No Time To Die: Production Diary

14014024044064072507

Comments

  • Posts: 1,970
    Its gonna be hard for me when a new actor comes in. Esp since this site has become a thing for me.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    I like Brady's idea of having SPECTRE to infilatrate and compromise MI6 from all sides, traitors and turncoats everywhere, this is where the movies need to go if they want to stay interesting and memorable like a Marvel movie. Also this is just my opinion but I think Madeleine needs to return, trip and break an ankle so Bond can leave her.

    That's close to what Ellis is doing with Eidolon.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I'll have a terribly hard time adjusting to a new Bond after Daniel. Ever since I really got into Bond in a big way, Dan has always been Bond, so to imagine a future time where that's no longer the case is a drag, and I've enjoyed his work immensely, to put it mildly. I don't envy the next guy to take over, who will be unfairly judged by me as a result of my attachment to Craig's era.

    I can relate to that.

    I went through it two times already. First with the transition from Dalton to Brosnan and then again from Brosnan to Craig.

    Brosnan made it easy though. As soon as I saw that PTS of GE I was 100% convinced and a huge fan.

    You'll see that once a new actor is established, Craig will fast become just one of the others and be in the same position that Brosnan now is in.

    I don't believe the next guy will have problems convincing you. What is more important is the movie itself, the direction, the story, the overall impression. If it is something of the calibre of TLD, GE or CR it'll be all good, no matter who plays Bond.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited September 2016 Posts: 28,694
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Yep. As usual, you and I are on the same page. I can't even fathom a reality where they don't go this route. They JUST got the rights back to Bond's biggest bad guy. They have to keep going. I say two more with Blofeld, a nice little trilogy like they had before.

    To whom are you referring @The_Reaper? To my idea, which in essence is all about not holding back and go full throttle on Blofeld and SPECTRE, albeit in a more beloved Bond-esque way I think. More screentime for Blofeld, YET he hides in complete secrecy, FRWL-style.

    Or, are you referring to @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 's Marvel-esque idea, which in essence sounds -forgive me for saying this @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7- more like his belief in what he thinks will happen. Not necessarily his desired treatment of Blofeld and SPECTRE.

    My idea:
    I want SPECTRE to be..............secret and effective again! Guys, let's not forget that SPECTRE and Blofeld have been entirely compromised by now! That's very clear from the finale of SPECTRE. MI6 must have loads, bucket loads of information now to dismantle EVERY scheme or operation SPECTRE has a finger in.

    I'm surprised NO one is really addressing that. So to actually give SPECTRE a future in future films, the crime syndicate needs to be both effective and entirely secret again. Obviously, the organization needs to be a modern interpretation again of the 1960's SPECTRE. More of a Bilderberg-esque secret brotherhood as designed by Sam Mendes, and less of the cheesy Ken Adam-style syndicate. But again, it needs to be hiding in complete secrecy again, just like in "FRWL" and "TB". And obviously, James Bond should not be able to compromise SPECTRE again, like he did in Rome.

    The same goes for its head, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Blofeld is NOT like "The Dark Knight"s The Joker. He's the secret head of counter-espionage syndicate SPECTRE, just like 'M' is the secret head of MI6. Letting Blofeld escape, or letting him being on the run constantly only destroys the mystique of the character. Blofeld therefore needs to hide in secrecy again in Bond #25. Let him....disappear. There are many interesting story ideas to let this happen. But please don't make an entire movie about Blofeld's escape.

    Best thing IMO is to let him escape in a neat, clean, typical Blofeld-esque way. No 'The Joker' stuff please. And all of this during the first 20 to 30 min's of the film. So that during the rest of the film Bond can do a plain, solid, secret mission again! No more personal backgrounds, instead more secrecy!

    "From Russia With Love" IMO could still serve as the best template on how to make SPECTRE and Blofeld become secret again.

    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 's idea:
    @Gustav_Graves, I'm sorry, but EON aren't just going to let Blofeld hide away again, especially with how much Waltz would cost them.

    If Blofeld is back in a Craig-starring Bond 25, it's going to be a full-out conflict between the two, in a film that holds nothing back and pulls no stops. There's no reason not to throw everything and the kitchen sink at this thing since EON have already used up a modern interpretation of SPECTRE at the tail end of Dan's era. They started it, now they must finish it.

    It would've been far more interesting to see SPECTRE develop throughout a new actor's era as they did with Connery back at the very start, but they've blown their chances of that now and have to make due with what they've got.

