No Time To Die: Production Diary

13173183203223232507

Comments

  • Posts: 233
    suavejmf wrote: »
    She wouldn't do it. Emma is an agenda-driven 'artist' and Bond is too 'misogynist' for her. ;)

    What a Lesbian. ;)

    Sometimes I wonder why I'm on this forum.
  • In other news Radio 2 DJ Chris Evans has been reportedly charged with sexual assault claims. The news comes after he exits the rebooted Top Gear series (produced by the BBC) due to low ratings. It's is unknown of how Chris Evans has been charged with something!
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Chris Evans has ______all to do with Bond? Did I miss something?
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,134
    @MurphyHorse please stick to the topic at hand. We had another user back along who posted bizarre and off topic comments. He didn't last too long.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Murdock wrote: »
    Apparently to some he was lazy and bored in SP.
    What-Meme-13.jpg

    So relaxed and at ease, that some thought that. So crazy.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Let's be fair to Dan here. Yes I thought his performance dropped down a very slight notch but he was still superb and none of the problems I have with SP were down to him in the slightest.

    Even if accusations of him phoning it in were accurate (which they are not IMO) could you blame him when so many others were doing the same (the writers, Mendes, Newman, Waltz)?
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I found Craig's performance to be one of the worst aspects of the film. The light whimsical approach is not in his wheelhouse.

    Some might have taken from the film that he was on great form but some of us just saw his most awkward performance to date and he was so much better in Skyfall.

    I wanted with SP for him to lighten up slightly and become more confident but they tipped it too far with the groansome oneliners he was shackled with.

    This is a far cry from his work in CR, QOS & SF, if he comes back I hope they give his character the depth they robbed it of with SP.

    If you want this kind of Bond there are many in the series that will deliver it and actors that are far more comfortable with this type of thing. Moore or Brosnan couldn't have pulled off that brutal bathroom punch up in the CR PTS and vice versa for Craig trying the lighthearted quip machine approach.

    I'm sorry but I'm of the opinion that while not quite the nadir that is DAD this is going to go down as Craig's worst film when the dust has settled.

    If Craig does return I hope we get something between the performance in his first 3 films and not this forced Rog like routine we got in SPECTRE.

    That being said he was nowhere as catatonic and phoning it in as Waltz who just delivered a vanilla unmemorable turn, quite extraordinary if you consider who he was actually playing.

    I'm becoming more of the opinion that I'd be most happy for this to be the end of this timeline and new Bond is cast unless they can bring DC back to cap this off with one ideally 2 films to redeem the jarring mess that is SPECTRE.

    More of the same would be the nail in the coffin and a tenure that has been so celebrated would be tarnished. If they can overcome this blip with a real barnstormer of a conclusion to this Quantum/SPECTRE arc by using YOLT as a basis then I'm all for it but to just ignore what has gone before and just place DC as Bond on a mission isn't going to cut it, if he comes back it's to conclude what they started.

    If they want a standalone then they might as well recast and reset.

    Once this is finished with they should never let a future Bond get so painted into a corner as SPECTRE has done for the Craig era, there is a reason this didn't even approach the SF boxoffice is because word of mouth got round that it just wasn't very good.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Let's be fair to Dan here. Yes I thought his performance dropped down a very slight notch but he was still superb and none of the problems I have with SP were down to him in the slightest.

    Even if accusations of him phoning it in were accurate (which they are not IMO) could you blame him when so many others were doing the same (the writers, Mendes, Newman, Waltz)?

    Very true. Not only that, but the fact that he was able to still showcase enthusiasm in the role given the appalling script is a testament to his commitment.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I found Craig's performance to be one of the worst aspects of the film. The light whimsical approach is not in his wheelhouse.

    Some might have taken from the film that he was on great form but some of us just saw his most awkward performance to date and he was so much better in Skyfall.

    I wanted with SP for him to lighten up slightly and become more confident but they tipped it too far with the groansome oneliners he was shackled with.

    This is a far cry from his work in CR, QOS & SF, if he comes back I hope they give his character the depth they robbed it of with SP.

    If you want this kind of Bond there are many in the series that will deliver it and actors that are far more comfortable with this type of thing. Moore or Brosnan couldn't have pulled off that brutal bathroom punch up in the CR PTS and vice versa for Craig trying the lighthearted quip machine approach.

