy with, as he (unlike Hodge) has a lot of experience wrtining the kind of movies Bond movies are.

    I'm sure you're right about Nolan's experience.

    But would EON be willing to relinquish control to the extend Nolan would probably expect/require. And would they be able to come to a working agreement that avoided more 'creative differences' on B26?

    If Nolan is used to writing, producing and directing then it seems highly unlikely to me (under current arrangements) that we would be willing or able to work with EON.

    Look at the privileges EoN have afforded to Craig. I have no doubt in my mind that EoN will drop their pants for Nolan quicker than one can raise their eyebrow.

    Nolan is a good director and I for one am not always happy with his choices but he's a Bond fan and hopefully he could do something interesting with the character and to be fair, going forward EoN needs him more than he needs them.

    And what if Nolan insists on say Tom Hardy as 007....

    Now let me be clear I would be fine with either Hardy or Cillian Murphy being Bond number 7 others on this board would not so remember Nolan likes to work with people he trusts and considering he casted Hardy as a 007 wannabe in Inception (seriously I wonder through the entire shoot did Nolan say Hardy just be more like Sean Connery .... more .... more) my guess if Nolan had his choice of who to play Bond we already know who...

    Has Nolan come out and said he'd like for Hardy or Murphy to be Bond? If not then it's just unsubstantiated paranoid speculation.
  • Posts: 6,709
    Risico007 wrote: »
    And what if Nolan insists on say Tom Hardy as 007....

    Well, and this is from a Nolan fan. If he does that, then F. him. Hardy is an overrated brute with puffy lips. I wouldn't want him near a Bond flick. Nor any of the Nolan regulars for that matter. None except Michael Caine, just because his friend (Connery) would have a laugh knowing that. Heck, give him a role like Laurence Olivier in Marathon Man and I'd be happy. But none of the other regulars. Not even Cotillard.
  • Posts: 6,709
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Has Nolan come out and said he'd like for Hardy or Murphy to be Bond? If not then it's just unsubstantiated paranoid speculation.

    Never heard of it either, thankfully.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I'd much prefer Murphy than Hardy, I like Hardy but he's totally unsuitable for Bond, Cillian would give the role some refinement that Hardy lacks.

    To be honest if Nolan did direct bearing mind he had a say in who got cast if it was still with EON when he gets his opportunity I think if he's got any sense and I'd say he had, he'd cast neither of them and go for a relative unknown.

    The time you start casting names in the role shows no faith in the brand itself and you need something else to make it work. The star is made with the role not the other way round, it's tried tested and true.

    @PanchitoPistoles you have the gaul to call the @ColonelSun arrogant and pompous when you are one of the most arrogant members on the board, dismissing others views as they don't track with your obsessive one tracked mission to convince everyone that Christopher Nolan is going to take over Bond soon.

    I'll take the odd piece of gold from our friend the Colonel over your drivel anyday of the week, some peoples post counts are full pointless guff and some of yours would do better fertilizing the lawn.

    Your posts are just full of your own opinion with nothing to back it up but your own obsession, time to take a look in the mirror.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 2018 Posts: 8,392
    Nolan would deliver a breathtaking vision of what Bond can be. EON are clearly out of ideas, they need someone to come in who knows what their doing. Who cares if he wants Hardy as the next Bond, there are worst choices out there. Just let him reimagine Bond how he wants it, and I have no doubt it will surprise the naysayers. Nolan is more of a modern day cinematic magician, like the Bond directors of old, how continually set out to surprise and excite with their tricks. Yes, Nolan films are more emotional, but that is only one a small piece of the overall pie. Point being he is a man who respects tradition and heritage and will do Bond justice. Apparently he says his vision for Bond has been spinning around in his head for years, ever since he was young.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    simnew wrote: »
    Maybe it really is time to close the chapter on James Bond as These latest films really don’t have a lot in common with their forebears. The problem is that if you base everything on current affairs then the story will seem quite ordinary. If you base the story on a fantasy it can become more timeless and we have lost the surprise factor in the latest films along with a lot of the style and surprise that the earlier films had.

