› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…661662664666667…2507

Comments

  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    edited March 2017 Posts: 3,327
    talos7 wrote: »
    Not at all, it is Bond in the prime of his career. As far as the being married, the character is still the same character and some of the same events occur in different timelines. Just because we didn't see it doesn't mean that Dalton's Bond had not been married.
    The tricky part of multiple timelines is that events can be the same and characters can be different.
    If you think about it, M in Brosnan's films is not the same M as in Craig's even though portrayed by the same actress. So even though she died in the Craig timeline, theoretically if they were to make a new Bond with Brosnan, Judy Dench could return as M because THAT M could very well be alive.
    You can see it as you want, but I see the Brosnan Bond in a complete different era and timeline. Different M, different time.

    The Dalton Bond still belongs to the same timeline as the Connery/Laz/Moore era, and I think most people will think this too. Having the same supporting actors involved only strengthens this further. TLD also comes 2 years after AVTAK, and not 6 years later like GE did after LTK.

    It also helps having all the same production values attached to that same timeline (Barry/Binder/Maibaum, etc.)

    GE is a new era, a complete reboot, a different M, a huge gap between LTK and GE, different production team, and a very different time.

  • gumboltgumbolt Now with in-office photocopier
    Posts: 153
    What about Felix from TLD? Does that not establish the same pattern as before - same character, different actor? Bond recognises him by sight in a few movies, including TLD. So it must surely be the same character, merely different actor. For some strange reason - I wonder if the changes were producer's choice, dictated by circumstances or just something they didn't really give much thought to? It is pretty strange really, especially in the 60s and early 70s when he appeared often and in relative quick succession.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    gumbolt wrote: »
    What about Felix from TLD? Does that not establish the same pattern as before - same character, different actor? Bond recognises him by sight in a few movies, including TLD. So it must surely be the same character, merely different actor. For some strange reason - I wonder if the changes were producer's choice, dictated by circumstances or just something they didn't really give much thought to? It is pretty strange really, especially in the 60s and early 70s when he appeared often and in relative quick succession.
    I find the Felix from TLD one of the weakest actors ever, and yes the change of actor from film to film is baffling.

    For me the definitive Leiter has to be the one from LALD and LTK.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,196
    Part of the confusion comes from EON keeping, or bring back, some of the same actors to play the same characters in different timelines, or using the same actor to play different characters. This was done most obviously with M. Craig's M is not Brosnan's M.
    And as far as Dalton being the same Bond as Moore's, So we have a Bond who's pushing 60 in one film, then 2 years later we have a vigorous, early/mid forties Bond taking part in a training exercise and it's far fetched to see this as a new beginning? I think not.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    Why do I bother?
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,196
    Well thankfully we are talking about fictional characters in fictional worlds. I could easily also say, "why do I bother...." Who would be arrogant enough to think that their theory is absolutely the correct one?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    talos7 wrote: »
    Well thankfully we are talking about fictional characters in fictional worlds. I could easily also say, "why do I bother...." Who would be arrogant enough to think that their theory is absolutely the correct one?
    My comment wasn't directed at the theory, but rather the fact that no matter how much myself and the mods try to keep this thread on track, we are instantly ignored. The past two pages have been about timelines and who was the best Felix Leiter.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    talos7 wrote: »
    Part of the confusion comes from EON keeping, or bring back, some of the same actors to play the same characters in different timelines, or using the same actor to play different characters. This was done most obviously with M. Craig's M is not Brosnan's M.
    And as far as Dalton being the same Bond as Moore's, So we have a Bond who's pushing 60 in one film, then 2 years later we have a vigorous, early/mid forties Bond taking part in a training exercise and it's far fetched to see this as a new beginning? I think not.
    There isn't really anything in AVTAK that hints at Bond being over-the-hill, close to retiring or past it. It's just a standard Bond film on a mission, in which any actor could have played it.

    In TLD we see a Bond who is getting fed up and bitter with his career, so it seems like a continuation in character, even though the actor playing Bond is visibly younger.

    Not that much different between YOLT and OHMSS, or even DAF to LALD (even though Moore and Connery are similar age, Moore looks visibly younger).

