No Time to Die production thread

18078088108128131208

Comments

  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    It would be very interesting to get honest reactions from Connery, Lazenby, Moore(in Spirit), Dalton & Brosnan on what they think about Bond Dying & Being a Father.....even if the film comes out good, which I can't see at the moment, coz the concept doesn't do it Justice on paper....hope it ignites the screen though.
  • Posts: 4,408
    "I've always accepted death as the likely end to my profession."
    "You have a daughter now, James. You have no time to die anymore."

    I kinda love this dialogue...I hope something like this appears in the film.

    CONS

    Personally, I'm in two minds about Mathilde. On one side it feels a little soap-opera-esque. In fact it feels like a very Sam Mendes move. After all SF was about 'mothers', SP was about 'fathers', and it would make sense for that trilogy to end on the 'children.' You can make a strong argument this type of stuff doesn't belong in a traditional Bond film. But do we really want to see Bond save a child? I'm most fearful that this ending will just give way to platitudes and false emotion.

    Also, what will the character of Mathilde be like? Precocious? Shy? I have zero idea what the personality of a 5 year-old is like. We aren't gonna have to watch some plucky kid save the day by pressing a button or something whilst her parents are in danger...

    Essentially, there is a lot of room for such a storyline to go wrong.


    PROS

    But I'm not against it either. In fact, there are a lot of interesting dramatic possibilities. For one thing, it gives Lea Seydoux more to do. Another is that Daniel Craig will get to perform scenes as Bond we have never seen him in before. There is always a fear in Bond that the actors are essentially being forced to do the same scenes over again.

    Plus, I think it's kinda funny and subversive having the Bond girl from a previous film turn up with child. It's not like Bond is a champion for monogamy. So this situation was bound to happen to him eventually...

    Fukunaga also has a lot of experience working with child actors. All his projects deal with childhood trauma to some extent. So he is a very good pair of hands for this type of storyline, so I have faith he knows what he's doing.

    Nonetheless, like I said this story gives both Seydoux and Craig more meat to chew on. Which is no bad thing....

    lea-seydoux-and-daniel-craig-1445895098-view-0.jpg

    Think it'll either work well or well be terrible - it'll all be in the execution - those lines have given me hope that it might just actually work. Just hope the 'secrets' in the PTS isn't just that Maddy is pregnant!

    Thanks.

    I don't think her 'secret' is that she is pregnant. Clearly her secret is connected to Safin....I also think there will be a thematic through-line with Madeleine as the film opens with her as a young girl. Hence why it could be emotionally resonate for it to end with her grown up with her daughter.....I think Madeleine is very much the lead of this story.

    @GadgetMan - I actually think a few names on that list wouldn't care. However, a number of those actors will probably be desperately jealous of the material Craig gets. He get's to do a lot with the character. You don't associate Bond with as much range as they give Craig.

    Also, it's kinda strange that so many years since CR that we now have the inclination that Mr White is actually the grandfather to Bond's child. We all knew he'd be important going forward. But not this significant a character.

    Mr._White_during_the_meeting.png?ssl=1
  • Posts: 31
    Also, it's kinda strange that so many years since CR that we now have the inclination that Mr White is actually the grandfather to Bond's child. We all knew he'd be important going forward. But not this significant a character.

    If the supposition are true, (but we don t know)
    ( Is the child the son of bond and Madeleine )??or what..?
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,582
    Bond may be a father. But let's pump the brakes on this notion that he is going to die. If there is one theme that has stretched across DC's four films, it is that life and death are not always on opposite ends of the spectrum.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    TripAces wrote: »
    Bond may be a father. But let's pump the brakes on this notion that he is going to die. If there is one theme that has stretched across DC's four films, it is that life and death are not always on opposite ends of the spectrum.

    This is a good point. The father thing is not exactly something I would have advocated for but it is certainly interesting.

    Bond dying - without ambiguity - on the other hand, isn't. I'll be disappointed if they do but I remain unconvinced by the arguments put forward to the extent that I don't think it's going to happen. I believe the approach towards death that has been established by the previous films will be continued.
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Whether people like it or not society has moved on and the A to B travelogues with tick the box antics are long gone.

    SF whether you liked it or not changed the pieces on the board and they aren't going back anytime soon.