    This is exactly why the current era of films just don't feel quite like proper Bond films to me.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 6,709
    Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Well, yes, if you google search it that's what it says. But no. It's not that simple. Sublimation of aggressiveness into an obsessive and compulsory reiteration of one's opinion or stance can also be taken as a passive way to be aggressive. That's why many people here take some of your posts as an aggression. Listen, I have no problem with it because I realize you don't mean any harm. It's a way to organize your expectations, I get it. And the aggression towards Miss. Broccoli is somewhat of a projective objectal frustration with it all. No problem, unless you show intent on harming her, lol. That being said, the Colonel wasn't being passive-aggressive because he referred to you in a demeaning fashion on a PM to another member. It was not public or meant for your eyes. Peter brought it up and I don't think he should have (but you do get on people's neves, and you know that), but hey, nonetheless, no need to keep on attacking each other. As for Germanlady and some others, I miss them too. I miss all of them. Well, except that pr*ck we talked about ;)
    Oh, btw, do you advocate for any actor to play JB in a Nolan film? Just curious.
    Cheers mate.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    I'm a huge Nolan fan and think he could do wonders with Bond too. I don't favour Hardy for Bond however, especially after Craig. Enough with these guys who look like they'd be more suited to manning the entrance doors to a nightclub, irrespective of how many female fans they may have. I'd strongly prefer if they take it back to a taller, suaver, more traditionally handsome & refined appearance. That of course excludes singers trying to make a name for themselves too (sorry Harry!).

    In terms of his 'regulars', I'd be happy with any of them in a supporting capacity (including Hardy as an OO - just not Bond). I'd be fine with Cotillard, but she's involved with that new Chastain competitor franchise, and so is probably out. That leaves Hathaway, who I'm quite partial to.

    Having said all that, it's probably a pipe dream at this point. Nolan won't do B25 unless the whole project is shelved for 2019 and they go back to the drawing board. By B26 who knows what will happen. For all we know, the whole thing could have been sold by then.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'm a huge Nolan fan and think he could do wonders with Bond too. I don't favour Hardy for Bond however, especially after Craig. Enough with these guys who look like they'd be more suited to manning the entrance doors to a nightclub, irrespective of how many female fans they may have. I'd strongly prefer if they take it back to a taller, suaver, more traditionally handsome & refined appearance. That of course excludes singers trying to make a name for themselves too (sorry Harry!).

    In terms of his 'regulars', I'd be happy with any of them in a supporting capacity (including Hardy as an OO - just not Bond). I'd be fine with Cotillard, but she's involved with that new Chastain competitor franchise, and so is probably out. That leaves Hathaway, who I'm quite partial to.

    Having said all that, it's probably a pipe dream at this point. Nolan won't do B25 unless the whole project is shelved for 2019 and they go back to the drawing board. By B26 who knows what will happen. For all we know, the whole thing could have been sold by then.

    Until we get an actual announcement about a writer or director from EON, I refuse to rule that out as a possibility. It's already September, and the only news we are getting is of people leaving the project, not joining it.
  • Posts: 17,744
    I genuinely don't understand the love for Nolan. I find his films dreary and completely unexciting.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Univex wrote: »
    Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Well, yes, if you google search it that's what it says. But no. It's not that simple. Sublimation of aggressiveness into an obsessive and compulsory reiteration of one's opinion or stance can also be taken as a passive way to be aggressive. That's why many people here take some of your posts as an aggression. Listen, I have no problem with it because I realize you don't mean any harm. It's a way to organize your expectations, I get it. And the aggression towards Miss. Broccoli is somewhat of a projective objectal frustration with it all. No problem, unless you show intent on harming her, lol. That being said, the Colonel wasn't being passive-aggressive because he referred to you in a demeaning fashion on a PM to another member. It was not public or meant for your eyes. Peter brought it up and I don't think he should have (but you do get on people's neves, and you know that), but hey, nonetheless, no need to keep on attacking each other. As for Germanlady and some others, I miss them too. I miss all of them. Well, except that pr*ck we talked about ;)
    Oh, btw, do you advocate for any actor to play JB in a Nolan film? Just curious.
    Cheers mate.

    Correction: yes it was meant for Panchito's eyes. Colonel wiped his hands yet again, but to put things to bed, he gave me direct quotes to pass along.

    That's why I put his words in quotes.

    I had full permission from @ColonelSun.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I genuinely don't understand the love for Nolan. I find his films dreary and completely unexciting.
    +1
  • Posts: 6,709
    peter wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Well, yes, if you google search it that's what it says. But no. It's not that simple. Sublimation of aggressiveness into an obsessive and compulsory reiteration of one's opinion or stance can also be taken as a passive way to be aggressive. That's why many people here take some of your posts as an aggression. Listen, I have no problem with it because I realize you don't mean any harm. It's a way to organize your expectations, I get it. And the aggression towards Miss. Broccoli is somewhat of a projective objectal frustration with it all. No problem, unless you show intent on harming her, lol. That being said, the Colonel wasn't being passive-aggressive because he referred to you in a demeaning fashion on a PM to another member. It was not public or meant for your eyes. Peter brought it up and I don't think he should have (but you do get on people's neves, and you know that), but hey, nonetheless, no need to keep on attacking each other. As for Germanlady and some others, I miss them too. I miss all of them. Well, except that pr*ck we talked about ;)
    Oh, btw, do you advocate for any actor to play JB in a Nolan film? Just curious.
    Cheers mate.

