No Time To Die: Production Diary

17337347367387392507

Comments

  • Posts: 4,325
    Getafix wrote: »
    I know but the longer and varying waits create an environment in which speculation runs riot, especially in the digital age. Will it be 2, 3, 5 years?

    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important

    Thankfully there are many other films coming out in the mean time. Bond isn't the be all and end all.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Everyone with a keyboard feels the need to spill their hearts and frustrations, despite not having the salient pre-requisite of having any idea what they are actually talking about.

    Including you, brother. Including you.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 1,970
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    pachazo wrote: »
    Everyone with a keyboard feels the need to spill their hearts and frustrations, despite not having the salient pre-requisite of having any idea what they are actually talking about.

    Including you, brother. Including you.

    We've had this cute little run around before. I make the very clear decision not to discuss things I don't know anything about, as I see how stupid it makes others look. It's why I didn't talk about the strike news, some of the issues surrounding distribution deals, etc. and why I don't give rumors the time of day until things are actually confirmed. If i have nothing to say about something, or if what I said wasn't backed up by data or experience on the issue, I take a seat back and wait for those who do to speak about it, which is frankly very few around here.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited May 2017 Posts: 45,489
    Getafix wrote: »
    The big difference in the past was films came out much more regularly and there was more certainty that another was on the way

    I think the real difference is the internet, which gives everyone the ability to whine at high volumes about things older fans never did in Bond's heyday. I'd love to see a world where the internet was around during Connery's hiatus, and how bad George would get flamed in the comments, for instance. It'd make the things people say about Brosnan seem like compliments in comparison.

    Everyone with a keyboard feels the need to spill their hearts and frustrations, despite not having the salient pre-requisite of having any idea what they are actually talking about. Because of their ignorance, we see comments that call EON lazy, simply because certain posters don't have the privilege of getting morning phone calls from Barbara every day to tell them where Bond 25 was at. Because we don't hear updates on the Bond productions out the ear, it must then mean that EON aren't doing anything at all. How's that for logic?

    Back in the day, when none of this rather cancerous technology was around, people just accepted that they'd have to wait for another Bond film, and they just did something else (like watching the other films, reading, sleeping, living) until it came. They didn't have a place to whine about the Connery/Lazenby changeover, the big gap between TMWTGG and TSWLM, the turn from fun to serious with Dalton, the big hiatus, etc. They just sucked it up and went on with things, the way it should be done. It's unfortunate that we now have a way for people to do anything but get on with it these days, via social networking, forums and the like, where they yammer endlessly like their hearts won't keep pumping if they don't. Through these mediums of communication, many "fans" come off as very spoiled in their supposed love for Bond and its creators, and feel myopic about life's many lessons regarding patience and empirical observation, both of which they lack to worrying degrees.

    It's the equivalent of taking a road trip with a bunch of school kids along for the ride, their voices chirping up in unison with incessant calls of, "ARE WE THERE YET?!" If only we could pull over to the road and kick them all out, urging them to find their own way home.

    Great post. I had a laugh because it s all so true.
    pachazo wrote: »
    Everyone with a keyboard feels the need to spill their hearts and frustrations, despite not having the salient pre-requisite of having any idea what they are actually talking about.

    Including you, brother. Including you.

    Hm, also true perhaps.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,325
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,325
    -
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    Its also interesting to see Greg Wilson as an associate producer for bond 25 I swear he is being groomed to run the show one day.
    Indeed. I look forward to a fresh approach, and we'll get it soon enough.
    Getafix wrote: »
    The big difference in the past was films came out much more regularly and there was more certainty that another was on the way
    So much so that we even knew the title in advance.
    Getafix wrote: »
    I know but the longer and varying waits create an environment in which speculation runs riot, especially in the digital age. Will it be 2, 3, 5 years?

    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Agreed, he did and I respect him for it. Having said that, there have been extenuating circumstances of late, either on account of MGM or legal troubles. Even Cubby ran into timing issues post Saltzman and post LTK. It's just that these issues seem to be more prevalent these days. Keep in mind the studio in question is owned by hedge funds at present and has changed hands a few times in the past (including being owned by Kerkorian at a few points). Hardly the most predictable outfit to be associated with.

