No Time to Die production thread

11871881901921931208

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,157
    Is this the one, @peter?



    Edit: that was hard to embed...

    That looks like my grandpa at last year's convention of Dimi's exes.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT HER TO BE, DOESN'T MEAN SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE 007 AT THE END. WISHFUL THINKING IS NOT FACT.
    What people want has nothing to do with what people think will be the most likely outcome. People rooting for Bond to die and her to be 007 at both the beginning and end? Now that's "wishful thinking" ;-)
    See now you're contradicting yourself because by saying that "She's definitely not going to be 007 at both the beginning and end", you're literally presenting your opinion as fact,

    Sorry, dude. I refuse to write "in my opinion" after most of my sentences.

    You don't need to, either. Nor does anyone else. It's fairly clear most things here are written as opinion.

    Lets not allow this to escalate into another silly argument.

    Fair play @CraigMooreOHMSS. You do you @Zekidk :)

    Didn't want to butt in or undermine anyone, @Denbigh - hope I didn't.

    Things just seemed to be a bit quieter on here the last couple of days so just wanted to keep the mood going!
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 3,274
    Pavlo wrote: »

    "Those of a traditionalist disposition might want to look away now. The old-fashioned values and casual sexism that defined the 007 of previous generations will be a thing of the past, according to Naomie Harris, who's reprising her role as MI6 secretary Eve Moneypenny in the forthcoming Bond movie. 'We're seeing a real evolution of his character,' she says of the new and improved James Bond."

    That's the second warning I got. The first one was when Phoebe Waller Bridge promised to make Bond a Metoo icon. As long as they don't mess around with the first 24 - like renaming 'Dr.No' to "Dr.No means No" or something, I'll be fine.
  • Posts: 3,164
    It's called 007. Mark my words.

    Yes. I think you could be right. ;)

    If true, 😘👌 and CALLED IT ;)
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Pavlo wrote: »

    "Those of a traditionalist disposition might want to look away now. The old-fashioned values and casual sexism that defined the 007 of previous generations will be a thing of the past, according to Naomie Harris, who's reprising her role as MI6 secretary Eve Moneypenny in the forthcoming Bond movie. 'We're seeing a real evolution of his character,' she says of the new and improved James Bond."

    That's the second warning I got. The first one was when Phoebe Waller Bridge promised to make Bond a Metoo icon. As long as they don't mess around with the first 24 - like renaming 'Dr.No' to "Dr.No means No" or something, I'll be fine.

    She never said that. She referred to the films overall, not the character himself. Whether that is what happens of course remains to be seen, but she didn't promise to make him a MeToo icon. Quite the opposite.
  • Posts: 4,408
    antovolk wrote: »
    It's called 007. Mark my words.

    Yes. I think you could be right. ;)

    If true, 😘👌 and CALLED IT ;)

    Wait?!?!? @marketto007 you are a man seriously in the know about these kind of things. You visited the set of Spectre after all and have links with Sony.

    Are you saying that Bond 25 is called ‘007’?
  • Posts: 12,462
    Swansong and 007 are my two least favorite title ideas I’ve heard. Would be a bummer to get either one.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited July 2019 Posts: 5,970
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Pavlo wrote: »

    "Those of a traditionalist disposition might want to look away now. The old-fashioned values and casual sexism that defined the 007 of previous generations will be a thing of the past, according to Naomie Harris, who's reprising her role as MI6 secretary Eve Moneypenny in the forthcoming Bond movie. 'We're seeing a real evolution of his character,' she says of the new and improved James Bond."

    That's the second warning I got. The first one was when Phoebe Waller Bridge promised to make Bond a Metoo icon. As long as they don't mess around with the first 24 - like renaming 'Dr.No' to "Dr.No means No" or something, I'll be fine.

    She never said that. She referred to the films overall, not the character himself. Whether that is what happens of course remains to be seen, but she didn't promise to make him a MeToo icon. Quite the opposite.
    I agree @CraigMooreOHMSS, plus once again it's the media itself that seem to be twisting the #MeToo angle. The media automatically seem to think representing women better is somehow part of a movement when it's just plain and simple progression. What they write around her words is what spins it into "#MeToo". This is what Naomi was actually quoted:

    'We're seeing a real evolution of his character. He's now having equal relationships with the female characters and he's emotionally attached, making real connections. There's real respect for the women in his life. There are now four women in the script and they all have incredibly strong roles and play a huge part in driving the story forward and assisting Bond."
  • Posts: 6,709
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 3,274
    She never said that. She referred to the films overall, not the character himself. Whether that is what happens of course remains to be seen, but she didn't promise to make him a MeToo icon. Quite the opposite.

