› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…534535537539540…2507

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Guy Ritchie. Trust me :-)

    I see you're out of Spain and positioned firmly at the grasshopper.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited December 2016 Posts: 4,116
    Just don't want Mendes the third ...if that means Ritchie so be it.

    You're not going to get the director you want. Just my opinion.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,195
    Will the choice of director signal the tone? To a degree I think it will. Someone like Villeneuve would seem to telegraph a gritty. tough direction, while someone like Richie something lighter and style dependent.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Richie did a good job with The Man From Uncle.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    To me there is still no director more qualified than Martin Campbell. I wouldn't say his films are excessively serious or campy. They both find a happy medium.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Fair point. CR being the superior effort.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Agreed. Martin Campbell started Craig's era. He should be the one to finish it.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited December 2016 Posts: 8,195
    I'm all in for Campbell bookending the Craig era..........or launching a new actor.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Me too.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Preferably bookending Craig's era.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    He's too stubborn to do it, though. His main rule to make a Bond film would be introducing the new actor and that's it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    He's too stubborn to do it, though. His main rule to make a Bond film would be introducing the new actor and that's it.

    Fine by me. Introduce another one, completing the trilogy of Bond introductions. By the way, I never realized that was an actual rule of his. I always thought it was just a curious quirk of fate.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    He's too stubborn to do it, though. His main rule to make a Bond film would be introducing the new actor and that's it.

    Which is understandable. He's introduced the last 2 actors in a superb way; I doubt he wants to be brought in as a janitor just to clean up the mess of careless directors.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    First I've heard of this rule. I'd still rather he finish Craig's run. With a talented writing staff they can fix this.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Really? I thought it was a common knowledge.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    They have to find out a way to bring flippant, irreverent Bond back, that much is certain. They can't keep making gritty, emotional stories forever. They should have stopped doing that after Casino, but there we have it. If you look at the world of politics and culture today, things are changing and fast. If they make another film that follows the Craig tropes of going rogue, mourning a loved one, and revealing something from Bonds past, I doubt they will capture the audience in the same way again.

    @Mendes4Lyfe This post needs to be engraved on a gold plaque and sent to EON.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    jake24 wrote: »
    The thirty year old men of the sixties are incredibly different from men the same age today. Nowadays, it is becoming increasingly difficult to spot thirty-something actors without the appearance of a boyish male model, in contrast to the distinguished ruthlessness Connery possessed circa 1962. This is the main reason for why none of the actors tipped to replace Craig interest me in the slightest.
    But it's acting . A good 30 yr old actor can play mature no problem.
    Sean Connery wasn't Bond. He just acted the part well.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    My money is still on DC for a 5th movie being released in 2018!!!!! B-)
    I hope you are right. That would be perfect.
    Plenty of time for Craig to have got the Shakespeare bug out of his system.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited December 2016 Posts: 8,392
    timmer wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    The thirty year old men of the sixties are incredibly different from men the same age today. Nowadays, it is becoming increasingly difficult to spot thirty-something actors without the appearance of a boyish male model, in contrast to the distinguished ruthlessness Connery possessed circa 1962. This is the main reason for why none of the actors tipped to replace Craig interest me in the slightest.
    But it's acting . A good 30 yr old actor can play mature no problem.
    Sean Connery wasn't Bond. He just acted the part well.

    Very well said. Ewan Mcgregor in the Star Wars prequels comes to mind. He was only around 30 years old, but played a convincing Jedi Master and mentor.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    The thirty year old men of the sixties are incredibly different from men the same age today. Nowadays, it is becoming increasingly difficult to spot thirty-something actors without the appearance of a boyish male model, in contrast to the distinguished ruthlessness Connery possessed circa 1962. This is the main reason for why none of the actors tipped to replace Craig interest me in the slightest.
    But it's acting . A good 30 yr old actor can play mature no problem.
    Sean Connery wasn't Bond. He just acted the part well.

    Very well said. Ewan Mcgregor in the Star Wars prequels comes to mind. He was only around 30 years old, but played a convincing Jedi Master and mentor.
    Right. McGregor is a good actor.
    I'm sure he could have also played young, immature and shallow at the same age if the role had called for it.
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    Im gonna make a bold prediction and say Campbell will never direct a Bond movie again
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Im gonna make a bold prediction and say Campbell will never direct a Bond movie again

    Agree at the age 73 it's unlikely
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited December 2016 Posts: 10,591
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Im gonna make a bold prediction and say Campbell will never direct a Bond movie again
    Precisely. Campbell will be in his mid to late seventies by the time the next film would come out. By that point he'll no longer have the physicality nor the energy to direct a film of that scope. Plus, why tamper with a legacy?
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited December 2016 Posts: 8,195
    I have to laugh, 73 is not the same for all people; look at Eastwood(85) Miller(71) Scorsese(74) Ridley Scott (79) I've seen footage of Campbell recently, he is a fit, energetic, healthy 73. Bring on Bond 25!.............With that said, yes it is a rather safe prediction that he will never again direct a Bond movie, but it won't be because of age.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited December 2016 Posts: 10,591
    Maybe not, but I still think he should leave the series on a high of two exceptional films.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited December 2016 Posts: 8,392
    jake24 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Im gonna make a bold prediction and say Campbell will never direct a Bond movie again
    Precisely. Campbell will be in his mid to late seventies by the time the next film would come out. By that point he'll no longer have the physicality nor the energy to direct a film of that scope. Plus, why tamper with a legacy?

    We have no idea of the scope of Bond 25. It could be an epic, or it could be a grounded mission with little action and more suspense. Plus, Campbell is filming an action film with Jackie Chan and Brosnan as we speak. I don't think we can just assume he will be past it, especially with George Miller and Clint Eastwood showing that guys in their 70's/80's can direct big budget films. Campbell has always been an extremely outgoing creative force with lots of stamina, as can be seen in this video.



    I've never said that it was likely for Campbell to return, certainly not, however it's definitely not out of the question yet. There is still an opportunity for him to return, especially with Bond changeover on the horizon.

    One thing you have to say in his favour, he has never shied away from discussing his time on Bond.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited December 2016 Posts: 15,423
    Campbell filmed that movie and production wrapped on it back in March. It's not a big budget production, either.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Campbell filmed that movie and production wrapped on it back in March.

    Ok, well maybe he forgot how to do it by now then. :P
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited December 2016 Posts: 10,591
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Im gonna make a bold prediction and say Campbell will never direct a Bond movie again
    Precisely. Campbell will be in his mid to late seventies by the time the next film would come out. By that point he'll no longer have the physicality nor the energy to direct a film of that scope. Plus, why tamper with a legacy?

    We have no idea of the scope of Bond 25. It could be an epic, or it could be a grounded mission with little action and more suspense. Plus, Campbell is filming an action film with Jackie Chan and Brosnan as we speak. I don't think we can just assume he will be past it, especially with George Miller and Clint Eastwood showing that guys in their 70's/80's can direct big budget films. Campbell has always been an extremely outgoing creative force with lots of stamina, as can be seen in this video.



    I've never said that it was likely for Campbell to return, certainly not, however it's definitely not out of the question yet. There is still an opportunity for him to return, especially with Bond changeover on the horizon.

    One thing you have to say in his favour, he has never shied away from discussing his time on Bond.

    Not for Craig's final run. Assuming B25 is Craig's swan song, it will be epic and grand in scale.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Campbell filmed that movie and production wrapped on it back in March.

    Ok, well maybe he forgot how to do it by now then. :P
    Sometimes, a nanosecond matters. :))
Sign In or Register to comment.