› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…251252254256257…2507

Comments

  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    They're all terrible ideas, but in the end they do not sound much worse than what we got in the end.

    Come on, now. In comparison to the character assassinations in early SP drafts, the final film, with characters acting as they should, was brilliant. Acting like SP would've been better if M and Tanner were random sleeper agents for an opposing cause is a bit ridiculous, and I can see why it was altered.

    Yes, I'd rather not see the characters boring or not not die merely to move a single entry in the series alone.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    Walecs wrote: »
    They're all terrible ideas, but in the end they do not sound much worse than what we got in the end.

    Come on, now. In comparison to the character assassinations in early SP drafts, the final film, with characters acting as they should, was brilliant. Acting like SP would've been better if M and Tanner were random sleeper agents for an opposing cause is a bit ridiculous, and I can see why it was altered.

    Yes, I'd rather not see the characters boring or not not die merely to move a single entry in the series alone.
    Exactly. It's the laziest and lamest thing a "writer" does.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    Why would people want to watch this?

    The Bond universe isn't X Men or The Avengers. Who wants to see an origin story of a middle aged woman who sits behind a desk? The excitement as she studies law at Oxford, the suspense as she negotiates the office politics at MI6 to become boss.

    Or we could have a Q origin story. Studies physics and applied computing at Cambridge, takes a job at MI6, acquires two cats and a mortgage.

    And then the multi billion dollar box office leviathan that smashes global box office records - Bill Begins.

    Yawn at how Bill Tanner went through university and no one noticed him, snooze at how he worked his way up in MI6 to become chief of staff and no one noticed him, snore at how every time he's in a scene he sucks any atmosphere away like an open hatch on a space capsule.
    Wait, you haven´t understood the concept of a prequel yet properly. All those people had a wild and adventurous youth. Also Fleming did it all get wrong with Bond supposedly having an ordinary, protected childhood, completely ignoring how he seduced his chemistry teacher at the age of 13, and saved Big Ben from accidentally striking its bell 7 times at six o´clock, thus foreboding his sinister future already at the age of 15. People desperately crave for these hidden pasts of seemingly simple characters. All of them.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    And if you think the Bond/Blofeld connection in SPECTRE was bad, weren t Dr No, Red Grant, Goldfinger and Scaramanga all in the Young Bond novels? I think that is where they got that idea, and since Young Bond is so popular, expect more of the same.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    And if you think the Bond/Blofeld connection in SPECTRE was bad, weren t Dr No, Red Grant, Goldfinger and Scaramanga all in the Young Bond novels? I think that is where they got that idea, and since Young Bond is so popular, expect more of the same.
    None of those villains were in Young Bond.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    None? I am sure I read it somewhere. On this site.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited June 2016 Posts: 15,423
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    None? I am sure I read it somewhere. On this site.
    Perhaps it was the recurring old villains from James Bond Jr. Goldfinger, Dr. No and Oddjob at least do make appearances in that cartoon.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    That s it! I get those mixed up, they are equally silly to me.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    James Bond Jr. is intolerably bad I can't stand it. But, I have to admit, despite me never wanting to see them adapted to film, the Young Bond novels, at least the Charlie Higson ones are rather good. Not Adult James Bond level good, just on par with the term 'great adventure with mystery and excitement!' if you know what I mean.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    If you send me one for free, I will read it.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited June 2016 Posts: 15,423
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    If you send me one for free, I will read it.
    I'll remind Santa Claus to knock on your door on Christmas Eve. :))
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,860
    Yeah i still haven't read a single young bond novel I will eventually.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I'll send you one over, too. :))
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    Wow, that's even worse! So all the Bond fans who were teasing about Voldemort being the new M when Skyfall came out wouldn't have been that far off! What a crock...

    I wonder what Fiennes thought when he was presented with the idea. He was probably furious, chewed them up and spat them out.

    According to the Sony hacks, Fiennes said he wouldn't do the movie if M was the traitor.

    So are we to assume that all that stopped this going ahead was Fiennes saying he would walk? Babs and MGW were fine with it were they?

    I'll give Babs credit picking Dan out of the blue and managing to get some A list talent behind the camera but his tenure has been dragged down by abject writing. Babs blindness that P&W are competent is utterly inexplicable.

    CR was thankfully based on Fleming and even they couldn't manage to botch it but ever since the writing has been a shambles. Yes you can blame the writers strike somewhat for QOS but that is still on a par with SF as the second best script of Craig's tenure which given it had an extra year to be crafted is pretty mediocre far.

    P&W's obsession with everything being centred on MI6 is beyond tiresome. Here's a novel idea: how about a film that doesn't feature a traitor? This is a device Gardner employed in pretty much all of his books and it gets tired very quickly. Tellingly it's something Fleming only did rarely. Vesper is the only one that springs to mind off the top of my head. It's what a writer to does when they are out of ideas to artificially create drama between the characters.

    I can understand the mitigating plea that Babs would cite; namely that Logan making a monumental cockup of SP meant they were up against it and had to get someone in to do a quick fix, so it's understandable they brought P&W back at the 11th hour. But how did it get to that stage? Logan's script should've been locked in by early 2014 giving them more than enough time to start from scratch if it was a load of bollocks (as was the case). With the extra year due to waiting for Mendes I just can't understand how they have left themselves with so little time that they couldn't start again and were just forced to keep polishing Logan's turd.