    If an actor wants a long break post Bond in the future though, and he becomes the primary holdup, then I'm all for giving him the sack.
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I know but the longer and varying waits create an environment in which speculation runs riot, especially in the digital age. Will it be 2, 3, 5 years?

    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important

    Thankfully there are many other films coming out in the mean time. Bond isn't the be all and end all.
    Not even that. The gap has closed considerably of late, and yes we have a lot of great stuff to look forward to while the Bond machine figures itself out.

    Regarding keyboard warriors, that's what the internet is for. The more the merrier and all opinions are welcome from my humble perspective. I don't presume to be an authority on what's happening here. I know as much or less than most, but don't begrudge anyone their opinions.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    pachazo wrote: »
    Everyone with a keyboard feels the need to spill their hearts and frustrations, despite not having the salient pre-requisite of having any idea what they are actually talking about.

    Including you, brother. Including you.

    We've had this cute little run around before. I make the very clear decision not to discuss things I don't know anything about, as I see how stupid it makes others look. It's why I didn't talk about the strike news, some of the issues surrounding distribution deals, etc. and why I don't give rumors the time of day until things are actually confirmed. If i have nothing to say about something, or if what I said wasn't backed up by data or experience on the issue, I take a seat back and wait for those who do to speak about it, which is frankly very few around here.

    Yes, I know you do. I also understand your frustration with the people who go overboard in believing every single rumor that pops up. At the end of the day, most of us here are just fans with no ties to the production of Bond 25 and I think part of the fun lies in the speculation of what happens next. I'd hate to create an environment where we can't have any fun and not be able to share our opinions on what direction they should take next.

    It just seems like you're too quick to shoot people down sometimes, that's all. I wasn't trying to antagonize you and that's the honest truth.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    pachazo wrote: »
    pachazo wrote: »
    Everyone with a keyboard feels the need to spill their hearts and frustrations, despite not having the salient pre-requisite of having any idea what they are actually talking about.

    Including you, brother. Including you.

    We've had this cute little run around before. I make the very clear decision not to discuss things I don't know anything about, as I see how stupid it makes others look. It's why I didn't talk about the strike news, some of the issues surrounding distribution deals, etc. and why I don't give rumors the time of day until things are actually confirmed. If i have nothing to say about something, or if what I said wasn't backed up by data or experience on the issue, I take a seat back and wait for those who do to speak about it, which is frankly very few around here.

    Yes, I know you do. I also understand your frustration with the people who go overboard in believing every single rumor that pops up. At the end of the day, most of us here are just fans with no ties to the production of Bond 25 and I think part of the fun lies in the speculation of what happens next. I'd hate to create an environment where we can't have any fun and not be able to share our opinions on what direction they should take next.

    It just seems like you're too quick to shoot people down sometimes, that's all. I wasn't trying to antagonize you and that's the honest truth.

    @pachazo, my apologies, then. We don't really converse on here, so I didn't know how to take your reactions (nuance is lost in text anyway). I'm sure that at times I could hold back a little, but I've seen the same cycle pop up endlessly over these nearly 800 pages (!) and so it's only inevitable that I try to point out how things could be better. It's just the same people, often myself, @jake24 or @RC7 pointing out pitfalls to avoid, and nothing really changing. Maybe I'm too dedicated to call it a lost cause?

    I hate censorship and don't want to put a moratorium out on discussing anything Bond-related or otherwise, I just simply wish that people didn't take every whisper as a chance to plan a celebration party, or, if they don't like the news, throw EON under the bus for random reasons that have no logical correlation. We all want a new Bond film yesterday, but an attempt at patience must also be teamed with a certain restraint in these matterrs. Look at the news, mull over the facts, argue validity and all the rest, but avoid blindly accepting everything you read. A news report naming Uwe Boll as the next Bond director should receive the same scrutiny as one saying Daniel is returning for Bond 25, simply because it's all industry talk and not verified by EON. I think our main issue is that we don't speculate enough: instead, people skip speculation and treat pieces of news as confirmation of their own biases or wishes.

