No Time To Die: Production Diary

14744754774794802507

Comments

  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    It would also be great if Sam Mendes came back. He seems to get a lot of criticism around here but I think his work is excellent.
    I hope he does not come back. With Skyfall he made one of the best Bond films in my book - but after it he was done and he just came back for the money - at least that's the feeling I get from SPECTRE.

    His take one the character was marvellous in Skyfall but in retrospective a different director would've been better for SP since he had nothing new to add besides hommages and just making it bigger. I would like to continue the Madeleine Storyline along with the Spectre Organization - but hopefully somebody else directs it.
    If they want to make a more action oriented thriller following the traditional Bond template, then they should not bring Mendes back. He has proven he can't do it, at least imho.

    If they are looking for another unique character exposé with some depth, then by all means bring him back. That's what he does best, and that's what he delivered with his first effort.

    Yes, I agree with that, but I think even with a character study Mendes is tapped out as far as Bond. Just my opinion.

    I want to see Mendes get back to making Mendes films and not Bond.

    Mendes like Apted are two directors I admire but both didn't completely translate well to Bond.
  • edited October 2016 Posts: 1,661

    Getafix wrote: »
    I struggle to think of decently directed action films these days.


    No one even threw a baby. 7/10.

    John Wick 2 - More Of The Same

    coming soon!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    Agreed - Mendes needs to stick with Mendes films, and needn't return for a third Bond movie. I doubt I'll manage to find any enthusiasm for 'Bond 25' if he is returning.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,537
    Naomie Harris Doesn't Want to Label James Bond
    etonline.com/movies/200970_naomie_harris_doesn_t_want_to_label_james_bond/

    It's no secret: Naomie Harris would like to see Daniel Craig return as James Bond in the next installment of the long-running spy franchise. "I am in love with Daniel," she tells ET while promoting the new film, Moonlight, in which she plays a drug-addicted mother.

    [...] But when the conversation turns to Craig, there's no doubting that Harris is a staunch supporter of the 48-year-old actor. "He is incredible," she says. "I think he's the best Bond we've had in so long, so I want him back."

    [...] While Harris says she's into the various possibilities, she doesn't want "to put labels on anything."

    "I hate when people talk about black Bond or gay bond or what have you. It's not about that," she says. "We just want someone who inhabits all the qualities of Bond, right? We just want that mysterious quality. That kind of man we all want to be with and whoever the actor is who is able to do that, I'm happy with that."

    And for the record, don't consider Harris for the part. "She retired," she says of Moneypenny. "I like the idea that she's deskbound. But anything can change, anything can happen."
  • Posts: 12,526
    Hopefully we should get some sort of announcement soon? Surely?
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    I agree. I'm part of the group is very much advocates to stay a bit farther away from the "Bond formula" to begin with. The problem with Spectre, what kind of made it soul-less, was the fact that there were really no stakes. There was no consequence.

    You hit the nail on the head. The story desperately needed some stakes in the form of a sacrificial lamb (I don't care who--Lucia, Tanner, Swann, or someone else entirely).

    It is interesting that one of the scripts contained an Irma Bunt and that Bond's last line was originally "We have all the time in the world."

    It makes you wonder what fate they had planned for Swann, and may still...
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    It would also be great if Sam Mendes came back. He seems to get a lot of criticism around here but I think his work is excellent.
    I hope he does not come back. With Skyfall he made one of the best Bond films in my book - but after it he was done and he just came back for the money - at least that's the feeling I get from SPECTRE.

    His take one the character was marvellous in Skyfall but in retrospective a different director would've been better for SP since he had nothing new to add besides hommages and just making it bigger. I would like to continue the Madeleine Storyline along with the Spectre Organization - but hopefully somebody else directs it.
    If they want to make a more action oriented thriller following the traditional Bond template, then they should not bring Mendes back. He has proven he can't do it, at least imho.

    If they are looking for another unique character exposé with some depth, then by all means bring him back. That's what he does best, and that's what he delivered with his first effort.

    Yes, I agree with that, but I think even with a character study Mendes is tapped out as far as Bond. Just my opinion.

    I want to see Mendes get back to making Mendes films and not Bond.

    Mendes like Apted are two directors I admire but both didn't completely translate well to Bond.

    Yes, I think Mendes even knows he's done. He's a wealthy and highly intelligent man. I don't think there's enough money to have him do another nine month shoot (waaaaay too long, IMO).