    It's a shame Marvel got to the idea first, but it would have been interesting to see SPECTRE infecting MI6 from the inside as hidden in plain sight sleeper agents gaining control in secret for decades working in the same headquarters as their enemies in each major nation's intelligence services.



    Whomever said the part I bolded, my friend, which I believe was "the other guy." (=

    I see :-). No hard feelings hehe. But I do find it a pity....that some people actually prefer to.....copy-paste Marvel once again, instead of sticking to a rich, colorful filmography of 24 (26) Bond films. Inspiration enough from within if I may say so. That's what should be the starting point, not Marvel.

    *sigh*

    @Gustav_Graves, you once again misinterpret our stance. It's not a matter of copying Marvel, it's taking that one idea of an organization inside another organization which is a narrative angle present in tons of films (Marvel/Disney have no ownership of it) and giving it a Bond spin. Just because you're doing a romance during a war period doesn't mean you're ripping off Casablanca, just like it's not ripping off to play with an organization inside an organization, which has a narrative tradition and is the best way to drum up suspense and tension. Not to mention that we've yet to see it in Bond.

    It's an infinitely better approach than what we've got, and I don't think many would disagree that SPECTRE and Blofeld's reintroduction was badly timed. I am certain most would prefer the organization and Blofeld being introduced with a new actor in a new timeline where, like in Connery's era, SPECTRE was gradually revealed over time as a highly connected conspiracy that had the world by the throat as opposed to the organization and Blofeld being rushed, used up and retconned into the Craig era. Some of it works fine, but some of it is also sloppy and it could've been done much better. It's not to say EON had an easy go of it, as it's a hard thing to manage, I just think the execution could've been improved.

    The issue so many have with parts of SP is that the fixes that would make it so much better are easy to see and would be easy to alter, so they are bemused why some of what is in the finished film was executed in a specific way that doesn't feel right. And I agree with some of their complaints.

    It would've been easy and endlessly brilliant to see Bond affected by his torture instead of him having a superman moment afterward with his sharpened aim. It would've been great to see the finale take place in SPECTRE's HQ as opposed to London where Bond has to face off with the agents and Blofeld before Nine Eyes goes live, with Hinx coming back into the fray to fight him one last time to the death as the place erupts in chaos. And of course there's the off screen stuff, like the reckless spending on "action" for so little in return that EON let Mendes and co. run with. Millions flushed down the toilet for an explosion (GUINNESS WORLD RECORD woooo!) that most thought was CGI anyway, and that has no impact at all in a cinematic environment full of action films where objects explode when a hero flicks them with their finger.

    Explosions mean nothing any more, and when we tell EON we want to see things done "for real," we mean stunts, not explosions. Anybody can wire a few tanks of gasoline and C4 to blow, but what Bond used to do better than anyone was real stunts with real stakes that took painstaking planning and skill to perform safely. We've gone from the ski jump in TSWLM and some of the best chases in cinema to what...boring explosions that win Guinness Records? Come on, now. Bond should aspire to much more and reclaim the throne he used to have for stuntwork.

    I can have my fill of some of the SP dissenters at times, but some of their complaints go beyond nitpicking and do hold weight. I know you'll just see this post as me stepping on EON's toes and blockading their creative development and blah, blah, blah, but there are clear issues here that are apparent to see, and some of what occurred while shooting SP doesn't represent the best of Bond, or what Bond should be. It's not about blowing things up for awards and acting overjoyed at reckless spending, it's about crafting artful films with innovative use of visuals, sound and stunts that show the other franchises out there how it's done.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    i would really like the idea of Blofeld assuming the identity of Frans Oberhauser - just to f##k with Bond's head.. but that would be really stretching out a plot hole of Bond recognizing him (unless Ernst went through some drastic plastic surgery to take someone's likeness, ala DAD).... but at the end of the day, why would he go through that much trouble, to make Bond believe he was a long dead foster brother??..... yeah, the more i put thought to the idea.. it wouldn't work.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.
  • RareJamesBondFanRareJamesBondFan Touch it. You can touch it if you want.
    Posts: 132
    Just because you're doing a romance during a war period doesn't mean you're ripping off Casablanca, just like it's not ripping off to play with an organization inside an organization, which has a narrative tradition and is the best way to drum up suspense and tension.

    drums.jpg
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 6,844
    boldfinger wrote: »
    19 new comments in this thread. 'Oh', thinks I, 'perhaps there's something interesting in there?'

