› › ›

No Time to Die production thread

1…790791793795796…1208

Comments

  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,870
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think Bond 26 might be Pinewood-Heavy, even if the pandemic isn't around(hopefully) anymore by then. Maybe Bond 27 would get back to the real-life globe-trotting.

    I was under the impression Disney had purchased Pinewood for the next several years and Eon was getting the boot.

    Eon should sell 007 to Disney............... problem solved.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    delfloria wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think Bond 26 might be Pinewood-Heavy, even if the pandemic isn't around(hopefully) anymore by then. Maybe Bond 27 would get back to the real-life globe-trotting.

    I was under the impression Disney had purchased Pinewood for the next several years and Eon was getting the boot.

    Eon should sell 007 to Disney............... problem solved.

    The real problem will begin after that.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    delfloria wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think Bond 26 might be Pinewood-Heavy, even if the pandemic isn't around(hopefully) anymore by then. Maybe Bond 27 would get back to the real-life globe-trotting.

    I was under the impression Disney had purchased Pinewood for the next several years and Eon was getting the boot.

    Eon should sell 007 to Disney............... problem solved.

    Better a world without 007 than a corporation like Disney owning 007.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Disney would ruin Bond like it did Star Wars. We'll probably have a Bond film every year then it's value would be lost....the wait(although not a lengthy one) is what makes Bond Valuable.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited May 2020 Posts: 5,970
    No matter what EON have kept it going and treat it with the respect it deserves because they're literally attached to the property by blood, so why would they sell it? And why would we want them to? Especially with Gregg ready and waiting.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Indeed, I bet Gregg is Wilson's Successor....and eagerly waiting to make his own mark on the franchise.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,022
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think Bond 26 might be Pinewood-Heavy, even if the pandemic isn't around(hopefully) anymore by then. Maybe Bond 27 would get back to the real-life globe-trotting.

    I was under the impression Disney had purchased Pinewood for the next several years and Eon was getting the boot.

    Yeah, true....I heard that before the pandemic, but maybe they could work something out or EON finds somewhere new.

    Maybe Eon could return to Leavesden or find another factory that could be converted to a film studio?
    Either way, B26 could be years from now. Disney's contract should be expired by then.

    Warner Brothers owns Leavesden studios (Harry Potter movies)
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,710
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Indeed, I bet Gregg is Wilson's Successor....and eagerly waiting to make his own mark on the franchise.

    I have it on good source that your bet is well placed.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,593
    I like to think Gregg continued on as a reporter in the franchise after DAD, and was that reporter again in Skyfall, and that he writes all the important articles that pop up in the films (The Guardians article about Bond in Mexico, for example). It would be cool if he started doing the cameos and he always popped up as a reporter.
  • Escalus5Escalus5
    edited May 2020 Posts: 628
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Disney would ruin Bond like it did Star Wars. We'll probably have a Bond film every year then it's value would be lost....the wait(although not a lengthy one) is what makes Bond Valuable.

    I disagree.

    Remember that the series started as an every year thing ('62-'65), then went to every other year and did generally well in the latter for decades. STAR WARS was never established with those short gaps, so trying to do an every year release eventually proved to be a disaster (with SOLO).

    Dragging these Bond movies out for ridiculous 4- and 5-year gaps only to deliver movies with subpar scripts is the height of idiocy. At least if these things came out regularly, and we got a terrible Bond movie, we'd have less than two years to wait until the next one.

    What would make the series really valuable are producers who can develop the material intelligently and also keep to a consistent release schedule. And yeah, I know, people will argue that the movies are too big to be produced every other year, but I've never believed that crap.
  • AKillToAViewAKillToAView
    Posts: 440
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think Bond 26 might be Pinewood-Heavy, even if the pandemic isn't around(hopefully) anymore by then. Maybe Bond 27 would get back to the real-life globe-trotting.

    I was under the impression Disney had purchased Pinewood for the next several years and Eon was getting the boot.

    Yeah, true....I heard that before the pandemic, but maybe they could work something out or EON finds somewhere new.

    Maybe Eon could return to Leavesden or find another factory that could be converted to a film studio?
    Either way, B26 could be years from now. Disney's contract should be expired by then.

    I believe the contract is set to last until 2030 so unless they decide to let EON rent, it could be quite some time before we get another Bond filmed at Pinewood.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,593
    Wasn't Leavesden an old Rolls Royce factory? Very cool, very Bond.
  • delfloriadelfloria
    edited May 2020 Posts: 1,870
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Disney would ruin Bond like it did Star Wars. We'll probably have a Bond film every year then it's value would be lost....the wait(although not a lengthy one) is what makes Bond Valuable.

