No Time to Die production thread

18008018038058061208

Comments

  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    edited June 2020 Posts: 737
    Yeah, I think Calvin was a bit confused about whether it the video was meant to be tongue in cheek anyway, like when the guy refers to the 'perfect chronology' of his new ordering.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    edited June 2020 Posts: 280
    Yeah, I think Calvin was a bit confused about whether it the video was meant to be tongue in cheek anyway, like when the guy refers to the 'perfect chronology' of his new ordering.
    The fact that his voice and tone stayed exactly the same throughout didn't help the differentiating...
  • Posts: 4,409
    antovolk wrote: »
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Personally, I really really want them to kill James Bond. I just think the gesture would speak volumes.

    How would you approach the next movie then though. Just think of him as a different person?
    Or would he be the same character, but in a time before his death?
    Or would it be like an alternate universe, like they'd have in sci-fi?
    Or perhaps it wouldn't matter at all, and they can presumably kill him off again, and again.

    Casino Royale and the whole Craig era is already an alternate universe though.

    Are people still genuinely believing that it's some sort of prequel to all the other films or...?

    "We're not expected to believe it was the previous Bond, just a different one. But it's the same person. But it isn't." - fans of Batman, Superman, Spider-Man etc have become used to that very principle, in comics and in films. Different interpretations of the same iconic character. Why couldn't this same principle apply to Bond?

    +1

    This picture has a whole new context....that awkward moment when you find out you are the father

    EZqAmDLXkAELaI3?format=png&name=small

    giphy.gif
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Then again Noamie Harris did say they are really going to shock people.....I don't think you necessarily need to shock to impress. Maybe EON might be thinking the Craig Bond films with tragic endings(CR & SF) have been the critically successfully ones, and want another tragic ending....I personally don't see a genuine reason to kill Craig's Bond, other than wanting an OSCAR win to reward Craig for his stalwart performances since CR.....I think for the first time, I really want the GUNBARREL at the film's end, just to signify, even if it's the slightest, that Bond's death is a sort of Hoax.....I just can't stand the notion of James Bond dying.

    I don't either. And I can't think of a reason for them to do it. The more likely scenario is that Bond and Madeleine part ways, for her safety and for the daughter's. This is where both of their pasts lead them to a decision that is best for the child.
  • Posts: 4,617
    Sorry, I'm behind the curve with this so I apologise. Are we talking about Bond being there for the first five years (nappies, burping, warming the milk, etc etc) or a girl appearing after five years "I am your father" Either option is a big stretch for me.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    edited June 2020 Posts: 1,033
    Is it possible these leaked call sheets are a plant to throw us off? I mean how does something like this end up on eBay? Seems highly suspicious given that everyone was “sworn to secrecy” — and now someone just decides “I wonder how much I can get on eBay for these plot spoilers?”

    That, combined with the report of different endings, makes me believe we should take this with a grain of salt. Also, the timing - during a pandemic lockdown - couldn’t be better to intentionally spread misinformation.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,415
    Denbigh wrote: »
    But I don’t think she is meant to be the same M @shamanimal, just the same actress. If you’ve got Judi, you don’t get rid of Judi. Rebooted timeline or not haha, but I do think her M could be seen as characterised differently to the one before; having a more maternal relationship with 007.

    Yeah, she even dresses much vampier in Casino Royale than the Brosnan-M did (and drinks way less!). She doesn't seem quite the same character to me.
    Agent_One wrote: »
    According the GE script, Brosnan!Dench is named Barbara Mawdsley.

    Are you sure that's right? I thought Raymond Benson made that up for his books. It's a clunky name somehow.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    TripAces wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Then again Noamie Harris did say they are really going to shock people.....I don't think you necessarily need to shock to impress. Maybe EON might be thinking the Craig Bond films with tragic endings(CR & SF) have been the critically successfully ones, and want another tragic ending....I personally don't see a genuine reason to kill Craig's Bond, other than wanting an OSCAR win to reward Craig for his stalwart performances since CR.....I think for the first time, I really want the GUNBARREL at the film's end, just to signify, even if it's the slightest, that Bond's death is a sort of Hoax.....I just can't stand the notion of James Bond dying.

