› ›

SPECTRE Production Timeline

1…753754756758759…870

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    chipsticks wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    He's got that, "I'm tapping that ass" smirk on his face.

    can you blame him?

    I rather he wouldn't because quite frankly he is too old for a 30 year old woman, he could be her father for Christ's sake. It's not as bad as the Moore/Roberts situation but almost.

    I suppose yes, technically he could be her father if he had her at 17. At least the age difference isn't too noticeable.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    edited September 2015 Posts: 11,119
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,229
    antovolk wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    EON is correct to inject some nostalgia into the proceedings. That is a different discussion from whether the recent poster is a good one or a creative one.

    For franchises such as Bond, I think creativity for posters is almost counter-productive. The very expected is maybe what they should aim for. Like I said earlier, the SW poster was absolutely un-creative: it could not be more conventionally Star Warsian. I think people react to posters where they can easily identify the franchise they belong to. Maybe that's why we've had a SF poster that was basically a gunbarrel with Bond in it. It was beyond generic, beyond expected, yet it was Bondian and very easily identifiable.

    I agree to a degree. The gunbarrel is definitely iconic, and after a long 4 yr gap between QoS and SF, perhaps was the right approach. Having said that, they could have done the gunbarrel in so many better ways for SF imho. Having DC turning and shooting through the barrel (rather than standing in front of it) would have been brilliant.

    Personally, I'd like to see Bond doing something (he is a man of action after all) rather than just looking at us. That's why I like the SF one where he's on the ground shooting. I remember the first time I saw it....my first thoughts were, 'well at least this is different'.

    The best one they've done so far for SP is the bullet through glass. I love how they used that at the end of the trailer as well.

    It was a great teaser poster. My bet is that we will see more and more minimalistic posters, not only for Bond, but for other movie franchises as well. Unless they do space opera like SW, or similar stuff. And if they keep doing it, there must be a reason for it.

    Actually, a lot of movie franchises already have more minimalistic posters.

    I don't go to cinema very often but that doesn't surprise me.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,229
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    chipsticks wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    He's got that, "I'm tapping that ass" smirk on his face.

    can you blame him?

    I rather he wouldn't because quite frankly he is too old for a 30 year old woman, he could be her father for Christ's sake. It's not as bad as the Moore/Roberts situation but almost.

    I suppose yes, technically he could be her father if he had her at 17. At least the age difference isn't too noticeable.

    And it's not like she's a lolita. Even in the novels, Bond bedded noticeably younger women. Honey Ryder was about 15 years younger if I recall.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    chipsticks wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    He's got that, "I'm tapping that ass" smirk on his face.

    can you blame him?

    I rather he wouldn't because quite frankly he is too old for a 30 year old woman, he could be her father for Christ's sake. It's not as bad as the Moore/Roberts situation but almost.

    I suppose yes, technically he could be her father if he had her at 17. At least the age difference isn't too noticeable.

    And it's not like she's a lolita. Even in the novels, Bond bedded noticeably younger women. Honey Ryder was about 15 years younger if I recall.

    Exactly. The age difference is hardly noticeable, doesn't seem to be a concern to me.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    chipsticks wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    He's got that, "I'm tapping that ass" smirk on his face.

    can you blame him?

    I rather he wouldn't because quite frankly he is too old for a 30 year old woman, he could be her father for Christ's sake. It's not as bad as the Moore/Roberts situation but almost.

    I suppose yes, technically he could be her father if he had her at 17. At least the age difference isn't too noticeable.

    And it's not like she's a lolita. Even in the novels, Bond bedded noticeably younger women. Honey Ryder was about 15 years younger if I recall.

    Exactly. The age difference is hardly noticeable, doesn't seem to be a concern to me.
    Unlike Rog and Grace Jones.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Grace Jones is just freaking scarey ..but not in an aesthetically compromising way ...just scarey.

  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    edited September 2015 Posts: 5,080
    Don't care about Jone's age since Bond only bedded her to get out of a sticky situation.