    I disagree.

    Remember that the series started as an every year thing ('62-'65), then went to every other year and did generally well in the latter for decades. STAR WARS was never established with those short gaps, so trying to do an every year release eventually proved to be a disaster (with SOLO).

    Dragging these Bond movies out for ridiculous 4- and 5-year gaps only to deliver movies with subpar scripts is the height of idiocy. At least if these things came out regularly, and we got a terrible Bond movie, we'd have less than two years to wait until the next one.

    What would make the series really valuable are producers who can develop the material intelligently and also keep to a consistent release schedule. And yeah, I know, people will argue that the movies are too big to be produced every other year, but I've never believed that crap.

    Barbara and Michael are not Cubby and Harry, who were able to turn out classic Bonds every other year.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,918
    There's also no living in the 60s or 70s or 80s any longer.

    Note that Michael and Barbara did keep up the 2-year schedule in the 90s across 3 films.

    They also planned an impressive 18-month or so turn between 2006 Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace to try for a May 2008 release. Indicates they had that mindset to move forward with their bold direction taken.

    Then there are the writers' strikes. The studios. And the courts. Those are what set the current state, though it doesn't have to stay that way.

    And now they fortunately completed the latest film, but there is the pandemic. One possibility is it will focus them to get reestablished and move forward once again. Or they'll wait it out as necessary, to try another day.

  • moneyofpropre2moneyofpropre2 France
    edited May 2020 Posts: 859
    (BTW, little off-topic, but if one day one you of have have the chance to interview Mark Higgins, please ask him what was cut in the QOS 'Aston chase, how it was supposed to end, how Bond get ride of the third Alfa Romeo, why did they crash Aston on rock on puurpose ? Theses interrogation are on my head since 2008, that's make me crazy).
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Since 51/52% users on this community voted against NTTD being postponed because of COVID in the first place I’m not that surprised that a lot would love EoN selling to a big corporation like Disney too.
  • BonSimonLeBon_1BonSimonLeBon_1
    Posts: 2,436
    RichardTheBruce wrote: »
    There's also no living in the 60s or 70s or 80s any longer.

    Note that Michael and Barbara did keep up the 2-year schedule in the 90s across 3 films.

    They also planned an impressive 18-month or so turn between 2006 Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace to try for a May 2008 release. Indicates they had that mindset to move forward with their bold direction taken.

    Then there are the writers' strikes. The studios. And the courts. Those are what set the current state, though it doesn't have to stay that way.

    And now they fortunately completed the latest film, but there is the pandemic. One possibility is it will focus them to get reestablished and move forward once again. Or they'll wait it out as necessary, to try another day.

    In Peter Lamont's book The Man with the Golden Eye he reveals that there were thoughts of actually filming Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace back to back.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,602
    delfloria wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Disney would ruin Bond like it did Star Wars. We'll probably have a Bond film every year then it's value would be lost....the wait(although not a lengthy one) is what makes Bond Valuable.

    I disagree.

    Remember that the series started as an every year thing ('62-'65), then went to every other year and did generally well in the latter for decades. STAR WARS was never established with those short gaps, so trying to do an every year release eventually proved to be a disaster (with SOLO).

    Dragging these Bond movies out for ridiculous 4- and 5-year gaps only to deliver movies with subpar scripts is the height of idiocy. At least if these things came out regularly, and we got a terrible Bond movie, we'd have less than two years to wait until the next one.

    What would make the series really valuable are producers who can develop the material intelligently and also keep to a consistent release schedule. And yeah, I know, people will argue that the movies are too big to be produced every other year, but I've never believed that crap.

    Barbara and Michael are not Cubby and Harry, who were able to turn out classic Bonds every other year.

    They made films in 1995, 1997, 1999 (every other year), 2002, 2005, 2008. Not exactly massive gaps back then.
    moneyofpropre2 wrote: »
    (BTW, little off-topic, but if one day one you of have have the chance to interview Mark Higgins, please ask him what was cut in the QOS 'Aston chase, how it was supposed to end, how Bond get ride of the third Alfa Romeo, why did they crash Aston on rock on puurpose ? Theses interrogation are on my head since 2008, that's make me crazy).

    Yes I'd like to know that. I've always had a hunch that they intended Bond to try and be reaching for his machine gun on the floor and to flip the car onto two wheels briefly so it fell in his hands as they go around the JCB.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    matt_u wrote: »
    Since 51/52% users on this community voted against NTTD being postponed because of COVID in the first place I’m not that surprised that a lot would love EoN selling to a big corporation like Disney too.

