SPECTRE Production Timeline

1140141143145146870

Comments

  • Posts: 19,339
    QBranch wrote:
    barryt007 wrote:
    i wouldnt p**s on CR67 if it was on fire !! 8-|
    I've owned better frisbees.
    Hahaha exactly !!
  • Posts: 2,483
    Ludovico wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    'It's the first good Bond song'. I really hope that was misquoted. Mendes seems to be making a habit of these sweeping, and at times utterly false, statements.

    If he really said that then he knows very little about music. And that's quite possible. Talent is not fungible. Hence, John Barry thought OHMSS was terrible, demonstrating that being a musical genius hardly qualifies one to be a film critic.

    Maybe there was also the personal involvement of Barry that played a role in what he said about OHMSS? I am not trying to defend him, just wondering. Ironically Do You Know How Christmas Trees Are Grown is one of my favourite holiday songs.

    It's a bizarre yet strangely appealing song.

  • Posts: 15,220
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    He looks like a civil servant. I see nothing wrong with it: that's what he is.
  • Posts: 9,855
    So I wonder if the file M hands Bond at the end of Skyfall will be the mission for bond 24?
  • Risico007 wrote:
    So I wonder if the file M hands Bond at the end of Skyfall will be the mission for bond 24?

    Probably not, it was just meant to be a generic mission file, but there's always a chance it will be Bond 24's mission, or at least the PTS mission.
  • Posts: 15,220
    I doubt it is anything else than a generic file, but who knows.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Risico007 wrote:
    So I wonder if the file M hands Bond at the end of Skyfall will be the mission for bond 24?

    The PTS is Bond opening the file to reveal a year's worth of unpaid utility bills - a sheepish 'M' explains he's incapable of dealing with automated payment services. Cue action.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    I've always wondered if the 'next assignment' or whatever that's announced at the end of a Bond movie is for the next film, but obviously it's just a placeholder to signify that another movie will happen at some point.
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    Creasy47 wrote:
    I've always wondered if the 'next assignment' or whatever that's announced at the end of a Bond movie is for the next film, but obviously it's just a placeholder to signify that another movie will happen at some point.
    I agree.
    If this would't be the case, then Bond would start Bond24 with a damage arm, and that's not gonna happen
  • Posts: 908
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.
  • Posts: 15,220
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.

    Quid? I mean, is Bill Tanner supposed to be bleeding Batman or Sherlock Holmes or something? He does desk work for MI6! How intense does he need to look?
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 3,278
    Getafix wrote:
    I noticed again that he says B24 will be like the second half of Skyfall.

    Meaning no huge action setpieces for B24? I wouldn't be surprised. SF really only had one (the PCS) because Mendes didn't use the other two from the original script.
    Getafix wrote:
    On a side note, I love the way that some of the Bond films pay homage to other classic movies.

    SF intended, too. But it was cut out. This was suppose to take place on Silva's island (there was also a scene on the island which featured rats):

    "Director Sam Mendes will pay homage to the Indiana Jones rope bridge battles. 007 will have it out with a villain on a rickety affair like in Temple Of Doom."
    http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=49867#xXAiTeLt55rbqmSG.99

  • edited May 2014 Posts: 7,507
    @Ludovico: Please don't let that guy get under your skin again! His goal clearly is to provoke. Don't let him succeed...
  • RC7RC7
    edited May 2014 Posts: 10,512
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.

    They don't need to rethink his look, they just need to add some flesh to the character. Build a relationship with Bond that isn't facilitated by M. Have them sharing a cocktail at Blades, an inside joke, anything that delivers a sense of friendship. I always thought the short scenes between Brosnan and Kitchen nailed this - they had chemistry - and it is achievable, even with limited screen time. Kinnear is definitely capable, but Logan needs to use him effectively rather than A.N.Other MI6 bod. Leave the bods in the background.

  • Posts: 908
    Ludovico wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.

    Quid? I mean, is Bill Tanner supposed to be bleeding Batman or Sherlock Holmes or something? He does desk work for MI6! How intense does he need to look?

    Brosnans Tanner wasn't meant to be Batman either, but still he managed to pull of some screen presence. All we know of him now is he is Mr. slowpoke and not an especially bright one at that (judging from all the wondering he's doing and his two movies). Be it as it may, I am the first to admit that this is foremost a matter of taste.
  • Posts: 5,767
    RC7 wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.

    They don't need to rethink his look, they just need to add some flesh to the character. Build a relationship with Bond that isn't facilitated by M. Have them sharing a cocktail at Blades, an inside joke, anything that delivers a sense of friendship. I always thought the short scenes between Brosnan and Kitchen nailed this - they had chemistry - and it is achievable, even with limited screen time. Kinnear is definitely capable, but Logan needs to use him effectively rather than A.N.Other MI6 bod. Leave the bods in the background.
    SF of all films had quite a lot of Tanner in it, and I saw quite some relationship with Bond. For instance when Tanner briefs Bond, especially the moments while Bond does his physical, and Bond asks Tanner, "And you believe her?", that shows they have a certain depth of trust and at least professional friendship. However, since Tanner looks a little gay in SF, I wouldn´t expect their relationship to be of the kind where they have a drink together at Blades. It´s certainly not the relationship Fleming described, but one surely can´t accuse SF of neglecting Tanner.


