No Time To Die: Production Diary

12442452472492502507

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondboy007 wrote: »
    I still don't think CR was so far off the "classic Bond cinematic formula" as people think. It was just the first time a gritty Bond film had been done right since the 1980's, and the best a Bond film had been period since the 1960's.
    I agree. It reminded me of the best of the 60's in many ways actually.
  • Posts: 1,631
    bondboy007 wrote: »
    I still don't think CR was so far off the "classic Bond cinematic formula" as people think. It was just the first time a gritty Bond film had been done right since the 1980's, and the best a Bond film had been period since the 1960's.

    I would definitely agree with that. The formula was still very much there, albeit subverted in some places, but it's still there. I do think that it gets a (justly deserved, I think) bump in terms of its reputation because it comes after a stretch of extremely generic and bland 90s action films masquerading as Bond films.
  • Posts: 1,680
    CR was adapted right from Fleming so it was hard to screw up IMO

  • Posts: 5,745
    I wish we could get something Machiavellian. More of like an evil Bond who isn't a hero. A cunning, manipulative bachelor with a hint of humanity which he's tried to rule out for his career. Imagining something Fincher-Esque.

    I would be done with the series if they pulled that.

    Is this not the "Flemingesque" we all claim to clamor for?
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    edited June 2016 Posts: 3,000
    JWESTBROOK wrote: »
    I wish we could get something Machiavellian. More of like an evil Bond who isn't a hero. A cunning, manipulative bachelor with a hint of humanity which he's tried to rule out for his career. Imagining something Fincher-Esque.

    I would be done with the series if they pulled that.

    Is this not the "Flemingesque" we all claim to clamor for?

    If that's "Flemingesque," then I don't want "Flemingesque". This aside, I'm not a Fleming purist anyway. I want film-Bond to be what film-Bond has always been; fun escapism, with occasional serious underpinnings.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    JWESTBROOK wrote: »
    I wish we could get something Machiavellian. More of like an evil Bond who isn't a hero. A cunning, manipulative bachelor with a hint of humanity which he's tried to rule out for his career. Imagining something Fincher-Esque.

    I would be done with the series if they pulled that.

    Is this not the "Flemingesque" we all claim to clamor for?

    If that's "Flemingesque," then I don't want "Flemingesque". This aside, I'm not a Fleming purist anyway. I want film-Bond to be what film-Bond has always been; fun escapism, with occasional serious underpinnings.
    +1
  • Posts: 5,767
    JWESTBROOK wrote: »
    I wish we could get something Machiavellian. More of like an evil Bond who isn't a hero. A cunning, manipulative bachelor with a hint of humanity which he's tried to rule out for his career. Imagining something Fincher-Esque.

    I would be done with the series if they pulled that.

    Is this not the "Flemingesque" we all claim to clamor for?
    No, that wouldn´t be Flemingesque at all, and not everybody clamors for Flemingesque anyway.

    As @BMW_with_missiles so correctly hinted at, film and novel are different mediums, each with its own strengths.

  • Posts: 4,325
    Naomi Harris being unsure isn't new news we had that ages ago.
  • JohnHammond73JohnHammond73 Lancashire, UK
    Posts: 4,151
    I think if Craig was to leave the Bond series then Naomi Harris returning could be up in the air, if producers feel a soft reboot is in order. However, Lois Maxwell played Moneypenny with 3 different Bond actors so I don't see why Harris can't carry on. However, I would rather see a more classic Moneypenny than the one as part of Team Bond in SP.
  • Posts: 4,325
    So, that announcement in June ...
  • Posts: 377
    I'm all for a return to classic Bond formula i am done with dark and gritty for now. That's why i enjoyed SP so much, it had some of the fun back in it. Yet some people think that was a terrible thing. The fun, the humour, exotic loctations, beautiful women, action and adventure have been staples of the series from day one and part of why we are all Bond fans here surely. But i still dont see why Nolan couldn't make a great Bond film. Just because his Batman films are dark doesn't mean his Bond would be. He too has grown up with old school Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @cooperman2, I like formula as well. However, it must be done well. It can't be predictable pastiche. That takes a bit of skill, and as I said earlier, I don't believe Babs/Wilson have shown any ability to do formula in an interesting fashion. They appear to be better when going 'off script'. The competition seems to have a better idea of what constitutes quality formula than EON does these days, on recent evidence imho.
  • DisneyBond007DisneyBond007 Welwyn Garden City
    Posts: 100
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    So, that announcement in June ...

