SPECTRE Production Timeline

1803804806808809870

Comments

  • Posts: 11,119
    Bounine wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    Mendes says runtime is same as Skyfall
    http://www.timeout.com/london/blog/fear-not-tired-movie-bums-spectre-wont-be-the-longest-bond-movie-ever-sam-mendes-says-so-100215

    Also Sony Russia announced a Moscow premiere, date and attending cast TBC.

    Hmmm. Bit of a worry. Same length as SF but SP seems to have a hell of a lot more action. I was happy with the action to non action ratio is Skyfall which means this movie will most likely have too much for my liking. What a pity. Still, when it comes to modern Bond films I know never to get my hopes up too much.

    Well, CR is 1 minute longer or shorter than SF and had more and better engaging action than SF without compromising on the non action scenes. I think SP will definitely handle the quality and frequency of action better than SF without it coming off as hollow action porn.

    Nice response to reassure too much worry.

    Seriously people don't seek things to worry about.

    Oh my God is the movie saturated with
    so much yellow that we can't see it?...

    Or is it so long that we'll have to spend the night?...

    Or is Sam Smith actually singing the theme?...

    Oh crap! Forgot that.....


    :-w
    Thank you. Someone had to say it.

    The abundance of action issue in contemporary Bond films is an entirely relevant one. With the exception of Skyfall and to a lesser extent Casino Royale (this film still was a tad too action heavy), the Bond films have suffered from this since Goldeneye. It was the catastrophic Brosnan era, the Bond movies that are a disgrace to the franchise that kicked this all off. The healthy, sane balance sadly ended with License To Kill.

    A big part of the reason the Brosnan Bond films did so well is due to the fact that this is James Bond, a franchise that has endured for so many years and has changed with the times and because Bond is such a household name that many will run along to the cinema to check out the latest installment regardless of the reviews. It's lucky they changed things up post DAD, otherwise the franchise may very well have met it's death. Fortunately for them now, they have talented actors and directors behind them to keep the series alive but if they are going to sacrifice story and character development with mindless action then they will eventually take a nose dive down the toilet. Fortunately they have the sense to return to basics every few films and save themselves but not without ruining one's enjoyment of a few Bond films along the way. Aside for the ridiculously embarrassing Brosnan era, QOS is the worst Bond film in the franchise - non stop action with very little story. An absolute mess of a movie. Then they redeemed themselves with SF. Regardless of whether SP is a good film or not it will still do well at the box office as it's Bond. Let's see what happens next...

    Thank you. Someone had to say it.

    I think it's not that black-and-white really. When my nephews tried to watch FRWL they said it was boring, because there was almost no action in it. Like economic conjuctural changes.....the amount of action through the decades vary as well. And while the Brosnan films have been very pivotal to the brand....and extremely succesful, it does seem that the Daniel Craig films excell on the box office figures of the Brosnan films. To such an extend that the Craig films have become again the truly 'godfather' of non-3d, non-scifi, real-life-action cinema. Back in the 1990's that wasn't entirely the case yet, because movies like "Lethal Weapon", "Batman", "Die Hard" and "Mission: Impossible" did considerably better at the box office.
  • Posts: 1,970
    I have so many things planed the rest of the year and spectre is one of those big things planned. Dam it is Nov 6 yet?
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 2,599
    Unfortunately the attention span of the audience has lessened as years have progressed. This is obviously why films of the action genre, movies in general and thriller books are faster paced, but I see no need to include as much action as the Brosnan era had. Up until the Brosnan era, I saw these films as action/thrillers (this includes all the Bond films right back to Dr No) but sadly post LTK most of them merely fall into the action genre. The older fans go to see Bond for something more than just action. It used to be about so much more. Anyway, aside for this issue, everything else about SP looks and sounds magnificent such as the good acting and beautiful cinematography and sets. The action itself looks great too. I just hope that the movie isn't dominated by it.
  • Posts: 3,276
    Bounine wrote: »
    [if they are going to sacrifice story and character development with mindless action then they will eventually take a nose dive down the toilet.

