SPECTRE Production Timeline

1157158160162163870

Comments

  • edited June 2014 Posts: 2,599
    RC7 wrote:
    Exploding pens? No, we don't really go in for those anymore, despite the fact it's just a pen and would actually sit fine in this movie. Feel free to help yourself to an ejector seat, though. Lazy, lazy, cynical marketing tool.

    Exactly! :)

    Bad, tacky mistake.
  • edited June 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Totally agree. It was total flashback to the Brosnan era - horrible moment when I felt I was back watching DAD's 40th anniversary 'homage'/ desecration. Sadly, rather than acknolweding it for the cheap, lazy gag that it was, I think Mendes felt it was a moment of triumph.
  • edited June 2014 Posts: 5,767
    Ludovico wrote:
    The DB5 in SF means something else to me: old gadgets can be reused.
    To me it means the same as it did already in GE: So much lack of self-confidence that they tried to remind the audience via the car that they´re watching a Bond film.

    Getafix wrote:
    Totally agree. It was total flashback to the Brosnan era - horrible moment when I felt I was back watching DAD's 40th anniversary 'homage'/ desecration. Sadly, rather than acknolweding it for the cheap, lazy gag that it was, I think Mendes felt it was a moment of triumph.
    I cannot recall any film where Bond didn´t ridicule Q in one way or another because of Q´s outrageous gadgets. All the more so does it seem odd that in SF all of a sudden Bond complains, "A gun and a radio. Not exactly Christmas."
    Not to mention that that scene completely ignores the previous two films, i.e. the whole Craig-Bond history.

  • Posts: 1,596
    It's just a tip of the cap to remind us that this is still the same James Bond we've "grown up" with from the past 22
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    It's just a tip of the cap to remind us that this is still the same James Bond we've "grown up" with from the past 22

    No. It's not. Every person on earth knows JB. They don't need reminding.
  • edited June 2014 Posts: 11,189
    Here's the truly evil, horrible nasty Aston Martin scene again ;)



    Boo hiss Mr Mendes. How dare you bring out the DB5, Bond's most iconic car, for the 50th anniversary.
  • Posts: 4,619
    Mr. Mendes attended a cricket match 2 weeks ago instead of working on Bond 24... :)

    "Whats he doing in the cricket? He should be prepping a Bond movie!"
    Audio:
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Here's the truly evil, horrible nasty Aston Martin scene again ;)



    Boo hiss Mr Mendes. How dare you bring out the DB5, Bond's most iconic car, for the 50th anniversary.

    You forgot the bit at SF where he deployed the machine guns ;)

    As for the 50th anniversary, excuse my french, but fuck it. Are we going to trot the same bollocks out on the 55th, 60th, 65th, 70th, 75th etc etc etc etc. The sooner all that is binned off, the better.
  • Posts: 7,507
    Mr. Mendes attended a cricket match 2 weeks ago instead of working on Bond 24... :)

    "Whats he doing in the cricket? He should be prepping a Bond movie!"
    Audio:

    Yes, it's no doubt a sign that the relationship between Mendes and EON is crumbling! :))
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    RC7, yeah we probably will get nods to past Bond images during anniversary years, and I think most people really enjoy those for the most part if well done. Sorry you hate it so much, but I sincerely doubt those things will ever be "binned off." You seem to be highly irritated about this in Skyfall in particular. For me Skyfall was quite well done, never took me out of the story, and the references were fine.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    I'm afraid that Bond movies will go back to the style of Moore/Brosnan rather than Lazenby/Dalton (the true Fleming's Bond). I want less gadgets, less action and more spying, and most important, I want more characters depth, more focus on characters rather than on action.
  • RC7RC7
    edited June 2014 Posts: 10,512
    RC7, yeah we probably will get nods to past Bond images during anniversary years, and I think most people really enjoy those for the most part if well done. Sorry you hate it so much, but I sincerely doubt those things will ever be "binned off." You seem to be highly irritated about this in Skyfall in particular. For me Skyfall was quite well done, never took me out of the story, and the references were fine.

    But why? It happened, it's been done. A greatest hits is a sign of decline. I'm more irritated by SF because it could have been great, DAD was just a mess. I don't remember seeing any nods in TLD for the 35th. It's just a modern fad, a marketing ploy that needs to be nipped in the bud.

    To put it in context. Is it a shame we don't see the DB5 during Roger's tenure? No, because they had the balls to deliver new iconography. Rog was around for the 15th and 21st birthdays - no bullshit homages, though. I don't want to see homages, clever or overt, I want to see an original Bond movie, plain and simple.
  • Posts: 11,425
    RC7 wrote:
    RC7, yeah we probably will get nods to past Bond images during anniversary years, and I think most people really enjoy those for the most part if well done. Sorry you hate it so much, but I sincerely doubt those things will ever be "binned off." You seem to be highly irritated about this in Skyfall in particular. For me Skyfall was quite well done, never took me out of the story, and the references were fine.

    But why? It happened, it's been done. A greatest hits is a sign of decline. I'm more irritated by SF because it could have been great, DAD was just a mess. I don't remember seeing any nods in TLD for the 35th. It's just a modern fad, a marketing ploy that needs to be nipped in the bud.

