It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I'm thinking a lot lately what Ian Fleming would have thought about the 23 (25 incarnations in total on screen) Bond films so far. I like to think that he looks down on us fans from a cloud "playing a golden harp", smoking an expensive filtered cigarette, with a hugeee smile on his face ;-).
I think, Ian Fleming would certainly have his list of favourites. Perhaps in chronological order:
--> FRWL
--> OHMSS
--> FYEO
--> TLD
--> LTK
--> CR
--> SF
??
All the above Bond films give us the best insight in Bond's character (past & present) and how 007 started to become....quite an ordinary human being....with the necessary suave traits of luxury and cold-blooded killing moods where necessary.
I think it's a whole lot easier than to write something restrained by the laws of reality and logic. Of course I do!
There's a difference between writing a screenplay and coming up with a story. Having the imagination to come up with the story and concept of Inception is where the real talent is. Writing the screenplay that navigates that story is easy once you have the ideas down.
No, it isn't. The whole thing is a test of endurance and if you come out the other side with anything resembling sense you've done a decent job. None of it is even remotely easy.
I imagine the difficult job is coming up with a great story/plot AND writing fantastic dialogue. One without the other is not much use to any one. Logan writes good dialogue, but IMO most of his stories are pretty derivative/lame. That was very evident in SF, I thought. Poor story, but some nice dialogue along the way.
And that's why in these days of more and more pressure from the movie producers (I speak about movies generally), it's great to have a novel to rely on - and not just for the fanbase. At least some time ago, a creator could do what he wanted to do with no pressure from outside, in order to put some Chinese sponsor, or to re-use the sets of a less known movie , or to develop the little role of someone who became a star during the production of the movie, etc, etc... And it means somewhere in the creative process, there's a coherent novel.
And that's why to use again some Ian Fleming Bond novels (even already used, even in disguise), would not necessarily be the boring fest a few here seem to think. They could give a Fleming framework to a movie, even if it's already been used in a 60s Connery movie, and let everyone flourish it, instead of starting with no framework. And I think this can work. Hey, it does look like Casino Royale is the most popular Bond movie in recent memory, for fans as well as non-fans, isn't it ?
Now imagine a scriptwriter telling EON : "Hey, I've got this idea of a long poker scene...". "What ???"
Now compare with "Hey, let's change from baccarat to poker". "Good idea !"
PS : I didn't read Getafix's post when I wrote this :) !
SF had a terrible story, (a weird rip-off of Mission Impossible, The Dark Knight, and Home Alone), but it had a good script and beautiful cinematography. For me, I'm willing to see the script sacrificed a little if it means getting a better story in Bond 24. What worries me about having all these writers come in for Bond 24 is that maybe the story still isn't squared away.
So far, in most Mendes movies (all except Away We Go I think ?), a main character dies. Really dies. SF is no exception with the death of M. Will it continue ? Let's see what happens to Tanner in the next one :)
Logan's downfall in.pretty much all his stories. This is why I was not too sad when I learned someone would go over his script.
But you see the whole plot of inception is just not that original. All of the nightmare on Elm Street movies deal with this "true or dream" dilemma and you probably won't claim that the drama part of the story (= coping with loss) is that new.
I still would prefer script writers to adhere to a little higher standard than "anything resembling sense". Not that anybody in the movie business seems to give a rats arse about what I like or not.
My point is that it's difficult, clearly.
I absolutely have no doubt. Really.
Can I add one more thing to this? I have the entire BluRay-50th-anniversary-box now. I have compared the pixel densities and resolution of each film. And you know what stroke me? Especially when comparing Craig's last three outings? "Skyfall" truly stands out here. I really think the digital camera's for "Skyfall" made that happen. I know that for "QOS" and "CR" certain filters were used to give the image a more "rougher grittier texture". But it's not only that. Overall I think digital camerawork can add such distinct brightness that even a BluRay disc can not show.
I hope Hoyte will also use digital camera's.
You can hope that all you want but it's 100% sure that they will be shooting on film. Whishes and hopes are fine but they are kind of useless once we have actual confirmations.
No such thing has been confirmed. Hoyte van Hoytema specifically said that he has experience in both: Film & Digital. And as both Michael Wilson and Barbara Brocolli were impressed by the quality of Digital filming, I'm quite sure that they will ask van Hoytema to use digital. Moreover, he did it with "Interstellar".
Interstellar is shot on film.
It has been confirmed by several people that Bond 24 will be shot on film. No, the producers won't ask Hoytema to use digital, it has already been decided that the movie will be shot on film. (By the way, it's mainly the director who decides what format to use and not the producers.) And you clearly have no idea what you are talking about as Interstellar was shot on standard 35 mm film and IMAX 70 mm film.
They may use digital cameras for some sequences (like in the case of QOS) but most of the film (and by that I mean more than 90 %) will be shot on film.
Deakins confirmed earlier this year that B24 will be shot on film.
I really thought "Interstellar" was shot digitally. Sorry about that. But to say that I have no idea what I'm talking about is simply overreacting. All we know know is this:
--> Deakings confirms Bond 24 will be shot on film? Really, the man who didn't want to return decides that? He decides, an not van Hoytema himself? I'm sceptical. Maybe Deakins also confirms that Bond 24 will not be shot in 3D :-)?
--> Hoyte van Hoytema can shot BOTH on film AND digital. That's the only thing we know.
--> "confirmed by several people"...nice, but links please??
--> Producers have a lot of influence. Initially Roger Deakins was NOT keen about transferring to the IMAX format. But Sony and the producers insisting on it, as IMAX means "money". So to say that producers "have nothing to do with it" also shows a bit "having no ideas about it".
Let's wait and see. But for now I only know that it can be either digital or film. Hoyte van Hoytema can do both.
Check the opening post! I update it with every story with links. That's the point of this thread..
"-Roger Deakins, who was Cinematographer on the digitally shot Skyfall, mentioned on his blog that Bond 24 will be shot on film, though he won't be returning as Cinematographer."
http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2977
Are you dense? No, Deakins did not decide that Bond 24 should be shot on film but he did talk to people (like SAM MENDES) who made that decision.
By jolly, just have a clear look at the link you just posted. It's a forum. Only one forummember on that cinematographer-forum, named "Octopoli" said "All I know is 100% shooting back on film as I know the lab handling it". If you can confirm this was said by Roger Deakins, even then I find it rather "fishy" coming from his mouth. Deakins is out. Hoyte van Hoytema is in. He directs it, not Deakins.
http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/her-cinematographer-hoyte-van-hoytema-to-fill-roger-deakins-shoes-on-sam-mendes-bond-24?hf_source=HitFixUserShare&hf_medium=Twitter&hf_campaign=KristopherTapley&hf_exp=social_title_on&title=Who has Sam Mendes tapped to fill Roger Deakins' shoes on Sam Mendes' Bond 24?
"I can't confirm it but I've heard that the Bond series will also be going back to film with this installment. Van Hoytema obviously shot "Interstellar" on film, given that Nolan remains one of the most outspoken worshippers of celluloid there is, as well as "Tinker Tailor." "Her," however, was filmed digitally via the Arri Alexa. All of that just goes to show that he knows how to give you an arresting image whatever the medium"