    Not sure how the two are related and I don't remember any voting taking place on here.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    mtm wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Disney would ruin Bond like it did Star Wars. We'll probably have a Bond film every year then it's value would be lost....the wait(although not a lengthy one) is what makes Bond Valuable.

    I disagree.

    Remember that the series started as an every year thing ('62-'65), then went to every other year and did generally well in the latter for decades. STAR WARS was never established with those short gaps, so trying to do an every year release eventually proved to be a disaster (with SOLO).

    Dragging these Bond movies out for ridiculous 4- and 5-year gaps only to deliver movies with subpar scripts is the height of idiocy. At least if these things came out regularly, and we got a terrible Bond movie, we'd have less than two years to wait until the next one.

    What would make the series really valuable are producers who can develop the material intelligently and also keep to a consistent release schedule. And yeah, I know, people will argue that the movies are too big to be produced every other year, but I've never believed that crap.

    Barbara and Michael are not Cubby and Harry, who were able to turn out classic Bonds every other year.

    They made films in 1995, 1997, 1999 (every other year), 2002, 2005, 2008. Not exactly massive gaps back then.
    moneyofpropre2 wrote: »
    (BTW, little off-topic, but if one day one you of have have the chance to interview Mark Higgins, please ask him what was cut in the QOS 'Aston chase, how it was supposed to end, how Bond get ride of the third Alfa Romeo, why did they crash Aston on rock on puurpose ? Theses interrogation are on my head since 2008, that's make me crazy).

    Yes I'd like to know that. I've always had a hunch that they intended Bond to try and be reaching for his machine gun on the floor and to flip the car onto two wheels briefly so it fell in his hands as they go around the JCB.

    Qos' Car Chase, is already up there with the best Bond car chases....but having Bond perform a sort of wheelie in order to reach his gun would have further made my day, seeing Bond in such stylish awe.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    The Disney concept is absurd. Do you want a truly through and through woke PC bond film. I didn’t think so.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,602
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Disney would ruin Bond like it did Star Wars. We'll probably have a Bond film every year then it's value would be lost....the wait(although not a lengthy one) is what makes Bond Valuable.

    I disagree.

    Remember that the series started as an every year thing ('62-'65), then went to every other year and did generally well in the latter for decades. STAR WARS was never established with those short gaps, so trying to do an every year release eventually proved to be a disaster (with SOLO).

    Dragging these Bond movies out for ridiculous 4- and 5-year gaps only to deliver movies with subpar scripts is the height of idiocy. At least if these things came out regularly, and we got a terrible Bond movie, we'd have less than two years to wait until the next one.

    What would make the series really valuable are producers who can develop the material intelligently and also keep to a consistent release schedule. And yeah, I know, people will argue that the movies are too big to be produced every other year, but I've never believed that crap.

    Barbara and Michael are not Cubby and Harry, who were able to turn out classic Bonds every other year.

    They made films in 1995, 1997, 1999 (every other year), 2002, 2005, 2008. Not exactly massive gaps back then.
    moneyofpropre2 wrote: »
    (BTW, little off-topic, but if one day one you of have have the chance to interview Mark Higgins, please ask him what was cut in the QOS 'Aston chase, how it was supposed to end, how Bond get ride of the third Alfa Romeo, why did they crash Aston on rock on puurpose ? Theses interrogation are on my head since 2008, that's make me crazy).

    Yes I'd like to know that. I've always had a hunch that they intended Bond to try and be reaching for his machine gun on the floor and to flip the car onto two wheels briefly so it fell in his hands as they go around the JCB.

    Qos' Car Chase, is already up there with the best Bond car chases....but having Bond perform a sort of wheelie in order to reach his gun would have further made my day, seeing Bond in such stylish awe.

    Yeah it does seem in need of some kind of punchline to make it a Bond sequence, for him to do something clever, and that's just where it felt like the elements were leading when I watch that. I may well be wrong.

    As moneyofpropre2 says, there was clearly a lot more planned to that sequence than we saw on screen.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    mtm wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Disney would ruin Bond like it did Star Wars. We'll probably have a Bond film every year then it's value would be lost....the wait(although not a lengthy one) is what makes Bond Valuable.

    I disagree.

    Remember that the series started as an every year thing ('62-'65), then went to every other year and did generally well in the latter for decades. STAR WARS was never established with those short gaps, so trying to do an every year release eventually proved to be a disaster (with SOLO).

