No Time To Die: Production Diary

1175617571759176117622507

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.
    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps grown with time.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Dalton got the scripts for TLD and LTK just a few weeks before shooting.

    Those were the days - keep the actor in his box.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps definately grown with time.

    And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.

    german-premiere-of-james-bond-film-spectre-752x501.jpg
    "i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!

  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited September 2018 Posts: 2,541
    That's one of the reason I liked Dalton. Let directors/actors/producers/writer/ do their job ,one doesn't need to be multitalented or get meddled in each another department.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps definately grown with time.

    And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.

    german-premiere-of-james-bond-film-spectre-752x501.jpg
    "i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!
    Which of the tabloids do you write for, @barryt007? ;)
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Such a waste of Christoph waltz blofeld and all 4 films together if blofeld doesn't come back.The least they could do is tie all the loosends.

    Agreed. No point in bringing Craig back if his finale is just a tacked on movie. You may as well recast and soft-reboot.
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    I don't think they did, but they did the same with Mikkelsen. According to Some Kind of Hero, Mikkelsen was invited to screentest for the role of LeChiffre twice and he missed it both times because he was busy elsewhere. They wanted him so badly that they eventually invited him a third time.
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today, we wouldn't have had a QOS (despite the fact that you could not like it) and that he has the two most successfull movies of all the franchise in his tenure.
    Now, given that, and given the fact that he earned on the field every benefit he could have got, given the fact that you don't know for sure what really happened with Boyle, you don't know what he does in his producer tenure and most of all, the guy has given heart, soul, blood, a knee and some teeth for the job, could we please stop speculating, stop insulting, move on and try to focus on the movie?
    Thanks
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited September 2018 Posts: 2,541
    Well said if bond25 not going to be better version of Spectre they might as well Reboot and bring new 007 in 2020-2021. One more thing is in 2022 bond films will complete 60 years. Just like die another day/ skyfall celebrated 40 & 50 years.
  • Posts: 4,619
    I hate Blofeld, so I'm overjoyed he won't be back.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'm not sure if folks have seen the 2015 Charlie Rose interview with Craig and Mendes, but it is quite illuminating in terms of casting light on some of the decisions and how the film came together. Mendes gets a lot of flack these days, but whenever I have seen him speak about Bond I've noticed that he is very aware of how the product will be perceived. It's not like he's clueless. He had a stage interview about a month back where they asked him briefly about Bond. Even there, his comments were especially insightful about the challenges the producers face going forward.

    One thing that's quite apparent in the SP interviews is that a lot of the one liners and humour in SP was improvised by Craig and the cast onset in the moment - Mendes let them do it. I really hope they don't do that this time around because I personally found that to be some of the most fake feeling stuff in the film.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today, we wouldn't have had a QOS (despite the fact that you could not like it) and that he has the two most successfull movies of all the franchise in his tenure.
    Now, given that, and given the fact that he earned on the field every benefit he could have got, given the fact that you don't know for sure what really happened with Boyle, you don't know what he does in his producer tenure and most of all, the guy has given heart, soul, blood, a knee and some teeth for the job, could we please stop speculating, stop insulting, move on and try to focus on the movie?
    Thanks

    If you are referring to me,it was a joke, so my answer to your question is : no.
    Thanks.

    jake24 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps definately grown with time.

    And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.

    german-premiere-of-james-bond-film-spectre-752x501.jpg
    "i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!
    Which of the tabloids do you write for, @barryt007? ;)

    I'm 'freelance' Jake.

    photographer-paparazzi-at-work-press-clipart-vector_csp29968754.jpg
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today...
    This is not true. Bond will always survive and rumours of his demise have been greatly exaggerated. The actor merely inhabits the role until his time is up. If anything nearly 60 years of continued and varied success has proven that. Bond is far bigger than any actor.
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today, we wouldn't have had a QOS (despite the fact that you could not like it) and that he has the two most successfull movies of all the franchise in his tenure.
    Now, given that, and given the fact that he earned on the field every benefit he could have got, given the fact that you don't know for sure what really happened with Boyle, you don't know what he does in his producer tenure and most of all, the guy has given heart, soul, blood, a knee and some teeth for the job, could we please stop speculating, stop insulting, move on and try to focus on the movie?
    Thanks

    If you are referring to me,it was a joke, so my answer to your question is : no.
    Thanks.

    jake24 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps definately grown with time.

