SPECTRE Production Timeline

1396397399401402870

Comments

  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2014 Posts: 4,399
    TripAces wrote: »
    Put yourself in EON's shoes for just a moment.

    How will they keep this franchise going? With constant re-boots every time a new actor takes over? DC isn't getting any younger. Mendes said prior to SF and now prior to SP that "the characters will age."

    The only way to keep Bond going on this current arch, in "the shadows," is to now continuously use "James Bond" as the cover name for 007. It would make sense to do that with a new Bond, whoever that may be. And to keep doing so.

    What's rubbish to begin with is any secret agent using his real name out in the field. If you want to get technical. Right?

    tumblr_mp0rmsboTP1rlq66wo1_400_zpsgsmpgilm.gif
  • timmer wrote: »
    Don't forget Babs is still running this show. She's Cubby's blood progeny.
    She's not going to do anything crazy. She is connected to the original films and the Fleming legacy via her dad.
    The crazy will come down the road, when Eon is run by persons less connected to the character's literary and cinema roots.
    .

    I don't really feel this is about family ties. To me B.B. doesn't seem to have such a coherent idea and vision of the way James Bond should be and develop.
    After all Bond became blond,more average looking and tougher when two other blond,rather average looking guys were seriously kicking arse leaving the classic take on Bond look a bit sedated. And if you look how jumpy the direction of the different Bonds was in this century, well that's quite the opposite way her old man did it ( not that I would claim he was faultless - just the opposite in fact).
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2014 Posts: 4,399
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    Don't forget Babs is still running this show. She's Cubby's blood progeny.
    She's not going to do anything crazy. She is connected to the original films and the Fleming legacy via her dad.
    The crazy will come down the road, when Eon is run by persons less connected to the character's literary and cinema roots.
    .

    I don't really feel this is about family ties. To me B.B. doesn't seem to have such a coherent idea and vision of the way James Bond should be and develop.
    After all Bond became blond,more average looking and tougher when two other blond,rather average looking guys were seriously kicking arse leaving the classic take on Bond look a bit sedated. And if you look how jumpy the direction of the different Bonds was in this century, well that's quite the opposite way her old man did it ( not that I would claim he was faultless - just the opposite in fact).

    to me, the character of Bond and the stories in this Craig era have stayed fairly consistent...

    the real issue Babs and MGW had was taking over from their dad in the 90s with Pierce - those movies felt so drastically different in tonality between one another, that it seemed they never knew what direction they wanted to go...

    they finally got their act together with CR which was fantastic.. QOS was a bit of a misstep due to the writer's strike, but it still made really good money.. and SF (despite your opinion) was a critical and box office smash... so whatever they are doing now, they are doing right..
  • Posts: 421
    I think everyone just really needs to chill. Having read pages and pages of theory, counter-theory, twists, turns and plots - I really don't think it will be quite that complicated regarding Blofeld etc. Don't get me wrong, Sam Mendes are clever and intelligent - but they're not stupid. At the most, Blofeld will have an alias. Character histories also won't be quite as inter-related as some would like to make out.

    We'll have interesting, complex characters but some of the stories here just come down to conspiracy and sounds quite frankly ridiculous.
  • Posts: 6,601
    bondjames wrote: »

    Hopefully she has kids who can carry the legacy forward.

    No, only Michael has a son, who is already working for them.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2014 Posts: 4,399
    AgentJM7 wrote: »
    I think everyone just really needs to chill. Having read pages and pages of theory, counter-theory, twists, turns and plots - I really don't think it will be quite that complicated regarding Blofeld etc. Don't get me wrong, Sam Mendes are clever and intelligent - but they're not stupid. At the most, Blofeld will have an alias. Character histories also won't be quite as inter-related as some would like to make out.

    We'll have interesting, complex characters but some of the stories here just come down to conspiracy and sounds quite frankly ridiculous.

    1bc999c7b7ea9f638486b0c0bf5aa9b7485052f0cf83048d2622e507813e7c7f_zps50a453e1.jpg
  • edited December 2014 Posts: 2,015
    Getafix wrote: »
    We can only hope they get it right this time. From what I'm picking up about the story it sounds a bit more intelligent than SF. Hoping the plot is major step up in terms of quality.

