No Time To Die: Production Diary

1214321442146214821492507

Comments

  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    edited February 2019 Posts: 3,000
    People are overlooking that Shatterhand was also the working title for TND before it became Tomorrow Never Lies and eventually Tomorrow Never Dies. I doubt it will be the actual title.
  • AgentJamesBond007AgentJamesBond007 Vesper’s grave
    Posts: 2,634
    People are overlooking that Shatterhand was also the working title for TND before it became Tomorrow Never Lies and eventually Tomorrow Never Dies. I doubt it will be the actual title.

    Elliot Carver = Blofeld?!?!?
  • Ludovico wrote: »
    Actually the Bond girls as Fleming wrote them have many functions in the story, they are not (all) there merely to sleep with Bond, although they do also serve as sexual reward. But making them action chicks then at least part of what they do is also what Bond does. That's exactly the definition of redundant. Way Lin does what Bond does until the plot requires her to suddenly become a helpless damsel in distress. And Fleming's Bond girls, the classical ones, are far more complete and complex than the action chicks we saw both in and out of the Bond franchise.

    And there's female agent and female agent. There's a huge difference between Jinx who is just a weak version of a female Bond in a bikini, and a station agent or a member of MI6.
    So what's the problem, that they actually get to fend off for themselves or that they're not developed enough?

    It seems unclear.

    I see zero problem with action Bond girls. They have been trying to make Bond girls an equal since TSWLM, even if it wasn't entirely succesful back then.

    Any female agent would have to be capable to physically defend herself. I don't see how that's debatable.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 832
    The “model” for the modern (main) Bond girl should be Camille.
    People are overlooking that Shatterhand was also the working title for TND before it became Tomorrow Never Lies and eventually Tomorrow Never Dies. I doubt it will be the actual title.

    Elliot Carver = Blofeld?!?!?

    Didn’t they actually try to bring blofeld/ spectre back in tnd? Many similarities between carver/ tomorrow and blofeld/ spectre regardless.
  • Posts: 15,231
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I really, really, really hope she's not going to play an action chick. They are a dime a dozen.
    To be honest we’ve only had one proper action-based Bond girl in Craig’s era and ironically it was Moneypenny :D

    One was enough. Heck one in the franchise would have been enough.
    What’s your problem with action-packed Bond girls?

    They are redundant. Bond is the hero, he's the one doing the action part. Not M, not Q, not Moneypenny, not the Bond girl. I don't understand why people complain about "team MI6", but don't beat an eyelid when there's a Way Lin or a Jinx suddenly having the same function in the narrative as Bond.
    Well, they're certainly not redundant. The role of the Bond girl serves to show a different kind of woman, and just because James Bond is our protagonist/hero doesn't mean no-one else can do any of the action? If what you want is for the girl to sit back and do nothing but sleep with Bond, then I'd have to say thats an unfortunate and outdated concept.

    There are female agents, there are females who can do just as much damage as Bond. Having an action-based female character doesn't do anything to disturb the "narrative". Yes, James Bond will always be more involved in the action and will do so thoroughly, but to say that he's only the one that can do it is just silly. Also, are you saying that any female agents within a James Bond film should just not do their job?

    Actually the Bond girls as Fleming wrote them have many functions in the story, they are not (all) there merely to sleep with Bond, although they do also serve as sexual reward. But making them action chicks then at least part of what they do is also what Bond does. That's exactly the definition of redundant. Way Lin does what Bond does until the plot requires her to suddenly become a helpless damsel in distress. And Fleming's Bond girls, the classical ones, are far more complete and complex than the action chicks we saw both in and out of the Bond franchise.

    And there's female agent and female agent. There's a huge difference between Jinx who is just a weak version of a female Bond in a bikini, and a station agent or a member of MI6.
    All fair points, although I still don't agree with action-based Bond girls being redundant, but what I'm mainly trying to get across is that you can have these types of Bond girls and still make them complete and complex. You're right in saying we haven't had one of these before (Jinx, definitely being an example of that), but it's not impossible so to say that no other Bond girl in the franchise should be involved in action would be quite close-minded.

    I'm not saying no Bond girl should be involved in the action. Melina Havelock and Camille worked fine for instance because both were wounded women, one an amateur, the other a rookie. Bond was a mentor for both (this was even more emphasized in Melina's case due to Moore's age). It also sort of works for Eve because she's more limited as a field agent and makes a blunder. They also work because each in their own way they make Bond's life more complicated.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    People are overlooking that Shatterhand was also the working title for TND before it became Tomorrow Never Lies and eventually Tomorrow Never Dies. I doubt it will be the actual title.

    Elliot Carver = Blofeld?!?!?