    Correction: yes it was meant for Panchito's eyes. Colonel wiped his hands yet again, but to put things to bed, he gave me direct quotes to pass along.

    That's why I put his words in quotes.

    I had full permission from @ColonelSun.

    Then, and as much as I side with you and value the Colonel, I can't defend it ;) I'll leave you guys to it.

    Someday someone should turn these pages into a book. Now there's a best seller, all the drama, howling, teeth snarling, blood and hugs ;) Isn't that what being a fan is all about? lol. Carry on, gentleman.
  • Posts: 1,490
    peter wrote: »

    Correction: yes it was meant for Panchito's eyes. Colonel wiped his hands yet again, but to put things to bed, he gave me direct quotes to pass along.

    That's why I put his words in quotes.

    I had full permission from @ColonelSun.[/quote]

    Yes, Peter is 100% right. I felt so deeply insulted by Panchito's wild claim that many people working in the film business are incompetent - so far from the truth - that I saw red, which is rare for me - after all who is this guy anyway?

    Anyway, I know many on here enjoyed reading my thoughts on the present situation. I might chime in again at some point, knowing one or two members here will take a swipe or try to downgrade my posts regardless of what I say. Such is life. Over and Out, again.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited September 2018 Posts: 8,207
    I genuinely don't understand the love for Nolan. I find his films dreary and completely unexciting.

    I like him but I've found his recent efforts to be overwritten and extremely self-indulgent to the point where it pains me to acknowledge their merits, of which there are many.

    Inception was clever and stylish. That's the last time I walked out of a Nolan flick impressed, and even then I preferred his smaller films like Insomnia and The Prestige.

    I understand that he's a bigshot and he's also a big Bond fan. There are plenty of Bond fans out there. Being a fan doesn't automatically guarantee you the directing gig. I'm sure he'd kick off a new era pretty well, but unlike some, I wouldn't lose sleep if he didn't direct one.
    doubleoego wrote: »
    then it's just unsubstantiated paranoid speculation.

    This should be the thread title.
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    Correction: yes it was meant for Panchito's eyes. Colonel wiped his hands yet again, but to put things to bed, he gave me direct quotes to pass along.

    That's why I put his words in quotes.

    I had full permission from @ColonelSun.

    Yes, Peter is 100% right. I felt so deeply insulted by Panchito's wild claim that many people working in the film business are incompetent - so far from the truth - that I saw red, which is rare for me - after all who is this guy anyway?

    Anyway, I know many on here enjoyed reading my thoughts on the present situation. I might chime in again at some point, knowing one or two members here will take a swipe or try to downgrade my posts regardless of what I say. Such is life. Over and Out, again.

    We definitely miss your input, @ColonelSun

    It is very highly valued, compared to some of the dirge being thrown out by a small number.

    Come again soon.
  • If @PanchitoPistoles is making numerous members uncomfortable to the point where they don’t want to post anymore, shouldn’t the moderators @MI6 look into this?

    In a thread devoted to Bond 25 news, this guy Panchito seems to be making himself the headline more often than the actual news.

    I fully respect @ColonelSun and feel that numerous people feel victimised by certain others.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    If @PanchitoPistoles is making numerous members uncomfortable to the point where they don’t want to post anymore, shouldn’t the moderators @MI6 look into this?

    In a thread devoted to Bond 25 news, this guy Panchito seems to be making himself the headline more often than the actual news.

    I fully respect @ColonelSun and feel that numerous people feel victimised by certain others.

    I just spoke with the Colonel again, and he truly doesn't see red often-- the guy is quite jovial and full of life and fun, with amazing stories (not just about Bond).

    But he did see red yesterday, because he's a passionate artist, with many friends in the film industry who make the movies that we consume. He, and his fellow mates, work night and day to make sure a film gets to its final passage (up on the screen).

    He knows the blood sweat and tears it takes to get what was once an idea on a computer screen, and the battles it takes to build the idea into living breathing actors and sets and costumes and lighting and sound, so that the idea goes from just that-- an idea-- to a cinema screen. I understand his anger at the criticism fired his way. He's loyal to his art, and all the people who make that art.

    As for the poster that downgrades what he says, he literally laughed and said predictable. Which it was.

    And, as @ColonelSun says, he appreciates those that enjoyed his post. That's very genuine from a very genuine man.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Univex wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Well, yes, if you google search it that's what it says. But no. It's not that simple. Sublimation of aggressiveness into an obsessive and compulsory reiteration of one's opinion or stance can also be taken as a passive way to be aggressive. That's why many people here take some of your posts as an aggression. Listen, I have no problem with it because I realize you don't mean any harm. It's a way to organize your expectations, I get it. And the aggression towards Miss. Broccoli is somewhat of a projective objectal frustration with it all. No problem, unless you show intent on harming her, lol. That being said, the Colonel wasn't being passive-aggressive because he referred to you in a demeaning fashion on a PM to another member. It was not public or meant for your eyes. Peter brought it up and I don't think he should have (but you do get on people's neves, and you know that), but hey, nonetheless, no need to keep on attacking each other. As for Germanlady and some others, I miss them too. I miss all of them. Well, except that pr*ck we talked about ;)
    Oh, btw, do you advocate for any actor to play JB in a Nolan film? Just curious.
    Cheers mate.

