No Time to Die production thread

11751761781801811208

Comments

  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    @JamesCraig, Point taken.

    Personal stuff, family business.

    The only thing I agree with you two on is that Blofeld angle. What on earth where they thinking?

    May be they had Martini too too much

    Or they took it too personal, like some "fans" do. :-c
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 3,278
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alec Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,593
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.

    Sean Bean as Alec Trevelyan? I’m not sure I understand what you mean.
  • Posts: 12,521
    Le Chiffre and Silva are already considered two of the best Bond villains, and I’d be surprised if public opinion changed on that.
  • Posts: 220
    Another article from Sassi: sassilive.it/cultura-e-spettacoli/cinema-cultura-e-spettacoli/james-bond-25-a-matera-nino-sangerardi-eon-production-versa-40-mila-300-euro-al-comune-di-matera/

    The authorization of filming locations in Italy would be from July 15th until October 4th and the prize paid to Matera city is 40,300 euros. Nothing new for the rest excepted it seems confirm that some building have been restored for some scenes.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.

    Sean Bean as Alec Trevelyan? I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

    Oh yes. He was great. I'll give Sophie Marceau some credit too. But the others?
  • PavloPavlo Ukraine
    Posts: 323
    https://instagram.com/cary_fukunaga?igshid=5zbqzl6d1a9m

    Cary posted new stories. Probably from Scotland.
  • Posts: 4,045
    Zekidk wrote: »
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »
    but I think a title reveal & teaser poster could be on the way very soon.
    Top Gun: Maverick is set for June 2020, and it already has a trailer out. Before they find the next to play Bond for Bond 26, MI:7 and MI:8 will have been made.

    Looking at it another way, it’ll have taken MI 26 years to make 8, and Bond will have hit 9 in that period. Plus 35 years to get the first TG sequel out, come on.
  • Posts: 17,819
    Pavlo wrote: »
    https://instagram.com/cary_fukunaga?igshid=5zbqzl6d1a9m

    Cary posted new stories. Probably from Scotland.

    Looks like it!
  • PavloPavlo Ukraine
    Posts: 323
    Pavlo wrote: »
    https://instagram.com/cary_fukunaga?igshid=5zbqzl6d1a9m

    Cary posted new stories. Probably from Scotland.

    Looks like it!

    Probably only second unit is actually filming now in Scotland. I think Cary continues to scout potential locations in Highlands. Maybe first unit will start filming next week.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 6,710
    Haven't got instagram.. Can anyone elaborate on said stories, please? :)
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 17,819
    Pavlo wrote: »
    Pavlo wrote: »
    https://instagram.com/cary_fukunaga?igshid=5zbqzl6d1a9m

    Cary posted new stories. Probably from Scotland.

    Looks like it!

    Probably only second unit is actually filming now in Scotland. I think Cary continues to scout potential locations in Highlands. Maybe first unit will start filming next week.

    That's certainly a possibility. Wouldn't be surprised if we get some more articles with photos and/or a new clapperboard.
    Univex wrote: »
    Haven't got instagram.. Can anyone elaborate on said stories, please? :)

    Nothing that interesting (or potentially spoiler-y, for that matter), so I only grabbed a few screenshots. The first one is taken from inside a helicopter – presumably flying over the Scottish Highlands. The second is just a forrest location.

    Put the screenshots in a spoiler tag because of scrolling.
    EzUVEmr.png
    xZTjoRe.png
    BK3TZw0.png
    ZA5Er2k.png
  • Posts: 6,710
    Thanks, @Torgeirtrap!

    Hope we get some more shooting pics in the next days. With some cast thrown in for good measure.
  • Posts: 17,819
    Univex wrote: »
    Thanks, @Torgeirtrap!

    Hope we get some more shooting pics in the next days. With some cast thrown in for good measure.

    No problem, @Univex!

    Time will tell, but since Fukunaga is there, you'd expect the cast to be so too.
  • Posts: 15,229
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.

    Sean Bean as Alec Trevelyan? I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

    Oh yes. He was great. I'll give Sophie Marceau some credit too. But the others?

    Actually, only Alec Trevelyan was really good in the Brosnan era, imo. I'd say Renard had potential but overall was disappointing. And I kinda like Elliot Carver but not because the way he was written (evil businessmen are so forgettable), only due to Jonathan Pryce's performance.