    He’d have made a better Blofeld than Waltz.
  • Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 2019 Posts: 5,970
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I really, really, really hope she's not going to play an action chick. They are a dime a dozen.
    To be honest we’ve only had one proper action-based Bond girl in Craig’s era and ironically it was Moneypenny :D

    One was enough. Heck one in the franchise would have been enough.
    What’s your problem with action-packed Bond girls?

    They are redundant. Bond is the hero, he's the one doing the action part. Not M, not Q, not Moneypenny, not the Bond girl. I don't understand why people complain about "team MI6", but don't beat an eyelid when there's a Way Lin or a Jinx suddenly having the same function in the narrative as Bond.
    Well, they're certainly not redundant. The role of the Bond girl serves to show a different kind of woman, and just because James Bond is our protagonist/hero doesn't mean no-one else can do any of the action? If what you want is for the girl to sit back and do nothing but sleep with Bond, then I'd have to say thats an unfortunate and outdated concept.

    There are female agents, there are females who can do just as much damage as Bond. Having an action-based female character doesn't do anything to disturb the "narrative". Yes, James Bond will always be more involved in the action and will do so thoroughly, but to say that he's only the one that can do it is just silly. Also, are you saying that any female agents within a James Bond film should just not do their job?

    Actually the Bond girls as Fleming wrote them have many functions in the story, they are not (all) there merely to sleep with Bond, although they do also serve as sexual reward. But making them action chicks then at least part of what they do is also what Bond does. That's exactly the definition of redundant. Way Lin does what Bond does until the plot requires her to suddenly become a helpless damsel in distress. And Fleming's Bond girls, the classical ones, are far more complete and complex than the action chicks we saw both in and out of the Bond franchise.

    And there's female agent and female agent. There's a huge difference between Jinx who is just a weak version of a female Bond in a bikini, and a station agent or a member of MI6.
    All fair points, although I still don't agree with action-based Bond girls being redundant, but what I'm mainly trying to get across is that you can have these types of Bond girls and still make them complete and complex. You're right in saying we haven't had one of these before (Jinx, definitely being an example of that), but it's not impossible so to say that no other Bond girl in the franchise should be involved in action would be quite close-minded.

    I'm not saying no Bond girl should be involved in the action. Melina Havelock and Camille worked fine for instance because both were wounded women, one an amateur, the other a rookie. Bond was a mentor for both (this was even more emphasized in Melina's case due to Moore's age). It also sort of works for Eve because she's more limited as a field agent and makes a blunder. They also work because each in their own way they make Bond's life more complicated.
    Again, I get your point, but that's assuming that the Bond girl should in a lesser position than Bond. That he should have to teach them how to defend themselves.

    A good example, surprisingly, would be Madeleine Swann. Her most interesting scene for me in the whole film was on the train and the discussion of her disliking of guns. She already how to deal with them, but because of her experiences she wanted to distance herself from them. James didn't have to teach her anything, yet she was still able to convey a multi-layered character in that scene. Unfortunately everything else in the film dragged her character to the usual characters we were used to seeing in the old Bond films, but there was a moment of glory in there.
  • Posts: 15,231
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    It may be outdated, but it is Fleming. Like an alcoholic Philip Marlowe is very Chandler. And would you rather have Madeleine getting out of danger by herself?
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    Everything in the MI6 building in the climax of SP is fantastic. It’s the Thames chase onward where it turns sour.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    It may be outdated, but it is Fleming.
    Fleming also saw lesbians as curable by the right man... so we can't always agree with his position on women.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited February 2019 Posts: 2,541
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    Everything in the MI6 building in the climax of SP is fantastic. It’s the Thames chase onward where it turns sour.

    I liked every single thing of London finale except that stupid posters of past characters in mi6 building.
  • NS_writingsNS_writings Buenos Aires
    Posts: 544
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    Everything in the MI6 building in the climax of SP is fantastic. It’s the Thames chase onward where it turns sour.

    The MI6 building climax would have been a lot better with a proper shootout between Bond and a couple of Blofeld's men.
  • Posts: 15,231
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    It may be outdated, but it is Fleming.
    Fleming also saw lesbians as curable by the right man... so we can't always agree with his position on women.

    True, but we're talking about Bond girls now, not Fleming's personal opinion about gays and lesbians. His villains are generally depicted as foreigners as well. A cliché? Yes. Potentially offensive? Yes. But it's still Fleming and I do think one can get away with it if done tastefully and with intelligence. I'd rather have this than PC Bond girls or whitewashed villains.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    It may be outdated, but it is Fleming.
    Fleming also saw lesbians as curable by the right man... so we can't always agree with his position on women.