    I'm sorry but I'm of the opinion that while not quite the nadir that is DAD this is going to go down as Craig's worst film when the dust has settled.

    If Craig does return I hope we get something between the performance in his first 3 films and not this forced Rog like routine we got in SPECTRE.

    That being said he was nowhere as catatonic and phoning it in as Waltz who just delivered a vanilla unmemorable turn, quite extraordinary if you consider who he was actually playing.

    I'm becoming more of the opinion that I'd be most happy for this to be the end of this timeline and new Bond is cast unless they can bring DC back to cap this off with one ideally 2 films to redeem the jarring mess that is SPECTRE.

    More of the same would be the nail in the coffin and a tenure that has been so celebrated would be tarnished. If they can overcome this blip with a real barnstormer of a conclusion to this Quantum/SPECTRE arc by using YOLT as a basis then I'm all for it but to just ignore what has gone before and just place DC as Bond on a mission isn't going to cut it, if he comes back it's to conclude what they started.

    If they want a standalone then they might as well recast and reset.

    Once this is finished with they should never let a future Bond get so painted into a corner as SPECTRE has done for the Craig era, there is a reason this didn't even approach the SF boxoffice is because word of mouth got round that it just wasn't very good.

    100% in full agreement with this.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited July 2016 Posts: 15,715
    In terms of performances, I rank Craig just below Connery as the big daddies of the actors (although I personally prefer Moore/Dalton/Brosnan, but that's just my personal taste). I will get killed for what comes next: In terms of Craig's tenure itself, I'd say it's the least good in the canon, because SF/SP are just so far from the genius strokes of originality of CR and QOS (even if these 2 are not flawless). However, if you remove SF/SP, then I'd rank Craig's tenure as the best in the canon, as I can't get enough of CR/QOS double bills. It's really sad because Craig is friggin immense as Bond, he is a total friggin legend. He has done nothing wrong as Bond, IMO (I still get a huge kick of him walking on the roofs in the SP PTS). I don't even put the blame on EON/Barbara, as they are 100% responsible for the ballsy decisions that resulted in CR. IMO the whole blame goes to Mendes and his team, who just massively dropped the ball in 2012-2015. If it wasn't for Craig (and the fantastic Bardem/Dench rivalery in SF), I would find the last 2 films unwatchable.

    I am hyped to see Craig come back for Bond 25, and (why not) even for Bond 26, but please, Mendes must go.
  • Posts: 4,044
    Shardlake wrote: »

    Once this is finished with they should never let a future Bond get so painted into a corner as SPECTRE has done for the Craig era, there is a reason this didn't even approach the SF boxoffice is because word of mouth got round that it just wasn't very good.

    Although there were large parts of the world where word of mouth and box office performance were both very good.

  • edited July 2016 Posts: 12,837
    Loved Craig in Spectre (which is my favourite of his era, for me it's easily SP>SF>CR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>QoS). I thought the more confident relaxed approach made sense because this is the man he's grown into. At ease, able to quip in the face of death because he's that confident in his abilities after all his previous missions, pretty much completely desensitised to killing the violence he has to inflict.

    It's not a Flemingesque approach and you could argue that his performance wasn't as "good" because the material wasn't as dramatic as CR, but the whole point of the Craig era is showing his development from rookie to fully formed cinematic 007. So in that context, it made complete sense to have him evolve from the Goldfinger esque relfection on what he's doing after the stairwell fight in CR, to the one liners and effortless gunning down of his enemies in SP. We were always going to get to this point eventually. It's what all these films have been building towards.

    I'm also a bit confused as to why the majority seem to be demanding a return to more straightforward Bond films devoid of personal issues etc but at the same time criticise Craig for playing it in the standard cinematic Bond mold.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Some think Dan is "shackled" with comedy in SP too much, when that's the exact impression I get with SF far more.

    To my mind, what he had to deliver one-liner was plain wretched at times in SF, like the two one-liners back to back after the casino fight in Macau (bet on red/circle of life), but in SP any deliveries he had were spot on and didn't hamper the momentum of the movie for me.

