SPECTRE Production Timeline

1520521523525526870

Comments

  • edited March 2015 Posts: 3,164
    hthomas20 wrote: »
    they are going to release 7mins of film vs a teaser on March 28?

    No, a teaser trailer will be released on March 28 according to Marketto, and at CinemaCon
    they will show 7 minutes of the film
  • edited March 2015 Posts: 591
    hthomas20 wrote: »
    ggl007 wrote: »
    @antovolk and @jake24
    Does this mean we won't get to see the teaser trailer on March 28th?

    No, not the first trailer, in fact what the leaks are saying will be presented at CinemaCon back up the March 28 for first teaser info.

    Mods feel free to edit if necessary but here's what it will be (spoiler tagged because from leaks)
    7 minutes of footage from the film.
    Sorry, but are you talking about past year leaks or new leaks?? In 2014 they knew that CinemaCom would show that??
    they are going to release 7mins of film vs a teaser on March 28?
    [/quote]

    Maybe both are happening? Do we think the 7mins could be a scene from the Austria sequences seeing as they're pretty much done with that aspect of the movie from what we've seen. I'm sure they have a little bit of stuff to do in Austria, also depends if they wanna do any reshoots once they go into editing.

  • edited March 2015 Posts: 3,164
    Maybe both are happening? Do we think the 7mins could be a scene from the Austria sequences seeing as they're pretty much done with that aspect of the movie from what we've seen. I'm sure they have a little bit of stuff to do in Austria, also depends if they wanna do any reshoots once they go into editing.

    People are getting confused about the timing - what's happening when.

    Sony won't (or at least aren't planning to) show a trailer at CinemaCon, they'll show what I mentioned.

  • edited March 2015 Posts: 591
    antovolk wrote: »
    Maybe both are happening? Do we think the 7mins could be a scene from the Austria sequences seeing as they're pretty much done with that aspect of the movie from what we've seen. I'm sure they have a little bit of stuff to do in Austria, also depends if they wanna do any reshoots once they go into editing.

    People are getting confused about the timing - what's happening when.

    Sony won't (or at least aren't planning to) show a trailer at CinemaCon, they'll show what I mentioned.

    Oh I totally agree with you. That's what I'm saying they'll release a teaser trailer in March and show seven minutes of the film at CinemaCon. I'm just wondering what will be in the seven minute clip.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    b roll footage, perhaps.
  • aaron819aaron819 Switzerland
    Posts: 1,208
    What are the sources for this 7 minute clip
  • Posts: 1,552
    aaron819 wrote: »
    What are the sources for this 7 minute clip
    Apparently something in the e-mail leaks?

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2015 Posts: 4,043
    JCRendle wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Your damned if you do and your damned if you don't!

    I doubt we'll see anything as OTT as the Brosnan era or as gadget laden as the Lotus is SWLM. I'm thinking they'll use them sparingly, maybe Bond will go to use them and they'll malfunction or accidentally discover them. I'm sure I heard from someone discussing the script that
    Bond steals the DB10 from Q Branch

    How do we know that Bond is even aware of the capabilities of the car if this is the case?
    Also an evening chase sounds great especially using the Tiber.
    Since when had Bond ever bothered learning the specifications of a gadget before going into the field? He's usually in the "I'll work it out as I go along" frame of mind.


    Bond seems pretty aware in GF, SWLM & TLD what the car does so @JCRendle I'm not sure what Bond films you've been watching?

    I'm sorry my 37 years of being a Bond fan obviously doesn't count for much.

    Anymore amusing pictures you can post to make certain other members think you are so witty in your short time posting here?
  • Posts: 3,164
    doubleoego wrote: »
    b roll footage, perhaps.

    Should be actual film footage - scenes etc...
  • aaron819aaron819 Switzerland
    Posts: 1,208
    JCRendle wrote: »
    aaron819 wrote: »
    What are the sources for this 7 minute clip
    Apparently something in the e-mail leaks?

    Who found those emails? Who first said anything about this clip of 7 minutes?

