SPECTRE Production Timeline

1712713715717718870

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    jake24 wrote: »
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    After SP, Bond should take a lighter tone.
    I agree but I'm not sure if this will go along very well with Daniel Craig playing Bond.
    It worked for Casino Royale.

    Precisely. Many people seem to be unaware of how light CR is. It's the perfect tone of lightness but handling things with a credible seriousness.
  • Posts: 3,164
    Not sure it's the best idea to link them here but a number of call sheets are on eBay with short scene descriptions...
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    doubleoego wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Tuxedo wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    After SP, Bond should take a lighter tone.
    I agree but I'm not sure if this will go along very well with Daniel Craig playing Bond.
    It worked for Casino Royale.

    Precisely. Many people seem to be unaware of how light CR is. It's the perfect tone of lightness but handling things with a credible seriousness.
    Yes.
  • Posts: 725
    roko wrote: »
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    roko wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    plus Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go.
    Yep, and before him, Brosnan was the most bankable Bond in years. Never forget that the hot mess that was DAD still made megatons of money. So I don't think that's an argument at all.

    DAD made less at the box office than any of the three Craig Bonds.

    Yes, but that wasn't my point. I said Brosnan was the most bankable BEFORE Craig came along. They couldn't have known that the next Bond would be even more bankable.
    They already had an actor whose movies made good money and whose last movie had made more than any Bond movie since the Connery years. And yet they let him go and went in a completely new direction, not knowing whether the new guy would be equally (or more) bankable.
    So bankability won't save Craig if they decide to go into a new direction with a new director who has his own ideas about who Bond needs to be.


    Right. Wilson gave a speech a bit before SF opened noting the best time to replace a Bond was while he was still successful. Craig may walk on his own, and for sure he will if SP doesn't do well. The budget and SF's BO are high hurdles and doing Craig no favors.

    The new distribution contract and the very real possibility of Nolan likely wanting to get his stamp on Bond could result in EON dropping Craig if he doesn't leave on his own. And if he does announce SP is his last, we won't know if he was pushed or not, because if he is dropped, EON will have to pay him off to keep him quiet. Connery and Broz detest EON. I don't think EON wants still another Bond burning them in the press. I hope Craig does B25, but the film business is rough.

  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    I love bond, but Eon can be real shits
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 5,745
    It will be interesting to see what producers we get for the next two films.

    The sons of Michael are bound to join Barbara sooner than later, and I wouldn't be surprised if

    1. Mendes leaving
    2. His replacement as director
    3. New writers (there's no way of knowing if Purvis and Wade will return), and
    4. Michael Wilson being replaced with one or both of his sons


    leads to an agreement to move beyond Craig or keep him.
  • Posts: 725
    I love bond, but Eon can be real shits

    There are books about how badly EON has treated most of their Bonds, particulalry Connery and Broz. Ending a Bond's run is one thing, but EON has a rep for causing hard feelings. Their loyalty is to their bank account and EON will drop him in a minute if they thinks it's in their long term financial interest.

    Craig is getting around $20m for SP. Sounds like a lot but not when you compare it to some of the underwear models and wrestlers in other franchises who get participation points. These big franchise salaries are complicated, as there are lots of variables so who knows what's what, but Craig had such a huge role in the production of SP along with acting in it, I'd love to know what he really thinks of his deal with EON.

  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    He wants to make as much money as he can right now. Odds are James Bond is his financial peak as an actor.
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 725
    If Craig was motivated by money, he wouldn't have taken 3 years off between Bonds and even backed out of the 2 films he was going to do. He threw away huge financial leverage after SF by not doing a single film before SP. I think he has more than enough money, and doesn't give a damn. Nobody knows what he will do after Bond or how well his career may go.
  • Posts: 859
    Is absolu not a topic for disctution about the speculation of Bond 25 or the next (what nobody know anything)... Out subject boys...
  • Posts: 709
    I love bond, but Eon can be real shits

    They're a business, like any other. They hire people, they let them go, it's nothing personal. Read some of the stuff about what goes on at Marvel, those people are some serious money grubbers.
  • Posts: 188
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Casting Bond isn't about casting a "bankable" actor. Sure, it requires a good actor in the role but the script and directing needs to be on point. After the first movie, of it's a success and the actor delivers then it's off to the races unless they screw up big time creatively as was tge case with DAD but prior to an actor's second outing there's a reason why a relative unknown is cast.