    But no just an ever more desperate kicking of heels until an official announcement.
    You should know better by now. I saw 45 new comments and knew instantly that´s not enough to indicate news.

    I saw 91 new comments and knew instantly that was too many to indicate actual news. ;)

    But just enough to indicate a detour discussion on Daniel Craig's singing abilities apparently...
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 1,296
    The idea of SPECTRE bulldozing and mindblowing MI6 from the inside out is brilliant as you say @Brady and a good way to go if they hope to make a good Bond story again. Also I want the next Bond film interspersed with flashbacks to Le Chriffre, Silva etc meeting and going to breakfast with Blofeld at the SPECTRE waffle house. If they need to use a CGI to make the actors look a littel younger then so be it. And yes absolutely they need to look to Marvel for inspiration, Like for instance the plot to Captain America 2- Robert Redford turned into an octopus, a building got knocked over, then everybody went home. :)
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited September 2016 Posts: 4,399
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    perhaps the upside of recasting those roles, getting some not as high profile actors/actresses for the role, thus limiting their screen time, and thus not having to spend some of the ol' production budget on the supporting cast at MI6...

    but be that as it may, i really like the current group we got, and i would like to see them continue on post Craig - especially Wishaw and Fiennes.


    EDIT: then again, Fiennes is really the only real high profile name of them..
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    HASEROT wrote: »
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    perhaps the upside of recasting those roles, getting some not as high profile actors/actresses for the role, thus limiting their screen time, and thus not having to spend some of the ol' production budget on the supporting cast at MI6...

    but be that as it may, i really like the current group we got, and i would like to see them continue on post Craig - especially Wishaw and Fiennes.


    EDIT: then again, Fiennes is really the only real high profile name of them..

    They could still limit Fiennes screen time, sure maybe letting him keep an important role butonce in a while less screen time. Judy Dench as legendary as she was she still had her films where her screen time was reduced to one scene or two.

    The only films which gave her much more screen time were Skyfall and The World is not enough. But still she never had as much importance to get the Villian as Ralph did in Skyfall or Spectre.

    We don't have to change the supporting cast so we can go back to the old days, they would just need to agree to appear in less scenes.





  • Posts: 5,767
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    I like Brady's idea of having SPECTRE to infilatrate and compromise MI6 from all sides, traitors and turncoats everywhere, this is where the movies need to go if they want to stay interesting and memorable like a Marvel movie. Also this is just my opinion but I think Madeleine needs to return, trip and break an ankle so Bond can leave her.
    Infiltration is as boring and unimaginative as natural deaths. Soap opera stuff. And we´ve had it too many times already: Renard blowing a hole into MI6, Miranda Frost fooling Bond, Vesper fooling Bond, Quantum infiltrating MI6, Silva hacking MI6, C taking over MI6. Where´s the fun gone? The simple metaphor of a healthy organism, a home, that needs to be protected?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited September 2016 Posts: 15,423
    boldfinger wrote: »
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    I like Brady's idea of having SPECTRE to infilatrate and compromise MI6 from all sides, traitors and turncoats everywhere, this is where the movies need to go if they want to stay interesting and memorable like a Marvel movie. Also this is just my opinion but I think Madeleine needs to return, trip and break an ankle so Bond can leave her.
    Infiltration is as boring and unimaginative as natural deaths. Soap opera stuff. And we´ve had it too many times already: Renard blowing a hole into MI6, Miranda Frost fooling Bond, Vesper fooling Bond, Quantum infiltrating MI6, Silva hacking MI6, C taking over MI6. Where´s the fun gone? The simple metaphor of a healthy organism, a home, that needs to be protected?
    Thank you.

    I mean, it's always a good idea and I would have loved to see something similar to The Winter Soldier in the Bond film series, but that ship has sailed and dare I say with failures in due. The scenario shouldn't be addressed for at least 20 years.
  • boldfinger wrote: »
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    I like Brady's idea of having SPECTRE to infilatrate and compromise MI6 from all sides, traitors and turncoats everywhere, this is where the movies need to go if they want to stay interesting and memorable like a Marvel movie. Also this is just my opinion but I think Madeleine needs to return, trip and break an ankle so Bond can leave her.
    Infiltration is as boring and unimaginative as natural deaths. Soap opera stuff. And we´ve had it too many times already: Renard blowing a hole into MI6, Miranda Frost fooling Bond, Vesper fooling Bond, Quantum infiltrating MI6, Silva hacking MI6, C taking over MI6. Where´s the fun gone? The simple metaphor of a healthy organism, a home, that needs to be protected?