    And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.

    german-premiere-of-james-bond-film-spectre-752x501.jpg
    "i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!
    Which of the tabloids do you write for, @barryt007? ;)

    I'm 'freelance' Jake.

    photographer-paparazzi-at-work-press-clipart-vector_csp29968754.jpg

    There's a latin motto "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta". Try looking into it
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today, we wouldn't have had a QOS (despite the fact that you could not like it) and that he has the two most successfull movies of all the franchise in his tenure.
    Now, given that, and given the fact that he earned on the field every benefit he could have got, given the fact that you don't know for sure what really happened with Boyle, you don't know what he does in his producer tenure and most of all, the guy has given heart, soul, blood, a knee and some teeth for the job, could we please stop speculating, stop insulting, move on and try to focus on the movie?
    Thanks

    If you are referring to me,it was a joke, so my answer to your question is : no.
    Thanks.

    jake24 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps definately grown with time.

    And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.

    german-premiere-of-james-bond-film-spectre-752x501.jpg
    "i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!
    Which of the tabloids do you write for, @barryt007? ;)

    I'm 'freelance' Jake.

    photographer-paparazzi-at-work-press-clipart-vector_csp29968754.jpg

    There's a latin motto "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta". Try looking into it

    And there's a useful 4-letter word...............................and you're full of it.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today...
    This is not true. Bond will always survive and rumours of his demise have been greatly exaggerated. The actor merely inhabits the role until his time is up. If anything nearly 60 years of continued and varied success has proven that. Bond is far bigger than any actor.

    Spot on..there is a chap who knows Bond.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited September 2018 Posts: 2,541
    True bond's character is bigger than any actor but I don't think of Craig the way media tried to portray him, from the beginning when he was announced as bond they were after him. I have seen a lot of his interviews from 2005 and he seems like a gentle person. BB Trust him so much because at the time of QOS he took a lot of responsibility upon himself which no bond actor did as far as I know.
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    barryt007 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today, we wouldn't have had a QOS (despite the fact that you could not like it) and that he has the two most successfull movies of all the franchise in his tenure.
    Now, given that, and given the fact that he earned on the field every benefit he could have got, given the fact that you don't know for sure what really happened with Boyle, you don't know what he does in his producer tenure and most of all, the guy has given heart, soul, blood, a knee and some teeth for the job, could we please stop speculating, stop insulting, move on and try to focus on the movie?
    Thanks

    If you are referring to me,it was a joke, so my answer to your question is : no.
    Thanks.

    jake24 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps definately grown with time.

    And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.

    german-premiere-of-james-bond-film-spectre-752x501.jpg
    "i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!
    Which of the tabloids do you write for, @barryt007? ;)

    I'm 'freelance' Jake.

    photographer-paparazzi-at-work-press-clipart-vector_csp29968754.jpg

    There's a latin motto "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta". Try looking into it

    And there's a useful 4-letter word...............................and you're full of it.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today...
    This is not true. Bond will always survive and rumours of his demise have been greatly exaggerated. The actor merely inhabits the role until his time is up. If anything nearly 60 years of continued and varied success has proven that. Bond is far bigger than any actor.

    Spot on..there is a chap who knows Bond.

    Wow, that escalated quickly.
    What a gentleman.


    About the bondjames comment: Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    True bond's character is bigger than any actor but I don't think of Craig the way media tried to portray him, from the beginning when he was announced as bond they were after him. I have seen a lot of his interviews from 2005 and he seems like a gentle person. BB Trust him so much because at the time of QOS he took a lot of responsibility upon himself which no bond actor did as far as I know.
    This is true as well. He is given an unfair shake by the media. I'm sure he means well and isn't going out of his way to sabotage the films. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise. The same goes for Mendes. They both gave it their best. Unfortunately, in my humble opinion at least, their best was hardly good enough the last time out and there's no point in making excuses. Craig at least has been given a chance by the producers to correct that and he's set expectations very 'high' with his Colbert interview (not sure why he did that). Now he has to live up to it.
    About the bondjames comment: Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
    I'm afraid we must agree to disagree. DAD was very successful and so was QoS. Bond as a franchise was in no risk of disappearing at that point. The films just weren't everyone's cup of tea and the producers made some strange decisions in both instances which required some rebalancing.