  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited May 2014 Posts: 41,009
    ...wait, how does Tanner look "gay" in SF?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,358
    Well this thread has become a joke now.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    boldfinger wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.

    They don't need to rethink his look, they just need to add some flesh to the character. Build a relationship with Bond that isn't facilitated by M. Have them sharing a cocktail at Blades, an inside joke, anything that delivers a sense of friendship. I always thought the short scenes between Brosnan and Kitchen nailed this - they had chemistry - and it is achievable, even with limited screen time. Kinnear is definitely capable, but Logan needs to use him effectively rather than A.N.Other MI6 bod. Leave the bods in the background.
    SF of all films had quite a lot of Tanner in it, and I saw quite some relationship with Bond. For instance when Tanner briefs Bond, especially the moments while Bond does his physical, and Bond asks Tanner, "And you believe her?", that shows they have a certain depth of trust and at least professional friendship. However, since Tanner looks a little gay in SF, I wouldn´t expect their relationship to be of the kind where they have a drink together at Blades. It´s certainly not the relationship Fleming described, but one surely can´t accuse SF of neglecting Tanner.



    Despite the fact your description of Tanner baffles me, is it really a problem seeing Bond drinking with a gay man? Again, for hypothetical reasons, accepting your particular take on his portrayal.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    Murdock wrote:
    Well this thread has become a joke now.

    Indeed it has. Perhaps it should've stayed closed until more news was announced, all it is now is ridiculous bickering, off-topic discussions, and troll comments that will only incite fights.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,358
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Murdock wrote:
    Well this thread has become a joke now.

    Indeed it has. Perhaps it should've stayed closed until more news was announced, all it is now is ridiculous bickering, off-topic discussions, and troll comments that will only incite fights.

    Agreed.
  • Posts: 15,220
    jobo wrote:
    @Ludovico: Please don't let that guy get under your skin again! His goal clearly is to provoke. Don't let him succed...

    I know he does, still, I cannot help but point out the ridiculous argument. Bill Tanner needs to be intense?
    RC7 wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.

    They don't need to rethink his look, they just need to add some flesh to the character. Build a relationship with Bond that isn't facilitated by M. Have them sharing a cocktail at Blades, an inside joke, anything that delivers a sense of friendship. I always thought the short scenes between Brosnan and Kitchen nailed this - they had chemistry - and it is achievable, even with limited screen time. Kinnear is definitely capable, but Logan needs to use him effectively rather than A.N.Other MI6 bod. Leave the bods in the background.

    Agreed. I do think Craig and Kinnear have good chemistry, but they need to flesh their relationship out a bit more. Bill Tanner never was a very important character in the film series, he was downright neglected, even more than Felix Leiter! We should be happy that they are giving him screen time and seem to be committed to give him some importance.
  • Posts: 4,619
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Indeed it has. Perhaps it should've stayed closed until more news was announced, all it is now is ridiculous bickering, off-topic discussions, and troll comments that will only incite fights.

    My suggestion: close this thread and never open it again. Bond 24 should have many separate threads in the future like Skyfall did. A thread for every big news. Posting everything in one thread makes this place a mess.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Indeed it has. Perhaps it should've stayed closed until more news was announced, all it is now is ridiculous bickering, off-topic discussions, and troll comments that will only incite fights.

    My suggestion: close this thread and never open it again. Bond 24 should have many separate threads in the future like Skyfall did. A thread for every big news. Posting everything in one thread makes this place a mess.

    Threads go this way, and that. We're not automatons. There is no news, so naturally discussion has drifted. Not a big deal. As soon as there's news it'll hit it's stride again.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 2,483
    Ludovico wrote:
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    They need to improve his look. He just looks like a boring fart in the Bond movies.

    That's just about nails it. That intensity off his nonexistence on the screen feels almost painful to me and I really doubt there is much to do about his look.

    Quid? I mean, is Bill Tanner supposed to be bleeding Batman or Sherlock Holmes or something? He does desk work for MI6! How intense does he need to look?


    :)) :)) :))
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I really like having news on this one thread; I want it kept open. We are just pfffting around since there is no real news. I'm all for deleting various posts later, once we get in stride again. Heck, there may be 5 pages of more of blather here, but I still think it is really worthwhile having the whole production news tracked on one thread.
  • Posts: 6,396
    I go away for a few hours for Whitby's finest fish and chips and I come back to this. I knew I should've hired a babysitter. ;-)
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Indeed. I woke up to something like 24 new posts and nearly got excited but then I cannily noticed that the thread's title had not been modified to show new info, so I reckoned (correctly) we were still just blathering on here.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    Indeed. I woke up to something like 24 new posts and nearly got excited but then I cannily noticed that the thread's title had not been modified to show new info, so I reckoned (correctly) we were still just blathering on here.

    Same. This was the first site I checked when I got up this morning, was really excited thinking that some news was released. But, of course not.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Indeed. I woke up to something like 24 new posts and nearly got excited but then I cannily noticed that the thread's title had not been modified to show new info, so I reckoned (correctly) we were still just blathering on here.

    Same. This was the first site I checked when I got up this morning, was really excited thinking that some news was released. But, of course not.

    While I sympathise, when have you ever genuinely checked in to such a thread and witnessed 'actual' news. My guess would be 1 in 50. I certainly never expect to see news.
Sign In or Register to comment.