    I don't find his performance in the film light and whimsical at all, as some have described it either. He's still that same rugged man doing bad things for queen and country, just looking seasoned while doing it, and the film contains some of the darkest content we've seen in a Bond film. Dan had complete control of everything, every aspect of his Bond performance; his movement, speech, dress sense, the whole nine, with not a false note sung. This felt like the matured and experienced version of the Bond we saw in CR, and it all felt earned and inevitable and wonderful to see.
  • edited July 2016 Posts: 12,837
    This felt like the matured and experienced version of the Bond we saw in CR, and it all felt earned and inevitable and wonderful to see.

    Completely agree with this.

    I think that's why the whole callbacks to previous films and Bond quitting angle felt so well done to me too. When he sees Mr White again, and then finds the video of Vespers interrogation (a brilliant moment) he's reminded of the man he used to be, and would doubtlessly in his head compare that to what he's evolved into (a remorseless assassin). Madeline leaving him would also help with this wakeup call. Which is why when he sees a route out in the form of Madeline (who he doesn't love like he did Vesper, but she loves him because of her daddy issues, and the idea of a life with her is actually a viable prospect, unlike other Bond girls, because she actually understands what he's been through) he takes it and quits MI6.

    It was really well done and to me it's a satisfying, clever conclusion to what started in CR (personally I don't see any need for a dull revenge driven follow up and I'd rather they recast and rebooted than write Madeline away with some offhand line, undoing everything they did in SP, just so DC can have one more mission/film).

    Over the course of the Craig era, they managed to show Bond evolving from a (relatively) Flemingesque (by this I mean his attitude to killing and sense of vulnerability and humanity, that was all similar to the books) rookie spy into the standard, Connery esque cinematic Bond, while also examining what that would cost him and turning it into a source of drama. It was brilliantly done imo, I really loved it, I don't care if it wasn't all planned from the beginning because for me it all worked out well in the end. Craig isn't my favourite Bond, nor is his run of films my favourite (QoS drags the era down for me and I don't think anything could compete with Dalton's perfect two) but I think they did something really clever and original with these films and I'll admire them endlessly for that.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @thelivingroyale, I agree.

    White, for the short time we got him back was electric, and in his dying and ruined state, he was definitely seen as a cautionary tale in Bond's mind. He'd lived his life killing and growing cold, and had lost out on his family and the love of his life through his work and obsessions, which I think Bond is very fearful of himself. It's such a nuanced set of performances when Craig and Christensen meet again in this movie, and it really hits home who Bond was and who he is now, and who he might want to be beyond that life.
    I'm so happy they got White back in there after all these years.

    I remember the night I stayed up for the trailer for SP to go live on 007.com very vividly. The second I heard Jasper's voice deliver the kite line I shouted in joy and made my mother think something was amiss I was so passionate and enthusiastic about seeing him again. I know a White return was a big wish-item for many others here too, and to see it granted was indescribably wonderful.
  • Posts: 9,846
    Let's be fair to Dan here. Yes I thought his performance dropped down a very slight notch but he was still superb and none of the problems I have with SP were down to him in the slightest.

    Even if accusations of him phoning it in were accurate (which they are not IMO) could you blame him when so many others were doing the same (the writers, Mendes, Newman, Waltz)?

    Hey Thomas Newman worked really hard on Spectre he had to put the Skyfall cd into the computer while drinking his cup of coffee I mean that require the use of two hands...

    Lmao
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Let's be fair to Dan here. Yes I thought his performance dropped down a very slight notch but he was still superb and none of the problems I have with SP were down to him in the slightest.

    Even if accusations of him phoning it in were accurate (which they are not IMO) could you blame him when so many others were doing the same (the writers, Mendes, Newman, Waltz)?

    Hey Thomas Newman worked really hard on Spectre he had to put the Skyfall cd into the computer while drinking his cup of coffee I mean that require the use of two hands...

    Lmao
    Good one!! :))
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited July 2016 Posts: 8,395
    I really love the use of "the moors" in SP, though. That was nicely done.

    Reminds me of how John Carpenter uses music in his movies. Great atmosphere!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I found Craig's performance to be one of the worst aspects of the film. The light whimsical approach is not in his wheelhouse.
    It's interesting how perfectly reasonable (at least I think most of us are) people can look at things so differently.