    I sincerely enjoyed SP as being a failed experiment. I said this long ago, but I found each scene to be its own story, and, for the most part, mesmerizing and interesting (although I could cut C out all together and not miss he, nor his B-plot), but as a whole, the film absolutely failed. It's a beautiful failure.

    Denis Villeneuve is the man I'd love to see behind the camera for a DC 007 story. The man can weave suspense and thrills and character, in perfect balance, as seen in SICARIO and PRISONERS...


  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    peter wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    It would also be great if Sam Mendes came back. He seems to get a lot of criticism around here but I think his work is excellent.
    I hope he does not come back. With Skyfall he made one of the best Bond films in my book - but after it he was done and he just came back for the money - at least that's the feeling I get from SPECTRE.

    His take one the character was marvellous in Skyfall but in retrospective a different director would've been better for SP since he had nothing new to add besides hommages and just making it bigger. I would like to continue the Madeleine Storyline along with the Spectre Organization - but hopefully somebody else directs it.
    If they want to make a more action oriented thriller following the traditional Bond template, then they should not bring Mendes back. He has proven he can't do it, at least imho.

    If they are looking for another unique character exposé with some depth, then by all means bring him back. That's what he does best, and that's what he delivered with his first effort.

    Yes, I agree with that, but I think even with a character study Mendes is tapped out as far as Bond. Just my opinion.

    I want to see Mendes get back to making Mendes films and not Bond.

    Mendes like Apted are two directors I admire but both didn't completely translate well to Bond.

    Yes, I think Mendes even knows he's done. He's a wealthy and highly intelligent man. I don't think there's enough money to have him do another nine month shoot (waaaaay too long, IMO).

    I sincerely enjoyed SP as being a failed experiment. I said this long ago, but I found each scene to be its own story, and, for the most part, mesmerizing and interesting (although I could cut C out all together and not miss he, nor his B-plot), but as a whole, the film absolutely failed. It's a beautiful failure.

    Denis Villeneuve is the man I'd love to see behind the camera for a DC 007 story. The man can weave suspense and thrills and character, in perfect balance, as seen in SICARIO and PRISONERS...


    During this protracted (?) downtime, one can only hope that they are looking for a top-notch screenwriter.
  • John Logan's working on it. They'll check back in with him the day filming begins.
  • Posts: 1,165
    I would only like to see Mendes back if they follow his Blofeld/Madeline/Hinx story.
    I don't want to see another director deal with that baggage and I don't want to see Mendes come back and ditch all the story set-up in SP. He left things in a strange way. It's open ended to continue and yet it's also a closed book on Craig's tenure and time for a clean slate.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Another director and talented writers could actually breathe some fresh life into what Mendes left behind. Spectre is an amazing foe, DC an incredible Bond. The thing failing the last film was the lack of stakes-- it had all the right ingredients for an amazing 007 adventure, it just lacked in over all execution.

    Mendes has given everything he had.

    But a skilled director/writing team can take those ingredients and make a gourmet feast.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    and, oh yah, one other thing: the next film needs: heart. I think Mendes was functioning on pure intellect.

    The next story needs heart. An "emotional" spine to the story (and no, that doesn't mean more digging into Bond and his step brother; but goes back to lots of stakes that actually mean something)
  • Posts: 5,767
    Mendes is the first Bond director I fail to manage to relate to in a positive way. His direction just doesn´t resonate with me. I try SF and SP over and over again, and sometimes I make it through the film, but most of the time I don´t get into it. That doesn´t happen with any other Bond film, as flawed as some might be.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited October 2016 Posts: 15,423
    And back then, we blamed Marc Forster for delivering a confusing Bond film... I mean, the guy tried new flavours and elements into the Bond film without repeating anything of the old (other than the Goldfinger/TSWLM reference, which was brief).
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    And MR.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Yes, and that.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    And back then, we blamed Marc Forster for delivering a confusing Bond film... I mean, the guy tried new flavours and elements into the Bond film without repeating anything of the old (other than the Goldfinger/TSWLM reference, which was brief).

    I always liked the look of QoS, what bothered me more was the editing and shaky cam work. When we finally have as physical a Bond as Craig, I wanted to actually see what he was doing during the action set-pieces.

    The film as a whole has grown on me, since, after all these years, I've pieced together who is now doing what!
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    peter wrote: »
    And back then, we blamed Marc Forster for delivering a confusing Bond film... I mean, the guy tried new flavours and elements into the Bond film without repeating anything of the old (other than the Goldfinger/TSWLM reference, which was brief).