    Likewise, if they turn the Bond franchise into Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and sacrifice action (setpieces) with drama and character development, it will eventually take a nose dive down the toilet. The key here is balance.
    Bounine wrote: »
    Aside for the ridiculously embarrassing Brosnan era, QOS is the worst Bond film in the franchise - non stop action with very little story. An absolute mess of a movie.
    You might find the Brosnan era "embarrasing" and QoS "the worst Bond film in the franchise" - that is your opinion. For me DAD was near perfect up until the invisible car and the Iceland scenes. Likewise, I really love QoS, it's fast paced, Craig is in asskic... mode and there are some wonderful setpieces. Shame about the editing though.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited October 2015 Posts: 4,116
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    [if they are going to sacrifice story and character development with mindless action then they will eventually take a nose dive down the toilet.

    Likewise, if they turn the Bond franchise into Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and sacrifice action (setpieces) with drama and character development, it will eventually take a nose dive down the toilet. The key here is balance.
    Bounine wrote: »
    Aside for the ridiculously embarrassing Brosnan era, QOS is the worst Bond film in the franchise - non stop action with very little story. An absolute mess of a movie.
    You might find the Brosnan era "embarrasing" and QoS "the worst Bond film in the franchise" - that is your opinion. For me DAD was near perfect up until the invisible car and the Iceland scenes. Likewise, I really love QoS, it's fast paced, Craig is in asskic... mode and there are some wonderful setpieces. Shame about the editing though.

    Yea I agree with that too. Way better than anything 80s or 90s.

    But that's MY opinion. Everyone has opinions
  • Posts: 832
    I don't think that CR is action heavy at all, and like the brosnan era. CR had some cool action scenes (including the sinking house which I like a lot) but did tend to be a bit boring. QOS had bad editing, bad plot, etc. SF lacked in the action department, imo, not a perfect balance. (although not far from it in terms of the amount of action at least). The brosnan films were each a bit action heavy, with TND the only one which really suffers from it (though I do like that film). i think that 5 action set pieces is a bit worrying for SP IF the movie has a running time close to that of SF, though I have my doubts that the film will lack in character development and drama with Mendes at the helm. Looks like an absolutely fantastic bond film
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited October 2015 Posts: 15,423
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    I don't think that CR is action heavy at all, and like the brosnan era. CR had some cool action scenes (including the sinking house which I like a lot) but did tend to be a bit boring. QOS had bad editing, bad plot, etc. SF lacked in the action department, imo, not a perfect balance. (although not far from it in terms of the amount of action at least). The brosnan films were each a bit action heavy, with TND the only one which really suffers from it (though I do like that film). i think that 5 action set pieces is a bit worrying for SP IF the movie has a running time close to that of SF, though I have my doubts that the film will lack in character development and drama with Mendes at the helm. Looks like an absolutely fantastic bond film

    As much as I am a die-hard fan for Tomorrow Never Dies, it would have been more in the vein of spy thriller rather than full escapist action film had they stuck to the original script. The only improvement the shooting script had was adding the significant Dr. Kauffman scene. Other than that, the first draft holds the upper hand. Changing the setting from Venice to Hamburg wasn't a good idea, either.
  • Posts: 1,860
    From my personal view I have never liked the overly long and BIG teaser sequences. They have a tendency to make the films top heavy and rob the films potential of a great climax. Perhaps it's because I was brought up on the Connery films. TWINE and the films that followed all had this problem for me and now I keep hearing that SP will have an even bigger and better teaser sequence. Hmmmmmm. Will the final confrontation in the new film be as spectacular as the helicopter fight......................... I hope so.
  • Posts: 7,430
    I cant agree that DAD was "near perfect". After the wonderfully shot surfing scene at the opening, the film nosedives! And I cant watch the start with Brossa in the fake beard, without tittering and thinking of Monty Pythons Life of Brian! ("Are there any women here?"). As someone says here, its finding the balance that is the key re action and story. Daltons two got it right, as did most of Connerys, Brossa's were too heavy action orientated. SP looks like it is going to achieve balance, but hey, we don't know yet!
    Here's hoping!
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Glen was horrible at pacing... and directing.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Are we really paying attention at beards, now? Perhaps we should discuss whether Moore wears a fake mole in his films or not, then criticize it.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Its a CGI mole.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Its a CGI mole.
    "I'm gonna chop it off, cut it and make some guacamole!"

    tmb_4081_480.jpg
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    =))
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Its a CGI mole.
    "I'm gonna chop it off, cut it and make some guacamole!"

    tmb_4081_480.jpg


    =)) ..ditto
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 2,081
    Do people worry at all that they've already seen so much of the film? There's been something like 10 different officially released videos with Spectre footage, that a lot of the good stuff must already be out there.