    SF is more confusing because this seems more like a washed-up Bond at the end of his career, yet he was only starting it 2 films earlier.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    But who cares, right?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    Back on topic, everyone. It's easy to run off topic with this, so if you have nothing to say regarding B25, then post your thoughts in the appropriate location.
  • gumboltgumbolt Now with in-office photocopier
    Posts: 153
    I have just started a new thread on character continuity and timelines in order to show due respect to our hard working moderators.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    edited March 2017 Posts: 2,730
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I dont believe, the General audience ever read a Fleming book or care about it too much, if they did. Its a sole fanboy thing. As for the films, they should put their focus onto pleasing the general audiences, they bring in the money. Bit certain rules should be applied, like Bond being white. Making him black is not bringing forward diversity. It's only ridiculous. A dead attempt to be oh so modern. There needs to be the girl, the cars, the action and some smirky dialogue. Plus gorgeous locations. IMO that's what everybody expects from Bond - in a certain, very bondish unique way.
    I agree with the rules, but even then when these rules are applied, it doesn't guarantee it will be a decent Bond film (look at the 4 Brosnan movies).

    Where I feel the films have been lacking ever since Babs has taken over are weak scripts, muddled storylines and plot holes. I think some of this could be remedied by going back to the Fleming novels, instead of re-imagining Fleming. They are the sole reason why this franchise exists in the first place, and why the films have stood the test of time.

    I just saw the making of TLD and Michael Wilson says on camera that they were looking at the possibility of exploring Bond's childhood, but Cubby was dead against the idea and told them to focus more on existing Fleming material instead.

    Cubby was 100% right. He probably wouldn't be too happy with what the producers and writers came up with in SF and particularly SP, having Bond and Blofeld being brothers.

    Let's talk about making movies for "general" audiences
    They made a film called deadpool, they wernt that many deadpool fans but through marketing and the spread of the good word that film grossed a Shit ton of money, they made it from the source material as opposed to pg13ing it for the general audience and in the process pissing off the fans. That tells us something, the general audience will adapt to what the die hard fans enjoy
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    gumbolt wrote: »
    I have just started a new thread on character continuity and timelines in order to show due respect to our hard working moderators.
    Thanks for this.

    Please move the discussion over to there.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    jake24 wrote: »
    But who cares, right?

    Agreed also it's obvious, Same bond from dr no to dad then it's a reboot - completely different world for CR and following. The continuity and world was never meant to be taken seriously otherwise the producers wouldn't have replaced Felix every movie with a different actor, it's only now days that people question these kind of irrelevant things. Also does anybody actually unironically believe in the code name theory
  • CatchingBulletsCatchingBullets facebook.com/catchingbullets
    Posts: 292
    The timing of public and news announcements about the production of a film rarely have any bearing on that film's own timeline and production momentum. And as I have said countless times over the years, NEVER judge a previous film's timeline of news and confirmations for a future one.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I dont believe, the General audience ever read a Fleming book or care about it too much, if they did. Its a sole fanboy thing. As for the films, they should put their focus onto pleasing the general audiences, they bring in the money. Bit certain rules should be applied, like Bond being white. Making him black is not bringing forward diversity. It's only ridiculous. A dead attempt to be oh so modern. There needs to be the girl, the cars, the action and some smirky dialogue. Plus gorgeous locations. IMO that's what everybody expects from Bond - in a certain, very bondish unique way.
    I agree with the rules, but even then when these rules are applied, it doesn't guarantee it will be a decent Bond film (look at the 4 Brosnan movies).

    Where I feel the films have been lacking ever since Babs has taken over are weak scripts, muddled storylines and plot holes. I think some of this could be remedied by going back to the Fleming novels, instead of re-imagining Fleming. They are the sole reason why this franchise exists in the first place, and why the films have stood the test of time.

    I just saw the making of TLD and Michael Wilson says on camera that they were looking at the possibility of exploring Bond's childhood, but Cubby was dead against the idea and told them to focus more on existing Fleming material instead.

    Cubby was 100% right. He probably wouldn't be too happy with what the producers and writers came up with in SF and particularly SP, having Bond and Blofeld being brothers.

    Let's talk about making movies for "general" audiences
    They made a film called deadpool, they wernt that many deadpool fans but through marketing and the spread of the good word that film grossed a Shit ton of money, they made it from the source material as opposed to pg13ing it for the general audience and in the process pissing off the fans. That tells us something, the general audience will adapt to what the die hard fans enjoy

    Agreed. Great post!
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    CatchingBullets wrote: »
    The timing of public and news announcements about the production of a film rarely have any bearing on that film's own timeline and production momentum. And as I have said countless times over the years, NEVER judge a previous film's timeline of news and confirmations for a future one.
    Very true.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited March 2017 Posts: 6,277
    bondjames wrote: »
    Didn't P&W say Bond needed to go in a completely different direction during their February interview? Something about SP having closed out a certain way of doing things? That doesn't lend itself to a direct sequel. Rather, quite the contrary. Unless they have been given a new directive.

