SPECTRE Production Timeline

1125126128130131870

Comments

  • Posts: 15,231
    If the character Blofeld is written closely to the original one Fleming invented, then everyone would.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    boldfinger wrote:
    Which seems highly logical, considering that SF ended with Craig only just having got slightly acquainted with three new central characters.

    Yes, it does make logical sense. The key is not over working it. I'm hoping Mendes isn't too heavy handed, but I'd be a liar of I said I wasn't worried. This doesn't need to turn into an ensemble piece, there needs to be a very clear delineation between star and supporting cast. I just hope he doesn't jump on the bandwagon. He has to understand that another director will pick up the mantle at some point and it isn't necessary for him to dedicate too much time and energy to wrapping up their stories this time around, the focus should be Bond. I don't want to see MP shoe-horned into the narrative just to satisfy Mendes' lust for development. If he's keen to do that he should sign on for the rest of the Craig tenure and pace it.
  • Posts: 3,278
    RC7 wrote:
    I'd be a liar of I said I wasn't worried.

    +1

    Please, do not turn Bond 24 into another Sam Mendes-movie, like SF. Personally I'm not a Bond fan because of "character development." After three reboots the character should be developed by now. My problem is: the general audience love character development.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Zekidk wrote:

    +1

    Please, do not turn Bond 24 into another Sam Mendes-movie, like SF. Personally I'm not a Bond fan because of "character development." After three reboots the character should be developed by now. My problem is: the general audience love character development.

    I don't mind character development regards Bond. I think if it's tempered correctly and you can see his journey then I'm all for it. It's the peripheral characters I'm more worried about. At the end of the day, a film is very dependent on narrative. If I wanted a multi-strand character piece, I'd watch a TV show like The Wire. TV is primarily dependent on character, film is driven by narrative. Mendes needs to make a great stand alone story first and foremost, with neat character moments punctuating and driving that narrative.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 3,278
    My point is: the Bond character should be developed now. The reboot is completed. Please no more of this struggling with inner demons, going back and forth between Bond being weak and hurting and strong and hurting others. Just give me a Bond movie with lavish sets, great action set pieces, exotic locations, gadgets and a 007 who's a larger-than-life character.

  • edited May 2014 Posts: 5,767
    Ludovico wrote:
    If the character Blofeld is written closely to the original one Fleming invented, then everyone would.
    That´s what I´ve been saying all along: the character.

    Zekidk wrote:

    +1

    Please, do not turn Bond 24 into another Sam Mendes-movie, like SF. Personally I'm not a Bond fan because of "character development." After three reboots the character should be developed by now. My problem is: the general audience love character development.
    I think it´s more marketing than anything. If they made a solid old-fashioned Bond adventure and sold it right, I´m sure they´d cash in phenomenally.
  • Posts: 15,231
    My point is this character can easily be named Blofeld and nobody in the general public would associate him with the bald, scarred, cat stroking villain.
  • RC7RC7
    edited May 2014 Posts: 10,512
    Zekidk wrote:
    My point is: the Bond character should be developed now. The reboot is completed. Please no more of this struggling with inner demons, going back and forth between Bond being weak and hurting and strong and hurting others. Just give me a Bond movie with lavish sets, great action set pieces, exotic locations, gadgets and a 007 who's a larger-than-life character.

    Fair enough.

    From a wider perspective, character doesn't stop developing. You, I, or anyone on this forum develops, adapts, progresses, based on our surroundings, our interactions, socially, politically etc. Bond shouldn't be any different. The Fleming Bond delivered much in the way of character and the development of that character. It seems like the obvious way to inject a freshness into the franchise, without having to rely solely on the numerous tropes that came to define the cinematic incarnation. I want Adam-style sets, great set pieces, exotic locations etc, but I'm also happy for them to allude to Bond's mental/physical state, his attitude towards his job, his employers, the world he exists in. It was ever-present in the novels and, if it's handled correctly, can feed neatly into the films without hampering the narrative.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 11,425
    RC7 wrote:

    I don't mind character development regards Bond. I think if it's tempered correctly and you can see his journey then I'm all for it. It's the peripheral characters I'm more worried about. At the end of the day, a film is very dependent on narrative. If I wanted a multi-strand character piece, I'd watch a TV show like The Wire. TV is primarily dependent on character, film is driven by narrative. Mendes needs to make a great stand alone story first and foremost, with neat character moments punctuating and driving that narrative.