    I think how SF will go into Bond fandom history will depend a lot of Spectre. If it has a good story, then I think SF's weird logic will be a contrast, and SF may become the "nonsensical villain plot" one. Even if Spectre only makes 750 M$ worldwide, because of SW VII, change rate and many other boring factors not related to the movie itself.

    And then we'll remember with a smile all those who insisted on praising SF's airtight plot that other dumb fans could not understand. It's a bit like calling FYEO the "serious one" in Moore movies, despite the 2CV or the hockey scene. But it was after Moonraker :)

    Personally, I hope Spectre will become the "Craig's Bond has some fun" one :)
  • Posts: 9,843
    So James Bond will return in Spectre... I am excited
  • edited December 2014 Posts: 372
    If there is gonna be a Blofeld in SP, do you reckon they are gonna make him a recurring character in the movie series? If so, then the possibility of Scott playing Blofeld wouldn't be so weird, because they also started young with Q/Moneypenny/M so they could last a while. Either way I don't wanna see him as Bond. Don't mean to sound very superficial here, but he isn't exactly tall, dark and handsome. He is by no means bad-looking, but I think Bond is an escapist thing for women too.

    Someone mentioned Erst Stavro Blofeld might be an anagram for 'something Oberhausen', but we're missing an h and a u. :P
  • HASEROT wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    Don't forget Babs is still running this show. She's Cubby's blood progeny.
    She's not going to do anything crazy. She is connected to the original films and the Fleming legacy via her dad.
    The crazy will come down the road, when Eon is run by persons less connected to the character's literary and cinema roots.
    .

    I don't really feel this is about family ties. To me B.B. doesn't seem to have such a coherent idea and vision of the way James Bond should be and develop.
    After all Bond became blond,more average looking and tougher when two other blond,rather average looking guys were seriously kicking arse leaving the classic take on Bond look a bit sedated. And if you look how jumpy the direction of the different Bonds was in this century, well that's quite the opposite way her old man did it ( not that I would claim he was faultless - just the opposite in fact).

    to me, the character of Bond and the stories in this Craig era have stayed fairly consistent...

    the real issue Babs and MGW had was taking over from their dad in the 90s with Pierce - those movies felt so drastically different in tonality between one another, that it seemed they never knew what direction they wanted to go...

    they finally got their act together with CR which was fantastic.. QOS was a bit of a misstep due to the writer's strike, but it still made really good money.. and SF (despite your opinion) was a critical and box office smash... so whatever they are doing now, they are doing right..

    Still all they did with CR was to jump on the 24/Bourne train. In QoS (which I regulary defend) they allowed Forster to cut out a 100 Millions worth of scenery and to bring cutting to a new extreme and Mendes was allowed to almost completely alter the script especially after Bond comes to Shanghai (thus rendering the movie a logical disaster) and blow the new timeline with the GF DB5. I haven't even dwelled on DADs 180 turn in the middle of the movie which probably also director induced ( just as the Vanish). To me this doesn't look like a strong and coherent vision of their product.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited December 2014 Posts: 16,351
    The DB5 can be easily explained in two possible ways.

    1. It was modified by Q Branch so Bond could stop destroying DBS's

    2. Alexander Demitrios already had it decked out with weapons and gadgets seeing as he's an arms smuggling criminal.
  • Posts: 12,526
    So chuffed that Mr White returns! And with such an exciting cast to boot?!!! I really am looking forward to this movie more than ever now! \:D/
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    Don't forget Babs is still running this show. She's Cubby's blood progeny.
    She's not going to do anything crazy. She is connected to the original films and the Fleming legacy via her dad.
    The crazy will come down the road, when Eon is run by persons less connected to the character's literary and cinema roots.
    .