    True, but we're talking about Bond girls now, not Fleming's personal opinion about gays and lesbians. His villains are generally depicted as foreigners as well. A cliché? Yes. Potentially offensive? Yes. But it's still Fleming and I do think one can get away with it if done tastefully and with intelligence. I'd rather have this than PC Bond girls or whitewashed villains.
    Trust me, I'm really not arguing for PC Bond girls or whitewashed villains. In fact, Severine is one of my favourite Bond girls and she perfectly encapsulated an Ian Fleming creation.

    I think me and @FrankXavier are just trying to say that you can have these interesting and complex female characters who can fend for themselves and get involved in the action, IF that's what the director/writer wants for their story.
  • NS_writingsNS_writings Buenos Aires
    Posts: 544
    Trying to get straight all the Shatterhand/YOLT rumours, here are my toughts (sorry if I posted this before)...

    1 - Shatterhand has been rumoured since the 1990s and you can see the title rumoured in many Bond forums back in the 2000s and early 2010s.

    2 - We know OHMSS ends with Tracy dying and YOLT deals with Bond's revenge, many people think this is what we'll have in Bond 25.

    3 - Many of us, judging by the way SPECTRE ended, assume that Bond 25 will start with Madeleine dying and will deal with Bond going after Blofeld, now masquerading as one Dr. Shatterhand, hence the reason for the title.

    I think... it's not commercial or teasing to deliver something we all know exactly how it's going to be, be it Shatterhand as the title, Madeleine dying and Bond going after Blofeld YOLT style. If they are wise, they'll have to change at least the 80% of that if they were really going that way. Many great things from SPECTRE were scrapped out or altered just because of the leaks (remember that 007.com disclaimer of "the leaked script is a very old draft"? That actually meant "now we're going to change this"). So... if EON knows what we are expecting, they are going to give us something else we are expecting.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 832
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    Everything in the MI6 building in the climax of SP is fantastic. It’s the Thames chase onward where it turns sour.

    spectre has the worst climax of ANY bond film. Everything in the London ending is unwatchable.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    edited February 2019 Posts: 3,000
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    Everything in the MI6 building in the climax of SP is fantastic. It’s the Thames chase onward where it turns sour.

    The MI6 building climax would have been a lot better with a proper shootout between Bond and a couple of Blofeld's men.

    That would have been excellent.
  • Posts: 15,231
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    It may be outdated, but it is Fleming.
    Fleming also saw lesbians as curable by the right man... so we can't always agree with his position on women.

    True, but we're talking about Bond girls now, not Fleming's personal opinion about gays and lesbians. His villains are generally depicted as foreigners as well. A cliché? Yes. Potentially offensive? Yes. But it's still Fleming and I do think one can get away with it if done tastefully and with intelligence. I'd rather have this than PC Bond girls or whitewashed villains.
    Trust me, I'm really not arguing for PC Bond girls or whitewashed villains. In fact, Severine is one of my favourite Bond girls and she perfectly encapsulated an Ian Fleming creation.

    I think me and @FrankXavier are just trying to say that you can have these interesting and complex female characters who can fend for themselves and get involved in the action, IF that's what the director/writer wants for their story.

    I don't know if you read one of my posts above, but I did say that I'm obviously not again Bond girls taking part in the action.

    I would also add that one must make a distinction between an action girl (in any movie) and a girl who happen to take an active part in the action in some capacity.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 2019 Posts: 5,970
    Spectre also proved to me how much Sam Mendes likes helicopters. We had one in Mexico City, Morocco and London. We even had a plane in Austria, yet my favourite helicopter sequence in a Bond film was in Skyfall??
  • Posts: 9,860
    Trying to get straight all the Shatterhand/YOLT rumours, here are my toughts (sorry if I posted this before)...

    1 - Shatterhand has been rumoured since the 1990s and you can see the title rumoured in many Bond forums back in the 2000s and early 2010s.

    2 - We know OHMSS ends with Tracy dying and YOLT deals with Bond's revenge, many people think this is what we'll have in Bond 25.

    3 - Many of us, judging by the way SPECTRE ended, assume that Bond 25 will start with Madeleine dying and will deal with Bond going after Blofeld, now masquerading as one Dr. Shatterhand, hence the reason for the title.

    I think... it's not commercial or teasing to deliver something we all know exactly how it's going to be, be it Shatterhand as the title, Madeleine dying and Bond going after Blofeld YOLT style. If they are wise, they'll have to change at least the 80% of that if they were really going that way. Many great things from SPECTRE were scrapped out or altered just because of the leaks (remember that 007.com disclaimer of "the leaked script is a very old draft"? That actually meant "now we're going to change this"). So... if EON knows what we are expecting, they are going to give us something else we are expecting.

    one would hope.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    It may be outdated, but it is Fleming.
    Fleming also saw lesbians as curable by the right man... so we can't always agree with his position on women.