    Just reading this makes me realize how ridiculously refreshing a good old-fashioned, straightforward mission with no drama on the homefront would be. One can dream.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited September 2016 Posts: 9,117
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    Also this is just my opinion but I think Madeleine needs to return, trip and break an ankle so Bond can leave her.

    Curiously the 'everyone's entitled to their opinion' crew are nowhere to be seen.
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    Also I want the next Bond film interspersed with flashbacks to Le Chriffre, Silva etc meeting and going to breakfast with Blofeld at the SPECTRE waffle house. If they need to use a CGI to make the actors look a littel younger then so be it. And yes absolutely they need to look to Marvel for inspiration, Like for instance the plot to Captain America 2- Robert Redford turned into an octopus, a building got knocked over, then everybody went home. :)

    Christ this guy is inane.
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Yep. As usual, you and I are on the same page. I can't even fathom a reality where they don't go this route. They JUST got the rights back to Bond's biggest bad guy. They have to keep going. I say two more with Blofeld, a nice little trilogy like they had before.

    To whom are you referring @The_Reaper? To my idea, which in essence is all about not holding back and go full throttle on Blofeld and SPECTRE, albeit in a more beloved Bond-esque way I think. More screentime for Blofeld, YET he hides in complete secrecy, FRWL-style.

    Or, are you referring to @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 's Marvel-esque idea, which in essence sounds -forgive me for saying this @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7- more like his belief in what he thinks will happen. Not necessarily his desired treatment of Blofeld and SPECTRE.

    My idea:
    I want SPECTRE to be..............secret and effective again! Guys, let's not forget that SPECTRE and Blofeld have been entirely compromised by now! That's very clear from the finale of SPECTRE. MI6 must have loads, bucket loads of information now to dismantle EVERY scheme or operation SPECTRE has a finger in.

    I'm surprised NO one is really addressing that. So to actually give SPECTRE a future in future films, the crime syndicate needs to be both effective and entirely secret again. Obviously, the organization needs to be a modern interpretation again of the 1960's SPECTRE. More of a Bilderberg-esque secret brotherhood as designed by Sam Mendes, and less of the cheesy Ken Adam-style syndicate. But again, it needs to be hiding in complete secrecy again, just like in "FRWL" and "TB". And obviously, James Bond should not be able to compromise SPECTRE again, like he did in Rome.

    The same goes for its head, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Blofeld is NOT like "The Dark Knight"s The Joker. He's the secret head of counter-espionage syndicate SPECTRE, just like 'M' is the secret head of MI6. Letting Blofeld escape, or letting him being on the run constantly only destroys the mystique of the character. Blofeld therefore needs to hide in secrecy again in Bond #25. Let him....disappear. There are many interesting story ideas to let this happen. But please don't make an entire movie about Blofeld's escape.

    Best thing IMO is to let him escape in a neat, clean, typical Blofeld-esque way. No 'The Joker' stuff please. And all of this during the first 20 to 30 min's of the film. So that during the rest of the film Bond can do a plain, solid, secret mission again! No more personal backgrounds, instead more secrecy!

    "From Russia With Love" IMO could still serve as the best template on how to make SPECTRE and Blofeld become secret again.

    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 's idea:
    @Gustav_Graves, I'm sorry, but EON aren't just going to let Blofeld hide away again, especially with how much Waltz would cost them.

    If Blofeld is back in a Craig-starring Bond 25, it's going to be a full-out conflict between the two, in a film that holds nothing back and pulls no stops. There's no reason not to throw everything and the kitchen sink at this thing since EON have already used up a modern interpretation of SPECTRE at the tail end of Dan's era. They started it, now they must finish it.

    It would've been far more interesting to see SPECTRE develop throughout a new actor's era as they did with Connery back at the very start, but they've blown their chances of that now and have to make due with what they've got.

    It's a shame Marvel got to the idea first, but it would have been interesting to see SPECTRE infecting MI6 from the inside as hidden in plain sight sleeper agents gaining control in secret for decades working in the same headquarters as their enemies in each major nation's intelligence services.