    She's perfect with Walken.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    Don't care about Jone's age since Bond only bedded her to get out of a sticky situation.

    She's perfect with Walken.
    Little did he know he'd be getting himself into one.

    Was that in bad taste?
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    edited September 2015 Posts: 5,080
    We're going onto Tangent Avenue here, but all I've got to say on this matter, the pleasure's all hers.

    Now I've finally got internet connection, I've only just seen the poster. I wish I didn't.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!

    Does someone actually agree on this? Or disagree?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,229
    jake24 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    chipsticks wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    He's got that, "I'm tapping that ass" smirk on his face.

    can you blame him?

    I rather he wouldn't because quite frankly he is too old for a 30 year old woman, he could be her father for Christ's sake. It's not as bad as the Moore/Roberts situation but almost.

    I suppose yes, technically he could be her father if he had her at 17. At least the age difference isn't too noticeable.

    And it's not like she's a lolita. Even in the novels, Bond bedded noticeably younger women. Honey Ryder was about 15 years younger if I recall.

    Exactly. The age difference is hardly noticeable, doesn't seem to be a concern to me.
    Unlike Rog and Grace Jones.

    Or Roger Moore and most of the Bond girls from his era, actually.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    The only main Bond girl from Rog's era I have a problem with age-wise is Roberts. But this should be taken to another thread.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    That's much, much better! The pose is not so artificial, Léa looks great in the back, the hint of a smile on Craig's face. See Eon, it wasn't so difficult was it?
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    edited September 2015 Posts: 2,015
    Germanlady wrote: »
    So, is this official or fanwork?

    Hm did you hesitate because it's too good to be official ? :)
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!

    Does someone actually agree on this? Or disagree?

    I agree wholeheartedly.
  • redwinewithfishredwinewithfish USA
    Posts: 8
    Here's my attempt.Si6gqTS.jpg
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Great to learn today Dan will be the first Bond to have a co - producer credit.
  • trevaniantrevanian
    Posts: 232
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!

    Does someone actually agree on this? Or disagree?

    You're reposting your own comment, asking for outside comment? Everybody who disagrees with you about Craig will still disagree with you, because he is still butt-ugly and the wrong shape to be Bond.

    I don't wan to be in the shoes of a newbie seeing Bond, not unless he is smart enough to go back and see FRWL to put things in perspective. But that would just magnify my disappointment with the current crop (feel free to change the vowel in that last word.)



  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited September 2015 Posts: 4,116
    trevanian wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!

    Does someone actually agree on this? Or disagree?

    You're reposting your own comment, asking for outside comment? Everybody who disagrees with you about Craig will still disagree with you, because he is still butt-ugly and the wrong shape to be Bond.

    I don't wan to be in the shoes of a newbie seeing Bond, not unless he is smart enough to go back and see FRWL to put things in perspective. But that would just magnify my disappointment with the current crop (feel free to change the vowel in that last word.)



    Butt ugly? Misshapen? crep?
  • hthomas20hthomas20
    Posts: 270
    Has there been any more rumors regarding a possible new tv spot or trailer coming on the 7th in regards to ticket sales starting?
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    trevanian wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!

    Does someone actually agree on this? Or disagree?

    You're reposting your own comment, asking for outside comment? Everybody who disagrees with you about Craig will still disagree with you, because he is still butt-ugly and the wrong shape to be Bond.

    I don't wan to be in the shoes of a newbie seeing Bond, not unless he is smart enough to go back and see FRWL to put things in perspective. But that would just magnify my disappointment with the current crop (feel free to change the vowel in that last word.)



    I think, its time, some mod put some respect in you. I know you from commanderbond a long time ago and I wonder, how much fun it must be to live out such hatred for so many years. Congrats.

    Flagged.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Germanlady wrote: »
    trevanian wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!

    Does someone actually agree on this? Or disagree?

    You're reposting your own comment, asking for outside comment? Everybody who disagrees with you about Craig will still disagree with you, because he is still butt-ugly and the wrong shape to be Bond.

