It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
That's funny, because Mendes was the one who told me it would be "impossible" for Craig to return.
It's important that you understand that: I did not make that up. I don't know what "impossible" means either. That's why I felt compelled to post here in the first place. I doubt I would have if my only info was that DC wouldn't be coming back.
And if - as has been suggested - I was mad enough to have posted lies here in an attempt to get attention, I certainly wouldn't have made up the "impossible" quote which doesn't even make sense to me! It implies either that Bond dies or the code-name theory applies, neither of which I think will be true; and both of these would no doubt be refuted when the film comes out, making me look like a proper arse. The best solution I have is that Mendes was perhaps being a little over-dramatic and making it sound like this "impossible" thing was a plot-point, when really it's a personal agreement between him and DC.
Unless, of course, they've got a big surprise up their sleeves. One thing I can say categorically is that the FINAL shooting draft of SPECTRE is NOT in the public domain; and anyone using leaked drafts to support their arguments is a fool.
And thank you to those who've responded soberly to my posts on this and other threads. I realise it's annoying to hear bad news and no doubt some will just think I'm name-dropping. But do remember that before Bond, DC was just an actor; if you'd gone to the Royal Court bar after performances of A NUMBER, you'd have found him there drinking like everyone else. I've met him a couple of times and we have good friends in common; and I've known several people involved with the Bond films over the years, many of whom I've worked with. There are several other factors that make Craig's departure very likely, imo, but which I won't go into here as they WOULD be breaches of confidence.
Point being: These people aren't mythical creatures, like unicorns. It's not that thrilling or unusual to meet them when they're your peers. If anything, it's a bit disappointing: I liked it better when the Bond films were completely divorced from my reality.
4 movies in a decade is a good run and nobody in the real world would complain if it was decided that a new actor will take over for Bond 25.
Better than what?
Ah so you are. Thought so.
[/quote]
Your claims are hearsay ...reporting as Mendes opinion without any supporting evidence.
We don't even know your credentials or connection beyond if course what you are asserting.
That's why your claims illicit such strong reaction. At least part of the reason.
Now I do regret my initial response to your claims and did offer a sincere apology for that.
However I still don't believe you.
So true. I don't look at anyone famous that way despite not being peers with anyone. A lot of people do, however - both in good and in bad, both here and all over the place. I've never understood it, and often find it quite disturbing.
Well, does it mean you have seen the final shooting draft and you have seen the leaked drafts, and checked that they are different as far as the plot are concerned ? I'm not 100% sure, but I think you said you didn't know how to find the December script, did it change ? Otherwise, you're making assumptions, like with the code-name theory, etc..
Remember, what is indeed true, is that December shooting script is NOT on the Sony Leaks website. We can say categorically it's not that easy to find the December script if you don't know someone who has it. The original DropBox link (or at least the one that started with 6f...) is dead. On the other hand, older scripts are very easy to find, and they have quite some changes in the ending.
So, IMO, "the ending is not the one on Sony Leaks" is still coherent with what we know so far, because yes, it's true. Remember that out there there is a script that was changed AFTER the Sony Leaks fiasco, so you really have to be aware of the hacking details to know what happened. If one thinks "Sony Leaks happenned on Monday, so the script we did on Thursday has not leaked", then he's wrong and he may not know it (I know a thing or two about the movie industry too, and I will not described the movie makers as "Internet aware", far from it)
Unless of course you mean there are some lines here and there that are changed, and well, we already know that. And don't forget we could check quite a few clapperboards scene numbers too...
This forum has that. Vocal minority and all that.
It also needs a healthy pinch of salt.
Huh? All an origin story means is that Bond's origins are explored, not that it ties into any Bond movie pre-2006. CR was a reboot, not a prequel.
In the meantime I am not wringing my hands over something I can't possibly know until the next film is announced either with him or without him.
The ramifications would be his private life being the subject of showbiz news; the fact he can no longer go down the pub, have a quiet pint and go unnoticed; people wanting selfies with him and snapping unwelcome photos of him; having to move to New York where he feels he can go about his daily business unrecognised, albeit with hats and glasses to disguise himself. Long delays to Bond productions throwing into doubt any other projects he might have had an interest in but ultimately had to make a pass on. That'll do for starters. It might not sound like a big deal to you, but after having 11 years of it it would be enough to drive any sane man crazy.