    Whomever said the part I bolded, my friend, which I believe was "the other guy." (=

    I see :-). No hard feelings hehe. But I do find it a pity....that some people actually prefer to.....copy-paste Marvel once again, instead of sticking to a rich, colorful filmography of 24 (26) Bond films. Inspiration enough from within if I may say so. That's what should be the starting point, not Marvel.

    *sigh*

    @Gustav_Graves, you once again misinterpret our stance. It's not a matter of copying Marvel, it's taking that one idea of an organization inside another organization which is a narrative angle present in tons of films (Marvel/Disney have no ownership of it) and giving it a Bond spin. Just because you're doing a romance during a war period doesn't mean you're ripping off Casablanca, just like it's not ripping off to play with an organization inside an organization, which has a narrative tradition and is the best way to drum up suspense and tension. Not to mention that we've yet to see it in Bond.

    It's an infinitely better approach than what we've got, and I don't think many would disagree that SPECTRE and Blofeld's reintroduction was badly timed. I am certain most would prefer the organization and Blofeld being introduced with a new actor in a new timeline where, like in Connery's era, SPECTRE was gradually revealed over time as a highly connected conspiracy that had the world by the throat as opposed to the organization and Blofeld being rushed, used up and retconned into the Craig era. Some of it works fine, but some of it is also sloppy and it could've been done much better. It's not to say EON had an easy go of it, as it's a hard thing to manage, I just think the execution could've been improved.

    The issue so many have with parts of SP is that the fixes that would make it so much better are easy to see and would be easy to alter, so they are bemused why some of what is in the finished film was executed in a specific way that doesn't feel right. And I agree with some of their complaints.

    It would've been easy and endlessly brilliant to see Bond affected by his torture instead of him having a superman moment afterward with his sharpened aim. It would've been great to see the finale take place in SPECTRE's HQ as opposed to London where Bond has to face off with the agents and Blofeld before Nine Eyes goes live, with Hinx coming back into the fray to fight him one last time to the death as the place erupts in chaos. And of course there's the off screen stuff, like the reckless spending on "action" for so little in return that EON let Mendes and co. run with. Millions flushed down the toilet for an explosion (GUINNESS WORLD RECORD woooo!) that most thought was CGI anyway, and that has no impact at all in a cinematic environment full of action films where objects explode when a hero flicks them with their finger.

    Explosions mean nothing any more, and when we tell EON we want to see things done "for real," we mean stunts, not explosions. Anybody can wire a few tanks of gasoline and C4 to blow, but what Bond used to do better than anyone was real stunts with real stakes that took painstaking planning and skill to perform safely. We've gone from the ski jump in TSWLM and some of the best chases in cinema to what...boring explosions that win Guinness Records? Come on, now. Bond should aspire to much more and reclaim the throne he used to have for stuntwork.

    I can have my fill of some of the SP dissenters at times, but some of their complaints go beyond nitpicking and do hold weight. I know you'll just see this post as me stepping on EON's toes and blockading their creative development and blah, blah, blah, but there are clear issues here that are apparent to see, and some of what occurred while shooting SP doesn't represent the best of Bond, or what Bond should be. It's not about blowing things up for awards and acting overjoyed at reckless spending, it's about crafting artful films with innovative use of visuals, sound and stunts that show the other franchises out there how it's done.

    Superlative post Sir. The difference between a respected member and an irritating clown has never been so stark.
  • Posts: 11,425
    But I do find it a pity....that some people actually prefer to.....copy-paste Marvel once again, instead of sticking to a rich, colorful filmography of 24 (26) Bond films. Inspiration enough from within if I may say so. That's what should be the starting point, not Marvel.

    Very true. Marvel's sausage factory has nothing to teach us. Apart from the virtue of planning v making things up on the hoof.

    There you @Gustav I agree with you. It's easy - if you speak sense I agree. Try it more often!
    It clearly boils down to if Craig returns or not. If he does we're pretty much guaranteed to get a Bond v Blofeld extravaganza. If he doesn't we can forget the mistakes made in SP and start again from scratch and build SPECTRE up over several films.

    Why do we need SPECTRE again at all? Isn't it boring?

    I never understood this desire to have the same villains over and over again. I think we've seen enough of them for a lifetime. Using SPECTRE and Blofeld again after Craig is done is lazy and unimaginative. Fan fiction, basically.

    If they absolutely have to reappear, I'd much rather see them in a TV series based on original novels.

    Agreed. SPECTRE is a cliche now and it's hardly as if SP did anything to reinvigorate it with creativity and originality.