    I don't either. And I can't think of a reason for them to do it. The more likely scenario is that Bond and Madeleine part ways, for her safety and for the daughter's. This is where both of their pasts lead them to a decision that is best for the child.

    Yeah, it sounds too peculiar for a James Bond plot. Well, we'll see how it pans out....it doesn't sound thrilling at the moment....but then again, execution is everything, we just hope EON gets it right come November.
  • Posts: 833
    peter wrote: »
    no matter what happens in NTTD, you won't see Bond living a domesticated life with Maddy, putting up shelves and taking out the bins. That's just hyperbole and silliness.

    To be clear, I'd still happily pay to see that film though. ;)
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 3,164
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    My assumption @shamanimal if they were to kill him in No Time to Die is that they'll just reboot it again, which I should stress once again, doesn't mean an origin story for Bond 26.

    It just means there's no continuity with these films, which the next film should be, because you can't cast a younger actor with that continuity.

    So they could re-boot with every new actor, and he could die at the end of some of the runs, but that's okay, because when they re-boot, they start with a new... erm, James Bond.
    We're not expected to believe it was the previous Bond, just a different one. But it's the same person. But it isn't.
    Denbigh wrote: »
    But I don’t think she is meant to be the same M @shamanimal, just the same actress. If you’ve got Judi, you don’t get rid of Judi. Rebooted timeline or not haha, but I do think her M could be seen as characterised differently to the one before; having a more maternal relationship with 007.

    Weren't the Brosnan-era M and the Craig-era M confirmed to have different real names too? Barbara Mawdsley and Olivia Mansfield respectively. So effectively, different characters?

    Anyway yes, ultimately it's alternate timelines, but don't expect Bond to go all Star Trek any time soon and have the next guy reunite with Craig or Brosnan etc...that's when it becomes too out there even for my liking. It all comes back to the same principle of different interpretations of the same character.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    antovolk wrote: »
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    My assumption @shamanimal if they were to kill him in No Time to Die is that they'll just reboot it again, which I should stress once again, doesn't mean an origin story for Bond 26.

    It just means there's no continuity with these films, which the next film should be, because you can't cast a younger actor with that continuity.

    So they could re-boot with every new actor, and he could die at the end of some of the runs, but that's okay, because when they re-boot, they start with a new... erm, James Bond.
    We're not expected to believe it was the previous Bond, just a different one. But it's the same person. But it isn't.
    Denbigh wrote: »
    But I don’t think she is meant to be the same M @shamanimal, just the same actress. If you’ve got Judi, you don’t get rid of Judi. Rebooted timeline or not haha, but I do think her M could be seen as characterised differently to the one before; having a more maternal relationship with 007.

    Weren't the Brosnan-era M and the Craig-era M confirmed to have different real names too? Barbara Mawdsley and Olivia Mansfield respectively. So effectively, different characters?

    Anyway yes, ultimately it's alternate timelines, but don't expect Bond to go all Star Trek any time soon and have the next guy reunite with Craig or Brosnan etc...that's when it becomes too out there even for my liking. It all comes back to the same principle of different interpretations of the same character.
    100% @antovolk, and yeah, someone reminded me of the names :)
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    I don't mind Craig's era ending with him heading towards domestic bliss, but we don't have to, and won't see it. Think about it, no doubt Bond does countless mundane things that we all do; He gets his hair cut, goes to the dentist, shops for groceries, waits for the plumber to arrive; we just don't see it.

    Also, I've always seen Connery, Lazenby and Moore as the same Bond, Dalton and Brosnan as the same and Craig as the next.
    Yes there are inconsistencies but I base this on two things; the ages of the actors and the fact that every Bond film takes place in the present day of when they were filmed and released.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    antovolk wrote: »
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Personally, I really really want them to kill James Bond. I just think the gesture would speak volumes.

