› ›

SPECTRE Production Timeline

1…169170172174175…870

Comments

  • GetafixGetafix
    edited June 2014 Posts: 11,425
    triple post!
  • WillyGaloreWillyGalore
    Posts: 6,396
    lamp post!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The media are certainly running with their 'script troubles' line...

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/jun/30/james-bond-movie-script-which-way-now

  • WillyGaloreWillyGalore
    edited June 2014 Posts: 6,396
    RC7 wrote:
    The media are certainly running with their 'script troubles' line...

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/jun/30/james-bond-movie-script-which-way-now

    I stopped reading after this first sentence:

    "This may be a heretical thought, but we at the Guardian have always found James Bond films a tiny bit boring".

    Blasphemy!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Getafix wrote:
    double post

    The postman always rings twice.
    Getafix wrote:
    triple post!

    Well, sometimes thrice.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Well those at The Guardian probably consider themselves above nonsense like Bond.

    They obviously prefer spy films in which fictional Guardian journalists are gunned down.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    My respect for LG has just gone through the roof. Not only did he direct two of my favourite Bonds -YOLT and SPY, but he also directed Educating Rita and Shirley Valentine. What a legend.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    WillyGalore wrote:
    "This may be a heretical thought, but we at the Guardian have always found James Bond films a tiny bit boring".

    It is incredibly stupid for them to say that. Bond films are so different from each other, I think it's impossible for someone to find all of them boring.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    WillyGalore wrote:
    "This may be a heretical thought, but we at the Guardian have always found James Bond films a tiny bit boring".

    Wow, never knew you worked for The Guardian, @WillyGalore.
  • WillyGaloreWillyGalore
    Posts: 6,396
    Thunderfinger wrote:
    WillyGalore wrote:
    "This may be a heretical thought, but we at the Guardian have always found James Bond films a tiny bit boring".

    Wow, never knew you worked for The Guardian, @WillyGalore.

    I don't like to blow my own trumpet. ;-)
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,568
    You might as well say films in general are a tiny bit boring.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I find The Guardian more than a tiny bit boring. No offence, Willy.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,114
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,846
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    Wait... your saying you Don't believe Connery look's like a Japanese Fisherman in You Only Live Twice?
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    I rewatched YOLT a couple of months ago. Say what you like about the fantastical nature of the plot/Connery but that volcano set is stunning - a real cinematic treat.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Risico007 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    Wait... your saying you Don't believe Connery look's like a Japanese Fisherman in You Only Live Twice?

    No. He looks more like a Japanese fisherman s friend.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    He looks more like Mr. Spock. :))
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,568
    Live long and proshper :))
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,114
    Murdock wrote:
    He looks more like Mr. Spock. :))

    He does look very alien.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,114
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    I rewatched YOLT a couple of months ago. Say what you like about the fantastical nature of the plot/Connery but that volcano set is stunning - a real cinematic treat.

    Great set. Poor plot.

    And, to get back on topic, with all of John Logan's flaws as a plot writer, I would take him over Gilbert easily. He only ever wrote one for his Bond movies.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @JWESTBROOK, when B24 was initially rumored as ending on a cliffhanger of sorts, that got me excited at the prospect of what could happen: shake up the formula and put Bond in some dangerous moment, and it just ends, making us wait a few years to see how he gets out of it, but now that P&W have returned to add in wit or humor, they could always do that if the idea was interesting enough to everyone. That way, it makes it so Mendes doesn't really have to tackle with Quantum, but he brings them back for someone else to take on with B25. I love that idea. Perhaps they could go as far as teasing the head of Quantum somehow.

    I would happily see Quantum teased for a return but unless the whole cliffhangar scene was filmed in full? I would just be a little concerned in terms of DC ageing if their is another 3 year gap to Bond 25?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    edited June 2014 Posts: 15,114
    I was against the cliffhanger scene. Even between CR and QOS the transition was far from seemless, and they only had two years gap and a first movie that did not have a cliffhanger, merely an open ending. I think making an open ending may still work, as long as they keep the plot of Bond 24 contained, the way DN and CR were. Have Bond win the day, get the girl, then the mastermind (Blofeld? or some equivalent) be shown in the end, having escaped the final great battle, saying something like: "Her Majesty's hound dog, but we are not done with Mr. Bond just yet."
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Stand alone movies please. We've seen the mess a two story arc can get us into.
  • WillyGaloreWillyGalore
    edited June 2014 Posts: 6,396
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    I rewatched YOLT a couple of months ago. Say what you like about the fantastical nature of the plot/Connery but that volcano set is stunning - a real cinematic treat.