    But after taking 50 years to get the rights do you really imagine they are going to let it lie? We're stuck with it I'm afraid and, like the DB5 they think that's what the punters want (and maybe it is to be fair), so it's about making the best of it.
    Getafix wrote: »
    It clearly boils down to if Craig returns or not. If he does we're pretty much guaranteed to get a Bond v Blofeld extravaganza. If he doesn't we can forget the mistakes made in SP and start again from scratch and build SPECTRE up over several films.

    Why do we need SPECTRE again at all? Isn't it boring?

    I never understood this desire to have the same villains over and over again. I think we've seen enough of them for a lifetime. Using SPECTRE and Blofeld again after Craig is done is lazy and unimaginative. Fan fiction, basically.

    If they absolutely have to reappear, I'd much rather see them in a TV series based on original novels.

    I kind of agree. I'm not sure I ever found Spectre that gripping in the first place. All a bit too campy and Austin Powers. Quantum was fine as it was.

    For me this is the big tragedy of the Mendes era. Craig started off so strongly and with a fresh slate, and Mendes has just brought us back to where we were before rather than continuing with the new trajectory. It feels like a big missed opportunity and sadly there's a bit of that Brosnan era staleness creeping back in.

    It started with SF for me. The cuff popping, 'health and safety' gag' and DB5 nonsense. Not so much flogging a dead horse, as animal necrophilia.

    Well we have always had these cycles so I don't think it's anything to get too worried about. Although it's disappointing how the Craig era turned out it's not like we've plumbed DAD depths.

    Very true. And I have been amongst the defenders of SP on here. I enjoyed it.

    It's just that the Craig era promised so much more. I was anticipating originality because Craigs interpretation allowed a less cliched take on the series, but Mendes films are laden with tired cliches that weigh the films down.

    SP was definitley not a low point for me though. Personally speaking I thought it was an improvement on SF.
  • Posts: 4,617
    "It's not about blowing things up for awards and acting overjoyed at reckless spending, it's about crafting artful films with innovative use of visuals, sound and stunts that show the other franchises out there how it's done."

    100% spot on but how come they did not know this before they made SP rather than creating a perfect example of blowing things up for awards etc etc.

    Mendes is a clever guy, he really does know about how good movies are made. What was he thinking?
  • Posts: 1,314
    Regarding the end of spectre. Apart from qs ambiguous line, How is it any different to the end of goldfinger?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Regarding the end of spectre. Apart from qs ambiguous line, How is it any different to the end of goldfinger?

    Bond quits?
  • Posts: 4,325
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Regarding the end of spectre. Apart from qs ambiguous line, How is it any different to the end of goldfinger?

    Throwing his gun away I guess is symbolic of him leaving his life as an assassin. Dialogue between Bond and Madeleine in the film centres on his choice of having or not having to live the life he currently leads, which parallels the dialogue between Bond and Vesper in CR.
  • Posts: 16,169
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    I like that idea. Something low-key with maybe just one or two locations outside London. Give the film a chance to well utilize the exotic settings. I'd love for a new Bond film to capture the feel and tone of DR NO.
  • Posts: 9,847
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    I like that idea. Something low-key with maybe just one or two locations outside London. Give the film a chance to well utilize the exotic settings. I'd love for a new Bond film to capture the feel and tone of DR NO.

    I always thought the short story of the Hildebrand Rarity could be utlized the same way the short story of the living daylights.. and with Bond "retired" wait


    How about this Spectre Frame Bond for the murder of a big time researcher (essentially Miltion Krest but not using his name as it was already in Licence to Kill) and Bond has to solve the murder clear his name and stop Spectre.

    I would watch it.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2016 Posts: 23,883
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    I like that idea. Something low-key with maybe just one or two locations outside London. Give the film a chance to well utilize the exotic settings. I'd love for a new Bond film to capture the feel and tone of DR NO.
    I agree. This is what some of us have been advocating since SP on this forum. The issue is, will EON and its studio backers go for this? Or have they caught the box office 'bug' and want to accomodate the larger excesses inherent in today's blockbusters in order to generate higher returns in foreign markets? This is what concerns me.

    A DN type film, while likely to be critically acclaimed, is unlikely to set the global box office on fire, although it could do well in certain select markets.