    Hmm...

    "James Bond will be turned into a ‘#metoo feminist icon’ thanks to feisty Bond girls and Fleabag writer Phoebe Waller-Bridge"
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/8942445/james-bond-feminist-icon-fleabag-phoebe-waller-bridge/

    You are right. That was the interpretation of the journalist. Probably just wishful thinking.

    What PWB is quoted saying is this: "He needs to be true to his character.” Hard for me to figure out what that means, since Naomie Harris is talking about a "new and improved Bond."
  • Posts: 16,148
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007
  • Posts: 6,709
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 259
    How about this one? Daniel Craig as Ian Fleming's James Bond 007 in "VALHALLA".
  • Posts: 16,148
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.
  • Posts: 6,709
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.

    Me too. Definitely. Even the bloody Eclipse crap.
  • Posts: 16,148
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.

    Me too. Definitely. Even the bloody Eclipse crap.

    007 would remind me of the lackluster title that was JASON BOURNE. Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away.
  • Posts: 6,709
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.

    Me too. Definitely. Even the bloody Eclipse crap.

    007 would remind me of the lackluster title that was JASON BOURNE. Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away.

    Again, me too. Didn't even see it. And I have the Bourne trilogy. A title matters, no matter how many times I see a fan here say it doesn't. It really does. As a novel writer, I find it an idiosyncrasy to believe a title doesn't relate directly to the quality of the piece.
  • Posts: 16,148
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.

    Me too. Definitely. Even the bloody Eclipse crap.

    007 would remind me of the lackluster title that was JASON BOURNE. Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away.

    Again, me too. Didn't even see it. And I have the Bourne trilogy. A title matters, no matter how many times I see a fan here say it doesn't. It really does. As a novel writer, I find it an idiosyncrasy to believe a title doesn't relate directly to the quality of the piece.

    Shame as all the other Bourne films had great titles. A title is extremely important, IMO.
    It's a dying art coming up with a catchy memorable title. In addition it's a films foremost stamp of individuality .
  • PavloPavlo Ukraine
    Posts: 323
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.

    Me too. Definitely. Even the bloody Eclipse crap.

    007 would remind me of the lackluster title that was JASON BOURNE. Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away.

    Again, me too. Didn't even see it. And I have the Bourne trilogy. A title matters, no matter how many times I see a fan here say it doesn't. It really does. As a novel writer, I find it an idiosyncrasy to believe a title doesn't relate directly to the quality of the piece.

    'Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away'
    C'mon, man) It's just silly to not watch a film because of title)
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited July 2019 Posts: 6,275
    Pavlo wrote: »

    Interesting that Ana has only one project to shoot next. It's about M. Monroe and I doubt that she has to be bold for it. Her only project in the process of making is B25 and maybe she did this with her hair for Bond.[/quote]

    Could be a bald cap.

    Could be wearing a wig in the film.

    Could be Nena Blofeld.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    Pavlo wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.

    Me too. Definitely. Even the bloody Eclipse crap.

    007 would remind me of the lackluster title that was JASON BOURNE. Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away.

    Again, me too. Didn't even see it. And I have the Bourne trilogy. A title matters, no matter how many times I see a fan here say it doesn't. It really does. As a novel writer, I find it an idiosyncrasy to believe a title doesn't relate directly to the quality of the piece.

    'Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away'
    C'mon, man) It's just silly to not watch a film because of title)

    That's not what he said.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited July 2019 Posts: 12,480
    titles ... just my opinion, of course:

    Spectre was lazy. 007 would be lazy.
    And I just don't like it.
    Swan Song is simply annoying to me.
    Didn't like A Reason To Die either. Awful.

    So I'm still going with: MeToo (with or without the hashtag) ;)
  • Posts: 3,274
    "007: Property of a Lady" for title would make sense.
  • Posts: 6,709
    Pavlo wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    "007" would just mean they've really ran out of steam. And would, IMO, be a bad sign for the series caretakers. I've never been a negativist, but I would promptly become one if the film is called "007". Even "Only a number" would be a better title.