    Frankly, that is not very likely. We can only hope that Mendes does his character stuff in an interesting way that does not totally obscure Bond or the plot. But I think if there's one thing that's certain, Bond 24 will be another Sam Mendes-movie, like SF. The box office and EON are expecting it.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 5,767
    RC7 wrote:

    Fair enough.

    From a wider perspective, character doesn't stop developing. You, I, or anyone on this forum develops, adapts, progresses, based on our surroundings, our interactions, socially, politically etc. Bond shouldn't be any different. The Fleming Bond delivered much in the way of character and the development of that character. It seems like the obvious way to inject a freshness into the franchise, without having to rely solely on the numerous tropes that came to define the cinematic incarnation. I want Adam-style sets, great set pieces, exotic locations etc, but I'm also happy for them to allude to Bond's mental/physical state, his attitude towards his job, his employers, the world he exists in. It was ever-present in the novels and, if it's handled correctly, can feed neatly into the films without hampering the narrative.
    Good thoughts.

    Not that it matters that much, but for the record, I would say that Fleming´s novels, rather than developing Bond´s character, re-imagined it in each new novel.

    Also, the franchise did very fine without any character development throughout all of Connery´s and Moore´s films. They had something of the immovability of Hammett´s hard-boiled Continental Op, which is quite a value. A man using the peace within himself for higher purposes. Shows a certain selflessness. I´m not saying that´s the only option though to portray Bond´s character. Depending on your point of view, SF showed both Bond´s character´s immovability and its development.

  • My prediction that Bond 24 will go just a little too far in developing the characters and all that looks like it's coming closer to reality. It should be a pretty good movie, but it's time for Craig to have his TB/TSWLM. If they go too far here, they could overcompensate and leave us with a DAF/MR-style movie for Bond 25.
  • Posts: 5,767
    My prediction that Bond 24 will go just a little too far in developing the characters and all that looks like it's coming closer to reality. It should be a pretty good movie, but it's time for Craig to have his TB/TSWLM. If they go too far here, they could overcompensate and leave us with a DAF/MR-style movie for Bond 25.
    I want Steve Coogan as a villain for that film.

  • Posts: 11,425
    boldfinger wrote:
    I want Steve Coogan as a villain for that film.

    I think we'll be waiting a long time before Mendes takes us down the MR route! Although I don't think anyone really expected Tamahori to take the direction he did on DAD - so you can never quite tell.
  • boldfinger wrote:
    I want Steve Coogan as a villain for that film.

    Which one? Bond 24, my hypothetical Bond 24 or 25?
  • Posts: 5,767

    Which one? Bond 24, my hypothetical Bond 24 or 25?
    I meant the DAF/MR-style one.
    But, having had to succumb to a serious case of Partridge-addiction recently, I wouldn´t mind him in any film. Actually, I think he´s such a good actor, he could even pull off a seriously sinister villain, not just a parody.

  • edited May 2014 Posts: 12,837
    I think it'd be perfect if they cast Steve Coogan in a recurring character role as an ally for Bond. Sort of like the Craig eras Zukofsky.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Problem with Steve Coogan is that, although I think he's highly talented, whenever I see him I just think of Alan Partridge. I recently saw the excellent Philomena and Judi Dench was brilliant. So was Steve Coogan, only that I cannot see him as anything other than Partridge, even when he's playing someone else. Something about his voice.
  • Posts: 6,396
    Getafix wrote:
    Problem with Steve Coogan is that, although I think he's highly talented, whenever I see him I just think of Alan Partridge. I recently saw the excellent Philomena and Judi Dench was brilliant. So was Steve Coogan, only that I cannot see him as anything other than Partridge, even when he's playing someone else. Something about his voice.