  • aaron819aaron819 Switzerland
    Posts: 1,208
    JCRendle wrote: »
    aaron819 wrote: »
    What are the sources for this 7 minute clip
    Apparently something in the e-mail leaks?

    Who found those emails? Who first said anything about this clip of 7 minutes?

  • Posts: 4,619
    A lot of us have read those e-mails. As for those 7 minutes, don't get too excited, since there is a pretty good chance we will never see that Cinemacon presentation planned for April.
  • Posts: 3,164
    A lot of us have read those e-mails. As for those 7 minutes, don't get too excited, since there is a pretty good chance we will never see that Cinemacon presentation planned for April.

    Exactly. We never saw the Skyfall 4-minute CineEurope footage from 2012.

    If anything we'll get scene descriptions as many movie bloggers will be there. And this is a good indication that we'll get a trailer before CinemaCon i.e. lining up with Marketto's March 28 date.
  • edited March 2015 Posts: 1,552
    Shardlake wrote: »
    JCRendle wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Your damned if you do and your damned if you don't!

    I doubt we'll see anything as OTT as the Brosnan era or as gadget laden as the Lotus is SWLM. I'm thinking they'll use them sparingly, maybe Bond will go to use them and they'll malfunction or accidentally discover them. I'm sure I heard from someone discussing the script that
    Bond steals the DB10 from Q Branch

    How do we know that Bond is even aware of the capabilities of the car if this is the case?
    Also an evening chase sounds great especially using the Tiber.
    Since when had Bond ever bothered learning the specifications of a gadget before going into the field? He's usually in the "I'll work it out as I go along" frame of mind.


    Bond seems pretty aware in GF, SWLM & TLD what the car does so @JCRendle I'm not sure what Bond films you've been watching?

    I'm sorry my 37 years of being a Bond fan obviously doesn't count for much.

    Anymore amusing pictures you can post to make certain other members think you are so witty in your short time posting here?
    That was a little rude. I did not post anything demeaning towards yourself, nor did I question your validity as a Bond fan.

    What I meant was that Bond usually seems to grasp a gadget without much explanation from Q.

    For example, from Brosnan's tenure:- Look at when he jumps in Q's fishing boat in The World is Not Enough - he knows exactly what he's doing, even though Q hasn't told him anything about it.

    In Die Another Day, Q gives him the instruction manual to the "Vanish", which he disregards and shoots through with the tracking guns.

    In GF, Q tells Bond about some of the gadgets on the DB5, granted - but he doesn't mention the tire slashers, yet Bond knows exactly what to do.

    I wasn't saying that he wasn't aware of what the cars or gadgets could do, I was saying that he was aware of what the cars and gadgets could do without much explanation. He's cocky and he would often be distracted during Q's explanations

    I'm sorry I offended you, it wasn't meant intentionally I assure you, but I do find that Bond is able to pick up gadgets without too much explanation.
    ---
    I'm sorry if you don't find my images amusing, but I fail to see what that's got to do with anything. I respect that you've been a Bond fan for 37 years, but that doesn't take away from any validity of opinion that I hold either - I have watched all the Bond films, read all of Fleming's Bond novels and short stories, plus several (granted not all) of the continuation novels I've got a good collection of books and magazines chronicling the production of the movies - I think that my opinions count just as much as yours.




  • Posts: 11,119
    And @JCRendle ? See my post entirely at the top :-).
  • Posts: 1,552
    And @JCRendle ? See my post entirely at the top :-).
    What do you mean? I was replying to Shardlake? I'll PM you.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Should we be expecting a special birthday clapperboard for Craig's birthday tomorrow?
  • Posts: 11,119
    jake24 wrote: »
    Should we be expecting a special birthday clapperboard for Craig's birthday tomorrow?

    One clapperboard for each crew- and cast member's birthday. LOL :-P.
  • Posts: 11,119
    One thing about the 2nd part of the story of Bond's childhood. What the hell is wrong with that? IF you use Ian Fleming's character Oberhauser, you automatically arrive at Bond's past anyway. And again, I don't believe it will be such a "deep layered" secondary plot as in SF. In any case I don't believe that bit of story won't make Bond tremble emotionally. Bond is on a mission in SP.
  • edited March 2015 Posts: 2,015
    NicNac wrote: »
    I was really using ejector seats as a sort of symbolic point. It defines film Bond more than any other single ingrediant (arguably).