    I don't wan to be in the shoes of a newbie seeing Bond, not unless he is smart enough to go back and see FRWL to put things in perspective. But that would just magnify my disappointment with the current crop (feel free to change the vowel in that last word.)



    I think, its time, some mod put some respect in you. I know you from commanderbond a long time ago and I wonder, how much fun it must be to live out such hatred for so many years. Congrats.

    Flagged.

    I don't see anything at all in the last post to warrant a flag.

    He is just expressing an opinion, which he is entitled to, as is the previous poster he referenced, who was actually asking for an opinion from others on his statement.

    I may not agree with this opinion, but the poster is certainly entitled to it, imho.
  • fromswedenwithlovefromswedenwithlove
    Posts: 654
    bondjames wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    trevanian wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    COJeIKeWwAA-8yc.jpg

    A bit better

    STUNNING!! Reminds me of the "Casino Royale" Poster with Vesper at the back. But damn, LOOK how self-assured 007 looks now after 4 films! LOO7 UP! LOO7 DOWN! LOO7 AT THEM!! It still is photography, but nowhere as photoshopped as the previous three films and their posters.


    And I want to add something to this discussion. I think we all are over-critisizing the film a lot. Which is normal on a forum off course. But please do NOT forget that since "Skyfall" a whole new breed of fans landed on planet Earth. People who previously couldn't care less about those Bond film, but decided to see "Skyfall" anyway. Most likely young people who don't even know that the franchise did not start with Craig, but with Connery back in an era they wouldn't even think of: the 1960's!

    Those 'new fans' now suddenly see this poster! Put yourself in their shoes. They probably see for the very first time an ffff-ing cool lad in beautiful, but also a bit 'weird' uncommon tuxedo. And then they see that girl and a skull at the back! They don't know Baron Samedi, but they find the whole poster simply 'cool'.

    I reckon those "Skyfall"-fans most likely want to see the 'sequel' to "Skyfall". And trust me, after people have seen "SPECTRE", Idris Elba will be forgotten!

    Does someone actually agree on this? Or disagree?

    You're reposting your own comment, asking for outside comment? Everybody who disagrees with you about Craig will still disagree with you, because he is still butt-ugly and the wrong shape to be Bond.

    I don't wan to be in the shoes of a newbie seeing Bond, not unless he is smart enough to go back and see FRWL to put things in perspective. But that would just magnify my disappointment with the current crop (feel free to change the vowel in that last word.)



    I think, its time, some mod put some respect in you. I know you from commanderbond a long time ago and I wonder, how much fun it must be to live out such hatred for so many years. Congrats.

    Flagged.

    I don't see anything at all in the last post to warrant a flag.

    He is just expressing an opinion, which he is entitled to, as is the previous poster he referenced, who was actually asking for an opinion from others on his statement.

    I may not agree with this opinion, but the poster is certainly entitled to it, imho.

    I have to agree on this. I don't feel that he's right in what he's saying but there's no need to flag it.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    edited September 2015 Posts: 6,601
    Butt ugly. Really? Not flagworthy. Oh dear.we have come a long way to find this ok.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Butt ugly. Really? Not flagworthy. Oh dear.we have come a long way to find this ok.

    Not flagworthy.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    RC7 wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Butt ugly. Really? Not flagworthy. Oh dear.we have come a long way to find this ok.

    Not flagworthy.

    In YOUR mind, not in mine and the flagging is done. He deserves it.
    Sad, people accept such wording.


  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    Spectre tickets go on sale Tuesday, September 8th in Australia.
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    My mom and sister saw the poster and did not find Craig attractive at all they think he is far from it...
    Point is, everyone is entitled to an opinion.. Being on this forum for 10 years I have seen way worse.

    I don't agree with his comment but I don't think it should be flagged... Just saying!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Butt ugly. Really? Not flagworthy. Oh dear.we have come a long way to find this ok.

    Not flagworthy.

    In YOUR mind, not in mine and the flagging is done. He deserves it.
    Sad, people accept such wording.


    I like DC as much as you, but some people don't.
Sign In or Register to comment.