No offence, but what makes you think he suddenly chose not to do anything between Bond movies apart from a small stage production with his new wife? His agent might have had lots of possible movies he had to pass on due to the prolonged nature and uncertainty of SP. Let's be honest here, Babs & Mickey don't have the same appetite as Cubby and Saltz for getting these movies made and out in the cinemas. The gaps are getting bigger and bigger with no knowing when the next one will be made.
I was responding to this: so naturally I wasn't talking about his personal life. (Since you mentioned it, though, sounds like he really suffers from being a well known actor, and if so, that's unfortunate and sad and he never should have taken the Bond role if it makes his life miserable. I'm not convinced it does, though, and he doesn't seem crazy to me, either. ;) )
I obviously don't know, but merely assume, like many others here do, that he chose not to do other movies between SF and SP. (I don't know him, have no inside knowledge, and haven't read the leaked mails or anything.)
Even if there was some uncertainty about the exact schedule with SP, he still would have known before they even started shooting SF when he'd be free of his promotional obligations with it and all. And knew that he'd certainly have quite a bit of time after it to do other stuff. Roughly a year maybe, possibly more (as it turned out). Smaller films you say he'd certainly rather make can take only a few weeks to shoot. Possibly even less for an actor who isn't the lead. I realize that the work involved is more than just the time on set, but anyway. Actors can do 3, 4 or more movies in a year even if they don't work all the time.
Now I also assume that people would be interested in working with him and he'd be offered stuff to choose from. He might have had more time between the 2 Bond movies than he initially expected, but that wouldn't explain not having had stuff scheduled for the earlier part of the break. I think he was supposed to do two movies, but dropped out from The Monuments Men, and whatever happened with the other. And somehow there was nothing else.
It's hardly crazy to think it was his choice rather than forced upon him by the Bond producers.
And he did do the play. I assume that was his choice as well. He rather did that than some movie maybe. Good for him. Not so good for those of us for whom New York is a bit too far away to go to the theatre for (London I would seriously consider). Still, can't complain if an actor rather does theatre sometimes. (The same goes for directors.)
IMO, he had worked almost continuously for many years and finally found, there is a life beyond making movies. I see him directing, producing and doing whatever film interests him - small or larger and not necessarely in the lead. He has no problems playing second or even thrid fiddle, if the part is interesting and tempting. Maybe baddies, too.
Rachel already started producing with Babs.
EXCLUSIVE: UK sales outfit nabs drama executive produced by Barbara Broccoli and Rachel Weisz.
http://www.screendaily.com/news/starline-warms-to-tom-brownes-radiator/5093117.article?blocktitle=LATEST-FILM-NEWS-HEADLINES&contentID=42422
PS. Thanks @Germanlady for filling us in on the two scrapped DC movies inbetween Bond. Could there be more? I'm sure it'll come out eventually.
I hope Craig does a 5th, and if I had to bet I would bet that he does do a 5th. But 4 is still a good run these days, and should be enough to 'immortalise' him as Bond as much as it has done Connery, Moore and Brosnan. The other two will be less well remembered over time for obvious reasons.
Just my 2p as a minority member.
OHMSS and TLD are two of my favourite Bond films, but the ignorance of young film critics tends to mean these films are dismissed.
Yes, it was. In the leaks Clooney is even apologizing for the film. Doesn't matter to me, but it was.
Monuments Men was kind of a flop, it broke even more or less.
So financially it didn't hurt the studio or producers but didn't make money either, or very little.
But for a movie with such a stellar cast they sure had high hopes for at least 300 million USD worldwide.
And quite frankly, the movie is boring as watching butter melt in the sun.
Chr*st almighty, you haven't half picked 'em there! Without those two the series would be in dire straits.
Two of my top 5, and I won't be the only one.
Goes to show the chasm between what fans consider good Bond movies and those the general media champion is significant.
No need to explain @NicNac. I was just saying that Dalton & Lazenby aren't held up as high as Connery or Moore (and I doubt they ever will). But the two have had.... not so much a renaissance, but a surge in popularity compared to when they were cast.
With fans like we are that's certainly true.
Sadly when talking with my colleagues at work or in the football club about Bond it's always only Brosnan and Craig who get mentioned the most as being anybody's favourite. Connery gets a lot of respect of course, but Dalton is forgotten or simply viewed as the one that failed which always makes me sad.