    I don't really feel this is about family ties. To me B.B. doesn't seem to have such a coherent idea and vision of the way James Bond should be and develop.
    After all Bond became blond,more average looking and tougher when two other blond,rather average looking guys were seriously kicking arse leaving the classic take on Bond look a bit sedated. And if you look how jumpy the direction of the different Bonds was in this century, well that's quite the opposite way her old man did it ( not that I would claim he was faultless - just the opposite in fact).

    to me, the character of Bond and the stories in this Craig era have stayed fairly consistent...

    the real issue Babs and MGW had was taking over from their dad in the 90s with Pierce - those movies felt so drastically different in tonality between one another, that it seemed they never knew what direction they wanted to go...

    they finally got their act together with CR which was fantastic.. QOS was a bit of a misstep due to the writer's strike, but it still made really good money.. and SF (despite your opinion) was a critical and box office smash... so whatever they are doing now, they are doing right..

    Still all they did with CR was to jump on the 24/Bourne train. In QoS (which I regulary defend) they allowed Forster to cut out a 100 Millions worth of scenery and to bring cutting to a new extreme and Mendes was allowed to almost completely alter the script especially after Bond comes to Shanghai (thus rendering the movie a logical disaster) and blow the new timeline with the GF DB5. I haven't even dwelled on DADs 180 turn in the middle of the movie which probably also director induced ( just as the Vanish). To me this doesn't look like a strong and coherent vision of their product.

    I'll admit that a lot of the reason for the success for the reboot is Daniel Craig. He almost single handedly held together QoS with his steely, determined, focused performance. Almost unanimously, folks have said Craig was very solid in QoS, despite that movies flaws (which were mainly editing related - it was pretty coherent plot wise).

    So you have a point. Once Craig is gone, there are risks to the franchise.
  • Posts: 421
    HASEROT wrote: »
    AgentJM7 wrote: »
    I think everyone just really needs to chill. Having read pages and pages of theory, counter-theory, twists, turns and plots - I really don't think it will be quite that complicated regarding Blofeld etc. Don't get me wrong, Sam Mendes are clever and intelligent - but they're not stupid. At the most, Blofeld will have an alias. Character histories also won't be quite as inter-related as some would like to make out.

    We'll have interesting, complex characters but some of the stories here just come down to conspiracy and sounds quite frankly ridiculous.

    1bc999c7b7ea9f638486b0c0bf5aa9b7485052f0cf83048d2622e507813e7c7f_zps50a453e1.jpg


    :))

    OK, OK.

    I'll just enjoy the basics by myself: Lea, Waltz and the DB10.
  • Posts: 4,622
    @matthelm
    My point re Babs is that she is not going to allow anything crazy radical to go down, like Mi6 stalwarts such as very traditional M or Fleming mainstay Bill Tanner be revealed as Blofeld. Nuts. Down the road, though, who knows.
  • Posts: 15,105
    Getafix wrote: »
    We can only hope they get it right this time. From what I'm picking up about the story it sounds a bit more intelligent than SF. Hoping the plot is major step up in terms of quality.

    I think how SF will go into Bond fandom history will depend a lot of Spectre. If it has a good story, then I think SF's weird logic will be a contrast, and SF may become the "nonsensical villain plot" one. Even if Spectre only makes 750 M$ worldwide, because of SW VII, change rate and many other boring factors not related to the movie itself.

    And then we'll remember with a smile all those who insisted on praising SF's airtight plot that other dumb fans could not understand. It's a bit like calling FYEO the "serious one" in Moore movies, despite the 2CV or the hockey scene. But it was after Moonraker :)

    The silly bits of FYEO were remnants of the silliness of the last four films. I think we should/will compare Skyfall and SPECTRE the way we can compare GF and TB.
  • edited December 2014 Posts: 2,015
    There is no way that Andrew Scott is Blofeld..

    I'd rather share the same opinion but... there is no way that anyone can write "there is no way" about movie plots :)

    And some should re-read Colonel Sun's last posts before the photo call, btw, if you trust him a bit :)
  • Posts: 15,105
    There is no way that Andrew Scott is Blofeld..

    I'd rather share the same opinion but... there is no way that anyone can write "there is no way" about movie plots :)

    I know he played Moriarty but... can you see him looking threatening towards Craig, Waltz, Fiennes?

    It would Toby Stephens all over again.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    bondjames wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    Don't forget Babs is still running this show. She's Cubby's blood progeny.
    She's not going to do anything crazy. She is connected to the original films and the Fleming legacy via her dad.
    The crazy will come down the road, when Eon is run by persons less connected to the character's literary and cinema roots.
    .

