› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…742743745747748…2507

Comments

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    Germanlady wrote: »
    This girl sounds and feels like a lots of trouble. Totally no.

    I'm leaning that way too, @Germanlady.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Jessica Chastain would make helluva of a villainess, or bad girl type leading lady. Dammit, I want her to play something like Xenia Onatopp but someone who's on Bond's side, even though I don't mind if she's on the other side, either.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    The series could use another femme fatale. Shame the only one we got during Craig's era was Valenka, who was limited to poisoning Bond and having zero interactions with him.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited May 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Controversial opinion this one may be, but the Craig era has only had female characters in leading roles, not Bond Girls. Then again, this may have been down to Bond as well who was aimed to be grounded and real-world-engaged with "real" characters.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited May 2017 Posts: 28,694
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Controversial opinion this one may be, but the Craig era has only had female characters in leading roles, not Bond Girls. Then again, this may have been down to Bond as well who was aimed to be grounded and real-world-engaged with "real" characters.

    Huh? The Bond girl role is the leading female role.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Controversial opinion this one may be, but the Craig era has only had female characters in leading roles, not Bond Girls. Then again, this may have been down to Bond as well who was aimed to be grounded and real-world-engaged with "real" characters.

    Huh? The Bond girl role is the leading female role.
    I don't think we see eye to eye in that matter, Brady. ;)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Controversial opinion this one may be, but the Craig era has only had female characters in leading roles, not Bond Girls. Then again, this may have been down to Bond as well who was aimed to be grounded and real-world-engaged with "real" characters.

    Huh? The Bond girl role is the leading female role.
    I don't think we see eye to eye in that matter, Brady. ;)

    The statement just didn't make sense to me, that's all. Eva Green, Olga Kurylenko and Lea Seydoux were both the main Bond girls and the leading ladies of their films, as billed.

    I just don't want this to turn into the shitestorm of yesterday where we all derailed this thread constantly. We can take it to the controversial opinions thread if you want to talk about the above at all.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2017 Posts: 8,392
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Controversial opinion this one may be, but the Craig era has only had female characters in leading roles, not Bond Girls. Then again, this may have been down to Bond as well who was aimed to be grounded and real-world-engaged with "real" characters.

    Huh? The Bond girl role is the leading female role.
    I don't think we see eye to eye in that matter, Brady. ;)

    The statement just didn't make sense to me, that's all. Eva Green, Olga Kurylenko and Lea Seydoux were both the main Bond girls and the leading ladies of their films, as billed.

    I just don't want this to turn into the shitestorm of yesterday where we all derailed this thread constantly. We can take it to the controversial opinions thread if you want to talk about the above at all.

    Crazy innit?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Controversial opinion this one may be, but the Craig era has only had female characters in leading roles, not Bond Girls. Then again, this may have been down to Bond as well who was aimed to be grounded and real-world-engaged with "real" characters.

    Huh? The Bond girl role is the leading female role.
    I don't think we see eye to eye in that matter, Brady. ;)

    The statement just didn't make sense to me, that's all. Eva Green, Olga Kurylenko and Lea Seydoux were both the main Bond girls and the leading ladies of their films, as billed.

    I just don't want this to turn into the shitestorm of yesterday where we all derailed this thread constantly. We can take it to the controversial opinions thread if you want to talk about the above at all.

    Crazy innit?

    That Craig's girls are treated like actual characters or that we suck at staying on topic?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    If we're still bothered by staying on topic 100% of the time 755 pages in, perhaps we should solely post on-topic things, instead of going on about being off-topic, which is off-topic in and of itself. Not sure why that's still a struggle with this thread.

    Let's either keep it Bond related and everyone have a good time and enjoy the information as it comes with some off-topic comments every so often, or post absolutely nothing not pertaining to 'Bond 25.'
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I'm curious. Is there anything official at all? Nothing as far as I know, except that we will eventually have B25 and perhaps the distributor discussion. I don't even think Annapurna has been confirmed by anyone involved with the negotiations as being a candidate.

    Even P&W could be smoke and mirrors, unless we're hanging our hats on Baz.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    I don't believe anything official has gone down yet, at least in the eye of the public. I suppose now we know to hold off on a thread like this for 'Bond 26' until much further down the road.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,843
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I don't believe anything official has gone down yet, at least in the eye of the public. I suppose now we know to hold off on a thread like this for 'Bond 26' until much further down the road.

    there goes my idea for a new thread ;)
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited May 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I don't believe anything official has gone down yet, at least in the eye of the public. I suppose now we know to hold off on a thread like this for 'Bond 26' until much further down the road.

    there goes my idea for a new thread ;)
    Sooo... *rubs hands against one another* When are we opening the Bond 26 Production Timeline thread?
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    edited May 2017 Posts: 4,325
    Apparently Paul McGuigan was in the running to direct CR, in fact he made the last two.

    http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/culture/film/interview-paul-mcguigan-film-and-tv-director-1-2331295
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,843
    if I had to make some safe bets regarding bond 25 and all the rumors we know I would say this