    I hope it's not a direct sequel.

    Blockbusters "rebooting" more or less started with Batman Begins. This concept, while widespread now, wasn't in the minds of the filmmakers in the '60s-'90s Bonds. I think the young'uns around here don't understand that...
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    edited March 2017 Posts: 2,115
    CatchingBullets wrote: »
    The timing of public and news announcements about the production of a film rarely have any bearing on that film's own timeline and production momentum. And as I have said countless times over the years, NEVER judge a previous film's timeline of news and confirmations for a future one.

    Particularly when the studio involved spent part of 2016 in negotiations to sell to a Chinese buyer.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,261
    talos7 wrote: »
    Not at all, it is Bond in the prime of his career. As far as the being married, the character is still the same character and some of the same events occur in different timelines. Just because we didn't see it doesn't mean that Dalton's Bond had not been married.

    If I am not completely mistaken, Leiter tells Della in LTK, that Bond has been married, probably to Tracy.
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    edited March 2017 Posts: 3,327
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Not at all, it is Bond in the prime of his career. As far as the being married, the character is still the same character and some of the same events occur in different timelines. Just because we didn't see it doesn't mean that Dalton's Bond had not been married.

    If I am not completely mistaken, Leiter tells Della in LTK, that Bond has been married, probably to Tracy.

    Della asks if she said something wrong (after seeing Bond's reaction), and Felix says `he was married once, but that was a long time ago.'

    Obviously it refers to Tracy in OHMSS. This would be the last time his marriage to her would be referenced in the Bond films. In Brosnan's era there is no reference to her at all.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    There's a subtle reference in TWINE.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,207
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Not at all, it is Bond in the prime of his career. As far as the being married, the character is still the same character and some of the same events occur in different timelines. Just because we didn't see it doesn't mean that Dalton's Bond had not been married.

    If I am not completely mistaken, Leiter tells Della in LTK, that Bond has been married, probably to Tracy.

    Della asks if she said something wrong (after seeing Bond's reaction), and Felix says `he was married once, but that was a long time ago.'

    Obviously it refers to Tracy in OHMSS. This would be the last time his marriage to her would be referenced in the Bond films. In Brosnan's era there is no reference to her at all.

    Elektra:
    "Have you ever lost a loved one, Mr. Bond?"

    Bond awkwardly dodges the question.
    Bond:
    "M sent me here because she thinks your life might be in danger."

    Not as direct as the LTK reference or Triple X in TSWLM, but you know what the inference is.
  • vzokvzok
    Posts: 4,044
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    DoctorKaufmann wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Not at all, it is Bond in the prime of his career. As far as the being married, the character is still the same character and some of the same events occur in different timelines. Just because we didn't see it doesn't mean that Dalton's Bond had not been married.

    If I am not completely mistaken, Leiter tells Della in LTK, that Bond has been married, probably to Tracy.

    Della asks if she said something wrong (after seeing Bond's reaction), and Felix says `he was married once, but that was a long time ago.'

    Obviously it refers to Tracy in OHMSS. This would be the last time his marriage to her would be referenced in the Bond films. In Brosnan's era there is no reference to her at all.

    Elektra:
    "Have you ever lost a loved one, Mr. Bond?"

    Bond awkwardly dodges the question.
    Bond:
    "M sent me here because she thinks your life might be in danger."

    Not as direct as the LTK reference or Triple X in TSWLM, but you know what the inference is.

    Wouldn't that be Paris Carver?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Back on topic, everyone. It's easy to run off topic with this, so if you have nothing to say regarding B25, then post your thoughts in the appropriate location.

  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    MI6 twitter...

    9lG7ZoV.jpg
  • Station_ZStation_Z
    Posts: 104
    I thought this doesn't make much sense. Thank you for the heads-up.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    ggl007 wrote: »
    MI6 twitter...

    9lG7ZoV.jpg

    Well that sucks.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    And while your at it I suppose Croatia is for that same war film?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    Well, would you look at that!
Sign In or Register to comment.