  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,860
    what i still don't get is how they mangae to get the likes of Sam Mendes and Daniel Craig and yet still can't get Chris Mcquarrie to write a script. did they not see Mission impossible rogue nation (a film that to be honest whipes the floor with both Skyfall and Spectre...) does anyone have a home adress I will buy a copy and send it to them with a note that reads

    watch this film and then hire mcquarrie to write a script!
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    jake24 wrote: »
    I don't mind Kinnear as Tanner. He's a good actor having to work with what is probably 80% of expositional dialogue. I'd like it if they were to touch on a Tanner-Bond relationship more akin to that of the Brosnan era.

    Nooo! Tanner is easily the most useless and annoying character of the Bond franchise.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,860
    I like tanner I dislike how he was used in Spectre (so he is bond's friend in skyfall and willing to go off book with him same with M but in Spectre they feel they can't trust bond and bond can't trust them!!!! Why? Can they get the money back they paid Logan)
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Tanner has always been Bond's friend. How come in Spectre he switches sides and stands with the man (Mallory) they all hated in Skyfall is beyond me to be honest.

    Tanner should be properly used again, the way Michael Kitchen portrayed him.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Tanner has always been Bond's friend. How come in Spectre he switches sides and stands with the man (Mallory) they all hated in Skyfall is beyond me to be honest.

    Tanner should be properly used again, the way Michael Kitchen portrayed him.
    Exactly.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    edited June 2016 Posts: 2,115
    A recurring phrase in this thread, and other posts, is "the extra year due to waiting for Mendes."

    Mendes' schedule gave Eon cover to do what it wanted all along -- have a three-year gap between films.

    From 2012, Los Angeles Times:

    Though they (Broccoli and Wilson) expressed frustration at the legal challenges that led to a four-year gap between the most recent Bond movies, they say they won’t allow themselves to be governed by the calendar, either.


    "Sometimes there are external pressures from a studio who want you to make it in a certain time frame or for their own benefit, and sometimes we’ve given into that," Broccoli said. "But following what we hope will be a tremendous success with 'Skyfall,' ***we have to try to keep the deadlines within our own time limits and not cave in to external pressures."*** (emphasis added)

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/14/entertainment/la-et-mn-skyfall-next-james-bond-movie-20121113

    Also in May 2012, Broccoli and Daniel Craig said a Sony executive who said the next movie would be out in 2014 was wrong.

    //Last week Rory, the president of distribution of Sony, announced Bond 24 for I guess late 2014…

    Broccoli: He was getting a little overexcited (laughs). We’re just actually focusing on this movie. One hopes that in the future we’ll be announcing other films, but no one’s officially announced it.


    Craig: No one’s announced anything. He got a little ahead of himself (laughs). It’s very nice that he has the confidence to be able to do that, but we haven’t finished this movie yet.//

    http://collider.com/daniel-craig-barbara-broccoli-skyfall-interview/#more-162975

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    That's very interesting @AlexanderWaverly. Thanks for posting.

    It's all fine and good to take your own sweet time if you're going to give us a quality Bond film for the ages. If, on the other hand, the longer wait results in recycled pastiche (without a decent script), then I wonder what the whole point is.

    With the low profit that the studios retain, I really wonder how many will be lining up to take Bond on with longer gaps between films.

    I suspect we may end up with Sony again.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Would not surprise me @bondjames
  • joshdeese93joshdeese93
    Posts: 352
    What are your thoughts on alternating each Bond film - one in modern times, and the other being a 1950s/1960s period piece? Both types of movies would retain the same actors (Bond, M, Q, Moneypenny, Tanner), but would just switch up the time setting.
  • daltondalton
    Posts: 1,631
    joshdeese93 wrote: »
    What are your thoughts on alternating each Bond film - one in modern times, and the other being a 1950s/1960s period piece? Both types of movies would retain the same actors (Bond, M, Q, Moneypenny, Tanner), but would just switch up the time setting.

    Can't support this idea at all.

    The cinematic franchise should always remain in the present. That's how Bond, as a franchise, is meant to be consumed. I'm all for a period piece if it's in the form of some kind of TV project, but the cinematic franchise should always take place in the here and now.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    dalton wrote: »
    joshdeese93 wrote: »
    What are your thoughts on alternating each Bond film - one in modern times, and the other being a 1950s/1960s period piece? Both types of movies would retain the same actors (Bond, M, Q, Moneypenny, Tanner), but would just switch up the time setting.

    Can't support this idea at all.

    The cinematic franchise should always remain in the present. That's how Bond, as a franchise, is meant to be consumed. I'm all for a period piece if it's in the form of some kind of TV project, but the cinematic franchise should always take place in the here and now.

    Way too confusing. Appreciate the creativity though.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    I think what we will get next will be something completely different than what we've seen. I really do hope BB isn't going to give into the Bond fanbase fantasy of Octopussy 2.0. I really want to see a different interpretation and style of Bond, that can't be compared to any other actor.
  • daltondalton
    Posts: 1,631
    I don't want to see a retread of something we've seen before either. That will only serve to damage the franchise in the long run. EON needs to find a way to take the franchise in a fresh direction.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    dalton wrote: »
    I don't want to see a retread of something we've seen before either. That will only serve to damage the franchise in the long run. EON needs to find a way to take the franchise in a fresh direction.

    Agreed. We've seen 60s Bond, and it was great. No need to revisit the past, as Bond should always reflect the current times.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    007 Magazine is adamant that they have a relaible source that Daniel Craig is definitely going to quit.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Well, I used to be a subscriber of the OO7 Magazine, and they hardly ever were wrong... Don't know about their relationship with Eon today, but 10 years ago, they were always the first to hear something...
Sign In or Register to comment.