    I don't really feel this is about family ties. To me B.B. doesn't seem to have such a coherent idea and vision of the way James Bond should be and develop.
    After all Bond became blond,more average looking and tougher when two other blond,rather average looking guys were seriously kicking arse leaving the classic take on Bond look a bit sedated. And if you look how jumpy the direction of the different Bonds was in this century, well that's quite the opposite way her old man did it ( not that I would claim he was faultless - just the opposite in fact).

    to me, the character of Bond and the stories in this Craig era have stayed fairly consistent...

    the real issue Babs and MGW had was taking over from their dad in the 90s with Pierce - those movies felt so drastically different in tonality between one another, that it seemed they never knew what direction they wanted to go...

    they finally got their act together with CR which was fantastic.. QOS was a bit of a misstep due to the writer's strike, but it still made really good money.. and SF (despite your opinion) was a critical and box office smash... so whatever they are doing now, they are doing right..

    Still all they did with CR was to jump on the 24/Bourne train. In QoS (which I regulary defend) they allowed Forster to cut out a 100 Millions worth of scenery and to bring cutting to a new extreme and Mendes was allowed to almost completely alter the script especially after Bond comes to Shanghai (thus rendering the movie a logical disaster) and blow the new timeline with the GF DB5. I haven't even dwelled on DADs 180 turn in the middle of the movie which probably also director induced ( just as the Vanish). To me this doesn't look like a strong and coherent vision of their product.

    I'll admit that a lot of the reason for the success for the reboot is Daniel Craig. He almost single handedly held together QoS with his steely, determined, focused performance. Almost unanimously, folks have said Craig was very solid in QoS, despite that movies flaws (which were mainly editing related - it was pretty coherent plot wise).

    So you have a point. Once Craig is gone, there are risks to the franchise.

    Which is why they need to keep him on for as long as possible. Thank God he looks great and astonishingly younger than he did in 2012. If Cruise at 51/52 is still credibly jumping off buildings and hanging off choppers then Craig after his contracted 5 movies has at least another 1 or 2 movies in him. I think Craig can have a 6 to 7 movie run.

  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    @Suivez_ce_parachute

    The Force Awakens opening in December 2015 is exactly why i dont feel like SP will reach the 1 billion mark.. it may come close - maybe around the $900mil mark is more realistic... it opens up Nov 6 here in the US, and Star Wars isn't until the Dec 18 - so that is a good month and a half for Bond to chew up some good box office revenue (provided that there aren't any other huge openings around that time) which in that time span, could put this film right around the $600mil-$700mil mark world wide... but once Star Wars opens, all bets are off...
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    It would Toby Stephens all over again.

    Oh god no. Please!
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited December 2014 Posts: 6,275
    You don't hire an actor of Waltz's calibre to relegate him to a subordinate role.

    Counterargument: Ralph Fiennes. Second counterargument: Waltz has won two Oscars as best supporting actor.
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    There has been so much betrayal,brooding and navel gazing, it seems enough for now. After all the Bond series (be it novels or films) has never claimed to be a serious spy series,which btw is the reason it still exists. But still, good idea!

    Good post. The refreshing thing about the title is that they are not hiding SPECTRE.
  • Posts: 15,105
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    It would Toby Stephens all over again.

    Oh god no. Please!

    Hence I don't think it will be Scott.
  • edited December 2014 Posts: 203
    HASEROT wrote: »
    @Suivez_ce_parachute

    The Force Awakens opening in December 2015 is exactly why i dont feel like SP will reach the 1 billion mark.. it may come close - maybe around the $900mil mark is more realistic... it opens up Nov 6 here in the US, and Star Wars isn't until the Dec 18 - so that is a good month and a half for Bond to chew up some good box office revenue (provided that there aren't any other huge openings around that time) which in that time span, could put this film right around the $600mil-$700mil mark world wide... but once Star Wars opens, all bets are off...

    isn't the second hunger games opening in November as well? also when does the MI5 movie open? december? i am bit nervous for SP, hope it stands out and makes over $1.5 billion!

    just checked IMDB, hunger games part 2 - Nov 20 and MI5 is Dec 25th. Wow, MI5 is brave to go up against SW:TFA! so that gives SP a good week and a half to do damage at the box office!