    The period after LTK was the darkest and most uncertain for the franchise.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
    Bond wasn't going anywhere. Stop rewriting history the way you see fit to your narrative.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited September 2018 Posts: 2,541
    I think the only tough time for bond was between 89' & 95 - long 6 year gap even BB admitted that it was bond's darkest time. They were going through a lot especially how will bond survive after post cold war.
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    edited September 2018 Posts: 630
    bondjames wrote: »
    True bond's character is bigger than any actor but I don't think of Craig the way media tried to portray him, from the beginning when he was announced as bond they were after him. I have seen a lot of his interviews from 2005 and he seems like a gentle person. BB Trust him so much because at the time of QOS he took a lot of responsibility upon himself which no bond actor did as far as I know.
    This is true as well. He is given an unfair shake by the media. I'm sure he means well and isn't going out of his way to sabotage the films. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise. The same goes for Mendes. They both gave it their best. Unfortunately, in my humble opinion at least, their best was hardly good enough the last time out and there's no point in making excuses. Craig at least has been given a chance by the producers to correct that and he's set expectations very 'high' with his Colbert interview (not sure why he did that). Now he has to live up to it.
    About the bondjames comment: Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
    I'm afraid we must agree to disagree. DAD was very successful and so was QoS. Bond as a franchise was in no risk of disappearing at that point. The films just weren't everyone's cup of tea and the producers made some strange decisions in both instances which required some rebalancing.

    The period after LTK was the darkest and most uncertain for the franchise.

    I'm talking about the business part of the things. If Casino Royale and Skyfall wouldn't have been successfull, producer would have dropped the franchise. Money is all.
    Not to mention MGM problems.
    Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
    Bond wasn't going anywhere. Stop rewriting history the way you see fit to your narrative.

    Try to understand what I'm writing, and don't be rude without any motivation. Thanks
  • Posts: 4,619
    bondjames wrote: »
    The period after LTK was the darkest and most uncertain for the franchise.
    Coincidentally, that's also when Barbara Broccoli took over from his father. :))
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
    Bond wasn't going anywhere. Stop rewriting history the way you see fit to your narrative.
    Try to understand what I'm writing, and don't be rude without any motivation. Thanks
    I don't specialize in Enigma Code to crack what's hidden beneath that sentence. If you want to clarify further what you meant, I'm all ears and keep an open mind to it.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited September 2018 Posts: 2,541
    As boldfinger said it's a team work one can't blame producer/actor Or director completely. And the most successful tenure of bond has been of Sean and Daniel's. Cubby also makes bond cartoonish in 70s but still I enjoyed, it's only a matter of time.
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today, we wouldn't have had a QOS (despite the fact that you could not like it) and that he has the two most successfull movies of all the franchise in his tenure.
    Now, given that, and given the fact that he earned on the field every benefit he could have got, given the fact that you don't know for sure what really happened with Boyle, you don't know what he does in his producer tenure and most of all, the guy has given heart, soul, blood, a knee and some teeth for the job, could we please stop speculating, stop insulting, move on and try to focus on the movie?
    Thanks

    If you are referring to me,it was a joke, so my answer to your question is : no.
    Thanks.

    jake24 wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Actually they lured him in with more than just beefy stuff to act, but also with the prospect of having larger involvement in conceptualization and implementation. That is on the record and he has confirmed it in interviews. It was a prerequisite for him doing the Bond thing.
    That is what I meant. They wanted Craig and did all kinds of stuff to lure him in. I don´t think the did something similar to any other Bond actor.

    No, as far as I know they didn't. That influence has remained and perhaps definately grown with time.

    And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.

    german-premiere-of-james-bond-film-spectre-752x501.jpg
    "i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!
    Which of the tabloids do you write for, @barryt007? ;)

    I'm 'freelance' Jake.

    photographer-paparazzi-at-work-press-clipart-vector_csp29968754.jpg

    There's a latin motto "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta". Try looking into it

    And there's a useful 4-letter word...............................and you're full of it.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today...
    This is not true. Bond will always survive and rumours of his demise have been greatly exaggerated. The actor merely inhabits the role until his time is up. If anything nearly 60 years of continued and varied success has proven that. Bond is far bigger than any actor.

    Spot on..there is a chap who knows Bond.

    Wow, that escalated quickly.
    What a gentleman.


    About the bondjames comment: Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.