    Additionally, teasers and trailers aren't really for us in the first place. They're designed to be put in front of other films, and on television to get people interested in the film, IMO they're not really designed for people who are already really excited about the film. This is all in my opinion, of course.

    I don't know, I've been having these thoughts leading up to the announcement of Spectre that made me decide to not watch anything. I was just wondering if anyone else had similar thoughts. Is anybody out there worried they'll be thinking "ah yes, saw that in the trailer" every 20 minutes when they're finally in the theatre?

    Want to know what people think.

    I don't feel like I've seen too much of the film. I have watched the trailers and tv spots, not any other videos. I agree that the teasers and trailers aren't really for those who will see the movie anyway - we aren't the target group. Many of us have really liked them though, so they have increased our excitement and anticipation.

    I do understand your decision not to watch anything. There have been cases where I've seen a trailer after seeing the movie, and been happy I hadn't seen the trailer before (including Skyfall), and I don't normally (though there are exceptions) really seek out material (written or visual) before seeing movies I plan to watch anyway. In other words, since they've already "sold" themselves to me I don't need to see any footage etc. beforehand, and often that has been an excellent decision. Sometimes I just think "oh screw it, I'm too bloody curious" and watch the trailers (but never any making of stuff etc. before having seen the movie). It also depends on the movie how much any previous knowledge can do harm. Sometimes even a lot of clips, reviews and all sorts of knowledge from interviews etc. are no problem, sometimes knowing just one important thing can be very unfortunate. (I still enjoyed The Usual Suspects, though... but geez, some people writing reviews are morons...) Most of the time trailers have not harmed the movie-watching experience, so I don't try to avoid trailers when I'm in the movie theatre waiting for the feature to begin, for instance. Reading any comments by people who have seen the movie can be a huge mistake though. Sometimes even a partial sentence can be a spoiler, so I do my best to avoid seeing any of those. I won't be hanging around here much between the premiere of Spectre and seeing it myself, that's for sure (thankfully that's only a few days), and certainly won't be reading reviews, etc. (I haven't read any articles about it so far, either.)

    Not having a clue what a movie is about - not really knowing anything about the story, or even the genre - is probably the best situation, at least for me. That's never gonna be possible with any Bond movie, anyway, though... ;)

  • Posts: 6,601
    Very good asrticle/interview

    "]Cracking Bond

    ‘He’s a misogynist. That’s clear. He’s got problems.’ Has playing the world’s best-known spy messed up Daniel Craig’s own life?

    Daniel Craig is James Bond, despite the efforts of danielcraigisnotbond.com, the protest website launched amid the general scepticism that greeted the casting of the actor a decade ago. “Too short, too blond, too thespy,” he recalls. “Can one be too thespian?” He laughs camply — a hugely confident man whose strand of emotionally knackered 007 is now in the DNA of the icon. His inspiration was Indiana Jones. “What was brilliant was that he was fallible, he bled,” he says of the archaeologist. “It’s never left me. If you do action, an audience has to feel jeopardy.” He smiles frequently. That site, by the way, is still live.

    The latest Bond film, out this month, is Craig’s fourth, on a continuous story arc that is a first for the franchise. Yet it’s the scale of these movies that pistol-whips you (or should that be PPK-whips?).History haunts each scene: the history of 53 years of a very British franchise and — crucially — the $1bn made by Skyfall, the most successful 007 film ever. It’s an operation that, at the latest count, has seen 610,934 uses of the title’s hashtag since December, when Sam Mendes announced his second Bond would be called Spectre. It is the 24th in the series.