    In short, I just wish we had more commenters saying "Nolan may direct Bond 25," than "Nolan will direct Bond 25." A lot of this will lead to broken hearts and minds, sooner or later, and I've just tried to help and make this process easier for all of us to get through.
  • Posts: 9,843
    I am becoming more of a wait and see kind of guy largely because the rumor train tends to get worse and worse sadly In my opinion anyways

    lets talk about the lead up to Quantum of Solace it seems like every other day there was a new article or fan theory why Bond 22 will definitely be Risico or The Property of a lady for Bond 23 there was a whole leaked idea (which I am guessing was just fan made nonsense) that Bond 23 was going to be The Property of a Lady and definitely have a UN auction scene etc (which was really cool in my mind) Bond 24 a few good director rumors but when Mendes was announced we had no real exciting rumors till the leak and well that told us everything moving into the current time line a few rumors last year Hiddleston is 007 and Bier will direct were interesting but gone are the days when the sun would take a fleming title and say that is going to be the title of Bond 25 or (pick a random hot celebrity) is going to be a bond girl... I hate to say it but the good days of rumors for me at least are kind of over..
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The Sun is known for its never ending rubbish stories even over here.
  • Posts: 1,970
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.

    There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I am becoming more of a wait and see kind of guy largely because the rumor train tends to get worse and worse sadly In my opinion anyways

    lets talk about the lead up to Quantum of Solace it seems like every other day there was a new article or fan theory why Bond 22 will definitely be Risico or The Property of a lady for Bond 23 there was a whole leaked idea (which I am guessing was just fan made nonsense) that Bond 23 was going to be The Property of a Lady and definitely have a UN auction scene etc (which was really cool in my mind) Bond 24 a few good director rumors but when Mendes was announced we had no real exciting rumors till the leak and well that told us everything moving into the current time line a few rumors last year Hiddleston is 007 and Bier will direct were interesting but gone are the days when the sun would take a fleming title and say that is going to be the title of Bond 25 or (pick a random hot celebrity) is going to be a bond girl... I hate to say it but the good days of rumors for me at least are kind of over..

    You enjoyed all the fake celebrity castings, @Risico007? That was a part of the experience I was happy to see go, actually. The less I have to see of a shirtless Hiddleston trying to act like he's got some hair on his chest, the happier I shall be. The same goes for the laughable Taylor Swift Bond girl nonsense, an offshoot of some of the same stories that circled Kate Upton, I believe.

    At the very least, as annoying as the latest rumors can be, they do have more believability than the very obvious click-bait stories of all the Bond betting casting choices and the random Bond girl news stories, which just became journalistic parody over time. I'm a lot easier on those who are taking the Syncopy story and running with it, as it at least seems like something that could actually happen.
  • Posts: 9,843
    well Brady really I am sad about a lack of title rumors because honestly the more title rumors there were the more fan art and fan trailers there were. it seems an odd coincidence but every time some site swore Bond 22 was Risico we would get 10 new posters and 5 new trailers sadly those days are gone (don't believe me Google image Red Sky at night and unless I mistake my guess you will see a bunch of bond 23 fan arts)

    and as for celebrity bs at least Hiddleston was possible this Syncopy/Nolan nonsense was well just that again the whole situation has changed for me.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Risico007 wrote: »
    well Brady really I am sad about a lack of title rumors because honestly the more title rumors there were the more fan art and fan trailers there were. it seems an odd coincidence but every time some site swore Bond 22 was Risico we would get 10 new posters and 5 new trailers sadly those days are gone (don't believe me Google image Red Sky at night and unless I mistake my guess you will see a bunch of bond 23 fan arts)

    and as for celebrity bs at least Hiddleston was possible this Syncopy/Nolan nonsense was well just that again the whole situation has changed for me.

    I don't think a lack of titles being reported stops anyone from making art. I see Bond 25 fan posters on here all the time, using Property of a Lady, Shatterhand and plenty of other original titles too. All the reports you reference end up being bullshit at the end of the day, so it's not like anything is lost. Fans make posters no matter what, and if they don't have a title they make one up. Either way, the trailers and posters will always be there in some capacity.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,325
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.

    There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010

    There wasn't, so what? There are other things in life besides James Bond films. How did you cope in 2004 and 2010 then when there weren't Bond films? There was Euro 2004 and World Cup 2010. Darn it, 2017 has no major football tournament or Bond film, what on earth will we do?!!!
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,195
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.

    There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010

    There wasn't, so what? There are other things in life besides James Bond films. How did you cope in 2004 and 2010 then when there weren't Bond films? There was Euro 2004 and World Cup 2010. Darn it, 2017 has no major football tournament or Bond film, what on earth will we do?!!!