    EON will have to make a strategic decision soon on what direction it wants to take with this franchise going forward and that will likely be part of the pitch and discussions with the new studio.
  • Posts: 16,169
    bondjames wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    I like that idea. Something low-key with maybe just one or two locations outside London. Give the film a chance to well utilize the exotic settings. I'd love for a new Bond film to capture the feel and tone of DR NO.
    I agree. This is what some of us have been advocating since SP on this forum. The issue is, will EON and its studio backers go for this? Or have they caught the box office 'bug' and want to accomodate the larger excesses inherent in today's blockbusters in order to generate higher returns in foreign markets. This is what concerns me.

    A DN type film, while likely to be critically acclaimed, is unlikely to set the global box office on fire, although it could do well in certain select markets.

    EON will have to make a strategic decision soon on what direction it wants to take with this franchise going forward and that will likely be part of the pitch and discussions with the new studio.

    I think if marketed as a traditional Bond film is, then a low key DR NO type Bond would be easily as successful. Especially if the main location chosen was used to it's advantage much like Jamaica in DN and Nassau in TB. Nassau in TB is so iconic , it's no wonder 5 decades later fans still travel there to find the various beaches and locations. I'd love for future films to go back to have one to two main locales for 007 on his assignment. I always think of FRWL first when I think of Istanbul- not TWINE.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2016 Posts: 23,883
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    I like that idea. Something low-key with maybe just one or two locations outside London. Give the film a chance to well utilize the exotic settings. I'd love for a new Bond film to capture the feel and tone of DR NO.
    I agree. This is what some of us have been advocating since SP on this forum. The issue is, will EON and its studio backers go for this? Or have they caught the box office 'bug' and want to accomodate the larger excesses inherent in today's blockbusters in order to generate higher returns in foreign markets. This is what concerns me.

    A DN type film, while likely to be critically acclaimed, is unlikely to set the global box office on fire, although it could do well in certain select markets.

    EON will have to make a strategic decision soon on what direction it wants to take with this franchise going forward and that will likely be part of the pitch and discussions with the new studio.

    I think if marketed as a traditional Bond film is, then a low key DR NO type Bond would be easily as successful. Especially if the main location chosen was used to it's advantage much like Jamaica in DN and Nassau in TB. Nassau in TB is so iconic , it's no wonder 5 decades later fans still travel there to find the various beaches and locations. I'd love for future films to go back to have one to two main locales for 007 on his assignment. I always think of FRWL first when I think of Istanbul- not TWINE.
    I agree. Visual splendour is something which easily translates across multiple markets and languages. This probably played a large part in SF's outsize global success - it truly was a beautiful film to look at (probably the best of 2012), much like some of the earlier Bond films.

    I was more referring to the other elements of DN - at its core it was a low key espionage thriller. Even though I personally really like that about the film, I'm not sure if that will work on a global level these days. Given the cultures that Bond films appeal to, the personal element (like in SF/SP) may now be more of a requirement to forge an emotional connection with the audience, much as I don't like it.
  • Posts: 4,325
    bondjames wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    We need a new actor (Fassbender please) and a whole new team, no more of this scooby doo gang. No more Blofeld. No more Madeline. Just an awesome actor to play Bond, a modern villain, original plot. That's what Eon needs. They need to make the modern Dr. No.

    I like that idea. Something low-key with maybe just one or two locations outside London. Give the film a chance to well utilize the exotic settings. I'd love for a new Bond film to capture the feel and tone of DR NO.
    I agree. This is what some of us have been advocating since SP on this forum. The issue is, will EON and its studio backers go for this? Or have they caught the box office 'bug' and want to accomodate the larger excesses inherent in today's blockbusters in order to generate higher returns in foreign markets. This is what concerns me.

    A DN type film, while likely to be critically acclaimed, is unlikely to set the global box office on fire, although it could do well in certain select markets.

    EON will have to make a strategic decision soon on what direction it wants to take with this franchise going forward and that will likely be part of the pitch and discussions with the new studio.

    I think if marketed as a traditional Bond film is, then a low key DR NO type Bond would be easily as successful. Especially if the main location chosen was used to it's advantage much like Jamaica in DN and Nassau in TB. Nassau in TB is so iconic , it's no wonder 5 decades later fans still travel there to find the various beaches and locations. I'd love for future films to go back to have one to two main locales for 007 on his assignment. I always think of FRWL first when I think of Istanbul- not TWINE.
    I agree. Visual splendour is something which easily translates across multiple markets and languages. This probably played a large part in SF's outsize global success - it truly was a beautiful film to look at (probably the best of 2012), much like some of the earlier Bond films.