    Think of these films like Beethoven’s Fifth. A huge start — da-da-da-dum — followed by dovetailed violent crescendos and quiet moments in bed. It is the form of the latest, with a turbulent, personal plot that sees Bond face both his demons and the Spectre group, led by Franz Oberhauser (Christoph Waltz). It also stars huge international action scenes, certainly more than in Skyfall, which barely left Britain. How, though, with such a leap in scale, can Spectre avoid being Die Another Day, Pierce Brosnan’s flabby farewell? “Because,” says the production designer, Dennis Gassner, a beaming man in a boater who spends a lot of time on Maui doing yoga, “we have better taste.”

    At 9.30pm on a cold March night in Rome this year, part of the elegant Via Nomentana was closed to residents, tourists and blow-dried dogs, held back behind temporary barriers by a disco dazzle of hi-vis. Balcony parties whooped and clinked while, below, two policemen sat idly in a pizzeria: the Italian idea of security, which seemed to involve waiting until the British told them what to do.

    The point of this fuss — 341 crew needing food, 200 locals guarding doors, a mile of road — was a scene in which Bond drives through so many tourist spots that the film even tyre-screeches around St Peter’s. Come 3am, two souped-up supercars were on an umpteenth race up to 110mph. Roar, vanish, repeat, until dawn. The Aston Martin has a button labelled “fire igniting start”, and the gargantuan cost for seconds of a chase that’s no different, really, from those in The Fast and the Furious films is absurd.

    What, then, makes Spectre special? History, yes, but it’s more. It’s the power of a man not even in Italy when I visit; an actor who took a tired franchise and updated it to such a millennial and twitchy extent that Roger Moore feels as worth revisiting as a saucy seaside postcard.

    Four months after the shoot in Rome, I meet that man. Craig is an actor so hooked on his role that, for Spectre, he was involved from the beginning: in the writing, casting, crewing. What a presence he is, pacing through the corridor of a London hotel, dressed casually in jacket, jeans and brown boots. He makes the walls shrink in. The first detail that stands out is his bright blue eyes, 291 on the Pantone scale. He’s very loud, puts his feet up on the table and swears a lot. You need his trust early. At parties he hosts, I imagine, he’d always want attention at the top of the table. In bigger groups, though, he would skulk in a corner, waiting for the evening to end.

    There’s an old review of a play (“Oh-oh,” he says), from 1992 (“Mm-hmm,” he squeaks, intrigued), in which the critic wrote: “Craig contains his violence like an unexploded mine.” Is that a good catch-all for the depth he has found in a once cartoonish Bond? “I suppose,” he says, nodding. His 007 lost a great love in Casino Royale, was furiously bereaved in Quantum of Solace, showed extraordinary restraint in Skyfall when faced with Javier Bardem’s hair, and, for Spectre, may finally find his family. Interest in this backstory — barely bothered with before — is “hard-wired” into him as an actor, Craig explains.

    “First and foremost,” he says, leaning in, always making eye contact, “get the story right. Then make whizz-bangs part of it. Character becomes important, and that’s the interesting way of doing this. He’s got older as I’ve got older, and I’ve changed and he’s changed. I don’t know how else to do it.” If you stick within the rules of Ian Fleming’s creation, he adds, you can do “anything you want”.

    The problem, though, is this very set of rules, laid down by the books and the first big-screen Bond, back in 1962, the 007 fans measure all others by. Played by Sean Connery like Dapper Laughs with a licence to kill, he is the embodiment of the “sewer of misogyny” that the journalist and commentator Bidisha claims Fleming wrote. It’s as dated as an authentic tagine: women in bikinis have sex with him, then die. That’s it. And despite Judi Dench, Skyfall wasn’t so much a leap forward as a fan-pleasing step back. Articles had headlines such as: “Women, the makers of Skyfall hate you.”