    Dragging these Bond movies out for ridiculous 4- and 5-year gaps only to deliver movies with subpar scripts is the height of idiocy. At least if these things came out regularly, and we got a terrible Bond movie, we'd have less than two years to wait until the next one.

    What would make the series really valuable are producers who can develop the material intelligently and also keep to a consistent release schedule. And yeah, I know, people will argue that the movies are too big to be produced every other year, but I've never believed that crap.

    Barbara and Michael are not Cubby and Harry, who were able to turn out classic Bonds every other year.

    They made films in 1995, 1997, 1999 (every other year), 2002, 2005, 2008. Not exactly massive gaps back then.
    moneyofpropre2 wrote: »
    (BTW, little off-topic, but if one day one you of have have the chance to interview Mark Higgins, please ask him what was cut in the QOS 'Aston chase, how it was supposed to end, how Bond get ride of the third Alfa Romeo, why did they crash Aston on rock on puurpose ? Theses interrogation are on my head since 2008, that's make me crazy).

    Yes I'd like to know that. I've always had a hunch that they intended Bond to try and be reaching for his machine gun on the floor and to flip the car onto two wheels briefly so it fell in his hands as they go around the JCB.

    Qos' Car Chase, is already up there with the best Bond car chases....but having Bond perform a sort of wheelie in order to reach his gun would have further made my day, seeing Bond in such stylish awe.

    Yeah it does seem in need of some kind of punchline to make it a Bond sequence, for him to do something clever, and that's just where it felt like the elements were leading when I watch that. I may well be wrong.

    As moneyofpropre2 says, there was clearly a lot more planned to that sequence than we saw on screen.

    Yeah, looks that way....or maybe they decided to make the Car chase more Visceral, considering it's Craig's Bond.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited May 2020 Posts: 4,343
    Walecs wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Since 51/52% users on this community voted against NTTD being postponed because of COVID in the first place I’m not that surprised that a lot would love EoN selling to a big corporation like Disney too.

    Not sure how the two are related and I don't remember any voting taking place on here.

    It happened. I voted (it was a yes, thankfully).

    The relation is simple: both are (pretty “controversial”) statements driven only by the frustration caused by the longer gaps we are facing in the Craig era.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,022
    Wohoo! I came across a golden nugget. Photo agency "Picture desk" hosting many unseen and unpublished set stills by Greg Williams. All stills are watermarked. I'm guessing we haven't seen 95% of them. And EON will probably release them later on as marketing in the fall and/or in a photobook.

    Two pages - 225 stills
    https://www.picturedesk.com/bild-disp/search/specialsLB.action?ts=1590426082946&data=eyJiciI6W10sInJiemlkIjoiTDIwMzkzMTMiLCJycyI6MSwicmJ6cGF0aCI6IlNwZWNpYWxzIiwibnJwIjoyMDAsInBuIjoxfQ&searchID=b56ae2fb-7c28-4796-8574-b5423bac61e4

    I have taken sceencaps of some of them.

    LgtSRwZ.jpg
    Cq578nj.jpg
    gXU4WZ2.jpg
    xj3L9rC.jpg
    eZGT3D0.jpg
    4lDZBXq.jpg
    7buwsBk.jpg
    uw6AFcb.jpg
    pXytnLW.jpg
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    Great catch as usual, @Contraband! Congratulations and thanks!
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,022
    ggl007 wrote: »
    Great catch as usual, @Contraband! Congratulations and thanks!

    Gracias
  • Pierce2DanielPierce2Daniel
    edited May 2020 Posts: 4,412
    Contraband wrote: »
    ggl007 wrote: »
    Great catch as usual, @Contraband! Congratulations and thanks!

    Gracias

    Crikey....these are amazing.

    Someone should save these asap. As I'm fearful that they'll get pulled.

    Also, I note that Dali Bensalah's character seems to loose his eye in Matera!

    I need these Ana De Armas photos in HQ!!!
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    Brilliant! Thanks @Contraband
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,022
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    ggl007 wrote: »
    Great catch as usual, @Contraband! Congratulations and thanks!

    Gracias

    Crikey....these are amazing.

    Someone should save these asap. As I'm fearful that they'll get pulled.

    Also, I note that Dali Bensalah's character seems to loose his eye in Matera!

    I have saved them all just for fun.

    Tip: Do a search like "Daniel Craig", then you get full version of a photo and some also in colour. Still watermarked though. On the other hand you can find many cool old with no watermark

    I would advise everyone not to republish all NTTD stills on blogs, forums, etc. I only uploaded some here as a teaser. I'm not gonna tweet or put them on instagram
Sign In or Register to comment.