    I was more referring to the other elements of DN - at its core it was a low key espionage thriller. Even though I personally really like that about the film, I'm not sure if that will work on a global level these days. Given the cultures that Bond films appeal to, the personal element (like in SF/SP) may now be more of a requirement to forge an emotional connection with the audience, much as I don't like it.

    Story is king.
  • Posts: 16,169
    @bondjames ,absolutely. DN had Bond in full investigative mode, and I'd love to see more of that, myself. In many ways DN works as an espionage mystery thriller with just a tad of sci -fi segued in towards the end.
    I think style-wise the biggest difference between the early 60s Connery films and pretty much all the later Brosnan plus entries is as Felix Leiter might say a "sense of adventure". Some of the newer Bonds sacrifice adventure for action- if that makes sense. Then a personal element is thrown in to make the film seems more prestigious than it is.
    I do feel as though the-this time it's personal- elements are often sloppily forced to appeal to the audience. Whereas a Bond film like DR NO or FRWL has every element needed to tell the story naturally.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I'm fully in agreement @ToTheRight. The 'action for the sake of action' and idiotic CGI (like the collapsing building pretitles scenario in SP) is a pander to a global audience because action translates well.

    In a way, that sense of mystery and 'detached' adventure that you mention came 'right back front and centre' for me during the Shanghai sequence in SF, which is why it's my favourite part of an excellent film (it was such a standout in the theatre).

    Bond on his own, snooping about and tracking Patrice in an 'exotic' setting filmed beautifully.

    In Connery's day they would have immersed us more in the location and it would have gone on for a few days as he gets closer to his quarry (as happened in Jamaica in DN and Istanbul in FRWL), but these days they tend to make it more atmospheric (almost like a music video). Come to think of it, they did a pretty good job of it in Vienna/Bratislava in TLD as well, with Saunders standing in for Felix to an extent.

    I really liked the China sequence and wish they had lingered there longer in SF.
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 5,767
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Regarding the end of spectre. Apart from qs ambiguous line, How is it any different to the end of goldfinger?

    Throwing his gun away I guess is symbolic of him leaving his life as an assassin.
    Bond throws his empty gun away at the beginning of SF. So if at all it´s more of an in-joke by Mendes.
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Dialogue between Bond and Madeleine in the film centres on his choice of having or not having to live the life he currently leads, which parallels the dialogue between Bond and Vesper in CR.
    Yet with Vesper it was so much more believable.
    Bond quits?
    Arguably. Possibly, if the filmmakers intended to ridicule Craig´s Bond, having him quit just after he enthusiastically confirmed to the new M he´s ready for work with pleasure. I mean, lack of continuity is one thing, but this is just pure insanity.

    ToTheRight wrote: »
    @bondjames ,absolutely. DN had Bond in full investigative mode, and I'd love to see more of that, myself. In many ways DN works as an espionage mystery thriller with just a tad of sci -fi segued in towards the end.
    I think style-wise the biggest difference between the early 60s Connery films and pretty much all the later Brosnan plus entries is as Felix Leiter might say a "sense of adventure". Some of the newer Bonds sacrifice adventure for action- if that makes sense. Then a personal element is thrown in to make the film seems more prestigious than it is.
    I do feel as though the-this time it's personal- elements are often sloppily forced to appeal to the audience. Whereas a Bond film like DR NO or FRWL has every element needed to tell the story naturally.
    The funny thing is, the over-the-top-nonstop-action phase of Bond films seems to be over, leaving lots of space for thrill and tension, which however is not implemented.

  • Posts: 4,617
    I think one of the long term issues with CGI is that the audience has become too used to massive action set pieces. We all know we are effectively watching digital cartoons. Movies like Day After Tomorrow, Ind Day, etc etc have meant that IMHO its not really possible now to get the audience on the edge of their seat via massive action. Even if it is real, people think it could be CGI anyway.
    The route needs to be very specific "surgical" use of great stunts (with subtle CGI if required) that put our hero at great risk and exploit the emotional connection that the audience has with the hero. Cruise's Atlas stunt , for me, has far more impact and integrity than a whole city being wiped out by a big wave or a villian's complex being blown up and fans still talk about the final set piece in TLD with great respect. I'm conviced this has to be the way forward with Bond and they are in big trouble if they just continue down the road of bigger and bigger explosions (CGI or real).
Sign In or Register to comment.