    I tell Craig that viewers didn’t think much of the scene in which Bond had sex in a shower with a prostitute to whom he offered a chance of freedom. “Did they not?” he asks, surprisingly. She was a former slave, and Bond did what men had done to her when she was 12. “That’s interesting. It’s not how we wanted it to perform. Maybe it was because she was a victim. That’s very valid.” He takes the criticism as if it is the first time he has heard the charge. (Later, supporting this, he argues that “if you’re even slightly famous, you should avoid the internet at all costs. It’s like being bullied at school.”)

    Still, aware or not, he adds that, for Spectre, he and Mendes tried hard to make Bond a little bit more modern. As with a train line after an upgrade, there are issues, and bits creak, but it’s better.

    “He’s a misogynist,” says Craig, matter-of-fact about his role. “That’s clear. He’s got problems. Serious f****** problems. But it’s not my job to judge him. I like the fact that if you put him up against a very strong character — especially a female — who goes, ‘What are you about?’, he goes, ‘Oh, OK.’ I like to see that change.”

    Was the desire to update the spy’s attitude to women the main reason for casting Monica Bellucci, 51, as his lover? She has four years on Craig: it’s almost a third-wave feminist act in a series with Pussy Galore and, more recently, Quantum of Solace shoving the actor, then 40, into bed with Gemma Arterton, then 22. Sitting here pushing a blockbuster, and wary of being “overtly political”, Craig says picking Bellucci “wasn’t as self-conscious as it has become”. Rather, her age just fitted. “But later,” he continues, “people started to say it’s a really good thing — and it is. If it raises debate, that’s no bad thing. If it helps the conversation about the disparity in wages, not only in this business, but in every business, then bring it on.” Bellucci plays a character called Lucia Sciarra — finally, no double entendre.

    Craig has few reservations about being Bond, the most scrutinised role in cinema. As Britain’s film figurehead, Bond is expected to be a spokesman, pushed to represent the country, mirror its culture. It’s all-consuming, then, and if its current incumbent has a complaint, it is the total lack of anonymity. Last year in Ireland, he and his wife, Rachel Weisz, spent a long night in the pub. They were, he tells me, left alone, really happy, and only at closing time did the locals ask for photos. The couple said yes, of course. They had respected privacy, so the celebrities offered selfies and small talk as a way of saying thanks. This is how Craig wants it, but not how he gets it. Mostly, if he goes somewhere public, he’s got “an hour, then it gets out of hand”.

    Yet all this, he admits, simply shows his age. He is 47, and shakes his head and frowns at a mention of Twitter — “anathema” to him. He hails from a “different generation”, and all these lights and the desire for photos, he doesn’t understand.

    “If me and my mates went out and all got shit-faced, and someone started taking photographs, they’d get thumped,” he says, chortling, before flipping back to serious again. “The other thing I don’t get is, people are happy to take pictures of me without asking. But things have changed so rapidly. Nobody really gives a f*** what I think about the modern world, but that part I can do without.”

    The conversation moves to Citizenfour, the disquieting Edward Snowden documentary about this modern world and its strangulation by surveillance. Craig had to “stop halfway, as it was making me sweat” — he was caught in the phone-hacking scandal, after all, before Sony, the Bond studio, suffered email-hacking on an industrial scale — and such themes are “messed around with” in Spectre. The new ways of spying, though, are tricky to introduce into 007: as Craig puts it, his agent is “of the old world”, using intelligence-gathering methods that don’t focus on listening into millions of phone calls and hoping.

    “I presume they get information,” he says, with a lack of conviction that suggests he doesn’t think they do. “That things are thwarted. But looking someone in the eye, having a conversation... In big conflicts, peace has come because people sat in a room together. I hope that is still happening.”

    Face-to-face is in Spectre. For one thing, because cybercrime — watching files download — is cinematic paint drying; and because Bond lives in a “fantastical world” that has “supervillains”. The latter is important for audiences. Is Waltz’s baddie based on anyone?

    “I don’t know if supervillains exist,” Craig says, shaking his head. “They could. There’s maybe an island somewhere that sinks. Or maybe they are in plain sight, parking boats off St Tropez every summer.”