    You're right. Just occasionally he does tend to slip into Partridge no matter what role he's playing. I don't even think he's aware of it.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 15,231
    I am just back from King Lear, directed by Sam Mendes. If, and that is a big IF, he wants Blofeld in Bond 24, my bet is that he found him in Simon Russell Beale. Okay, this is probably wishful thinking.
  • Posts: 12,526
    Ludovico wrote:
    I am just back from King Lear, directed by Sam Mendes. If, and that is a big IF, he wants Blofeld in Bond 24, my bet is that he found him in Simon Russell Beale. Okay, this is probably wishful thinking.

    What makes you so sure if you do not mind me asking? On a seperate note, how good was King Lear?
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 15,231
    RogueAgent wrote:

    What makes you so sure if you do not mind me asking? On a seperate note, how good was King Lear?

    Well, although he is a bit short (which I am not sure would look well in cinema), Beale, especially in the early scenes, when Lear is still assuming full power, is full of tyrannical authority, plays perfectly the man to whom nobody dares to say no to. He played many productions directed by Mendes (seven or nine I think), thus they know each other well and before Lear he was also Iago back in 1997, in another production directed by Mendes. So he is used to play Shakespearean characters with Mendes, and Blofeld is described by Fleming as Shakespearean. Beale is also heavy set like Blofeld in the novel TB. He was also, I believe, rumored in the past to play a Bond villain. That does not mean much, I know: fresher rumors mention someone else for the villain, and they do have some credibility.

    As for the play, it was amazing.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Height is not an issue in cinema is it? Look at Tom Cruise.
  • Posts: 33
    Two actors I'm fond of at the moment are Matthias Schoenaerts and Christoph Waltz.

    I would certainly like to see them involved in a future Bond film, Schoenaerts in particular. There's something about the guy that just screams Bond villain.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    edited May 2014 Posts: 7,314
    Getafix wrote:
    Height is not an issue in cinema is it? Look at Tom Cruise.
    Good point. I suppose it depends on the height differential between the actors. In regards to Beale, since Craig is the shortest Bond it wouldn't be as jarring as when Pleasence was standing next to Connery.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 5,767
    Ahaah Mistah Bond!
    MrSilva wrote:
    Two actors I'm fond of at the moment are Matthias Schoenaerts and Christoph Waltz.

    I would certainly like to see them involved in a future Bond film, Schoenaerts in particular. There's something about the guy that just screams Bond villain.
    Oh yes!

    Waltz has loads of charisma, but he would have to take care that the role differs enough from the bunch of similar roles he had in Tarantino films recently.

    pachazo wrote:
    Good point. I suppose it depends on the height differential between the actors. In regards to Beale, since Craig is the shortest Bond it wouldn't be as jarring as when Pleasence was standing next to Connery.
    Movie magic will save things. Wasn´t it that Humphrey Bogart stood on a box when he looked down on Ingrid Bergmann in Casblanca? Or look at The Expendables: You´ll hardly find a shot where the looming Dophgren looks as much taller than Stallone as he really is.
    Not to forget small Bond Craig ;-).

  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Craig may not be 6 ft., but he isn't short, for Pete's sake.
  • Posts: 6,601
    5.10, which is average. But more then your actual height, it is mannerism, that makes someone tall or little.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    5 ft. 10 inches is not short in my book. Less than that, I would start to say short.
  • Posts: 15,231
    Getafix wrote:
    Height is not an issue in cinema is it? Look at Tom Cruise.

    Well it depends what role you play. This would be my only potential reservation about Simon Russell Beale, that and his naturally friendly face. But with the right haircut and makeup, he could look nasty.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    5 ft. 10 inches is not short in my book. Less than that, I would start to say short.
    Well, I guess it depends on how tall you are when it comes to your definition of short. I wasn't trying to be negative towards Craig. I'm just saying that a short actor might not look as bad standing next to him as some of the other, taller Bonds that we've had in the past.
Sign In or Register to comment.