    I think it is incredibly ballsy to dig in on the ideas of a very divisive film to not just the fan base (I hate it personally) then pull out of it which to my eyes and what I'm seeing is something exciting, compelling and is going to be one emotional roller coaster ride.

    Bond needs to appeal to a wide selection of people not just us fans and if it means riling some of you or getting some of you to bail, well I'm afraid there is going to be some casualties along the way.

    This is now looking like a definitive full stop but don't think for one minute the ideas and concepts introduced in this era are going to disappear and it will go back to Bond goes on a mission because although some fans just want this, the wider demographic will get board of it and making Bond more human has proven a huge success.

    It's interesting to note where Bond once was and where it has gotten. In the past, long before the internet, Bond was meant as an escape. Bond captured raw locations that people dreamed of like Italy, Switzerland, etc. There's no real special quality of Bond being a travelogue anymore. You can go on YouTube and see a million vlogs of people living wherever in the world. You can google pictures of any place. Sure, it doesn't beat BEING there, but I'm sure audiences don't have the same sense of wonder they used to.

    Point is Bond can't rely on the qualities of the past, and must evolve to survive.
  • Posts: 623
    How about....
    The kid isn't Bond's, it's Madeleine's kid but it was conceived during the time she was captured at the end of SPECTRE, and the father is ... Brofeld!

  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Yes Bond has to evolve, and it has. The problem is that they have made a sequel to a film not many people liked, have expanded all the elements that caused the problems with it in the first place, and on top of it all have taken five years to do so. These issues are the direct result of SP and the baffling decision to continue its story threads over. Had they not done, so, none of these questions about relevance would have been an issue.

    None of these problems existed after SF.

    And I simply do no buy the notion that Bond has to have a family or surrogate family running around with him to stay 'relevant'. The creative decisions they are going with here are brave, I agree. But brave doesn't mean sensible. What they are doing here is the equivalent of Bond going back into space in FYEO, or his invisible car sprouting wings in a Brosnan starring Casino Royale.
  • Posts: 17,740
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Whether people like it or not society has moved on and the A to B travelogues with tick the box antics are long gone.

    Unfortunately…
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,970
    The most frustrating thing for me was that what the end of Skyfall promised was not what we got with Spectre.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The most frustrating thing for me was that what the end of Skyfall promised was not what we got with Spectre.

    How did it all come to this?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The most frustrating thing for me was that what the end of Skyfall promised was not what we got with Spectre.

    How did it all come to this?
    Commitment to tying up loose ends unfortunately.

    I just think Skyfall's ending promised us a "return-to-form". Now to me that doesn't mean a James Bond with no character development, interesting backstory or adventures, but it does mean leaning towards a more adventurous set of films that have their own stories; like Skyfall actually did before they decided to tie everything together in the next film...

    ...and this still could've been achieved while bringing SPECTRE back because you don't have to have it be connected to Quantum. By not bothering with that connection, you'd have got a lot more creative freedom and they wouldn't have written themselves into so many corners.

    Now, don't get me wrong I think No Time to Die is gonna be great, but I do think its drawbacks (if it ends up having any) will be its reliance on the continuity - based on what we've seen.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited June 2020 Posts: 6,275
    If it is true that
    Bond has a child with Madeleine, it is possible that they're once again using the title sequence as a time jump for the child to age up, much as the time jumps that allowed Graves to transform in DAD, and Trevelyan to implement his plan in GE.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,970
    @echo I think it was Naomie Harris during the announcement interviews who said that the film's main story is set five years later, with the Matera sequences taking place shortly after the events of Spectre I believe, so yes.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,582
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The most frustrating thing for me was that what the end of Skyfall promised was not what we got with Spectre.

    How did it all come to this?
    Commitment to tying up loose ends unfortunately.

    I just think Skyfall's ending promised us a "return-to-form". Now to me that doesn't mean a James Bond with no character development or interesting backstories, but it does mean leaning towards a more adventurous set of films that have their own stories; like Skyfall actually did before it decided to tie everything together in the next film...

    ...and this still could've been achieved while bringing SPECTRE back because you don't have to have it be connected to Quantum. By not bothering with that connection, you got a lot more creative freedom and they wouldn't have written themselves into so many corners.

    Now, don't get me wrong I think No Time to Die is gonna be great, but I do think it's drawbacks (if any) based on what we've seen will be its reliance on the continuity.