    Agreed. I was just answering @mcdonbb, who said "Craig is the most bankable Bond in years so I doubt the producers much less the studio even letting that go."
  • Posts: 188
    How does postproduction work, exactly? I mean, where in the production process are they right now? Are they still doing pick-up shots? Is the editing done? Are they doing the special effects before or after editing? Does anyone know?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    roko wrote: »
    How does postproduction work, exactly? I mean, where in the production process are they right now? Are they still doing pick-up shots? Is the editing done? Are they doing the special effects before or after editing? Does anyone know?

    Visual effects and editing begin much earlier in the process, it's just officially called 'post production' once they have wrapped. Lee Smith compiles the film as they shoot as an offline assembly. Sam will be in the edit, tightening it up and post shots will be in flux at various houses until they are signed off.
  • Posts: 11,119
    What insanely radical presumptuous predictions I read here.

    Do people tend to forget what Daniel Craig said when he was interviewed on the set of "SPECTRE" in Mexico-City?
    "The smoking again fits me perfectly! So I am mainly busy focusing on this film now."

    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    I'm angry about it. Daniel Craig is THE Bond actor of this generation. He drew in a complete new set of fans with "Skyfall" that usually weren't watching Bond films. So the most stupid idea is to cast another actor after "SPECTRE", especially since we're just starting by bringing back this crime syndicate S.P.E.C.T.R.E. and possibly Blofeld.

    Dumping Daniel Craig after "SPECTRE" feels like a lackluster, bad creative decision with this masterfully skilled reboot that started with "Casino Royale". As opposed to getting rid of Pierce Brosnan after "Die Another Day", which felt way more logical.

    Daniel Craig needs to stay. I love his films. I adore him. And he needs to do at least 1 or 2 more Bond films to finish his reign in the new Bond continuity/universe. After that? In all honesty, NO reboot please. A '2nd' actor should be casted for the franchise, similar to the casting of George Lazenby/Roger Moore a few decades back. Craig is our 'Connery'.

    And IF Craig leaves after "SPECTRE", then the media is partially to blame for that. Why else would you think Craig would be annoyed last time when he was asked that nasty question again:
    "I don't give a fuck!" [after being asked who should step into his shoes]

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    A bit of an overreaction. DC has been hassle free since CR hit. Talk of his successor has only gained momentum during this production, and for two key reasons. 1) There has been talk within the industry that this could be the case plus, 2) The guy has been Bond for a considerable amount of time.

    By the time SP hits it will have been 9 years since the release of CR and 10 since he was cast. Assuming he stays for another that will push him into 'longest tenure' territory. So talk of his successor is completely inevitable. He did two films in two years, but it's taken them seven years to complete the following two. I don't mind him playing an ageing Bond, but this talk will only continue until he hangs up the Walther. He's now much closer to the end of his tenure than the beginning. Something we should get used to.

    There is however something very simple DC could say that would quash most of this chat. "I'm going nowhere".
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    How brutal it must be for Craig when he hears nothing but "who's going to be the next Bond?" and "when are you leaving?" when he's trying to do his job.
  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    A bit of an overreaction. DC has been hassle free since CR hit. Talk of his successor has only gained momentum during this production, and for two key reasons. 1) There has been talk within the industry that this could be the case plus, 2) The guy has been Bond for a considerable amount of time.

