No Time To Die: Production Diary

16966976997017022507

Comments

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    RC7 wrote: »
    Errors? There are no errors?

    That guy has lost me by:

    "SPECTRE was easily the worst of Craig’s four 007 movies"

    Like most of the SP dissenters, they like SF in comparison despite that film doing so many of the things they hated in the last one.
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree that cutting it after QoS would have been fantastic, especially with the four year break that ensued. Craig in SF is quite a different Bond from the CR/QoS time.

    I also agree on the retro office fit being a bit clichéd. Dench's office was far more contemporary. I never liked that sort of thing (forced retrofit), even when it was done at the end of Revenge of the Sith. I certainly disliked it immensely at the end of Rogue One.

    Totally agree on the forced retrofitting.

    At the very least it makes sense for a traditionalist like Mallory to have such an office, connecting the space to who he is as a man.

    I remember this forum's pages being packed with folks who wanted few things more than a traditional office back, way before SF was an idea in people's heads. I guess it's the same thing that happened with SP's gun barrel. They get it back at the beginning after wanting it for so long, then still don't like it anyway.

    For me they're not the same thing. The gun barrel is timeless and iconic, where M's office is time specific. The former is a necessary component, the latter isn't.

    Naturally the offices move with the times, but as I said, the office also must reflect the man or woman who rules it. It makes no sense for a man as stripped back and old fashioned as Mallory to have a hyper-modern office, and his surroundings in SF and SP reflect that. Like Bond he's a bit of a man out of time, preferring the sturdy and time tested wood to glass and steel. He also offers a nice counter-point to Dench's M who, despite being quite old fashioned in some ways herself, had a very modern set of offices to combine with the very modern ideal of a woman in power.

    I think the scripts of both films did a good job of drawing this line between Mallory and Dench's M, and used the visual life of the movies, not only in how he dressed (double-breasted suits aren't very modern either) but also in how he customized his office to look. Being a military man like a long line of Bond bosses dating back to Lee's M, these aren't people who have a habit of preferring to live modern. They're taught discipline and how to survive on little in the service and their surroundings connect back to those now lost ideals of life.

    Well, I can tell you've been helping on my paper!
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited April 2017 Posts: 8,399
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?

    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2017 Posts: 23,883
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?

    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.
    Sounds like someone we all know (and some love to hate). He likes the women too. That's the irony of it all.

    Seriously, if they want to ensure the film's longevity with the public over time they should stay away from reality. The world is too political and polarized these days anyway, and I don't want Bond wading into this.

    These idiots should just make sure they give us a villain for the ages (irrespective of current affairs). They should go watch Die Hard or something and hopefully Rickman inspires them.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?

    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.
    Sounds like someone we all know (and some love to hate). He likes the women too. That's the irony of it all.

    Seriously, if they want to ensure the film's longevity with the public over time they should stay away from reality. The world is too political and polarized these days anyway, and I don't want Bond wading into this.

    These idiots should just make sure they give us a villain for the ages (irrespective of current affairs). They should go watch Die Hard or something and hopefully Rickman inspires them.
    +1
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited April 2017 Posts: 8,399
    bondjames wrote: »
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?

    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.
    Sounds like someone we all know (and some love to hate). He likes the women too. That's the irony of it all.

    Seriously, if they want to ensure the film's longevity with the public over time they should stay away from reality. The world is too political and polarized these days anyway, and I don't want Bond wading into this.

    These idiots should just make sure they give us a villain for the ages (irrespective of current affairs). They should go watch Die Hard or something and hopefully Rickman inspires them.

    I've always found that Bond is kind of an eternal figure anyway. Sex, alcohol, quips, guns, gambling etc. These are all pretty non-era specific elements, no?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?

    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.
    Sounds like someone we all know (and some love to hate). He likes the women too. That's the irony of it all.

    Seriously, if they want to ensure the film's longevity with the public over time they should stay away from reality. The world is too political and polarized these days anyway, and I don't want Bond wading into this.

    These idiots should just make sure they give us a villain for the ages (irrespective of current affairs). They should go watch Die Hard or something and hopefully Rickman inspires them.

    I've always found that Bond is kind of an eternal figure anyway. Sex, alcohol, quips, guns, gambling etc. These are all pretty non-era specific elements, no?
    Yes, but we are in an age where folks make hay over some of these characteristics for political and opportunistic purposes. The PC thought police are everywhere telling us which way to pee. I'm frankly sick of it, and it's probably Bond's most formidable enemy yet. It's a miracle that he has been able to survive, although many of the attributes I love so much about the character aren't palatable to the masses any more. Bond's quip in MR for instance still gets a smile out of me. Not because he's right, but because it tells me something about Bond. He comes around once Holly proves herself.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?

    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.
    Sounds like someone we all know (and some love to hate). He likes the women too. That's the irony of it all.

    Seriously, if they want to ensure the film's longevity with the public over time they should stay away from reality. The world is too political and polarized these days anyway, and I don't want Bond wading into this.

    These idiots should just make sure they give us a villain for the ages (irrespective of current affairs). They should go watch Die Hard or something and hopefully Rickman inspires them.