    To put it in context. Is it a shame we don't see the DB5 during Roger's tenure? No, because they had the balls to deliver new iconography. Rog was around for the 15th and 21st birthdays - no bullshit homages, though. I don't want to see homages, clever or overt, I want to see an original Bond movie, plain and simple.

    Well said!
  • edited June 2014 Posts: 2,015
    Mr. Mendes attended a cricket match 2 weeks ago instead of working on Bond 24... :)

    "Whats he doing in the cricket? He should be prepping a Bond movie!"
    Audio:

    The really funny part will happen if in a few days after being seen spending weeks doing time consuming promo and mundane things, he says he's tiring of Bond. You'll see here people saying it's understandable to say such things now :)
    RC7 wrote:
    I don't want to see homages, clever or overt, I want to see an original Bond movie, plain and simple.

    Yes, a potential Skyfall 2 won't have the 50th birhday excuse for being a self-refential fest so I hope we don't get Skyfall 2. The quote from Mendes wanting to re-create the experience of the audience's reaction to the DB5 is the most worrying part of the info so far IMO (Logan speaking freely about his disinterest because he may be free is only worrying for those who think a movie production is never a troubled production).




  • edited June 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Leave it to others to 'reference' Bond.

    SF just felt like some weird nostalgia fest to me - backward looking, navel-gazing, gloomy and not at all up-lifting. Not what I go to see a Bond movie for, frankly.
  • Posts: 75
    Purvis and Wade are back: Baz Bamigboy

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2671471/BAZ-BAMIGBOYE-Bond-turmoil-new-script-fails-thrill.html

    Good to hear there will be some terrible joke and bad grammar in Bond 24.
  • Posts: 9,855
    Purvis and Wade being back have me two fold

    1. The reason why they are brought back scares me

    2. However purvis and wade when they are good are bloody brilliant and they have this (some might say annoying) habit of trying to put as much unused Fleming into a script...

    Filming beginning in December is slightly upsetting but not hugely ( as long bond 24 still comes out next year)

    Overall if Purvis and Wade are in Casino Royale mode we are in good hands if it's die another day mode uhm I am scared
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    @Risico007, that can be said about anyone, really: when they're good, they're brilliant, and when they're bad, they're bad. Look at CR: brilliance. Look at DAD: trash.

    Either way, Logan has worked on this script all this time, and now the film has been pushed back for two months so the previously-exited team of Purvis & Wade can return and alter his script? Consider me very, very worried.

    My big fear is they're altering the tone of Craig's films, so he's just going to seem like a different man now. He was the same person (to me) in CR and QoS, changed quite a lot with his sense of humor and general inability to kick ass in SF, and now what? Are they going to return to the stone-cold-gazed agent from Craig's first two films? Keep it constant, and don't disappoint me once more.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,823
    QBranch wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Seriously, what person on earth would actively have gadgets fitted to their personal car?
    A person who makes husbands jealous, chefs outraged, tailors humiliated. The list is endless.
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Excelent QB.
  • Posts: 5,745
    Shocking. Positively shocking.

    Well here's the news you all have been so eagerly awaiting.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,358
    Has that absolutely been confirmed? I think it's a load of bollocks.
  • Murdock wrote:
    Has that absolutely been confirmed? I think it's a load of bollocks.

    Baz was on the money for Skyfall more often than not. Still, it's best not to jump to conclusions.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    @Murdock, it's Baz, and I believe most have said that he's quite reliable.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,358
    Eh, I'll wait for EON's word. I don't trust anyone else. ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Murdock wrote:
    Eh, I'll wait for EON's word. I don't trust anyone else. ;)

    I try not to, just prepping my disgust and disappoint pre-announcement if it is true!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,358
    It's not really a surprise considering they've been around this long. Maybe they tried doing other things and the money dried up so they begged Michael and Barbara to let them back in. Personally, I hope not, but accident's do happen.
  • Posts: 5,745
    I don't think that's the case, @Murdock.

    Logan had to deliver in a hurry, and I think he tried to take Bond somewhere. I don't think the producers liked how far he went, and they're now in a pinch to bring it back a bit.

    Queue your previously super successful writing duo making a return.

    I've been more than happy with their work on CR, QoS, and SF so I'm open to see what they'll do with a second chance.

    Actually, I'm pretty sure CR was their 'second chance', so count this as their third chance to prove something.

    I'm actually a little bit excited now. Finally something is happening.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,358
    True. Bond is a volatile franchise. You strive to far from the formula, you get either something unique and good or something unique and something that doesn't feel like Bond at all. I'm not to disappointed by it, but I sure hope we don't get a TMWTGG 2.0.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,823
    Murdock wrote:
    I sure hope we don't get a TMWTGG 2.0.

    I could deal. :))
  • Posts: 5,745
    This makes me even more curious as to who wrote what for Skyfall.

    I'm starting to think all the great dialogue out of SF came from Purvis & Wade, perhaps? They have written Q decently before.. Moneypenny on the other hand? There was that CG sex scene in DAD.

    Very interesting development. Makes me even more curious as to how the film will carry out.
Sign In or Register to comment.