    Never — from Connery (definitive), to George Lazenby (one-off), to Moore (silly), to Timothy Dalton (serious), to Brosnan (mixed) — has an actor playing Bond been as invested in the part as Craig. He is obsessive, saying “we” about the film-making when others would say “they”, and suggests that I talk to the director. He knows this role — not his theatre origins, his mainstream breakthrough on television with Our Friends in the North or his career-best film, Enduring Love — is how he will be remembered. So he wants it to be weighty, a reel to take to his teachers at the National Youth Theatre, to show them his talent wasn’t wasted. Indiana Jones, the inspiration, has a scene in which the rogue’s heart is nearly torn out. He bleeds. He’s vulnerable, and that is Craig’s Bond in microcosm.

    Will the film after Spectre, the 25th, be his last? “I don’t know. Yeah. I mean, yes. Maybe.” Then it’s the question of who takes over. A woman? “That’s another story. But why not? Jasmine Bond?” A black actor? Idris Elba is a rumour. “The right person for the job should do the job, and I don’t give a f*** what colour their skin is,” he says sternly. “It shouldn’t be an issue. We should have moved on.” And next for him? “I need to meet more directors,” he admits wearily. This is his first film since Skyfall. He needed time off as he’d “got married and needed to settle”. But he won’t rest long, and hints at a stage return.

    Back in 2001, the young actor summed up his career: “Grew up on the Wirral, left home at 16 or 17, came down to London, went to drama school, became an actor.” What’s to add? “I feel the same,” he shrugs, playing down stardom, millions and a United Nations post as global advocate for the elimination of mines and explosive hazards, which led Ban Ki-moon to say: “You have been given a licence to kill. I’m now giving you a licence to save.”

    He continues: “I always had an ambition to be an actor, and every actor who says they didn’t want to be famous is lying.” He pauses. A very large watch sits on his wrist. “But I never foresaw this.”

    On day 110 of the Spectre shoot, June 11, 2015, Pinewood was sizzling. The studios sit in a bleak crater where vast indoor stages offer essential cooling: acre on acre of dream factory and chill. The biggest is the 007 stage, which, for Spectre, held a full-scale replica of Westminster Bridge, laid with real tarmac for this colossal film. Gunshots fill the air. A fight scene is prepped and the crew wait for their key prop. All this structure and personnel — one has work as “crowd hair supervisor” — and you still spot a vacuum in the shape of the man this is for, whose obsession over a role many didn’t want him to take led to quiet desperation to prove the doubters wrong, or annoy them.

    An assistant rushes to Mendes to tell him “DC” has arrived, as a 4x4 with tinted windows pulls up. It stops, sprays dust in the air. A door opens. Everything clicks into its place. “Action!” The tone is modern, serious, suffering. It is, thanks to Craig, impossible to think of this spy as anything else these days.

    Months later, I speak to Mendes. Yes, Spectre is emotional, he says, but that’s just what he and Craig are good at. It’s a long way back to knowing winks. The creator of danielcraigisnotbond.com, however, was far from a lone voice back in 2005. How popular, I ask, is Craig now?

    “Oh, I have no idea,” Mendes says. “When we were in Istanbul on the last movie, a cab driver told me how much better Bond was since it stopped trying to be funny. Then I went to the hotel and a woman at the desk said, ‘Are you going to put some jokes in it?’”

    This is the director’s final Bond and, soonish, producers need a new actor for the tuxedo, too. Who the hell can replace him? “The good thing is, Jonathan, it’s up to someone else!” Mendes bursts out laughing — loudly, unsympathetically.


    Sam Mendes, the director of Spectre, on his unusual relationship with Daniel Craig and the super-spy. By Jonathan Dean

    Daniel Craig says he was involved in Spectre right from the start, in script and casting and more. Is that unusual for a film of this size?
    I think it’s probably very unusual, but that’s the nature of Bond and Daniel’s involvement in it. He hasn’t done a movie since Skyfall, and he really put all his focus on it. And because he and I already had a relationship, we picked up where we’d left off, so he could get involved on a more creative level. And on this movie, I have to say, that was incredibly useful. Because, although he’ll be the first person to admit he can sometimes get inarticulate when it comes to script or artistic issues, his instinct is unreally good. So because he was involved from such an early stage, I didn’t need to explain anything. He understood the genesis of every idea, of every sequence. He’d seen my storyboards, conceptual art...