    How would you approach the next movie then though. Just think of him as a different person?
    Or would he be the same character, but in a time before his death?
    Or would it be like an alternate universe, like they'd have in sci-fi?
    Or perhaps it wouldn't matter at all, and they can presumably kill him off again, and again.

    Casino Royale and the whole Craig era is already an alternate universe though.

    Are people still genuinely believing that it's some sort of prequel to all the other films or...?

    "We're not expected to believe it was the previous Bond, just a different one. But it's the same person. But it isn't." - fans of Batman, Superman, Spider-Man etc have become used to that very principle, in comics and in films. Different interpretations of the same iconic character. Why couldn't this same principle apply to Bond?

    +1

    This picture has a whole new context....that awkward moment when you find out you are the father.

    Except they’re talking about something else. “What is it?” - “You don’t know what it is?”.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Just when my anticipation for NTTD couldn't get any lower. It's dead and buried.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    matt_u wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Personally, I really really want them to kill James Bond. I just think the gesture would speak volumes.

    How would you approach the next movie then though. Just think of him as a different person?
    Or would he be the same character, but in a time before his death?
    Or would it be like an alternate universe, like they'd have in sci-fi?
    Or perhaps it wouldn't matter at all, and they can presumably kill him off again, and again.

    Casino Royale and the whole Craig era is already an alternate universe though.

    Are people still genuinely believing that it's some sort of prequel to all the other films or...?

    "We're not expected to believe it was the previous Bond, just a different one. But it's the same person. But it isn't." - fans of Batman, Superman, Spider-Man etc have become used to that very principle, in comics and in films. Different interpretations of the same iconic character. Why couldn't this same principle apply to Bond?

    +1

    This picture has a whole new context....that awkward moment when you find out you are the father.

    Except they’re talking about something else. “What is it?” - “You don’t know what it is?”.

    Unless "it" is a child.
  • Posts: 625
    shamanimal wrote: »
    You can't just go "ah, good another Bond film, so I'll ignore the last one".

    Yes, you can.
    That's how Bondfilms are meant to be seen from the beginning.
    90% of the audience in a movie theatre has no clue what happened in any other Bond film.
  • Posts: 623
    Jan1985 wrote: »
    shamanimal wrote: »
    That's how Bondfilms are meant to be seen from the beginning.
    90% of the audience in a movie theatre has no clue what happened in any other Bond film.

    Yea, you might be able to forget if he drove wore a Rolex or an Omega, but I think even the most superficial viewer might remember if the character was killed off at the end of the previous film.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,970
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Jan1985 wrote: »
    That's how Bond films are meant to be seen from the beginning. 90% of the audience in a movie theatre has no clue what happened in any other Bond film.
    Yea, you might be able to forget if he drove wore a Rolex or an Omega, but I think even the most superficial viewer might remember if the character was killed off at the end of the previous film.
    But @shamanimal, most movie goers would understand that it would be a new reboot and new version of the character, naturally and also because the marketing has made them aware of that change.
  • I've got mixed feelings if these new 'leaks' are true. But, I'll wait until I see the film before judging the idea of .. Bond's daughter and/or, his death. X_X
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 628
    talos7 wrote: »
    Also, I've always seen Connery, Lazenby and Moore as the same Bond, Dalton and Brosnan as the same and Craig as the next.
    Yes there are inconsistencies but I base this on two things; the ages of the actors and the fact that every Bond film takes place in the present day of when they were filmed and released.