  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    Still all they did with CR was to jump on the 24/Bourne train. In QoS (which I regulary defend) they allowed Forster to cut out a 100 Millions worth of scenery and to bring cutting to a new extreme and Mendes was allowed to almost completely alter the script especially after Bond comes to Shanghai (thus rendering the movie a logical disaster) and blow the new timeline with the GF DB5. I haven't even dwelled on DADs 180 turn in the middle of the movie which probably also director induced ( just as the Vanish). To me this doesn't look like a strong and coherent vision of their product.

    Directors are usually fairly hands on with altering the script to suit their vision - it's part of filmmaking Campbell did it, Forster had to do it out of necessity, and Mendes did it... for better or worse, it is what it is...

    christ i could go on and on with this - especially considering how flippantly you want to compare SF to DAD..... but my mom always told me to not feed the trolls... so i shall refrain..... good day sir..
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    mnhettia wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    @Suivez_ce_parachute

    The Force Awakens opening in December 2015 is exactly why i dont feel like SP will reach the 1 billion mark.. it may come close - maybe around the $900mil mark is more realistic... it opens up Nov 6 here in the US, and Star Wars isn't until the Dec 18 - so that is a good month and a half for Bond to chew up some good box office revenue (provided that there aren't any other huge openings around that time) which in that time span, could put this film right around the $600mil-$700mil mark world wide... but once Star Wars opens, all bets are off...

    isn't the second hunger games opening in November as well? also when does the MI5 movie open? december? i am bit nervous for SP, hope it stands out and makes over $1.5 billion!

    I don't think we need to worry about Bond's BO.

    Bond is unusual in that it makes so much more money overseas than it does in the US. Therefore even if it has a reduced US BO take due to all the competition (and I'll admit it's scary), it could make it up overseas with staggered release dates. Bond is huge globally so we're ok.

    Having said that, it may not surpass SF, and in a way I hope it doesn't, but still does well.

    If it beats SF, then we're stuck with trying to 'up' it each time, and I don't personally like that. I'd prefer the producers and directors to focus on quality and not necessarily Box office success, but if it tops SF, the pressure would be formidable.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    mnhettia wrote: »
    HASEROT wrote: »
    @Suivez_ce_parachute

    The Force Awakens opening in December 2015 is exactly why i dont feel like SP will reach the 1 billion mark.. it may come close - maybe around the $900mil mark is more realistic... it opens up Nov 6 here in the US, and Star Wars isn't until the Dec 18 - so that is a good month and a half for Bond to chew up some good box office revenue (provided that there aren't any other huge openings around that time) which in that time span, could put this film right around the $600mil-$700mil mark world wide... but once Star Wars opens, all bets are off...

    isn't the second hunger games opening in November as well? also when does the MI5 movie open? december? i am bit nervous for SP, hope it stands out and makes over $1.5 billion!

    just checked IMDB, hunger games part 2 - Nov 20 and MI5 is Dec 25th. Wow, MI5 is brave to go up against SW:TFA! so that gives SP a good week and a half to do damage at the box office!


    yeah i just had to check myself.... the Hunger Games movie will no doubt eat into SP's box office for sure.. taking that into considering i am actually lowering my predicted box office total from $900mil, to $800mil.
  • Murdock wrote: »
    The DB5 can be easily explained in two possible ways.

    1. It was modified by Q Branch so Bond could stop destroying DBS's

    2. Alexander Demitrios already had it decked out with weapons and gadgets seeing as he's an arms smuggling criminal.

    Possibly inspired by a movie he once saw called GF? ;)
    Sorry, I don't find any of these theories even close to convincing.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    The DB5 can be easily explained in two possible ways.

    1. It was modified by Q Branch so Bond could stop destroying DBS's

    2. Alexander Demitrios already had it decked out with weapons and gadgets seeing as he's an arms smuggling criminal.

    Possibly inspired by a movie he once saw called GF? ;)
    Sorry, I don't find any of these theories even close to convincing.

    Why?
  • Posts: 9,843
    you know bond had missions in between films why can't he have a DB5 built with weapons?
Sign In or Register to comment.