    I didn't find Craig's performance to be awful, but I certainly didn't find it to be impressive either. Just average and far below his best (actually, easily his worst, in my view). I agree with you that his attempts at whimsical humour felt flat and forced (almost like a full film's worth of 'Circle of Life' from SF). It's not his forte. Moreover, I personally didn't see anything Connery'esque about his performance. Sean was a god (and I'm not even religious) in comparison, imho. Everything was 'natural' for him, as it was for Moore. They never looked like they were acting. I even prefer Brosnan in DAD personally.

    Damn shame that SP is such a polarizing film, here and elsewhere. I don't think EON would have wanted to have something like this as the last entry while we have what is likely to be a long wait before B25.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Some think Dan is "shackled" with comedy in SP too much, when that's the exact impression I get with SF far more.

    To my mind, what he had to deliver one-liner was plain wretched at times in SF, like the two one-liners back to back after the casino fight in Macau (bet on red/circle of life), but in SP any deliveries he had were spot on and didn't hamper the momentum of the movie for me.

    Totally agree. Some of his flippant moments in SP are absolute class. I can rationalise some of the hatred directed at the film (although most of it I don't agree with), but this aspect I refuse to get on board with. He's the epitome of cool in this movie.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Regardless of whether Craig ends up returning or not, I think its pretty clear by how SP ends that that film was originally planned to be Craig's last hurrah. I think the point they were trying to make is that a woman started it (Vesper), and its a woman that ends it (Madeline). They may have made this message deliberately vague in order to leave the door open for Craig, but nonetheless I think that was their original intention.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I know that a lot of fans were relieved that the final line from several early drafts did not make the cut: We have all the time in the World. The fear being that the follow up film would have been locked into a predictable pattern and outcome. I can see that, in terms of BOND 25. However, if this truly is Daniel's final film in the series, and the closing of this tight internal continuity, I think that would have been the perfect way to end his run. Then B25 gives us a "soft" reboot (ala GOLDENEYE), with no mention of the Craig Era. Too late now, obviously, but that would have been a chilling farewell.
    I agree completely. It would have indeed been chilling and apropos. Leave it to our imagination.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Let's be fair to Dan here. Yes I thought his performance dropped down a very slight notch but he was still superb and none of the problems I have with SP were down to him in the slightest.

    Even if accusations of him phoning it in were accurate (which they are not IMO) could you blame him when so many others were doing the same (the writers, Mendes, Newman, Waltz)?

    I agree. The writers definitely phoned in ... I'm not even sure Logan had the right number.
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    Agree, writers and Mendes. Films are a director's medium. SP is uneven in tone and shot from an unfinished script. I don't question Craig's performance. He's so good, but what do you do with that ending as an actor other than request it be totally rewritten? The only thing I can fault Craig for is his introduction of Mendes into the series. But on the other hand, what was he to do? EON isn't on top of their own series with a potent creative team with short and long term plans. I only wish Craig had bumped into some other great director at a party and asked him if he wanted to direct a JB movie.
  • Posts: 1,661
    If this is true - big if, I guess - there's no way back for Daniel Craig:
    “Producers think that ungracious comment, right before the release of Spectre, cost them tens of millions at the box office. They’re ready to forget about Daniel.”

    http://www.inquisitr.com/3361472/james-bond-expect-delays-as-jack-huston-and-tom-hiddleston-lock-horns/

    It could be tabloid type rumor but if Craig's comments did have some impact on the box office - if it damaged the Bond brand - I can't see Broccoli/Wilson that keen to persuade Daniel Craig to return.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Murdock wrote: »
    Apparently to some he was lazy and bored in SP.
    What-Meme-13.jpg

    Well people say the same about Connery in YOLT but I still enjoy that movie.

    Craig is definitley his most laid back in SPECTRE though. Lacks the urgency of CR and QOS.
  • Posts: 1,296
    I think it's fairly fair to say at this point that it will be fall 2019 at the earliest friends. Hibernate.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited July 2016 Posts: 8,395
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    I think it's fairly fair to say at this point that it will be fall 2019 at the earliest friends. Hibernate.

    That's easy for you, Venusaur. ;)
  • Posts: 9,846
    In terms of one word titles Hibernate wouldn't be that bad a bond title...
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Hiddlenate.

    Starring Aidan Turner.
Sign In or Register to comment.