    By the time SP hits it will have been 9 years since the release of CR and 10 since he was cast. Assuming he stays for another that will push him into 'longest tenure' territory. So talk of his successor is completely inevitable. He did two films in two years, but it's taken them seven years to complete the following two. I don't mind him playing an ageing Bond, but this talk will only continue until he hangs up the Walther. He's now much closer to the end of his tenure than the beginning. Something we should get used to.

    There is however something very simple DC could say that would quash most of this chat. "I'm going nowhere".

    perhaps. but don't you think Tom Cruise should get the same questions? Regarding him still portraying Ethan Hunt after 20 years and 5 films?
  • RC7RC7
    edited August 2015 Posts: 10,512
    jake24 wrote: »
    How brutal it must be for Craig when he hears nothing but "who's going to be the next Bond?" and "when are you leaving?" when he's trying to do his job.

    Par for the course. Other Bonds have found themselves in similar circumstances. RM actively courted it. Let's not beat around the bush, this is Craig's profession and he's paid handsomely for it. If he can't deal with it, then it's tough shit. Personally, I don't think he cares.
  • RC7RC7
    edited August 2015 Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    A bit of an overreaction. DC has been hassle free since CR hit. Talk of his successor has only gained momentum during this production, and for two key reasons. 1) There has been talk within the industry that this could be the case plus, 2) The guy has been Bond for a considerable amount of time.

    By the time SP hits it will have been 9 years since the release of CR and 10 since he was cast. Assuming he stays for another that will push him into 'longest tenure' territory. So talk of his successor is completely inevitable. He did two films in two years, but it's taken them seven years to complete the following two. I don't mind him playing an ageing Bond, but this talk will only continue until he hangs up the Walther. He's now much closer to the end of his tenure than the beginning. Something we should get used to.

    There is however something very simple DC could say that would quash most of this chat. "I'm going nowhere".

    perhaps. but don't you think Tom Cruise should get the same questions? Regarding him still portraying Ethan Hunt after 20 years and 5 films?

    No. He's Ethan Hunt, no one else is, or will be. James Bond is an icon, embodied by a very elite club of individuals. 'Who will be the next Bond?' is one of the great hypothetical questions in pop culture. If you can't see the comparison then I don't know what to say, although I feel you're merely attempting to play M:I off against Bond, as you tend to do quite a bit.
  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    A bit of an overreaction. DC has been hassle free since CR hit. Talk of his successor has only gained momentum during this production, and for two key reasons. 1) There has been talk within the industry that this could be the case plus, 2) The guy has been Bond for a considerable amount of time.

    By the time SP hits it will have been 9 years since the release of CR and 10 since he was cast. Assuming he stays for another that will push him into 'longest tenure' territory. So talk of his successor is completely inevitable. He did two films in two years, but it's taken them seven years to complete the following two. I don't mind him playing an ageing Bond, but this talk will only continue until he hangs up the Walther. He's now much closer to the end of his tenure than the beginning. Something we should get used to.

    There is however something very simple DC could say that would quash most of this chat. "I'm going nowhere".

    perhaps. but don't you think Tom Cruise should get the same questions? Regarding him still portraying Ethan Hunt after 20 years and 5 films?

    No. He's Ethan Hunt, no one else is, or will be. James Bond is an icon, embodied by a very elite club of individuals. 'Who will be the next Bond?' is one of the great hypothetical questions in pop culture. If you can't see the comparison then I don't know what to say, although I feel you're merely attempting to play M:I off against Bond, as you tend to do quite a bit.

    Not really @RC7.

    But I do remember the Brosnan era. And although Brosnan occasionally received the question if he will quit anytime, it wasn't to that extend as what Craig is receiving. People at first were even angry when Brosnan was dumped.
  • edited August 2015 Posts: 4,619
    Dumping Daniel Craig after "SPECTRE"
    No, Craig won't be "dumped" after Spectre, but that doesn't mean it won't be his last Bond film. What if EON does want to make a 5th film with him, but he is the one who decides it's time to retire from the role?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    A bit of an overreaction. DC has been hassle free since CR hit. Talk of his successor has only gained momentum during this production, and for two key reasons. 1) There has been talk within the industry that this could be the case plus, 2) The guy has been Bond for a considerable amount of time.