    That would look weird:

    ALBERT R BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS

    PRESENT

    DANIEL CRAIG AS

    IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007

    IN

    007

    Yep, that too. Weird as hell. Just please, EON, use the little grey cells and give us some juicy pulp Fleming worthy title. Take your time, if you have to.

    Right?

    Exactly. I am now concerned we really are getting a crummy title for B25.

    I'd take A REASON TO DIE over 007.

    Me too. Definitely. Even the bloody Eclipse crap.

    007 would remind me of the lackluster title that was JASON BOURNE. Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away.

    Again, me too. Didn't even see it. And I have the Bourne trilogy. A title matters, no matter how many times I see a fan here say it doesn't. It really does. As a novel writer, I find it an idiosyncrasy to believe a title doesn't relate directly to the quality of the piece.

    'Honestly I skipped that film because the title was so trite it turned me away'
    C'mon, man) It's just silly to not watch a film because of title)

    That's not what he said.

    Thank you. I didn't see it because of a miriade of reasons. Still, a title is very important.
  • Posts: 16,148
    titles ... just my opinion, of course:

    Spectre was lazy. 007 would be lazy.
    And I just don't like it.
    Swan Song is simply annoying to me.
    Didn't like A Reason To Die either. Awful.

    So I'm still going with: MeToo (with or without the hashtag) ;)

    For me the bottom like is: this film is following the series' second longest hiatus. If the title is announced as 007, that leads me to believe Eon really couldn't come up with anything at all for this film regarding a title. If the title is that weak, to me that also implies after nearly 5 years they possibly haven't come up with anything substantial regarding the rest of the film itself.

    So far there has been very little that's got my heart pumping for this entry. The press conference was so-so, the choice of composer gave me doubts, and the lack of a title this late in the game I find worrying.

    What I do like so far is the Jamaica location, Malek's casting and Leiter's return.
    The one minute video clip we got awhile back showed some interesting colors and a potential for beautiful cinematography. Even as I'm typing this I feel I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something exciting regarding this film.

    Hopefully the trailer changes all that.



  • Posts: 787
    I've said it before, and I'll say it again: let Harris be MP for as long as she likes, and double her salary in exchange for taking on the lion's share of media. That woman always sounds positive about the films and excited about the work - especially compared with damned near everyone else on the projects lately.

    She's an outstanding ambassador for Bond.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited July 2019 Posts: 4,343
    I'm looking so forward to Lashana Lynch absolutely stealing Bond 25 - she's destined to be the breakout star of this film. Not just because she's the 'diversity' pick, but because she's a terrific actress and a great actress.

    Based on what? She just did Cap Marvel and she was fine in it. Quite good, actually. But there's no proof she's gonna steal the show from such a great actor as Craig. But yes, I'm confident she will do a great job. The fact that she's not that kind of objectively stunning beauty like tons of Bond actress of the past is a good thing. For a role like this we don't need another Richards or Bach kind of """actress""".

    Hopefully we are close to a teaser/poster/title reveal. Matera is the perfect spot to reveal something, given also all the press coverage perspectives.

    Plus, titles are a capital thing in Bond movies. If the title will be "007" I would be extremely pissed by the lack of creativity behind it. Such creative people at work, the genius PWB polishing, and they come up with "007"? Better "A Reason to Die" or "Shatterhand" at this point.
  • Posts: 152
    octofinger wrote: »
    I've said it before, and I'll say it again: let Harris be MP for as long as she likes, and double her salary in exchange for taking on the lion's share of media. That woman always sounds positive about the films and excited about the work - especially compared with damned near everyone else on the projects lately.

    She's an outstanding ambassador for Bond.

    Yes she is, 100%
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Oh I'm plenty psyched still for Bond 25. With that director and cinematographer, especially. I just cannot get worked up over a title really.

    I want Naomie has Moneypenny for years to come. She's great.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,603
    echo wrote: »
    Pavlo wrote: »

    Interesting that Ana has only one project to shoot next. It's about M. Monroe and I doubt that she has to be bold for it. Her only project in the process of making is B25 and maybe she did this with her hair for Bond.

    Could be a bald cap.

    Could be wearing a wig in the film.

    Could be Nena Blofeld.[/quote]

    Boy, For Special Services, would be a book I would like to see adapted. I would like to work on it myself!
Sign In or Register to comment.