    It’s hard to imagine Roger Moore having a similar approach...
    [Laughs] But I don’t think Daniel knows any other way. He said this himself. He can’t choose which way he’s going to approach a role. He approaches it the same way, looking for the truth of it. It’s always difficult to talk in broad, generalised terms, but that is what he’s doing. He’s trying to find some way of making it believable, psychologically and emotionally. And physically too, in terms of actually doing things himself. He just applied the only way he knows how to act to Bond. I don’t think it was ever a strategy or a choice. It’s just who he is.


    What changes have you and Daniel brought to the franchise?
    I think [Casino Royale director] Martin Campbell made the biggest stride, which was to take away the camp that had overtaken the genre. He eradicated the self-reflective jokes, the nods and winks. You’ve got to remember this is a franchise that once had George Lazenby turn to the camera and look straight into it and say: “This wouldn’t have happened to the other guy.” To put someone in the “real” in the middle of that is a big leap. In a way, the biggest leap was made in the casting of Daniel. Then the obvious thing we brought to it all in Skyfall was the idea that he’s ageing.


    You also brought in a through story, some continuity to the films’ plots?
    There’s definitely a connection between Spectre and Skyfall, and a connection between Spectre and all the movies Daniel has made. That was a very deliberate attempt by me and him to impose some kind of coherent journey on the character. Here, the character is developing across a series of stories. And, again, I didn’t introduce that. Quantum of Solace follows on immediately after Casino Royale.


    Let’s say that when Craig was cast, people in favour of him being Bond were 70:30 against. What is that ratio now?
    Oh, I have no idea. Bond belongs to everybody and everyone has an opinion about it. When we were in Istanbul on the last movie, a cab driver told me how much better Bond was since it stopped trying to be funny. Then, I went to the hotel and a woman at the desk said: “Are you going to put some jokes in it?” And that’s basically Bond. Everyone has a different version in their heads. Everyone has a different touchstone, and that’s what makes it interesting. This is our take on Bond. It’s not going to be the universal take on Bond. The moment you do that, you please no one. This is where we were guided by what we’re interested in as a director and an actor . It’s what we feel we’re good at, and beyond that it’s up to people to judge whether it works or not.


    At some point, Craig will no longer be James Bond. Who do you think could replace him? He’s a hard act to follow...
    You know, the good thing is, it’s up someone else. That’s my answer. It’s other people’s jobs to speculate and to enjoy the dialogue. What happens to Bond? Is he culturally significant any more? All of those things. But one thing I would say is that two months before Skyfall came out, the front cover of Entertainment Weekly had a photograph of Daniel and the headline was, “Is Bond dead?” Before every movie, there’s always the debate: “Does he make sense any more?” That’s up to the culture to decide and the filmmakers, people who have a little part of the mythology that is Bond. The only job is to be interesting. Nothing else.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/culture/film_and_tv/article1613553.ece

    DTD
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    edited October 2015 Posts: 3,277
    Finally, new SPECTRE International website is live, with two new promo photos of Daniel and Jesper, and the other ones from the December announcement, now in high resolution.

    http://www.007.com/spectre/

    logo-banner-animated-2.gif

    dc_crop21.jpg

    Gray-JamesBond_007_0229_Jesper_recropped.jpg

  • edited October 2015 Posts: 188
    Awesome article, @Germanlady! Wonderful insights, and two new-ish things that maybe can be gleaned from it:

    1. Global surveillance is going to play at least some role in Spectre.
    2. Daniel Craig is probably doing at least one more Bond after Specre.
    Germanlady wrote: »
    The conversation moves to Citizenfour, the disquieting Edward Snowden documentary about this modern world and its strangulation by surveillance [...] and such themes are “messed around with” in Spectre.

    [...]

    Will the film after Spectre, the 25th, be his last? “I don’t know. Yeah. I mean, yes. Maybe.”

    [...]