    GF : Bond uses all the gadgets, we have an iconic scene, and in the end.. he gets caught. Because he can't kill an old lady. Because he's fooled by a mirror.

    After that : Bond uses a gadget.. to escape successfully most of the times. When the gadget fails, well, it gives us for instance the LALD escape scene : another iconic scene.

    So in GF, we still have the Fleming plot "Bond is not a superhero, he gets caught", we don't have the deus-ex-machine gadget to solve the writer's problems. It was IMO the major problem with the Brosnan movies in particular : it's hard to remember a time when we witness Brosnan's Bond being witty, it seems he's just Batman with an utility belt for every problem.

    Oh wait, in DAD, Brosnan's Bond uses the ejector seat in a witty way, though. Hm.


  • Germanlady wrote: »
    @Gustav, you have some heavy spoiler in your last post and now I know more, then I cared to.
    I know, its not on purpose, but for **** sake. Pay attention please.

    Don't worry too much... On one side, yes, we have some people who read the leaks who post here, and toy dangerously with the "you know I know" attitude when they interact with others. But on the other side, I can tell you there are some things here that are taken as granted about SPECTRE's plot, that are very, very wrong from what we can read from the leaks.

    But well, the difference between the early scripts and the last scripts seems quite monumental on some aspects, according to the comments on them we have in the leaks (in one year, we'll be able to sing the praise of a "hero" who stood up and said "No way" when he read the Logan script...). And the difference between the very last scripts post-Logan that were leaked are less impressive in terms on quantity, but they are on some critical points. So they probably still continued to tune that after the leaks...

    So, surprises ahead for everyone, probably.

  • Posts: 6,601
    Thanks parachute. Sounds good.
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 262
    A lot of us have read those e-mails.

    I can hardly belief that "a lot of us" have read other peoples e-mails.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Do we think or know, whether or not the cast will be at comic con to present those 7 minutes?
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    From what I can understand, this was the schedule before the leaks. So we don't know if the plans remain the same.
  • Posts: 11,119
    NicNac wrote: »
    I was really using ejector seats as a sort of symbolic point. It defines film Bond more than any other single ingrediant (arguably).

    GF : Bond uses all the gadgets, we have an iconic scene, and in the end.. he gets caught. Because he can't kill an old lady. Because he's fooled by a mirror.

    After that : Bond uses a gadget.. to escape successfully most of the times. When the gadget fails, well, it gives us for instance the LALD escape scene : another iconic scene.

    So in GF, we still have the Fleming plot "Bond is not a superhero, he gets caught", we don't have the deus-ex-machine gadget to solve the writer's problems. It was IMO the major problem with the Brosnan movies in particular : it's hard to remember a time when we witness Brosnan's Bond being witty, it seems he's just Batman with an utility belt for every problem.

    Oh wait, in DAD, Brosnan's Bond uses the ejector seat in a witty way, though. Hm.


    I completely agree with you. Just an example. The invisible Aston Martin Vanquish from DAD for example, and its ejector seat. Obviously the screenplay writers came up with these "very cool ideas" for the sake of being very cool. Moreover, the inclusion of the Aston Martin was foremost product placement.

    Because A), it's ridiculous in the first place to make a car invisible. It doesn't serve any purpose to saving possible lives. Actually, it causes only traffic problems, IF there's a real car chase involved. We saw that when that skidoo hit the invisible Aston.

    And B), the way the ejector seat was used in DAD is the best example of how gadgets should NOT be executed. As a means of putting the car back on its wheels? Give me a break. It didn't have any purpose at all. I actually would have loved to see Bond escaping that car while it was on its back. A bit like @RC7 proposed.

    Also C), Writing in the Brosnan-era, especially for DAD, was quite bad. As a screenplay writer one can immediately channel his/her creativeness and influence on the writing process, once the screenplay writer now that there will be an Aston Martin in a film. And then to make it fit into the plot in a believable and credible way. That obviously didn't work in DAD.

