› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…314315317319320…2507

Comments

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I haven't really fancied either Miss Moneypenny or Q of the Craig era. They just haven't been portraying their own characters/roles respectively I wouldn't mind seeing a recast performed in the next installment.
  • daltondalton
    Posts: 1,631
    I'm perfectly fine with a recast of everyone but Fiennes. I'd like to see him stay on for as long as they can keep him.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,583
    Well that's the problem when you cast known people is that you can't just give them a few minutes of screen time. That's probably why we saw so much of MP, M and Q in Spectre. It probably wasn't a problem back in the day to give Desmond Llewellyn a few minutes because he probably didn't have much else going on, as well as Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell, Robert Brown etc. That's probably why we had seen Judi Dench get more screen time as the series progressed.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Like @jake24 I'm happy with the home team.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,154
    Drawback to casting A-listers in those roles. I'd love to go back to just having M, Q and Moneypenny make their appearances in the beginning, then let 007 have the show. SPECTRE felt like an MI6 ensemble piece as opposed to a "James Bond" film.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,583
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Drawback to casting A-listers in those roles. I'd love to go back to just having M, Q and Moneypenny make their appearances in the beginning, then let 007 have the show. SPECTRE felt like an MI6 ensemble piece as opposed to a "James Bond" film.

    Exactly, because it's basically Bond, now what's the MI6 team up too, ooh nine eyes and Bond is gone, back to twenty minutes of Bond, oh wait people need to know what the MI6 team is up to, yup still nine eyes, ok back to Bond. Oh wait, these scenes contain both MI6 and Bond...JACKPOT!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I'm in the camp that wants the rest of the MI6 team to get dialed back: M, MP, Q, Tanner. They were used way too much in SP, it's one of my bigger complaints with the film; dial them back, cut out that Nine Eyes/C garbage, and it would've flowed better (and wouldn't overstay its welcome in the running time department.)
  • GagReathleGagReathle France
    Posts: 38
    Back in the day, M, Q and Moneypenny didn't really existed inside the scripts of every movies. They were just here at the beginning and then they disappeared.

    Now it seems that they have to be here and have their own things to do. I don't mind that, it's cool, but it makes the scripts really difficult to write. And that didn't help Spectre to focus on what was important. At all.
  • IGUANNAIGUANNA
    Posts: 1,296
    Give Rory Kinnear a break, every man's got to eat, hes earning a check like the rest of us!
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I love the current entire MI6 team and I hope they stay.
  • TuuliaTuulia
    Posts: 2,081
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    What about Olivia Coleman as the next female M?
    Colman is generally wonderful, but too young for the role, surely? (Unless we have a very young Bond, and I sure wouldn't want that...)

    Assuming Ralph sticks around for a few more films (and I hope he does), she would be about the right age by then. I think she would be a fantastic successor personally.

    Oh, in a decade or more, sure, she'd probably be fantastic indeed. I can definitely imagine her in the role.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,154
    Last_Rat_Standing wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Drawback to casting A-listers in those roles. I'd love to go back to just having M, Q and Moneypenny make their appearances in the beginning, then let 007 have the show. SPECTRE felt like an MI6 ensemble piece as opposed to a "James Bond" film.

    Exactly, because it's basically Bond, now what's the MI6 team up too, ooh nine eyes and Bond is gone, back to twenty minutes of Bond, oh wait people need to know what the MI6 team is up to, yup still nine eyes, ok back to Bond. Oh wait, these scenes contain both MI6 and Bond...JACKPOT!

    It really was every other scene in SP that featured the staff. Too much, and probably one of the reasons I almost never pop in my SP blu-ray.
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    I wish Spectre was the second or third film to CR... Honestly can you imagine getting a sequel to CR and the ending of the movie shows Blofeld. Maybe getting a false indentity or just something indicating he is Blofeld..

    We really need one more film.
    Craig feels like the classic Bond again something we haven't felt since maybe Goldeneye. IMO.

    Everything's so perfect.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited July 2016 Posts: 8,395
    CASINOROYALE wrote: »
    I wish Spectre was the second or third film to CR... Honestly can you imagine getting a sequel to CR and the ending of the movie shows Blofeld. Maybe getting a false indentity or just something indicating he is Blofeld..

    We really need one more film.
    Craig feels like the classic Bond again something we haven't felt since maybe Goldeneye. IMO.

    Everything's so perfect.