    Purvis and Wade will write the film with potentially a third writer coming in and changing the dialogue etc

    Paul McGuigan will direct

    Daniel Craig will return

    it will film next year and be released next fall

    and before people say what about Waltz he might be too busy my guess is if they go with a 2 part story (which is rumored) Irma Blunt might be the main villain of bond 25 with Waltz playing more of a Hannibal Lecter role meaning all his stuff could be filmed in a day a week tops

    Cyrpus will definitatlly be a location

    The title of the film will be the name of the location of the finale of the film (be it 007 in new York or The Silver Phantom etc)

    and everything else is to murky to guess right now

  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    The only safe bet is this:

    James Bond will return.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    The only safe bet is this:

    James Bond will return.

    Amen to that,Mr Kleenex !!

  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    If McGuigan is directing the next one, I am done with Bond.
    Ok, I am exaggerating, but when there are directors such as Nolan and Villeneuve dying to direct a Bond film, picking this McGuigan guy would be INSANITY.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    If McGuigan is directing the next one, I am done with Bond.
    Ok, I am exaggerating, but when there are directors such as Nolan and Villeneuve dying to direct a Bond film, picking this McGuigan guy would be INSANITY.

    What if he does and it's a good Bond film? Martin Campbell's CV outside of Edge of Darkness (the TV series), GE and CR isn't all that impressive to be honest. But he did a fine job with Bond.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    If McGuigan is directing the next one, I am done with Bond.
    Ok, I am exaggerating, but when there are directors such as Nolan and Villeneuve dying to direct a Bond film, picking this McGuigan guy would be INSANITY.

    What if he does and it's a good Bond film? Martin Campbell's CV outside of Edge of Darkness (the TV series), GE and CR isn't all that impressive to be honest. But he did a fine job with Bond.
    +1
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2017 Posts: 15,713
    Are we really going to make such comments again? We spent the last 10 years laughing at everyone who said the franchise had been killed with the casting of Daniel Craig as James Bond back in 2005. Are we going to make the same type of comments the DCINB crowd said prior to CR's release? 'Oh no, they chose McGuigan as director, the franchise is over for me!'
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    If McGuigan is directing the next one, I am done with Bond.
    Ok, I am exaggerating, but when there are directors such as Nolan and Villeneuve dying to direct a Bond film, picking this McGuigan guy would be INSANITY.

    What if he does and it's a good Bond film? Martin Campbell's CV outside of Edge of Darkness (the TV series), GE and CR isn't all that impressive to be honest. But he did a fine job with Bond.

    First Zorro movie was pretty dope.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    And I quote! "FAKE NEWS FOLKS!!! FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!" Lol!
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    What if he does and it's a good Bond film? Martin Campbell's CV outside of Edge of Darkness (the TV series), GE and CR isn't all that impressive to be honest. But he did a fine job with Bond.

    1. The series is at a very different place right now compared to a decade ago. Sure, Spectre was a misfire, but Skyfall elevated the franchise in every possible way. 2. I am sure McGuigan is capable of making a decent Bond flick. I am also sure he will never make a movie as great as Nolan's Inception or Villeneuve's Sicario.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Just because someone is a great filmmaker doesn't mean they're a good Bond filmmaker. Some here would say Campbell and Mendes prove that, one excelling at nothing but Bond and the other doing best outside of Bond's rules.

    The same goes for writers, as Bond screenplays are vastly different than anything else, and you have to play by clearly defined rules. It takes a very perceptive and knowledgable fan of the films at their best to truly realize the conventions and elements successfully.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    Just because someone is a great filmmaker doesn't mean they're a good Bond filmmaker. Some here would say Campbell and Mendes prove that, one excelling at nothing but Bond and the other doing best outside of Bond's rules.

    The same goes for writers, as Bond screenplays are vastly different than anything else, and you have to play by clearly defined rules. It takes a very perceptive and knowledgable fan of the films at their best to truly realize the conventions and elements successfully.

    And the same goes for actors, Brady...
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    Just because someone is a great filmmaker doesn't mean they're a good Bond filmmaker. Some here would say Campbell and Mendes prove that, one excelling at nothing but Bond and the other doing best outside of Bond's rules.

    The same goes for writers, as Bond screenplays are vastly different than anything else, and you have to play by clearly defined rules. It takes a very perceptive and knowledgable fan of the films at their best to truly realize the conventions and elements successfully.

    And the same goes for actors, Brady...

    Exactly, great actors don't always make good Bonds. Which is essentially how I feel about every single actor people have suggested for #7 here.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    @PanchitoPistoles Please make a bet again, I want to see how it turns out this time. :D
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    edited May 2017 Posts: 4,619
    dominicgreene wrote: »
    @PanchitoPistoles Please make a bet again, I want to see how it turns out this time. :D

    Here's a bet: Tom Hardy will NEVER play James Bond. If it ever turns out I am wrong about this one, feel free to call me a fool.
Sign In or Register to comment.