    By the time SP hits it will have been 9 years since the release of CR and 10 since he was cast. Assuming he stays for another that will push him into 'longest tenure' territory. So talk of his successor is completely inevitable. He did two films in two years, but it's taken them seven years to complete the following two. I don't mind him playing an ageing Bond, but this talk will only continue until he hangs up the Walther. He's now much closer to the end of his tenure than the beginning. Something we should get used to.

    There is however something very simple DC could say that would quash most of this chat. "I'm going nowhere".

    perhaps. but don't you think Tom Cruise should get the same questions? Regarding him still portraying Ethan Hunt after 20 years and 5 films?

    No. He's Ethan Hunt, no one else is, or will be. James Bond is an icon, embodied by a very elite club of individuals. 'Who will be the next Bond?' is one of the great hypothetical questions in pop culture. If you can't see the comparison then I don't know what to say, although I feel you're merely attempting to play M:I off against Bond, as you tend to do quite a bit.

    Not really @RC7.

    But I do remember the Brosnan era. And although Brosnan occasionally received the question if he will quit anytime, it wasn't to that extend as what Craig is receiving. People at first were even angry when Brosnan was dumped.

    Because Brosnan was absolutely adamant he wanted to remain in the role, if DC can't bring himself to declare that he's still in it for the foreseeable then people will start asking questions. Especially when industry insiders hear murmurings that it could be his last.
  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    A bit of an overreaction. DC has been hassle free since CR hit. Talk of his successor has only gained momentum during this production, and for two key reasons. 1) There has been talk within the industry that this could be the case plus, 2) The guy has been Bond for a considerable amount of time.

    By the time SP hits it will have been 9 years since the release of CR and 10 since he was cast. Assuming he stays for another that will push him into 'longest tenure' territory. So talk of his successor is completely inevitable. He did two films in two years, but it's taken them seven years to complete the following two. I don't mind him playing an ageing Bond, but this talk will only continue until he hangs up the Walther. He's now much closer to the end of his tenure than the beginning. Something we should get used to.

    There is however something very simple DC could say that would quash most of this chat. "I'm going nowhere".

    perhaps. but don't you think Tom Cruise should get the same questions? Regarding him still portraying Ethan Hunt after 20 years and 5 films?

    No. He's Ethan Hunt, no one else is, or will be. James Bond is an icon, embodied by a very elite club of individuals. 'Who will be the next Bond?' is one of the great hypothetical questions in pop culture. If you can't see the comparison then I don't know what to say, although I feel you're merely attempting to play M:I off against Bond, as you tend to do quite a bit.

    Not really @RC7.

    But I do remember the Brosnan era. And although Brosnan occasionally received the question if he will quit anytime, it wasn't to that extend as what Craig is receiving. People at first were even angry when Brosnan was dumped.

    Because Brosnan was absolutely adamant he wanted to remain in the role, if DC can't bring himself to declare that he's still in it for the foreseeable then people will start asking questions. Especially when industry insiders hear murmurings that it could be his last.

    Let's hope that, from now on, Barbara and Michael are going to wave with bigger paychecks. Because in all honesty.....I don't want him to leave yet ;-(. I would cry a lot if he leaves after "SPECTRE". And Bond fans in here....really need to hug me and comfort me....if this happens.... :((
  • Posts: 1,985
    Just read about Sony not distributing Bond movies after Spectre. At this rate it looks like we're heading for another 4 year gap before Bond 25
  • Posts: 11,119
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Just read about Sony not distributing Bond movies after Spectre. At this rate it looks like we're heading for another 4 year gap before Bond 25

    That's not true. There will be an auction end of this year, in which all major movie companies/distributors can participate. Obviously, Sony wants to have Bond back, but I do expect that fairly easy and relatively fast the distribution rights -and perhaps also the home entertainment rights- will go to the highly successful Universal Pictures. They are already doing the distribution for "SPECTRE" in Netherlands and Belgium.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    If universal get it, they'd have both Bond and Bourne.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    And you know what I dislike, EVER since Daniel Craig became James Bond there was criticism attached to his casting. And it seems that the "no blond Bond" criticism has not changed into "who's stepping in Craig's shoes when he quits?".