    I always liked the look of QoS, what bothered me more was the editing and shaky cam work. When we finally have as physical a Bond as Craig, I wanted to actually see what he was doing during the action set-pieces.

    The film as a whole has grown on me, since, after all these years, I've pieced together who is now doing what!
    Agreed. The shaky cam thing is the downer for that film, otherwise, helluva of a Bond thriller. No nonsense, all action, no teeny drama, good vs evil going head to head.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited October 2016 Posts: 6,277
    John Logan's working on it. They'll check back in with him the day filming begins.

    LOL!
    TR007 wrote: »
    I would only like to see Mendes back if they follow his Blofeld/Madeline/Hinx story.
    I don't want to see another director deal with that baggage and I don't want to see Mendes come back and ditch all the story set-up in SP. He left things in a strange way. It's open ended to continue and yet it's also a closed book on Craig's tenure and time for a clean slate.

    Hinx is dead, unless we're headed back into Jaws territory.
    peter wrote: »
    And back then, we blamed Marc Forster for delivering a confusing Bond film... I mean, the guy tried new flavours and elements into the Bond film without repeating anything of the old (other than the Goldfinger/TSWLM reference, which was brief).

    I always liked the look of QoS, what bothered me more was the editing and shaky cam work. When we finally have as physical a Bond as Craig, I wanted to actually see what he was doing during the action set-pieces.

    The film as a whole has grown on me, since, after all these years, I've pieced together who is now doing what!

    I agree about QoS. Setting aside the shaky cam (please!) and rating on a bit of a curve because of the writer's strike, the movie is solid up until when they arrive in Bolivia. Oh, and Craig doesn't get nearly enough credit for his humor as he and Fields switch hotels (snobbery!). But from that point forward, it's pretty rocky,

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    @echo, I have never understood the criticism re: Craig and humour. From his very first film, to his last, he has always had a dry, sardonic wit. The only time I felt they were being a little cutesy, at times, was in SKYFALL.
    DC is amazing when he's being snobbish (from saying he hoped Vesper gave her parents hell for naming her); to the dark humour in the LeChiffre torture sequence; to mocking Mathis in QoS (he's already forgotten)... DC handles that type of humour with ease and coolness.

    There has always been humour in the DC era.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    peter wrote: »
    I always liked the look of QoS, what bothered me more was the editing and shaky cam work. When we finally have as physical a Bond as Craig, I wanted to actually see what he was doing during the action set-pieces.

    The film as a whole has grown on me, since, after all these years, I've pieced together who is now doing what!
    Exactly the same for me. And I tend to rewatch it more and more. Still getting angry about the editing but more and more love the rest.

  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,996
    peter wrote: »
    @echo, I have never understood the criticism re: Craig and humour. From his very first film, to his last, he has always had a dry, sardonic wit. The only time I felt they were being a little cutesy, at times, was in SKYFALL.
    DC is amazing when he's being snobbish (from saying he hoped Vesper gave her parents hell for naming her); to the dark humour in the LeChiffre torture sequence; to mocking Mathis in QoS (he's already forgotten)... DC handles that type of humour with ease and coolness.

    There has always been humour in the DC era.

    Exactly right. The humour comes from the character and the way he is dealing with a given moment. It's natural and isn't overdone.

    That is the refreshing thing with the Craig era; No cheesy one liners.

    A poster on here the other day reckoned DAF had the best dialogue of all the Bond films!

    Maybe if you're around 9 years old...
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Little finger and armour stripped is pretty cheesy.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,996
    Little finger and armour stripped is pretty cheesy.

    Perhaps, but it's not a humorous one liner which is what I was talking about.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    In that case, agreed.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    9 years old? Really? Some of you really don't have a sense of humour.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited October 2016 Posts: 9,020
    Yes DAF has great dialogue. Memorable, witty, funny, hilarious.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Little finger and armour stripped is pretty cheesy.

    Cheese factor 10 and the rat talk and flirt with Silva in SF is even worse.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Little finger and armour stripped is pretty cheesy.

    Cheese factor 10 and the rat talk and flirt with Silva in SF is even worse.
    The whole Silva character just puts me off and everything else in that film.
  • Posts: 1,548
    Personally I think Silva is the best Bond villain since Zorin. Both played by oscar winning actors.
Sign In or Register to comment.