    I'd say even the weakest of the Craig era villains (Dominic Greene) was at least marginally more interesting than most of the villains of the Brosnan era.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,680
    Univex wrote: »
    Thanks, @Torgeirtrap!
    No problem, @Univex!
    BE%20EXCELLENT.png
  • Posts: 1,985
    Ludovico wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.

    Sean Bean as Alec Trevelyan? I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

    Oh yes. He was great. I'll give Sophie Marceau some credit too. But the others?

    Actually, only Alec Trevelyan was really good in the Brosnan era, imo. I'd say Renard had potential but overall was disappointing. And I kinda like Elliot Carver but not because the way he was written (evil businessmen are so forgettable), only due to Jonathan Pryce's performance.

    I'd say even the weakest of the Craig era villains (Dominic Greene) was at least marginally more interesting than most of the villains of the Brosnan era.
    Renard IMO was more of the secondary villain. Elektra was the main villain. And I thought she was great
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.

    Sean Bean as Alec Trevelyan? I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

    Oh yes. He was great. I'll give Sophie Marceau some credit too. But the others?

    Actually, only Alec Trevelyan was really good in the Brosnan era, imo. I'd say Renard had potential but overall was disappointing. And I kinda like Elliot Carver but not because the way he was written (evil businessmen are so forgettable), only due to Jonathan Pryce's performance.

    I'd say even the weakest of the Craig era villains (Dominic Greene) was at least marginally more interesting than most of the villains of the Brosnan era.
    Renard IMO was more of the secondary villain. Elektra was the main villain. And I thought she was great

    Agreed. Both Alec and Elektra were very strong villains - the former was strongly written and gleefully executed, while the latter managed to be memorable despite some hammy writing thanks to Marceau's strong performance.

    Pryce and Stephens, er, yeah - I get that. Not great. Pryce had his moments but was a tad too hammy. But Pierce's era is 2/4 on the villain front, which puts him on an even keel with Craig's era (at least until Malek comes along).
  • Posts: 9,858
    To be honest I dealt with a real life crisis over the week (I lost my job on Monday but have no fear I applied for a bunch of jobs and have a possibility of an even bigger an better paying job) that being said o find this anger and resentment interesting... of course Nomi as 007 is a stunt and of course they are following trends... history will determine if it’s the right thing to do but my guess is this won’t change anything in the long term.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited July 2019 Posts: 3,497
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.

    Sean Bean as Alec Trevelyan? I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

    Oh yes. He was great. I'll give Sophie Marceau some credit too. But the others?

    Actually, only Alec Trevelyan was really good in the Brosnan era, imo. I'd say Renard had potential but overall was disappointing. And I kinda like Elliot Carver but not because the way he was written (evil businessmen are so forgettable), only due to Jonathan Pryce's performance.

    I'd say even the weakest of the Craig era villains (Dominic Greene) was at least marginally more interesting than most of the villains of the Brosnan era.
    Renard IMO was more of the secondary villain. Elektra was the main villain. And I thought she was great

    Agreed. Both Alec and Elektra were very strong villains - the former was strongly written and gleefully executed, while the latter managed to be memorable despite some hammy writing thanks to Marceau's strong performance.

    Pryce and Stephens, er, yeah - I get that. Not great. Pryce had his moments but was a tad too hammy. But Pierce's era is 2/4 on the villain front, which puts him on an even keel with Craig's era (at least until Malek comes along).

    Sophie Marceau was so damn hot during that torture/death part... >:)

    And I'm a sucker for French women speaking English.

    And TWINE has PB's best performance as Bond...


    But uhm... Bond 25.
  • Posts: 17,819
    QBranch wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Thanks, @Torgeirtrap!
    No problem, @Univex!
    BE%20EXCELLENT.png
    nph-thumbs-up.gif
  • Posts: 6,710
    QBranch wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Thanks, @Torgeirtrap!
    No problem, @Univex!
    BE%20EXCELLENT.png
    nph-thumbs-up.gif
    giphy.gif
  • Posts: 15,229
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    I’ve seen every Bond film in the cinema, usually on day one, since GE and was a fan of Bond films before then, and for the first time ever I’m completely unexcited about a new Bond film. Not just because of this latest thing, it just feels like yet another blow against the character. I never thought I’d be pining for the Brosnan era, but here I am. I loved Casino Royale, I thought it was an amazing Bond film, and greatly looked forward to what promised to be an exciting new era of Bond films with a fantastic new Bond actor. Constant “personal” storylines, small stakes, a depressed, navel gazing Bond who seems to be constantly rogue or retired and making mistakes and learning lessons and must be about the crappiest agent MI6 ever produced, QUANTUM being a damp squib and even the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld being totally lame and now we’ve got another movie with a retired Bond, a female 007 and a movie that will “reflect the metoo movement”... Its all just been so disappointing.