    Great set. Poor plot.

    And, to get back on topic, with all of John Logan's flaws as a plot writer, I would take him over Gilbert easily. He only ever wrote one for his Bond movies.

    Why do you blame Gilbert for YOLT's plot? Surely it's Roald Dahl who should take the brunt of your stick.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I'm still not sure about P&W. I've never come out and said one way or the other whether I liked them or not because I truly don't know. They are attached to the Craig era films that I love as co-writers, but we have never really been told what they were responsible for. CR for example, has many great moments like Bond and Vesper meeting that we know Haggis is responsible for, but other than that a lot of the writer contributions to the various drafts from CR to Skyfall is largely a mystery. Some contributions are obvious, but others like little dialogues or action set pieces are harder to decipher when trying to deduce who added what to a script. Until we know for certain just what P&W have been responsible for in the scripts of the Brosnan era and chiefly the Craig films, I will neither clap for them or raid their homes with pitchforks.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited June 2014 Posts: 12,480
    I know, it is impossible for us to say which parts are pure P&W, in general. When I learned that Haggis came up with the idea of Vesper having a child, that rather turned me off from him. When I read that P&W had written a solid script, one for CR that didn't need a lot added (paraphrasing here), that was reassuring. Plenty of the humor in TWINE and of course DAD were just not good, though; to put it politely.

    But again, as you know, writers come up with many ideas; some are brilliant, if they are good (and/or lucky), and some can be not good at all. It is a highly fluctuating craft and a good Bond film is not easy, in my opinion. I'm now totally open-minded to see what P&W add to Logan's script. I am glad, in general, that changes are being made. Better now than after filming has begun. It shows that the producers and Mendes care strongly about having a solid script.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    The only way I'll be disappointed about any of this is if the two story arc that was dropped featured Bond taking on Quantum for two films, with Bond 25 wrapping it all up. However, Logan doesn't strike me as a big QoS fan, if he's even seen the damn thing, so I'm sure the story didn't concern that. My biggest fear is that we'll never hear no more mention of the organization and much like DAF before them, Bond 24 and 25 will leave a promising storyline severed and left in the dust in favor of unrelated adventures that may or may not be great, but lack the continuation of an important arc all the same. Seeing no more Quantum after having them act as such a presence in CR and QoS will feel akin to the disappearance of Irma Bunt in DAF and Bond's own thirst for any kind of vengeance for his wife's murder.

    Who knows what Mendes and co. have planned. They may be happy with Logan's work but need to add in more thrilling action to try and balance the spectacle with the dark character study. The script could be too dark (I wish!) and needs moments of levity. Either of those two would explain the return of P&W, but since we're all very much on the outside looking in, any guesses at this point are pure conjecture at best.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,114
    WillyGalore wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    I rewatched YOLT a couple of months ago. Say what you like about the fantastical nature of the plot/Connery but that volcano set is stunning - a real cinematic treat.

    Great set. Poor plot.

    And, to get back on topic, with all of John Logan's flaws as a plot writer, I would take him over Gilbert easily. He only ever wrote one for his Bond movies.

    Why do you blame Gilbert for YOLT's plot? Surely it's Roald Dahl who should take the brunt of your stick.

    True, true, but Dahl did not direct YOLT, TSWLM and MR. In the end, they were Gilbert's movies. He is the one who recycled.
  • WillyGaloreWillyGalore
    edited June 2014 Posts: 6,396
    Ludovico wrote:
    WillyGalore wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    I rewatched YOLT a couple of months ago. Say what you like about the fantastical nature of the plot/Connery but that volcano set is stunning - a real cinematic treat.

    Great set. Poor plot.

    And, to get back on topic, with all of John Logan's flaws as a plot writer, I would take him over Gilbert easily. He only ever wrote one for his Bond movies.

    Why do you blame Gilbert for YOLT's plot? Surely it's Roald Dahl who should take the brunt of your stick.

    True, true, but Dahl did not direct YOLT, TSWLM and MR. In the end, they were Gilbert's movies. He is the one who recycled.

    So by the same logic, Richard Maibaum only deserves a minimum amount of credit for his contribution?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,114
    Maibaum contributed to a few more Bond movies.
Sign In or Register to comment.