    Keep an eye on the announcement, I believe that MGW and BB may kept Daniel Craig for Bond 25 otherwise Adrian Turner may announced as the new James Bond (sadly, no Bond for Tom Hiddleston).

  • Posts: 377
    Agreed bondjames. MI:GP was one of the most enjoyable movies of recent times and although it followed the MI template closely it never seemed like it was pastiching it. It would take a really good director to pull it off. Perhaps Babs and Michael should look in that direction more and Dark Knight direction less.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited June 2016 Posts: 4,116
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    Agreed bondjames. MI:GP was one of the most enjoyable movies of recent times and although it followed the MI template closely it never seemed like it was pastiching it. It would take a really good director to pull it off. Perhaps Babs and Michael should look in that direction more and Dark Knight direction less.

    I agree and wish they would too. I am ready for a good Bond film. Not a lackluster hack job like SP ...and as much as I loved SF I don't want another Dark Knight redux either.



  • Posts: 1,092
    People thinking Turner will be Bond somehow by next week makes me laugh.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    So, that announcement in June ...

    Keep an eye on the announcement, I believe that MGW and BB may kept Daniel Craig for Bond 25 otherwise Adrian Turner may announced as the new James Bond (sadly, no Bond for Tom Hiddleston).

    I think Brad Bird would make a stellar Bond film, as can be seen in Ghost Protocol. And that movie was his first go at live-action, if you can believe it! He can clearly orchestrate and direct scenes of big, done-for-real action, while keeping those sequences clever and fresh in a franchise that has a lot of them.
  • Posts: 12,526
    Until we hear from Eon officially? Nobody is returning for Bond 25!
  • DisneyBond007DisneyBond007 Welwyn Garden City
    Posts: 100
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    So, that announcement in June ...

    Keep an eye on the announcement, I believe that MGW and BB may kept Daniel Craig for Bond 25 otherwise Adrian Turner may announced as the new James Bond (sadly, no Bond for Tom Hiddleston).

    I think Brad Bird would make a stellar Bond film, as can be seen in Ghost Protocol. And that movie was his first go at live-action, if you can believe it! He can clearly orchestrate and direct scenes of big, done-for-real action, while keeping those sequences clever and fresh in a franchise that has a lot of them.

    I've heard of Brad Bird before, he's directing several films including "The Incredibles"; "Mission Impossible IV" (M:I:IV); and now, "Tomorrowland: A World Beyond".

    He'll be good to direct Bond 25 because that's excellent man ;-)
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,277
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    People thinking Turner will be Bond somehow by next week makes me laugh.

    Haha, same here.
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    Until we hear from Eon officially? Nobody is returning for Bond 25!

    Totally agree.

  • edited June 2016 Posts: 11,425
    Szonana wrote: »
    I wish we could get something Machiavellian. More of like an evil Bond who isn't a hero. A cunning, manipulative bachelor with a hint of humanity which he's tried to rule out for his career. Imagining something Fincher-Esque.

    I would be done with the series if they pulled that.

    Hehhe another fan of the classic formula of 1962-2002. I like to see more fans of the typical Bond formula now i still love Craig my preference for the safe stuff doesn't mean im not open to other things.

    I can like them very much too in a different way but the formulatic cinematic Bond is very special to my heart.

    The classic formula stopped working some time between 89 and 95 IMO.

    TLD is the last film that still feels like it's really fully part of the original Cubby era IMO.

    LTK (although I like it) begins a process of tinkering with the formula - Bond going rogue, 'this time it's personal', Q joining Bond in the field etc.

    GE by contrast tries so hard to go back to the formula that it ends up feeling like pastiche. By 95 the magic was gone and its as if EON is just going through the motions.

    It took them until 2006 to work out how do take a new approach that wasn't just at attempt at doing a poorly reheated Moore movie.