    I've always found that Bond is kind of an eternal figure anyway. Sex, alcohol, quips, guns, gambling etc. These are all pretty non-era specific elements, no?
    Exactly.
  • Posts: 1,092
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Wade said Trump was a real-life Bond villain. God, what an idiot.

    Not to get political, but when I think of a Bond villain I think of an egotistical, compensating man who purports to be better and more capable than he really is, often with material fetishes and pursuing schemes to get rich and/or powerful. Trump is the bumbling Auric Goldfinger, and he even has a better gold plane than that bastard ever had. I think that's what Wade was getting at, and I wouldn't be surprised if he was comparing the guy to Goldfinger in his head, knowing their love for the film.

    Trump is a hero. He took on the entire global elite; the mainstream media, the established Right, Left, nearly every single political figure of power, not to mention the financial banking globalists who are crapping their pants right now and beat them! If you don't agree, you know nothing about history and haven't been paying attention to politics your entire life. The system is/was a corrupt cesspool of special interests and scumbag criminals.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Wade said Trump was a real-life Bond villain. God, what an idiot.

    Not to get political, but when I think of a Bond villain I think of an egotistical, compensating man who purports to be better and more capable than he really is, often with material fetishes and pursuing schemes to get rich and/or powerful. Trump is the bumbling Auric Goldfinger, and he even has a better gold plane than that bastard ever had. I think that's what Wade was getting at, and I wouldn't be surprised if he was comparing the guy to Goldfinger in his head, knowing their love for the film.

    Trump is a hero. He took on the entire global elite; the mainstream media, the established Right, Left, nearly every single political figure of power, not to mention the financial banking globalists who are crapping their pants right now and beat them! If you don't agree, you know nothing about history and haven't been paying attention to politics your entire life. The system is/was a corrupt cesspool of special interests and scumbag criminals.

























    NO POLITICAL DISCUSSION IN THIS THREAD PLEASE




























  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    I know this thread runs off the rails on an hourly basis, but even still, it's certainly no place for politics. Let's get back on topic, if we can.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Our asylums are full of people who think their Napoleon...or God.
    e9c1704s-960.jpg
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,399
    I think if we had just one slither of rumour from a reliable source, it would be much easier to stay to topic. These last couple of weeks have been more thin on the ground than any of the months prior. At least in the past there was a decent amount of media speculation whizzing around for us to mull over.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Well, there is a rumour doing the rounds these days. The return of Craig.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,399
    bondjames wrote: »
    Well, there is a rumour doing the rounds these days. The return of Craig.

    That's pretty old now - I think everyone has made up their mind where they stand on it. I'm talking about something out of left field.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    P+W is just the start.
    Mendes will follow.
    Then Craig.
    And Newman.

    oh Dear....
  • talos7 wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    Let's wait how Dan looks in 2019. One can age quite a bit within four years at that age.
    I rather Craig quits on a high like SPECTRE than delivering something like DAF or AVTAK (from the age perspective)
    This is a very astute observation from @BondJasonBond006. Having passed the half century myself, I can tell you that just prior to that most people (in fact everyone) thought I looked in my late thirties... then BOOM, I crossed the 50 Rubicon and it was as if a switch had been thrown; my once thick and solidly brown hair suddenly began to turn grey. Add a few more years to that hallmark and I'm now almost entirely grey! My face has also suddenly gain more mileage. Still have all my hair, but what @BondJasonBond006 says is correct: the aging process suddenly speeds up. Dan had a craggy face before he hit 40, so some might not notice that much of a change. But trust me, he'll begin to look really facially old soon, despite having a fit body.

    Sean actually started looking better past 50. His 40's were awkward.


    One way of putting it (JOKE)

    http://i.amz.mshcdn.com/BS92XSwHkcwWM-IxtGemXXl4fDg=/http://a.amz.mshcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Zardoz-2.jpg
  • edited April 2017 Posts: 2,599
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    Let's wait how Dan looks in 2019. One can age quite a bit within four years at that age.
    I rather Craig quits on a high like SPECTRE than delivering something like DAF or AVTAK (from the age perspective)
    This is a very astute observation from @BondJasonBond006. Having passed the half century myself, I can tell you that just prior to that most people (in fact everyone) thought I looked in my late thirties... then BOOM, I crossed the 50 Rubicon and it was as if a switch had been thrown; my once thick and solidly brown hair suddenly began to turn grey. Add a few more years to that hallmark and I'm now almost entirely grey! My face has also suddenly gain more mileage. Still have all my hair, but what @BondJasonBond006 says is correct: the aging process suddenly speeds up. Dan had a craggy face before he hit 40, so some might not notice that much of a change. But trust me, he'll begin to look really facially old soon, despite having a fit body.

    Sean actually started looking better past 50. His 40's were awkward.


    One way of putting it (JOKE)

    http://i.amz.mshcdn.com/BS92XSwHkcwWM-IxtGemXXl4fDg=/http://a.amz.mshcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Zardoz-2.jpg

    In regard to Connery, yes, very true. My mother always said that he was notably more handsome when he hit his fifties. Well, if I remember correctly, I don't think she thought he was that handsome when he was in his thirties. She did though once he reached his fifties. The rate at which he aged slowed right down when he reached his fifties too,whereas, when he was in his 30's and 40's he aged pretty quickly.

