› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…17281729173117331734…2507

Comments

  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    Where has all this news about Finland being a possible shooting location come from? The site link is only in Finnish with no option for a vague translation using my Apple device. Can someone give me the bare bones of what it is implying? Also, isn’t it possible that if Finland were to be used, it’s most likely that it’ll only be as a stand-in for Russia, assuming Eon stick with the Hodge’s story?
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    they've steered clear of Scandinavia in the past because it's really expensive to film there.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Just curious, what's so special about Scandinavia to have prices as high as said?
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    well Scandinavia is just expensive. some of the wealthiest countries on earth and the cost of stuff reflects that. also (I may be wrong) I don't think they offer the tax breaks and other incentives for filmmakers that some other countries do.

    wages, equipment hire, etc. will all be higher than most other places
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I see. And to think France, Austria and other countries from Western to Central Europe would've been the ones to hold that position.

    Thanks.
  • vzokvzok
    Posts: 4,044
    Getafix wrote: »
    sad thing is if they'd had their act together they easily could have made 2 films between 2015 and 2019

    But they’re all so tired.

    Some actors are good at resting I hear.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    vzok wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    sad thing is if they'd had their act together they easily could have made 2 films between 2015 and 2019

    But they’re all so tired.

    Some actors are good at resting I hear.

    true. it's tough getting out of bed once every 3-4 years for that 25 mil paycheck
  • vzokvzok
    Posts: 4,044
    Getafix wrote: »
    vzok wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    sad thing is if they'd had their act together they easily could have made 2 films between 2015 and 2019

    But they’re all so tired.

    Some actors are good at resting I hear.

    true. it's tough getting out of bed once every 3-4 years for that 25 mil paycheck

    You’re a tough boss with your perfectly reasonable points.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    vzok wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    sad thing is if they'd had their act together they easily could have made 2 films between 2015 and 2019

    But they’re all so tired.

    That will be Bond 25's title.

    So Very Tired. :))


  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    K Turner makes some valid points I think. Esp about investing more in writing - take heed EON.

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/sep/01/kathleen-turner-millions-paid-to-hollywood-a-listers-immoral

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    bondsum wrote: »
    Where has all this news about Finland being a possible shooting location come from? The site link is only in Finnish with no option for a vague translation using my Apple device. Can someone give me the bare bones of what it is implying? Also, isn’t it possible that if Finland were to be used, it’s most likely that it’ll only be as a stand-in for Russia, assuming Eon stick with the Hodge’s story?

    James Bond is not Finnish! James Bond will return.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Getafix wrote: »
    well Scandinavia is just expensive. some of the wealthiest countries on earth and the cost of stuff reflects that. also (I may be wrong) I don't think they offer the tax breaks and other incentives for filmmakers that some other countries do.

    wages, equipment hire, etc. will all be higher than most other places

    Finland is not in Scandinavia, and as for incentives, Norway has recently changed its policy.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited September 2018 Posts: 4,512
    With so much time between the movies and after QOS i hoped there start film earlier.
    Mission Impossible 6 have more then year for filming and post production.

    How nice it have been if half way 2016 there start production on Bond 25 (With Boyle and Hodge already writing whyle Spectre release) and end filming in March this year. Two movies with 3 years in between and then 4 years later in 2022 we can have end DC era..

    With P&W not working on Bond 25 i always see as option to let them write Bond 26 already. Also the fact there not working on Johnny English Strikes again.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    well Scandinavia is just expensive. some of the wealthiest countries on earth and the cost of stuff reflects that. also (I may be wrong) I don't think they offer the tax breaks and other incentives for filmmakers that some other countries do.

    wages, equipment hire, etc. will all be higher than most other places

    Finland is not in Scandinavia, and as for incentives, Norway has recently changed its policy.

    Semantics. A lot of people bunch Finland together with the other 3 and regard it as Scandinavian but I appreciate there are lots of reasons to see it as distinct. but any way I don't think Finland is cheap either
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited September 2018 Posts: 17,743
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    well Scandinavia is just expensive. some of the wealthiest countries on earth and the cost of stuff reflects that. also (I may be wrong) I don't think they offer the tax breaks and other incentives for filmmakers that some other countries do.

    wages, equipment hire, etc. will all be higher than most other places

    Finland is not in Scandinavia, and as for incentives, Norway has recently changed its policy.

    But not by THAT much though? Then again, if Mission Impossible can film in Norway (or any other Nordic country), so can Bond.

    Bond in Finland would be really fun. It's a shame Nordic countries aren't represented as often in international productions – even if the cost of filming is higher.
  • fanbond123fanbond123
    edited September 2018 Posts: 1,661

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/sep/01/kathleen-turner-millions-paid-to-hollywood-a-listers-immoral

    Yes, interesting quote by Turner. I tend to agree. A lot of people seem to be pro-Tom Cruise fans on MI6 forum, and he is often quoted as saying he makes films to entertain people but surely he's making the likes of Mission Impossible etc for the huge pay cheque? It's naive to think otherwise. I doubt Cruise would hang from a helicopter's rope for 5, 10 or even 15 million dollars. 20 million and he'll do it.

    Depending on your point of view, you could admire Craig for admitting he'd only return for the money. I doubt many/any other actor would be so frank. Sure, it suggests (or proves) he has no interest in the character/franchise, he's only interested in the cash but had Eon or MGM said "we're not paying you more than you got for SPECTRE" - I doubt he'd bother to return. Eon would have a new James Bond actor. We'd be arguing over the suitability of the new guy. ;)

    It's often been cited Brosnan wanted too much for Bond film number 5 and was given the boot. Probably some truth to it.