    Pssst, we all know that and all have other interest but this is a J A M E S B O N D site and people come here to discuss J A M E S. B O N D Lol
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,325
    talos7 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.

    There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010

    There wasn't, so what? There are other things in life besides James Bond films. How did you cope in 2004 and 2010 then when there weren't Bond films? There was Euro 2004 and World Cup 2010. Darn it, 2017 has no major football tournament or Bond film, what on earth will we do?!!!

    Pssst, we all know that and all have other interest but this is a J A M E S B O N D site and people come here to discuss J A M E S. B O N D Lol

    Really? Good point, so why wasn't there a Bond film in 1966, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017 - Eon are just terrible aren't they? Denying us all those Bond films - shame on them!

    Eon have been very good custodians of the James Bond franchise. I find it annoying when people slam BB and MGW just because the next Bond film won't come out until 2018/19 - some people need to grow up a bit I'm afraid.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.

    There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010

    There wasn't, so what? There are other things in life besides James Bond films. How did you cope in 2004 and 2010 then when there weren't Bond films? There was Euro 2004 and World Cup 2010. Darn it, 2017 has no major football tournament or Bond film, what on earth will we do?!!!

    Well done. Like someone plucked out my thoughts and plastered them about. Welcome to Team Patience, @tanaka123. Good to have you on board.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,325
    -
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Wasn't he bulked up for all of CR?

    Daniel was the same throughout the production. No doubt he put his time in the gym and he realistically represents someone with an active military background.

    The only time he looks "bulked-is when he emerges from the water; this is due to how he is framed in the shot and the lighting. Look at him when he pretends to be the parking attendant and later when he's working on his computer in his room at The Ocean Club. He's lean and muscular but not bulky in the least.

    I've worked on quite a few photo shoot, both behind and in front of the camera. The camera and lighting can change ones appearance even during the same shoot.

    Bingo!
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    ...And then, there are the comics. ;)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    doubleoego wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Wasn't he bulked up for all of CR?

    Daniel was the same throughout the production. No doubt he put his time in the gym and he realistically represents someone with an active military background.

    The only time he looks "bulked-is when he emerges from the water; this is due to how he is framed in the shot and the lighting. Look at him when he pretends to be the parking attendant and later when he's working on his computer in his room at The Ocean Club. He's lean and muscular but not bulky in the least.

    I've worked on quite a few photo shoot, both behind and in front of the camera. The camera and lighting can change ones appearance even during the same shoot.

    Bingo!

    Very much agreed here, too. I never understood the beef cake Craig comments, with people saying he was too muscly to be Bond. He simply looks like a man who would do the job he's doing, and I love Dan forever for being so committed to gain that muscle and credibility as Bond.

    It has been very apparent from jump, and later proven in how he acts in QoS and SF especially, that Dan's Bond is built as a military man who has taken all his naval experience and fitness into the 00 job after his time with the Royal Navy was over. Dan's fitness is very fitting of a military man, and even his run is very military in style, very stiff and in control, with no sense of imbalance. It's all drive and purpose. Like everything with how the character has been written, it all comes back to a distinct and well expressed character portrait. You can see the navy alive in Bond in a very overt way like never before.
  • Posts: 1,490
    doubleoego wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Wasn't he bulked up for all of CR?

    Daniel was the same throughout the production. No doubt he put his time in the gym and he realistically represents someone with an active military background.

    The only time he looks "bulked-is when he emerges from the water; this is due to how he is framed in the shot and the lighting. Look at him when he pretends to be the parking attendant and later when he's working on his computer in his room at The Ocean Club. He's lean and muscular but not bulky in the least.

    I've worked on quite a few photo shoot, both behind and in front of the camera. The camera and lighting can change ones appearance even during the same shoot.

    Bingo!

    Very much agreed here, too. I never understood the beef cake Craig comments, with people saying he was too muscly to be Bond. He simply looks like a man who would do the job he's doing, and I love Dan forever for being so committed to gain that muscle and credibility as Bond.

    It has been very apparent from jump, and later proven in how he acts in QoS and SF especially, that Dan's Bond is built as a military man who has taken all his naval experience and fitness into the 00 job after his time with the Royal Navy was over. Dan's fitness is very fitting of a military man, and even his run is very military in style, very stiff and in control, with no sense of imbalance. It's all drive and purpose. Like everything with how the character has been written, it all comes back to a distinct and well expressed character portrait. You can see the navy alive in Bond in a very overt way like never before.