    How weird -- I do almost the same thing! The only difference is, I separate Connery's Bond from the two that followed, mostly because I have a much easier time seeing DAF as a direct sequel to YOLT (and not OHMSS).
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 623
    I don't think there's any contradictions in the chronology that would jar as much as killing him off. You could change actors, change his car, his hair, even change his race, but none of them would be such a 'f*ck you' to the series as killing him and resurrecting him in a Star Trek style alternate Bondverse.
    See, I don't think they'd even go there, but from things people are saying on here, it looks like people here think they would, most baffling of all, you wouldn't mind!
    It's not Toho studios and Godzilla we're talking about here.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,970
    I don't think you're really listening to anyone's explanations and replies. I get you don't like the idea of killing him. That you grasped easily, but your comments regarding the series' supposed inability to be able to reboot the series if they did kill him, and your supposed idea that it would somehow ruin the franchise, is lost on me.

    Resurrection is not a term that makes sense in what we're talking about - it's a reboot. New person, new timeline. You understood that so why are you rolling with this weird resurrection thing? What was Daniel Craig if this next Bond reboot would be a resurrection? And don't say it's cause Brosnan didn't die because no he didn't, but whether he did or not had no effect on the reboot.
  • Posts: 623
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Resurrection is not a term that makes sense in what we're talking about - it's a reboot. New person, new timeline. You understood that so why are you rolling with this weird resurrection thing? What was Daniel Craig if this next Bond reboot would be a resurrection?

    If he dies in a 2020 movie, and he's back in 2025, without any kind of Conan-Doyle style explanation of how he cheated death, then you can call it a 'reboot' all you like - I still call it daft.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,970
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Resurrection is not a term that makes sense in what we're talking about - it's a reboot. New person, new timeline. You understood that so why are you rolling with this weird resurrection thing? What was Daniel Craig if this next Bond reboot would be a resurrection?

    If he dies in a 2020 movie, and he's back in 2025, without any kind of Conan-Doyle style explanation of how he cheated death, then you can call it a 'reboot' all you like - I still call it daft.
    ...it's a different person. A different version of the character that makes more sense to whoever is playing the role, just as Craig was different from everyone else.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited June 2020 Posts: 4,585
    Not to derail the discussions too much, but...

    We're only five months away, now.

    giphy.gif

    I am feeling confident that we will see NTTD in theaters, on the new release date. Theaters might be limited to 60-70% capacity. And some chains (like AMC, here in the states) might be out of business, so tickets might be scarce and ticket prices might go up substantially.

    But the film is coming!
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    TripAces wrote: »
    giphy.gif
    giphy.gif
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    I have to remember to try to reserve any critical judgement regarding the plot of this movie. At the end of the day, I’m just happy we’re getting one last movie with Craig even if the plot absolutely sucks.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »
    I have to remember to try to reserve any critical judgement regarding the plot of this movie. At the end of the day, I’m just happy we’re getting one last movie with Craig even if the plot absolutely sucks.

    Given the talent on board (CJF and PWB), I'll be shocked if this film's plot is a stinker.

    I think we're in for a good time.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited June 2020 Posts: 7,551
    Murdock wrote: »
    Just when my anticipation for NTTD couldn't get any lower. It's dead and buried.

    Seriously? I don’t think anything could deplete my excitement for a new Bond film. They could cast a giraffe as Bond and I’d say “well let’s see where they’re going with this.” I’ll wait until after it’s out to decide if I dislike it.
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 17,756
    Wasn't a child's toy spotted whilst they were filming this scene in Norway? I can't find the photo online?

    71154930.jpg?imageId=71154930&x=0&y=7.461095890411&cropw=100&croph=80.684931506849&width=980&height=590

    It wasn't photographed anywhere I believe, but the quote from Dagbladet (the newspaper the photo above comes from) said:
    Dagbladet's pictures show that the "actors" in the cars that were filmed during the "James Bond" shoot this week have been marked with dots on their faces.

    In a Toyota Land Cruiser sits a "couple" with a child dummy in the back seat, the three appear to be a core family.
    In the Bond car, an Aston Martin V8 Vantage, sits a man in green jacket. Most likely they're all stand-ins for the film's more central actors, Dagbladet are told.

    Other photos featuring the same car (and "couple"):
    628628
    628
Sign In or Register to comment.