    So now we have another Aston Martin in SPECTRE. I think we can safely assume that that one gadget from the Aston Martin DB10 will be used in a better, more credible way, and that it'll actually have a real purpose. Perhaps Q says something like this to 007: "
    We're not going to use our budget to turn this car into a ridiculous submarine, 007. So please 007, FIRST channel your driving skills. On too many occasions we had to use our defibrillators on you! But IF something life-threatening happens, heaven forbid, then you contact me FIRST via your earphone!
    "
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    In GF, Q tells Bond about some of the gadgets on the DB5, granted - but he doesn't mention the tire slashers, yet Bond knows exactly what to do.

    Most of Q's briefing happened off screen didn't it?
  • Posts: 1,552
    Maybe, but that's only conjecture. I interpret the scenes as Bond not needing much explanation, he's smart enough to work out the majority of gadgets without the need for Q to go into too much explanation. I'm not saying I'm right, or that you're wrong, I'm just saying that that's my interpretation.
  • RC7RC7
    edited March 2015 Posts: 10,512
    I completely agree with you. Just an example. The invisible Aston Martin Vanquish from DAD for example, and its ejector seat. Obviously the screenplay writers came up with these "very cool ideas" for the sake of being very cool. Moreover, the inclusion of the Aston Martin was foremost product placement.

    The Jag and DB10 in SP are also product placement. Those who've read leaked emails might have a better insight into this, or perhaps not, but it stands to reason that a discussion between the manufacturers and EON would have been under way for some time. To strike a deal that is mutually beneficial, but is something the screenwriter knows they must include. I find it unlikely that Logan would write a car chase and then EON start talks with the manufacturers. One would imagine the process producing set-pieces is similar to the way EON have always worked, where 'Car chase in Rome' or even simply 'Car chase' is an idea that is kicked around very early on and accommodated by Logan. I don't think this scenario is any different to DAD. Haggling over the the minutiae of how
    one uses an 'ejector seat' is a moot point imo. It's still a car with an ejector seat, which to me seems at odds with what I'd expect from the DC films.
    .
    In terms of it fitting the story I read a spoiler somewhere else that suggested he steals it from Q branch. So it's to be expected that he doesn't really know it's capabilities. It's not the worst idea in the world, but neither is it particularly great. It's still merely taking ingredients from the nostalgia fridge and sticking them in a blender. I assume SP will hark back to the old days, where we see Q's lab and all agents drive tricked out Astons. All well and good and I'm sure it'll have a neat twist and fit snugly with any themes Mendes is toying with, but I just wonder if that is necessary? I really loved Q's entrance in SF, much more than his topshop moment later on, and would love to see more clandestine meetings in interesting locations. This is not me being a merchant of doom, just something I find interesting to talk about.
    So now we have another Aston Martin in SPECTRE. I think we can safely assume that that one gadget from the Aston Martin DB10 will be used in a better, more credible way, and that it'll actually have a real purpose.

    I wonder what that purpose is in the era of films. SF opened the door it seems, where CR and QoS were taking risks by keeping it shut.
    My best guess is that none of the gadgets are used in ways Bond has any real control over, so it might be that the ejector seat is used in an accidental way, that renders the chase over. Which does sound a little comic, but I think I'd prefer it to Bond consciously deploying these tricks.
    In the cold light of day what would you actually prefer? A damn good car chase with some neat driving skills, physical stunts and great interplay between the drivers or A damn good car chase with some neat driving skills, physical stunts and great interplay between the drivers plus gadgets. I just can't see past the thought processes involved in the conception of this, whether they are more credible or not. It's a really odd thing, that I didn't thing we'd be privvy to in a DC film.
  • edited March 2015 Posts: 3,278
    With the reveal of gadgets, I don't think I'm spoiling things by saying that the car chase for sure will feature comic elements. It has Purvis and Wade written all over it. Especially
    the Roger Mooreish scene featuring the FIAT
    For those worrying about the use of gadgets: relax. If you end up watching SP and think that the chase would have worked better with a gadgetfree DB10, feel free to complain all you want.
Sign In or Register to comment.