    Thank you,i am indeed known to be one.
    And Craig has not 'saved' Bond in anyway,shape or form.
    And this is not meant as a nasty question before you comment,but were you around or old enough between 1989 and 1995 ?
    If you were then you will know that is the closest we came to losing 007.

  • edited September 2018 Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    True bond's character is bigger than any actor but I don't think of Craig the way media tried to portray him, from the beginning when he was announced as bond they were after him. I have seen a lot of his interviews from 2005 and he seems like a gentle person. BB Trust him so much because at the time of QOS he took a lot of responsibility upon himself which no bond actor did as far as I know.
    This is true as well. He is given an unfair shake by the media. I'm sure he means well and isn't going out of his way to sabotage the films. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise. The same goes for Mendes. They both gave it their best. Unfortunately, in my humble opinion at least, their best was hardly good enough the last time out and there's no point in making excuses. Craig at least has been given a chance by the producers to correct that and he's set expectations very 'high' with his Colbert interview (not sure why he did that). Now he has to live up to it.
    About the bondjames comment: Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
    I'm afraid we must agree to disagree. DAD was very successful and so was QoS. Bond as a franchise was in no risk of disappearing at that point. The films just weren't everyone's cup of tea and the producers made some strange decisions in both instances which required some rebalancing.

    The period after LTK was the darkest and most uncertain for the franchise.

    I'm talking about the business part of the things. If Casino Royale and Skyfall wouldn't have been successfull, producer would have dropped the franchise. Money is all.
    Not to mention MGM problems.
    Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
    Bond wasn't going anywhere. Stop rewriting history the way you see fit to your narrative.

    Try to understand what I'm writing, and don't be rude without any motivation. Thanks

    No they wouldn't .
    What about the 2 Dalton films, and the 6 year gap to GE...and TMWTGG and its 3 year gap to TSWLM,they didn't 'drop the franchise' then,if you are referring to films not doing too well.
  • That's one of the reason I liked Dalton. Let directors/actors/producers/writer/ do their job ,one doesn't need to be multitalented or get meddled in each another department.
    Didn't Dalton and John Glen butt heads on set?

  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited September 2018 Posts: 2,541
    I don't suppose they did. Do you have anything to support that. Do share I would like to see.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today...
    This is not true. Bond will always survive and rumours of his demise have been greatly exaggerated. The actor merely inhabits the role until his time is up. If anything nearly 60 years of continued and varied success has proven that. Bond is far bigger than any actor.

    Yeah, I think the only actor you can really give credit to for saving the series is Roger Moore. Him breaking the mould and doing something different finally proved they could move out of Connery's shadow. Brosnan deserves a lot of credit as well because if he wasn't so popular and GE had flopped we probably would have been looking at a very long gap, but that wouldn't have been the end. I think especially with how things are today (reboots, remakes) we would have certainly got another one eventually. Might just have had to wait a bit longer for it.
  • I would like to remind you that without Craig we probably wouldn't have a Bond today, we wouldn't have had a QOS (despite the fact that you could not like it) and that he has the two most successfull movies of all the franchise in his tenure.

    Some people vastly overrate the importance of Daniel Craig to the franchise. Likely comes from a personal habit of doing the same thing. People forget DAD was Brosnan's most successful film yet, and most would have been fine to see him in a fifth film.

  • Posts: 1,490
    CraterGuns wrote: »
    That's one of the reason I liked Dalton. Let directors/actors/producers/writer/ do their job ,one doesn't need to be multitalented or get meddled in each another department.
    Didn't Dalton and John Glen butt heads on set?

    Yes, there were tensions which came to a head towards the end of the shoot when Dalton asked a question, but John Glen, who is a charming, funny and very polite man, snapped back - this was also partly due to the fact he'd broken a toe or badly hurt his foot a day or so before, and he was in some pain. I have huge respect for John Glen, he was wonderful to work with, but he was more of a technical director with an editor's mind, and not really an actor's director. And Dalton, as we know, wanted to push the character and, I believe, John Glen was not really geared up for that. With Roger Moore it was easy because Sir Roger, even when he questioned things, like Bond ruthlessly kicking Locke's car off the cliff in FYEO, he accepted Glen's directions. Dalton was not so straight forward in that regard, he wanted to dig deeper into the character. Some here have suggested bring Glen back - despite his maturing years - but Craig and Glen would never gel.
Sign In or Register to comment.