    100% agree.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    doubleoego wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Wasn't he bulked up for all of CR?

    Daniel was the same throughout the production. No doubt he put his time in the gym and he realistically represents someone with an active military background.

    The only time he looks "bulked-is when he emerges from the water; this is due to how he is framed in the shot and the lighting. Look at him when he pretends to be the parking attendant and later when he's working on his computer in his room at The Ocean Club. He's lean and muscular but not bulky in the least.

    I've worked on quite a few photo shoot, both behind and in front of the camera. The camera and lighting can change ones appearance even during the same shoot.

    Bingo!

    Very much agreed here, too. I never understood the beef cake Craig comments, with people saying he was too muscly to be Bond. He simply looks like a man who would do the job he's doing, and I love Dan forever for being so committed to gain that muscle and credibility as Bond.

    It has been very apparent from jump, and later proven in how he acts in QoS and SF especially, that Dan's Bond is built as a military man who has taken all his naval experience and fitness into the 00 job after his time with the Royal Navy was over. Dan's fitness is very fitting of a military man, and even his run is very military in style, very stiff and in control, with no sense of imbalance. It's all drive and purpose. Like everything with how the character has been written, it all comes back to a distinct and well expressed character portrait. You can see the navy alive in Bond in a very overt way like never before.

    Most certainly. I always found the muscular/hulking cimments ridiculous and amusing but I think and this is just my opinion, that people are used to seeing Bond actors with a rather ordinary looking body.
    Outisde of Craig the only Bond actor who looked physically impressive was Connery (particularly in TB). The days of heroes like Bond pulling off all these incredible physical feats while their bodies look like they've never undergone any sort of physical training/conditioning are over. With what we know today about diet, nutrition and various ways of working out, combined with what we're supposed to believe and accept when it comes to Bond's capabilities, he has to look, well, look physically capable and Craig delivered. The way some people talk about him you'd think they were talking about him as though he was as swole as Jay Cutler.
    All the stuff Craig's Bond is able to do doesn't require much suspension of disbelief because not only has he appropriately(which is the key word here) made himself look credible in the role but he's done the physical training to do all this stuff which in turn transforms his body to look capable; moreso than any other Bond actor.
    That being said, it's not terribly difficult for anyone who's in moderate shape to transform their bodies into looking more defined, sculpted and impressive. The key component is diet; a huge emphasis on that, disciplined training and consistency.
  • Posts: 4,325
    Let's remember that rumours are ... just rumours. For instance,

    https://mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=1572
  • Posts: 1,970
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.

    There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010

    There wasn't, so what? There are other things in life besides James Bond films. How did you cope in 2004 and 2010 then when there weren't Bond films? There was Euro 2004 and World Cup 2010. Darn it, 2017 has no major football tournament or Bond film, what on earth will we do?!!!

    Because I'm a Bond super fan and I want more Bond. 2004 it was rough cause I really wanted a 5th Brosnan film. 2010 wasn't so bad actually cause I had a lot going on that year.
  • Posts: 9,843
    FJ we had Everything or Nothing and Bloodstone on the years you wanted bond films watch a play through of each game.
  • Posts: 4,325
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Cubby always felt a fairly consistent release schedule was important
    Yep

    We probably would been at Bond 28 production thread by now if he was still alive.

    Bit unfair - QoS was originally going to come out in May 2008. Skyfall would have come out in 2011 if it wasn't for MGM and Spectre was originally going to come out in 2014. Cubby had his own problems in getting a Bond film produced between 1989 and 1995.

    There could of been a film in 2004 and 2010

    There wasn't, so what? There are other things in life besides James Bond films. How did you cope in 2004 and 2010 then when there weren't Bond films? There was Euro 2004 and World Cup 2010. Darn it, 2017 has no major football tournament or Bond film, what on earth will we do?!!!

    Because I'm a Bond super fan and I want more Bond. 2004 it was rough cause I really wanted a 5th Brosnan film. 2010 wasn't so bad actually cause I had a lot going on that year.

    You mean you're one of them ... an obsessive?
Sign In or Register to comment.