› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…2425272930…2507

Comments

  • GetafixGetafix
    edited December 2015 Posts: 11,425
    Does EON actually legally have a deciding vote? I thought it was more that MGM ultimately trust EON to not totally screw up - commercially at least.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    Does EON actually legally have a deciding vote? I thought it was more that MGM ultimately trust EON to not totally screw up - commercially at least.
    I'm not sure. I just know from reading the previous occurrences around DC & Dalton that it is somewhat collaborative with EON calling the final shot (even if not 'legally' so I'm sure they get to decide finally, but they'll definitely take everyone's comments into consideration).
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Harry must have had some serious issues with Cubby to not sell him his share.
  • smittysmitty
    edited December 2015 Posts: 725
    EON had the ultimate say on casting Craig and rubber stamped Craig's offer to Mendes on SF. The leaks also showed that EON had major control on the size of the budget. MGM obviously has some legal authority in the management of the franchise, but given they have contributed nothing but grief, and delays, to the production schedule, and they are nothing but a shell of a studio that can't even afford to distribute their own films, I would highly doubt they have any real power over EON's major decisions. They cannot possibly have the clout to over rule EON on serious issues without risking serious retribution by EON, film delays, and all kinds of a lack of cooperation by EON if MGM oversteps its role. It's probably a very prickly relationship. It may "technically" look like 50/50 but it ain't. They can each make the other party miserable over a ton of issues, but EON has the ultimate power over Bond, not MGM.

    Also, MGM trusting EON not to screw Bond up would be pretty funny, given MGM went bankrupt from mismanagement. EON probably trusts MGM's judgement as far as you can throw a piano.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited December 2015 Posts: 4,116
    I remember from MGW's recent interview he made a comment that MGM no longer owned half. A comment that confused me.

    I hope they don't because it always bothers me as to what happens if MGM goes bye bye.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    I remember from MGW's recent interview he made a comment that MGM no longer owned half. A comment that confused me.

    I hope they don't because it always bothers me as to what happens if MGM goes bye bye.
    I think they still own their half. If not, then EON probably don't have to have any more ties with them.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    A Bond movie won't be the same without the roaring lion at the start.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    jake24 wrote: »
    A Bond movie won't be the same without the roaring lion at the start.
    That's true. It's so familiar. I actually miss the United Artists logo that used to come up in the past too with the music that came with it. So reassuring......like comfort food.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    jake24 wrote: »
    A Bond movie won't be the same without the roaring lion at the start.

    I don't mind MGM financing but don't like them owning anything.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,275
    smitty wrote: »
    EON had the ultimate say on casting Craig and rubber stamped Craig's offer to Mendes on SF. The leaks also showed that EON had major control on the size of the budget. MGM obviously has some legal authority in the management of the franchise, but given they have contributed nothing but grief, and delays, to the production schedule, and they are nothing but a shell of a studio that can't even afford to distribute their own films, I would highly doubt they have any real power over EON's major decisions. They cannot possibly have the clout to over rule EON on serious issues without risking serious retribution by EON, film delays, and all kinds of a lack of cooperation by EON if MGM oversteps its role. It's probably a very prickly relationship. It may "technically" look like 50/50 but it ain't. They can each make the other party miserable over a ton of issues, but EON has the ultimate power over Bond, not MGM.

    Also, MGM trusting EON not to screw Bond up would be pretty funny, given MGM went bankrupt from mismanagement. EON probably trusts MGM's judgement as far as you can throw a piano.

    There have been many management changes at MGM. John Calley, for one, rescued Bond with GE.

    I read recently that MGM stands to make more than Eon on SP.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    The sooner we find out who is going to replace Sony the better? Then perhaps we will get a statement on when they are planning for Bond 25 to be released?
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    walter1985 wrote: »
    of course i want Craig back for Bond 25. but i don't care which director is going to be hired, i don't care which country's Bond's going to visit, i don't care if Blofeld is going to be back... as long as there's a decent script! no more plotholes, please please please.

    I can handle plot holes ...just work on story and character development.

    After 24 films you can't rely on just action and homage. No more left overs lol. BEEF!!!!

    Yeah I'd quite like it if the homage thing was left to one side now for a good while. Too much self-referentiality will inevitably lead to self-parody. We had stacks of it in Die Another Day, a little in Skyfall and a little more again in Spectre. Whilst it's fun for the Bond fan in me for this to happen once in awhile - like watching DAD, was that the electronic noises from the start of Dr. No, and watching Spectre, that reminds me of Sister Lily and Sister Rose, I don't want this all the time. It would be good if 25 years from now a Bond film could do the same for a Bond film of now, which would be hard to imagine of a Bond film that is already paying homage to other Bonds.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    The sooner we find out who is going to replace Sony the better? Then perhaps we will get a statement on when they are planning for Bond 25 to be released?

    Someone famous will replace them, and Bond 25 will be out next week.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    The sooner we find out who is going to replace Sony the better? Then perhaps we will get a statement on when they are planning for Bond 25 to be released?