    True, but we're talking about Bond girls now, not Fleming's personal opinion about gays and lesbians. His villains are generally depicted as foreigners as well. A cliché? Yes. Potentially offensive? Yes. But it's still Fleming and I do think one can get away with it if done tastefully and with intelligence. I'd rather have this than PC Bond girls or whitewashed villains.
    Trust me, I'm really not arguing for PC Bond girls or whitewashed villains. In fact, Severine is one of my favourite Bond girls and she perfectly encapsulated an Ian Fleming creation.

    I think me and @FrankXavier are just trying to say that you can have these interesting and complex female characters who can fend for themselves and get involved in the action, IF that's what the director/writer wants for their story.

    I don't know if you read one of my posts above, but I did say that I'm obviously not again Bond girls taking part in the action.

    I would also add that one must make a distinction between an action girl (in any movie) and a girl who happen to take an active part in the action in some capacity.

    Fair play @Ludovico, I did read the post but I was just trying to explain where I was coming from. I also agree that I should've used that term a bit more loosely than I did. "Action-packed" can be a confusing term. I don't know if you've seen it, but the kind of Bond girl or villain I'd like to see in a Bond film is one like Luv from Blade Runner 2049. She was an interesting character, who got involved in the action and it benefited her arc and the story.
  • Posts: 1,985
    Denbigh wrote: »
    One of the problems I have with Shatterhand is that it would mean getting a second adaptation of YOLT, which would deviate even more so from original text than the actual adaptation did.

    Everytime I've heard someone bring up this possibility, they've wanted it to be done right, which means we'd need Waltz to return and the film to be set in Japan. None of the locations we have seen even remotely look like Japan. So I think it'd be best if they go for something else for the actual title, which I think they will do because I don't think a film has ever stuck with it's working title.

    Although, like you touched upon @AgentM72, I'm sure Skyfall always had that as its title.
    It's funny that Shatterhand has been the working title for so long now and the media is now just running rampant with it!
    I know right, just shows how lazy journalists are. Also, one of the articles I read said they didn't know what Shatterhand meant. Do your research for gods sake! It's your job.

    They can still properly adapt the storyline of YOLT but use a different location besides japan.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 1,985
    .
  • Posts: 2,921
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    The “model” for the modern (main) Bond girl should be Camille.

    The one Bond didn't even sleep with?!

  • The standard was set by Vesper Lynd I'd say.

    Not in the effect she had on Bond (you can only that once in a while), but in the way she was written. She was brimming with personality.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Very happy to hear about Norway! And Lupita would be great.
    I'll try to catch up on reading comments now ...
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 489
    One weird thing from the Daniel Craig era is that the girls he sleeps with in his first three films all die, apart from the nameless girl in Turkey.
  • Revelator wrote: »
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    The “model” for the modern (main) Bond girl should be Camille.

    The one Bond didn't even sleep with?!

    I don’t see how that’s important/ I didn’t mean that bond couldn’t sleep with the main bond girl.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited February 2019 Posts: 6,387
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    One of the problems I have with Shatterhand is that it would mean getting a second adaptation of YOLT, which would deviate even more so from original text than the actual adaptation did.

    Everytime I've heard someone bring up this possibility, they've wanted it to be done right, which means we'd need Waltz to return and the film to be set in Japan. None of the locations we have seen even remotely look like Japan. So I think it'd be best if they go for something else for the actual title, which I think they will do because I don't think a film has ever stuck with it's working title.

    Although, like you touched upon @AgentM72, I'm sure Skyfall always had that as its title.
    It's funny that Shatterhand has been the working title for so long now and the media is now just running rampant with it!
    I know right, just shows how lazy journalists are. Also, one of the articles I read said they didn't know what Shatterhand meant. Do your research for gods sake! It's your job.

    They can still properly adapt the storyline of YOLT but use a different location besides japan.

    Yes. Yes, they could.
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I don’t believe it will be the final title either.

    I'll take that bet.
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Saying a Bond girl who fights is redundant is like saying a villain driving a nice car is redundant because only Bond can drive nice cars. Having a villain drive a nice car doesn't take away from James Bond's vehicle in the same way having a Bond girl involved in action doesn't take away from James Bond's action scenes.
    Exactly.

    The idea that the Bond girl needs to be inferior to Bond and in need of saving is outdated.

    Did anyone actually like Madeleine being a damsel in distress in the climax of SP?

    No. It would have been better if she had been revealed as "Number 14" of Spectre or something like that.

    Also, why didn't they bring back the "number" system? Honestly I wonder if Logan or Mendes ever even saw a Bond film with Spectre in it...or if their understanding of Bond is all post-1971.
Sign In or Register to comment.