    Correction: yes it was meant for Panchito's eyes. Colonel wiped his hands yet again, but to put things to bed, he gave me direct quotes to pass along.

    That's why I put his words in quotes.

    I had full permission from @ColonelSun.

    Then, and as much as I side with you and value the Colonel, I can't defend it ;) I'll leave you guys to it.

    Someday someone should turn these pages into a book. Now there's a best seller, all the drama, howling, teeth snarling, blood and hugs ;) Isn't that what being a fan is all about? lol. Carry on, gentleman.

    A theatre play.
  • Posts: 17,744
    I genuinely don't understand the love for Nolan. I find his films dreary and completely unexciting.

    I like him but I've found his recent efforts to be overwritten and extremely self-indulgent to the point where it pains me to acknowledge their merits, of which there are many.

    Yes, that's one of my main issue with Nolan films. They feel extremely self-indulgent; and as one of my friends pointed out after watching The Dark Knight Rises as the cinema - watching that film was "too much Nolan". There was no feeling of wanting more, as there was so much of everything.
    Inception was clever and stylish. That's the last time I walked out of a Nolan flick impressed, and even then I preferred his smaller films like Insomnia and The Prestige.
    I could enjoy parts of Inception, but I didn't leave the cinema with a feeling that I wanted to watch that film again. A sort of "once is enough" experience, if you will.
    I understand that he's a bigshot and he's also a big Bond fan. There are plenty of Bond fans out there. Being a fan doesn't automatically guarantee you the directing gig. I'm sure he'd kick off a new era pretty well, but unlike some, I wouldn't lose sleep if he didn't direct one.

    I would sleep very well if he didn't direct a Bond film, as well. There are plenty of directors that have expressed their love for Bond, such as Steven Soderbergh and Nicolas Winding Refn (although he's been quoted saying his interests don’t lie in franchise projects). That's a long way from a guarantee of being chosen to direct a Bond film. There are a lot of factors at play.
  • If @PanchitoPistoles is making numerous members uncomfortable to the point where they don’t want to post anymore, shouldn’t the moderators @MI6 look into this?

    In a thread devoted to Bond 25 news, this guy Panchito seems to be making himself the headline more often than the actual news.

    I fully respect @ColonelSun and feel that numerous people feel victimised by certain others.

    Oh please. I don't care who ColonelSun is, even if he was Cubby from the grave. His opinions are not worth more than any other member here. I'd like to read everyone's opinion, even if I don't agree with them. And if you can't stand the heat (without abusing or namecalling etc.), one shouldn't post here.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Univex wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Passive-aggressives is characterized by an avoidance of direct confrontation, which is exactly what the Colonel has done when he called me an ignorant twit through peter, instead of messaging me directly.

    Well, yes, if you google search it that's what it says. But no. It's not that simple. Sublimation of aggressiveness into an obsessive and compulsory reiteration of one's opinion or stance can also be taken as a passive way to be aggressive. That's why many people here take some of your posts as an aggression. Listen, I have no problem with it because I realize you don't mean any harm. It's a way to organize your expectations, I get it. And the aggression towards Miss. Broccoli is somewhat of a projective objectal frustration with it all. No problem, unless you show intent on harming her, lol. That being said, the Colonel wasn't being passive-aggressive because he referred to you in a demeaning fashion on a PM to another member. It was not public or meant for your eyes. Peter brought it up and I don't think he should have (but you do get on people's neves, and you know that), but hey, nonetheless, no need to keep on attacking each other. As for Germanlady and some others, I miss them too. I miss all of them. Well, except that pr*ck we talked about ;)
    Oh, btw, do you advocate for any actor to play JB in a Nolan film? Just curious.
    Cheers mate.

    Correction: yes it was meant for Panchito's eyes. Colonel wiped his hands yet again, but to put things to bed, he gave me direct quotes to pass along.

    That's why I put his words in quotes.

    I had full permission from @ColonelSun.

    Then, and as much as I side with you and value the Colonel, I can't defend it ;) I'll leave you guys to it.

    Someday someone should turn these pages into a book. Now there's a best seller, all the drama, howling, teeth snarling, blood and hugs ;) Isn't that what being a fan is all about? lol. Carry on, gentleman.

    A theatre play.

    Theatre of the Absurd.
Sign In or Register to comment.