    Re rehearsal time - Turner could stick to acting in plays. I think they have a lot of rehearsal time!


  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    According to the rumours, he wanted $40 million. Unproven rumours, that is.
  • DrClatterhandDrClatterhand United Kingdom
    Posts: 349
    My first meaningful post, so forgive me if I'm slightly off-topic. I feel Craig's run ended with SPECTRE. It seems like EoN are trying get beyond a creative impasse, and that we're heading for another damp squib. They've had so much time to build things from the ground up, but we're now left with what looks like Quantum Of Solace: Part II.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    DrClatterhand wrote: »
    My first meaningful post, so forgive me if I'm slightly off-topic. I feel Craig's run ended with SPECTRE. It seems like EoN are trying get beyond a creative impasse, and that we're heading for another damp squib. They've had so much time to build things from the ground up, but we're now left with what looks like Quantum Of Solace: Part II.

    Well said. "Creative impasse" describes it beautifully.
  • fanbond123fanbond123
    Posts: 1,661

    DrClatterhand wrote: »
    My first meaningful post, so forgive me if I'm slightly off-topic. I feel Craig's run ended with SPECTRE. It seems like EoN are trying get beyond a creative impasse, and that we're heading for another damp squib. They've had so much time to build things from the ground up, but we're now left with what looks like Quantum Of Solace: Part II.

    Perhaps Purvis and Wade have an old, unused Johnny English screenplay hidden in a safe or down the sofa. Take it out, rewrite it for Bond 25. No-one will notice the difference.

    :P



  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited September 2018 Posts: 17,743
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    DrClatterhand wrote: »
    My first meaningful post, so forgive me if I'm slightly off-topic. I feel Craig's run ended with SPECTRE. It seems like EoN are trying get beyond a creative impasse, and that we're heading for another damp squib. They've had so much time to build things from the ground up, but we're now left with what looks like Quantum Of Solace: Part II.

    Perhaps Purvis and Wade have an old, unused Johnny English screenplay hidden in a safe or down the sofa. Take it out, rewrite it for Bond 25. No-one will notice the difference.

    :P



    It'll be more fun than the last two Bond films, at least! My excitement level for Johnny English Strikes Again is higher than that of Bond 25, at the moment.
  • QQ7QQ7 Croatia
    Posts: 371
    I expect 4 to 5 year breaks between Bond films in the future. EON probably thinks that market had enough of Bond.
  • DrClatterhandDrClatterhand United Kingdom
    Posts: 349
    For the first time in my life I'm not particularly excited for the next Bond film. They should have recast the role. It all feels stagnant. My personal pick would have been Dan Stevens. Craig was electric in the first three of his four films. Admittedly, Quantum Of Solace was lacklustre in terms of story, but Craig nailed it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 2018 Posts: 8,392
    Every tenure has an expiration date. I feel like they could have squeezed a fifth Craig film in 2018, but if there is another delay, and we don't get Bond 25 until summer 2020, then they should just recast. 2019 is already pushing it as it is.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited September 2018 Posts: 17,743
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Every tenure has an expiration date. I feel like they could have squeezed a fifth Craig film in 2018, but if there is another delay, and we don't get Bond 25 until summer 2020, then they should just recast. 2019 is already pushing it as it is.



    To me, this felt like a very natural ending of an era, and I think they could (or should) have recast after SP. Craig has simply not been "my Bond", just like other people here feel about Brosnan.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 2018 Posts: 8,392
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Every tenure has an expiration date. I feel like they could have squeezed a fifth Craig film in 2018, but if there is another delay, and we don't get Bond 25 until summer 2020, then they should just recast. 2019 is already pushing it as it is.



    To me, this felt like a very natural ending of an era, and I think they could (or should) have recast after SP. Craig has simply not been "my Bond", just like other people here feel about Brosnan.

    I agree, that seemed like a natural place to leave it. Craig's Bond has always been angsty, and it seems like his films always end on a note of tragedy, or meloncholy. Letting him finally have his happy ending driving off with the Bond girl seems so fitting, to draw things to a close.

    Perhaps it will still be his ending yet, we'll have to wait and see how things go...
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    edited September 2018 Posts: 4,619
    To be honest, I don't really care who the Bond actor is (as long as he is a white male from a Commonwealth country). He is just a pawn on the chessboard. At least he should be, Craig now obviously has much more power within the franchise than any Bond actor ever had before him...
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 2018 Posts: 8,392
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    To be honest, I don't really care who the Bond actor is (as long as he is a white male from a Commonwealth country). He is just a pawn on the chessboard. At least he should be, Craig now obviously has much more power within the franchise than any Bond actor ever had before him...

    It wouldn't bother me as much if Craig were a mega-star like Cruise who has a proven track record throughout the decades of making successful starring vehicles for himself, but almost all of Craig's film projects outside of Bond crash and burn at the boxoffice. The last person who should be having an input is him.
  • petergreenhill5petergreenhill5
    Posts: 824
    vzok wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    sad thing is if they'd had their act together they easily could have made 2 films between 2015 and 2019

    But they’re all so tired.

    Some actors are good at resting I hear.

    Between 1961 and 1971, seven Bond films were written, filmed, released and I don't recall anyone complaining of tiredness....


  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    edited September 2018 Posts: 7,653
    The longer the break between the movies the more you find remarks like that Bond series is well past its bedtime.

    They should never pass the three years before a new 007 movie is released.
Sign In or Register to comment.