    A bit of an overreaction. DC has been hassle free since CR hit. Talk of his successor has only gained momentum during this production, and for two key reasons. 1) There has been talk within the industry that this could be the case plus, 2) The guy has been Bond for a considerable amount of time.

    By the time SP hits it will have been 9 years since the release of CR and 10 since he was cast. Assuming he stays for another that will push him into 'longest tenure' territory. So talk of his successor is completely inevitable. He did two films in two years, but it's taken them seven years to complete the following two. I don't mind him playing an ageing Bond, but this talk will only continue until he hangs up the Walther. He's now much closer to the end of his tenure than the beginning. Something we should get used to.

    There is however something very simple DC could say that would quash most of this chat. "I'm going nowhere".

    perhaps. but don't you think Tom Cruise should get the same questions? Regarding him still portraying Ethan Hunt after 20 years and 5 films?

    No. He's Ethan Hunt, no one else is, or will be. James Bond is an icon, embodied by a very elite club of individuals. 'Who will be the next Bond?' is one of the great hypothetical questions in pop culture. If you can't see the comparison then I don't know what to say, although I feel you're merely attempting to play M:I off against Bond, as you tend to do quite a bit.

    Not really @RC7.

    But I do remember the Brosnan era. And although Brosnan occasionally received the question if he will quit anytime, it wasn't to that extend as what Craig is receiving. People at first were even angry when Brosnan was dumped.

    Because Brosnan was absolutely adamant he wanted to remain in the role, if DC can't bring himself to declare that he's still in it for the foreseeable then people will start asking questions. Especially when industry insiders hear murmurings that it could be his last.

    Let's hope that, from now on, Barbara and Michael are going to wave with bigger paychecks. Because in all honesty.....I don't want him to leave yet ;-(. I would cry a lot if he leaves after "SPECTRE". And Bond fans in .here....really need to hug me and comfort me....if this happens.... :((

    There were other reasons for MW and BB unceremoniously dumping Brosnan. They wanted a new direction ..not more DAD ..Brosnan in a way became a symbol ..or a scapegoat. We're starting fresh ..rebooting. need young face...

    Ok maybe on surface not logical decision ...and in MW fashion said best to leave while on top.. PB didn't seem to agree of course.

    My point is this ..the producers and actor are artistically on the same page ..we're not reboot again... Craig is bankable... so no I still don't agree lol
  • Posts: 1,985
    As always said Brosnans Bond was here to do 1 thing resurrect the series from the dead that was the 6 year gap and to make the franchise money that was it. They didn't countinue the dark path that they did with LTK because they saw the audience wasn't ready for those movies so they chose the easy way with Brosnans run. Brosnans run was never to tell a story about Bond the character like Craig's run is doing
  • Posts: 1,985
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Just read about Sony not distributing Bond movies after Spectre. At this rate it looks like we're heading for another 4 year gap before Bond 25

    That's not true. There will be an auction end of this year, in which all major movie companies/distributors can participate. Obviously, Sony wants to have Bond back, but I do expect that fairly easy and relatively fast the distribution rights -and perhaps also the home entertainment rights- will go to the highly successful Universal Pictures. They are already doing the distribution for "SPECTRE" in Netherlands and Belgium.

    So what do you say the chances of Bond 25 Re coming out in 2017?
Sign In or Register to comment.