    And then Mendes came along and almost took us back to pastiche again (although superior quality pastiche to what we'd seen during Brosnan's era).
  • Posts: 6,601
    I believe it all came down to many fans being vocal in terms of wanting the traditional Bond back after tje last three. So they gave us that.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I believe it all came down to many fans being vocal in terms of wanting the traditional Bond back after tje last three. So they gave us that.

    And predictably, they all complained. Humans are fun like that. And by fun, I mean...
  • Posts: 11,425
    I enjoyed SP. But feel that approach is a bit of a dead end now.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I enjoy all of the Craig era, and still to this day don't understand how some can view CR and QoS as one version of Bond, and SF and SP as another. All four go together to form one smooth journey of a man, with an emphasis on continuity, characterization and tone that is consistent to all. Maybe we've all just been watching different films all these years?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    I enjoy all of the Craig era, and still to this day don't understand how some can view CR and QoS as one version of Bond, and SF and SP as another. All four go together to form one smooth journey of a man, with an emphasis on continuity, characterization and tone that is consistent to all. Maybe we've all just been watching different films all these years?

    Opinions vary is why. I most certainly see a growth and a slight variation of the character as the series goes along (he's obviously not the exact same man in CR that he is in SF), but I prefer the Bond we get in the former two than the latter two, for different reasons.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I believe it all came down to many fans being vocal in terms of wanting the traditional Bond back after tje last three. So they gave us that.

    And predictably, they all complained. Humans are fun like that. And by fun, I mean...

    It had many aspects of the traditional Formula but not full back in since it still has the Casino Royale print. It's the end of Craig's Bond evolution and journey.

    If the Formula would have been completely in we wouldn't have had Bond going Rough he would have gotten his mission from M receiving oficially his gadgets from Q meet his Bond ladies sleep with them and at end being with Madeline but not the i love you thing or Bond retiring.

    So it had some stuff of the formula but wasn't placed like it was from 1962-2002.
    I still love the Craig era films but ive said it many times to make the transition easier from one actor to another there can't be direct sequels or films to close to the other we need the light standalone missions.

    The Craig era was great i loved it but its a sure thing they got themselves trapped in the corner by being forced to a reboot again.

    Maybe just a soft reboot where we keep Ralph Fiennes, Ben Wishaw and Naomi harris but starting with a plain mission and succeeding at the end with no single losse ends so we can go back to the traditional Bond.


  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    The Bond of Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace is completely different in behaviour and characteristics in comparison to the one we've seen in the subsequent two. In CR and QoS, Bond is very thuggish, violent, careless, nervous (as in Connery being a nervous passenger) and suspicious. Whereas the one we've seen in the latter two are more laid back, humourous, sophisticated and comically sarcastic (a la Roger Moore and Sean Connery in between in a biblical sense). He doesn't frown too much, and does have more facial expressions as opposed to the killing machine we've seen in the first two.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I believe it all came down to many fans being vocal in terms of wanting the traditional Bond back after tje last three. So they gave us that.

    And predictably, they all complained. Humans are fun like that. And by fun, I mean...

    Although, the complaints weren't really about the return to the older style, they were about the way in which it was done; anticlimactic action sequences, plot holes, and a lackluster ending (I say this as a fan of SP). Shortly after SP, I noticed many people speaking more favorably of the Brosnan films. I believe that was due to the fact that his films were the most recent time we had seen the classic formula, and they were done with arguably more solid plots and action sequences.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited June 2016 Posts: 8,392
    Wow, EON really appears to have taken its foot off the pedal recently. Either that or they have just learnt to be a lot more sneaky. No news in over 2 weeks! One thing, however has not changed, if you have noticed? Remember when Elba was the favourite, and Hiddleston? Remember those guys? No, no one does. We haven't heard anything about them in weeks, at least not related to playing James Bond. One name has been consistent in this regard: ever since he was first mentioned way back In December of 2015, Aidan Turner has been consistently connected with the part, right up until the present. And yet, according to comments left on this website by members, he still isn't the favourite? No EON only backs nobodys appartently. Well, it is true that EON did hire a nobody last time, but that is not exactly what I would call a trend. And even if it were, what is to say that EON wouldn't buck the trend in 2016, this year, by announcing Aidan Turner has clinched it. That would be a nice change of pace, and might actually bring back some of the excitement which has been slowly seeping out of the franchise since 2006.
Sign In or Register to comment.