    It's a funny thing age. I turned 40 in January and at the risk of sounding immodest, people tell me I look around 27 on average. My mother is 67 and looks around 55. My father is 70 and looks around 55 I would say too. My parents have always looked young for their age along with my sister. A part of it is to do with what you eat and generally how you live your life but most of it is in the genes. Anyway, who knows how Craig will age. Maybe he will start looking a lot older or maybe he'll remain relatively timeless for a while.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I think he started to look better around the time of The Hunt For Red October, which coincidentally is the film where he sported a more well manicured & youngish toupee. Facially he was always reasonably young looking. It's just the hair that let him down, along with his weight at some point in the 70's.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    Errors? There are no errors?

    That guy has lost me by:

    "SPECTRE was easily the worst of Craig’s four 007 movies"

    Like most of the SP dissenters, they like SF in comparison despite that film doing so many of the things they hated in the last one.
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree that cutting it after QoS would have been fantastic, especially with the four year break that ensued. Craig in SF is quite a different Bond from the CR/QoS time.

    I also agree on the retro office fit being a bit clichéd. Dench's office was far more contemporary. I never liked that sort of thing (forced retrofit), even when it was done at the end of Revenge of the Sith. I certainly disliked it immensely at the end of Rogue One.

    Totally agree on the forced retrofitting.

    At the very least it makes sense for a traditionalist like Mallory to have such an office, connecting the space to who he is as a man.

    I remember this forum's pages being packed with folks who wanted few things more than a traditional office back, way before SF was an idea in people's heads. I guess it's the same thing that happened with SP's gun barrel. They get it back at the beginning after wanting it for so long, then still don't like it anyway.
    On paper, yes. But it was how it's executed that's bad. It still wasn't a traditional gunbarrel because of the yellow tint and it not opening up to the movie.

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    FRWL has a sepia tone tint over the gunbarrel. DN GF and YOLT had Black and white gunbarrels. Those must not traditional then.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    Murdock wrote: »
    FRWL has a sepia tone tint over the gunbarrel. DN GF and YOLT had Black and white gunbarrels. Those must not traditional then.
    I never noticed. The Piss filter is much more noticeable than whatever your trying to describe.

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Murdock wrote: »
    FRWL has a sepia tone tint over the gunbarrel. DN GF and YOLT had Black and white gunbarrels. Those must not traditional then.
    I never noticed. The Piss filter is much more noticeable than whatever your trying to describe.

    I don't see any filter on Spectre's gunbarrel.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    does anyone think that bond 25 has the potential to be better than casino royale, or will it just be another Spectre. I think the latter is more likely.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,399
    does anyone think that bond 25 has the potential to be better than casino royale, or will it just be another Spectre. I think the latter is more likely.

    I think the former. ;)
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    edited April 2017 Posts: 1,187
    Murdock wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    FRWL has a sepia tone tint over the gunbarrel. DN GF and YOLT had Black and white gunbarrels. Those must not traditional then.
    I never noticed. The Piss filter is much more noticeable than whatever your trying to describe.

    I don't see any filter on Spectre's gunbarrel.
    IMG_3470.jpg
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    does anyone think that bond 25 has the potential to be better than casino royale, or will it just be another Spectre. I think the latter is more likely.

    I think the former. ;)
    +1. EON will be on their game for B25.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Looks normal to me. Maybe you saw the wrong movie?
    icwKpKf.png?1
  • Posts: 2,918
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    GQ's thoughts on Craig's (possible) final installment, and how to correct the errors of SP:
    http://www.gq.com/story/fix-the-franchise-james-bond

    I liked that the author knew his Fleming, and I thought his main points were all solid:
    01. Get rid of Madeleine Swann by having her dump Bond in the first act.
    02. Redeem Spectre's mishandling of Blofeld by giving the character a good reintroduction (he must be thirsting for revenge after Bond put him in prison) that doesn't rely on that stupid backstory.
    03. Return to Fleming by making Blofeld an elusive master of disguise and evasion.
    04. End the Craig era by having Bond "die" during his final confrontation with Blofeld, just as Bond "died" in You Only Live Twice. Craig's replacement as Bond will then return from the dead as a new man, as Bond did in The Man With the Golden Gun.
    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.

    Don't forget subtly anti-American. And as Milton Krest and the Spang twins demonstrate, Fleming had an abiding hatred of vulgar American millionaires.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I honestly don't think they even need to refer to Madeline in the next one.

    They went out of their way to make the whole ending so vague that we can interpret it any number of ways. Was Bond leaving or was he just going on a holiday? Just because he doesn't kill Blofeld doesn't mean he's leaving the service. Throwing his gun in the river could be a heat of the moment decision but doesn't need to have any more significance than that. An argument can be made that Maddy's whining in London prior to the finale may suggest that Bond was leaving the service for her, but who's to say she didn't change her mind? After all, she's a woman, and it's a female prerogative. Perhaps after he saved her life she reconsidered her stupid ultimatums.
Sign In or Register to comment.