    This guy sounds optimistic. I like that.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Agreed. I feel the same way.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2016 Posts: 23,883
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    I haven't really fancied either Miss Moneypenny or Q of the Craig era. They just haven't been portraying their own characters/roles respectively I wouldn't mind seeing a recast performed in the next installment.
    I'm with you on this. Whishaw showed promise in SF, but I'm ok if the whole lot get recast (including Fiennes, who I found terribly unimpressive in SP) next go around.
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    Give Rory Kinnear a break, every man's got to eat, hes earning a check like the rest of us!
    Much as I find him dull as a dishwasher, he's unintrusive, so I don't mind if he stays or goes.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I wish Tanner showed a little more emotion instead of his full Vulcan personality.
  • writer5150writer5150
    Posts: 154
    New Moneypenny was better in CR. Tanner in QOS. Q in SF. And we'll give SP to M. The idea of them becoming a more critical component of the story should be a rare treat, not in every film. I loved when Q popped up a second time in YOLT or TSWLM. But we knew this was the exception. M showing up again in Moonraker to visit Drax' office. When it becomes a team element, we're looking at Mission Impossible. (Interestingly, the first MI films had it backwards too -- with Cruise essentially on his own. Like Bond should be.)
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    writer5150 wrote: »
    New Moneypenny was better in CR.
    You mean Villiers.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2016 Posts: 23,883
    writer5150 wrote: »
    Interestingly, the first MI films had it backwards too -- with Cruise essentially on his own. Like Bond should be.
    That's an interesting point you make. Cruise nailed it from 3 onwards (and definitely in 4/5), as it became more of a team effort as it should be for that series.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    The third M:I film is the most unwatchable one with an inconsistent plot.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    The third M:I film is the most unwatchable one with an inconsistent plot.
    I personally find it too soppy and really don't like the domestic angle, but Seymour Hoffman is deadly scary as a villain, in contrast to Michael Nyqvist in GP.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    To be honest, Seymour Hoffman was the only good thing about the film. Even Maggie Q was wasted in it.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    To be honest, Seymour Hoffman was the only good thing about the film. Even Maggie Q was wasted in it.
    I personally agree, although I know many like this installment for some reason.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited July 2016 Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    To be honest, Seymour Hoffman was the only good thing about the film. Even Maggie Q was wasted in it.
    I personally agree, although I know many like this installment for some reason.
    At best it was a soap opera with worst development than what we've seen in The World Is Not Enough and the Skyfall two-parters. It was more of a poor man's Jack Bauer movie with a little bit of Jason Bourne thrown in than anything else.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2016 Posts: 23,883
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    To be honest, Seymour Hoffman was the only good thing about the film. Even Maggie Q was wasted in it.
    I personally agree, although I know many like this installment for some reason.
    At best it was a soap opera with worst development than what we've seen in The World Is Not Enough and the Skyfall two-parters. It was more of a poor man's Jack Bauer movie with a little bit of Jason Bourne thrown in than anything else.
    It's funny that you mention TWINE, because that is what it reminds me the most of. I was so looking forward to it in 2006 (and wondered how it would fare against the upcoming CR, since MI2 decimated TWINE). It was a let down for me apart from the plane interrogation and that amazing bridge escape scene.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited July 2016 Posts: 12,837
    My opinion on the MI6 team is this

    If there's a 5th Craig film, that ends with him back at MI6, may as well carry on from there and keep the same recurring cast, even though I'm not a fan of Harris as MP and don't really care either way about Fiennes.

    If Spectre is his last (most likely imo), then the Craig era will have to be its own stand alone thing, like the Nolan trilogy. I doubt they'd want to carry on from where Spectre left off with a new actor, so in this scenario the next actor will have a soft reboot as his first film, ala TLD or GE. With that in mind, I think that Fiennes and Harris should go too if Craig is done.

    But Wishaw stays either way, because he's brilliant and he's young enough to play Q for even longer than Desmond did. If Dench got to stay for Craig, he should definitely get to stay for Bond no 7.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    Well, I definitely need to give Spectre a rewatch before I can comment on the performances of the Mi6 team in the film, but from what I can recall I see no reason to want Fiennes, Harris or Wishaw released. Keep them all for the next Bond actor, I say!

    Fiennes is the most perfect casting for M you're going to find in my book. What a coup that they managed to get him for the part at all! Now, I don't know whether or not he underwhelmed this last go around, but surely he's talented enough to keep onboard.

    Naomi Harris has grown on me. Found her a bit annoying at first in Skyfall, but I like her now. I'd be happy to keep her as Moneypenny for awhile yet.

    Wishaw similarly came off as stilted to me in Skyfall—similar to Harris—but he was great in Spectre and I'm beginning to think there was something off about Mendes's direction to the new Mi6 cast in Skyfall.

    As far as Kinnear goes, I liked him in QoS and found him rather bland in Skyfall (Mendes again?). Again, I'll have to rewatch Spectre of course, but in the hands of the right director, Rory should be a fine Tanner.

    All in all, we have an awfully good Mi6 cast as it is. No need to change any of them for the next actor.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I do agree.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited July 2016 Posts: 8,205
    So, Hypothetically, If a 35 year old Bond is cast you would want to keep the supporting players?
Sign In or Register to comment.