    I agree. I don't think EON and Mendes needed to connect SP with SF (and, in effect, the other two films). Instead, NTTD acts best as a direct sequel to SP, with those two films being tandem, like CR and QoS. This would have created a terrific dynamic: CR --> QoS / SF (standalone, dividing line, transiition to new M) / SP --> NTTD.

  • edited June 2020 Posts: 31
    scene #235: "Nomi pilots Madeleine and Mathilde to safety with island in the background."

    Scene #199: INT ASH's DEFENDER - "Ash coordinating the pursuit of Bond"
    Scene #201: EXT DEAD TREE, FOGGY FOREST - "Bond sees a hiding place" (Bond, Mathilde)
    Scene #235: EXT RIB - "Nomi pilots Madeleine and Mathilde to safety with island in the background"
    Scene #243: EXT NEARBY ISLAND - Coverage and wide shot (Madeleine, Nomi, Mathilde)
    Scene #253: INT VANTAGE, MATERA - "Madeleine is going to tell Mathilde a story, they drive into a tunnel"

    Playing Mathilde is child actress Lisa-Dorah Sonnet

    i have two version
    1) bond at the end apparently dies

    2) while bond go fight safin, nomi and madelene take care of mathilde
    at the end reveals (while driving into tunnel) tha bond is her father
    even bond doesn t know that mathilde is her child (only madeleine knows...)
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Oh well the spoiler thing really is all over the place. I myself am not bothered about seeing them really, but this has been pitched as a minor spoilers page... either spoilers tags or change the title right?
  • LFSLFS
    edited June 2020 Posts: 40
    This movie is going to be terrible. I'm stating it here and I will be proven correctly. Daniel Craig will end up having been the longest-serving Bond and he will leave completely underused. He had so much potential!

    Casino Royale is great (despite the butchered ending), but after that nothing works for me. Everyone loves Skyfall, and so did I - at the cinema. I was blown away by its LOOKS. I got to realize that I don't like the substance. Spectre is catastrophic on every level and I don't see how this one now could possible be any good.

    They are on a route that they can't get off of anymore. That's the problem when you "connect" every story with the next and the previous one... Fleming didn't do that.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,205
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Oh well the spoiler thing really is all over the place. I myself am not bothered about seeing them really, but this has been pitched as a minor spoilers page... either spoilers tags or change the title right?

    Agreed. We said this on the last page too. The cat is out of the bag now. A title change is necessary.
  • Posts: 440
    99% chance the movie's final moment is a strong hint that Bond might still be alive after all followed by a cut to the "James Bond Will Return" card. Calling it now.
  • Posts: 31
    99% chance the movie's final moment is a strong hint that Bond might still be alive after all followed by a cut to the "James Bond Will Return" card. Calling it now.
    as we ve already seen in previous movie?

    i dont know , this time it might be something different, because it s last craig movie...
  • jabalijabali Los Angeles
    Posts: 43
    For what it’s worth, the call sheet listings have been taken down from eBay. They appear on the seller’s profile, but if you click on them, it says they’ve been removed. If you needed any convincing...
  • Posts: 31
    this is my version
    scene #235: "Nomi pilots Madeleine and Mathilde to safety with island in the background."

    Scene #199: INT ASH's DEFENDER - "Ash coordinating the pursuit of Bond"
    Scene #201: EXT DEAD TREE, FOGGY FOREST - "Bond sees a hiding place" (Bond, Mathilde)
    Scene #235: EXT RIB - "Nomi pilots Madeleine and Mathilde to safety with island in the background"
    Scene #243: EXT NEARBY ISLAND - Coverage and wide shot (Madeleine, Nomi, Mathilde)
    Scene #253: INT VANTAGE, MATERA - "Madeleine is going to tell Mathilde a story, they drive into a tunnel"

    Playing Mathilde is child actress Lisa-Dorah Sonnet

    i have two version
    1) bond at the end apparently dies

    2) while bond go fight safin, nomi and madelene take care of mathilde
    at the end reveals (while driving into tunnel) tha bond is her father
    even bond doesn t know that mathilde is her child (only madeleine knows...)
  • Posts: 859
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Oh well the spoiler thing really is all over the place. I myself am not bothered about seeing them really, but this has been pitched as a minor spoilers page... either spoilers tags or change the title right?