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/culture/film_and_tv/article1613553.ece

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    That above article is great. Nice to see another confirmation that Craig will be back for Bond 25.
  • Posts: 188
    Finally, new SPECTRE International website is live, with two new promo photos of Daniel and Jesper, and the other ones from the December announcement, now in high resolution.

    http://www.007.com/spectre/
    ...
    dc_crop21.jpg

    I commend the photographer/stylist on her/his choice of color here, although with Craig's eyes the blue is probably a no-brainer.
  • What's left after the final trailer?
    - WOTW video
    - character posters (?)
    - music video blog (?)
    - soundtrack
    - another TV spot (?)
    - ...
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 3,164
    What's left after the final trailer?
    - WOTW video
    - character posters (?)
    - music video blog (?)
    - soundtrack
    - another TV spot (?)
    - ...

    -Monday
    -Don't think so, bit late for that
    -yeah, that was in that schedule
    -yeah
    -like at least 5 if not more, especially in the lead up to the US release after the film's out in the UK
    -reactions and reviews.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Thanks for posting those interviews, @Germanlady. Very interesting read.
  • Posts: 220
    Not sure it was already posted. Here are the HQ images related to Spectre published in the StarBurst issue (October 2015):
    197879Starburst14.jpg
    661785Starburst15.jpg
    908325Starburst16.jpg
  • Posts: 15,124
    Finally, new SPECTRE International website is live, with two new promo photos of Daniel and Jesper, and the other ones from the December announcement, now in high resolution.

    http://www.007.com/spectre/

    logo-banner-animated-2.gif

    dc_crop21.jpg

    Gray-JamesBond_007_0229_Jesper_recropped.jpg

    This is completely off topic, but I love Craig's jumper here. I want one just like this.
  • Posts: 498
    antovolk wrote: »
    What's left after the final trailer?
    - WOTW video
    - character posters (?)
    - music video blog (?)
    - soundtrack
    - another TV spot (?)
    - ...

    -Monday
    -Don't think so, bit late for that
    -yeah, that was in that schedule
    -yeah
    -like at least 5 if not more, especially in the lead up to the US release after the film's out in the UK
    -reactions and reviews.

    There was this one video which came out some 10 days before Skyfall released , where it had all the actors and producers talk about the movie with a lot of footage around 12 minutes long If I recall correctly.
    I just can't seem to find it online

  • Posts: 3,164
    Skyfail wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    What's left after the final trailer?
    - WOTW video
    - character posters (?)
    - music video blog (?)
    - soundtrack
    - another TV spot (?)
    - ...

    -Monday
    -Don't think so, bit late for that
    -yeah, that was in that schedule
    -yeah
    -like at least 5 if not more, especially in the lead up to the US release after the film's out in the UK
    -reactions and reviews.

    There was this one video which came out some 10 days before Skyfall released , where it had all the actors and producers talk about the movie with a lot of footage around 12 minutes long If I recall correctly.
    I just can't seem to find it online

    Ah, that's the EPK, I forgot about that. Has 2/3 minute soundbite interviews with the car and crew and around 5 minutes of behind the scenes footage. So yeah that'll be coming too. Every big film release has one.
  • Posts: 498
    antovolk wrote: »
    Skyfail wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    What's left after the final trailer?
    - WOTW video
    - character posters (?)
    - music video blog (?)
    - soundtrack
    - another TV spot (?)
    - ...

    -Monday
    -Don't think so, bit late for that
    -yeah, that was in that schedule
    -yeah
    -like at least 5 if not more, especially in the lead up to the US release after the film's out in the UK
    -reactions and reviews.

    There was this one video which came out some 10 days before Skyfall released , where it had all the actors and producers talk about the movie with a lot of footage around 12 minutes long If I recall correctly.
    I just can't seem to find it online

    Ah, that's the EPK, I forgot about that. Has 2/3 minute soundbite interviews with the car and crew and around 5 minutes of behind the scenes footage. So yeah that'll be coming too. Every big film release has one.

    One of the best pieces that had come out of the Skyfall Marketing campaign
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    ICYMI the Writing's on the Wall video has been posted in the title song thread, and features some very interesting new footage from the film.
Sign In or Register to comment.