    Someone famous will replace them, and Bond 25 will be out next week.
    Yep, and Jesse Eisenberg will play Blofeld.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Every 3 years maybe the norm but I don't see why a 2 year gap every once in a while can't be possible. Furthermore, time can help to get the script right but as we have recently seen with 4 and 3 year gaps, such time did nothing to present a great script. Ideas and abstracts should be developing now and when things are more settled in moving forward with production bring in new excellent writers. EoN need to start making smarter risks while not getting complacent themselves to avoid time waste and disappointments.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,149
    Makes me wonder why, with that extra year after TWINE we got DAD? Also, as much as I enjoy SF, I don't believe it to be one of the best Bond films plot-wise. Even more so with SP, which, to me, has the weakest script since....well, DAD. I think the extra time off makes the filmmakers a bit rusty hence the expression if you don't use it, you lose it.
    Furthermore, if 3 and 4 year gaps become the norm, which it pretty much already has, and we continue to get disappointing films like DAD, and I hate to say it, SP, well, what's the point? SP is to this day the only Bond film where I didn't even bother to wait to see the James Bond Will Return credit. I do hope, with Bond 25 we get a film that ensures a future as opposed to the feeling that this one may be the one that screws up so badly it's the last.
  • Tuck91Tuck91
    Posts: 1,680
    Their not going to be able to put out a masterpiece with every film. If SP came out in 2012 I am almost positive it would have gotten the same praise as SF. I have said it many times I will say it again SP is the film fans wanted from EON for years & they delivered. Perfect, no. But it was just as good as SF.
  • BounineBounine
    edited December 2015 Posts: 2,598
    I have to say that as much as I hate the Brosnan films, with the exception of DAD, they did have better plots than the Craig films, excluding CR.
  • skullkrusherskullkrusher
    Posts: 212
    Guy Ritchie in frame as Bond director after The Man From U.N.C.L.E success:

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/guy-ritchie-frame-bond-director-6962038
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    edited December 2015 Posts: 6,601
    Well, the article engaging in making UNCLE a great film and a success probably is telling, how reliable this is. I say no way.
  • BounineBounine
    edited December 2015 Posts: 2,598
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    I have to say that as much as I hate the Brosnan films, with the exception of DAD, they did have better plots than the Craig films, excluding CR.

    i'll buy that GE and TND had better plots some of Craig's films... but not TWINE and DAD - one was weak, and the other was trash.... CR had an excellent plot.. QOS's i actually really liked.. SF's wasn't as clearly defined from the get go, but once the real plot sets in, i got invested... SP's was good, it just had daft writing, which undercut it.

    What do you mean by "daft" writing?

    If Eon actually hired decent writers, then two years is a perfectly adequate gap to have between films. I want to see Waltz return as Blofeld, as well as Bellucci and what's her name, the French actress who played Madeline. The film should start with her in Bond's flat or them enjoying themselves somewhere like with Bond and the girl from Dr No, near the beginning of FRWL. I don't think Madeline necessarily needs to get killed though. Maybe she should just choose to leave Bond after he decides to return to the service when Blofeld escapes from prison or whatever... :) In fact, I think that this would be better.
  • IGUANNAIGUANNA
    Posts: 1,296
    I don't trust MGM remember because of them Dalton had to leave the role. Barbara is a close friend and didn't want that to happen but MGM forced it or they wouldn't finance what a mistake.
  • IGUANNAIGUANNA
    Posts: 1,296
    I want the Weinstein Company involved next time in all honestys. They know how to make quality.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited December 2015 Posts: 3,157
    Man from UNCLE was a success? I thought it was a flop (money-wise, I haven't seen it because it performed so poorly in my town that they removed before I had the chance).
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Makes me wonder why, with that extra year after TWINE we got DAD? Also, as much as I enjoy SF, I don't believe it to be one of the best Bond films plot-wise. Even more so with SP, which, to me, has the weakest script since....well, DAD. I think the extra time off makes the filmmakers a bit rusty hence the expression if you don't use it, you lose it.
    Furthermore, if 3 and 4 year gaps become the norm, which it pretty much already has, and we continue to get disappointing films like DAD, and I hate to say it, SP, well, what's the point? SP is to this day the only Bond film where I didn't even bother to wait to see the James Bond Will Return credit. I do hope, with Bond 25 we get a film that ensures a future as opposed to the feeling that this one may be the one that screws up so badly it's the last.
    100% agree.
    SP was extremely disappointing and was not worth the 3-year wait at all. QoS, on the other hand, is my 3rd top Bond movie, and it came out after a 2-year wait.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,843


    I am just going to leave this well directed scene here and say if Ritchie can direct a scene as good between Craig's bond and WAltz's Blofeld then the film will be top tier bond at might even beat Casino Royale as my favorite.

    Like I said I have always wanted Ritchie but always assumed he would never get it.

  • Mark_HazzardMark_Hazzard Classified
    Posts: 127
    I'm all up for Ritchie behind the camera. Absolute Londoner, can direct brilliant dialogues and helmed brilliant blockbusters like Sherlock Holmes and U.N.C.L.E. The latter might have performed disappointingly at the BO, but the movie is a must-see for anyone who'd like to have a period Bond movie, slightly camp but actual fun Bond movie or a nice action-packed Bond movie. Mind you that Fleming helped to invent U.N.C.L.E.

    However, I think Ritchie would be even better in re-imagining Bond with a new actor. I'm really curious what he will come up with if he can have a say in that.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    HASEROT wrote: »
    .... it's just the writing didn't do it enough justice.... it kind of reminded me a bit like TWINE - a film being pulled in two different directions.. is it a character study, or a formula driven Bond film?.. i think SP was executed better than TWINE though, but it just kind of reminded me at times of what bothered me about that film... the 3rd act in London is what bothered me the most - it wasn't necessary, and could've been written into one big climax with Blofeld's base going BOOM at the end..

    still really enjoyed the movie though.
    I'm with you on the TWINE comparisons @haserot. That's the same feeling I got as well. Pulled in two directions. There is a dichotomy there which I last saw in a Bond film with TWINE. I much preferred SP, but the feeling was the same in places, including while watching some of the action.
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    Pass on Ritchie. Come on.
  • Mark_HazzardMark_Hazzard Classified
    Posts: 127
    @DocterNo, so who would you pick?
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    Little article by RedSnow http://www.jborbisnonsufficit.com/2015/12/06/is-guy-ritchie-the-new-front-runner-to-director-bond25/
Sign In or Register to comment.