    But in other hand, the first post say "allowing people to share all relevant filming news about B25, without having to worry about spoiler tags". But yeah, the title should be changed.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited June 2020 Posts: 4,247
    Had EON set out right from CR to serialize all of Craig's films, they wouldn't have written themselves into problems. Everything looks too Contrived to be honest. At least if we heard Silva, Madeleine or Blofeld's name in CR, it would have been more believable. Had another Director Directed SP, it would have had a different narrative entirely....and NTTD would have been another fresh Bond Entry.

    I think it's fair to say SP is the instigator of the problems in Craig's Era, because it went back and made Le Chiffre, Greene & Silva SPECTRE agents out of nothing and made Mr. White Madeleine's father.....It's amazing how a single film can create problems for other quality films.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited June 2020 Posts: 7,546
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The most frustrating thing for me was that what the end of Skyfall promised was not what we got with Spectre.

    How did it all come to this?

    It’s because of the timing of EON winning the rights of Spectre and Blofeld back. They thought they could use Blofeld, and be clever by weaving him in to Craig's previous films, and his personal history.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Another possible theory
    That child could be daughter of that scientist, as bond failed to save him, he will now raise her as his daughter.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The most frustrating thing for me was that what the end of Skyfall promised was not what we got with Spectre.

    How did it all come to this?

    It’s because of the timing of EON winning the rights of Spectre and Blofeld back.

    I know that. The organisation of Spectre and Blofeld isn't the problem. The plot of SP isn't even the problem. There's mention of tying up loose narrative threads, but there weren't any. Yes, it is implied he retires at the end, but it could just have been annual leave. Had he come back as normal in NTTD without Madeline it wouldn't have been a problem. No more so than us wondering how he got down from space in MR or how he got back to dry land after the end of DN.

    The whole plot sounds like bad fan fiction or something that John Gardner would have wrote in one of his later novels.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Had EON set out right from CR to serialize all of Craig's films, they wouldn't have written themselves into problems. Everything looks too Contrived to be honest. At least if we heard Silva, Madeleine or Blofeld's name in CR, it would have been more believable. Had another Director Directed SP, it would have had a different narrative entirely....and NTTD would have been another fresh Bond Entry.

    I think it's fair to say SP is the instigator of the problems in Craig's Era, because it went back and made Le Chiffre, Greene & Silva SPECTRE agents out of nothing and made Mr. White Madeleine's father.....It's amazing how a single film can create problems for other quality films.

    I have no problem with them going back to what was established in CR & QOS, though SF should have remained standalone.

    It is the way they did it, hamfisted and contrived, there is plenty in those first 2 films to do something interesting and within the universe we are in believable but they slung together a piss poor idea of Bond and ESB being connected as far as Bond's childhood.

    They could have done the connecting to the first 2 films and introduced ESB. I don't mind personal but SF should have been it.

    Though and I know some of you think that Craig should have bailed and this should have been the beginning of new era but it is what it is and he didn't.

    The idea that each film could now be separate was gone so yes they could have ended DC's era on a standalone but I don't think that would have lured him back. There was unfinished business and I think they wanted to make the last film more valid than it currently appears.

    Just a thought.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,546
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The most frustrating thing for me was that what the end of Skyfall promised was not what we got with Spectre.

    How did it all come to this?

    It’s because of the timing of EON winning the rights of Spectre and Blofeld back.

    I know that. The organisation of Spectre and Blofeld isn't the problem. The plot of SP isn't even the problem. There's mention of tying up loose narrative threads, but there weren't any. Yes, it is implied he retires at the end, but it could just have been annual leave. Had he come back as normal in NTTD without Madeline it wouldn't have been a problem. No more so than us wondering how he got down from space in MR or how he got back to dry land after the end of DN.

    The whole plot sounds like bad fan fiction or something that John Gardner would have wrote in one of his later novels.

    It's true, there were basically no loose ends that needed tying up at the end of Spectre.
    Spectre was meant to be Craig's sendoff, but he wasn't happy with it, I'm guessing most behind the scenes weren't, given how it played out, so now they're making a second sendoff film for Craig. Who knows, if this one tanks, maybe they'll do a third!
Sign In or Register to comment.