    Agreed 100%. I'm sick of Bond having personal issues, family angst, unnecessary family backstories involving Blofeld - basically rewriting anything Fleming did, and discarding precious material that still hasn't been used.

    +1.

    Fine, they wanted to reboot Bond with CR, but at the end of the movie where he says "Bond, James Bond" I thought that was pretty much it when it comes to building his character. Not so, unfortunately.

    The consequence of them focusing so much on Bond's character, is that it leaves little room for the supporting cast to shine. In 30 years, which Bond villains from the Craig-era, will be regarded up there with the likes of Goldfinger, Scaramanga and Alex Trevelyan? They couldn't even get Blofeld right.

    And what do we know that is "100% confirmed" from B25? Blofeld has a cameo & Malek's character is not a "political" terrorist.

    How many villains during the Brosnan era are held in high esteem, apart from Madonna?

    But this is again too much off topic.

    Sean Bean as Alec Trevelyan? I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

    Oh yes. He was great. I'll give Sophie Marceau some credit too. But the others?

    Actually, only Alec Trevelyan was really good in the Brosnan era, imo. I'd say Renard had potential but overall was disappointing. And I kinda like Elliot Carver but not because the way he was written (evil businessmen are so forgettable), only due to Jonathan Pryce's performance.

    I'd say even the weakest of the Craig era villains (Dominic Greene) was at least marginally more interesting than most of the villains of the Brosnan era.
    Renard IMO was more of the secondary villain. Elektra was the main villain. And I thought she was great

    That's my issue with it: he was build up as the main antagonist and is for all intents and purposes. Whether he's a henchman or not is beside the point: he's the fearsome terrorist that is depicted as bad news from the beginning, he's the one who is meant not to feel pain, he's the nihilistic maniac bent on creating chaos...

    Anyway it's off topic. If Malik plays second fiddles to Waltz's Blofeld, then he must nevertheless be his own man and be a genuine menace in and of himself. Something Renard failed to be.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Univex wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Thanks, @Torgeirtrap!
    No problem, @Univex!
    BE%20EXCELLENT.png
    nph-thumbs-up.gif
    giphy.gif

    MgyjPIb.gif
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 6,710
    JamesCraig wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    QBranch wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Thanks, @Torgeirtrap!
    No problem, @Univex!
    BE%20EXCELLENT.png
    nph-thumbs-up.gif
    giphy.gif

    MgyjPIb.gif

    URaQTqs.gif?noredirect

    ;)

    You can condemn the gif spree, but to tell you the truth, it's what this thread and forums needed. And this has been one of the most peaceful afternoon we've seen in weeks. So, here's an exemple of how we can all get along.

    PS: although, to be fair, those involved already did get along in the first place ;)
  • Posts: 12,526
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Bloody hell I thought that meant tomorrow ffs !!!!!!!

    You and me both barry007!! :))
    I think it's time for a homage to this poster...

    417o77z2LCL.jpg

    Except with Nomi in more stylish spy attire, of course.

    And Bond could be in his blue swim shorts!!!! =))

  • Posts: 1,985
    Any rumors on Waltz???
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    If you want rumours, just make some up.
  • Posts: 1,165
    Risico007 wrote: »
    To be honest I dealt with a real life crisis over the week (I lost my job on Monday but have no fear I applied for a bunch of jobs and have a possibility of an even bigger an better paying job) that being said o find this anger and resentment interesting... of course Nomi as 007 is a stunt and of course they are following trends... history will determine if it’s the right thing to do but my guess is this won’t change anything in the long term.

    @Risico007 Very sorry to hear about the job loss. Fingers crossed for bigger and better things! Wishing you all the best.

Sign In or Register to comment.