SPECTRE Production Timeline

1855856858860861870

Comments

  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    New spot from Omega involving the watch:

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    It's a nice watch, and I'm glad they did the gadget thing with it once in the Craig era, but I wouldn't want this to become a recurring (and frankly annoying) thing like it was in his predecessor's time, so hopefully Omega can find other ways to get its product 'placed' strategically in a James Bond film going forward.

    Perhaps a big billboard or something, like British Airways in MR.
    We%2527ll+take+more+care+of+you.jpg
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    I know this probably doesn't belong here, but look closely at this picture I found on Twitter :))

    CUg1ZelWUAAm9SS.jpg:large
  • Posts: 5,745
    jake24 wrote: »
    I know this probably doesn't belong here, but look closely at this picture I found on Twitter :))

    CUg1ZelWUAAm9SS.jpg:large

    He's in for trouble with the wife.
  • Posts: 859
    <iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/146377065?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0"; width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe> <p><a href=" Store Spectre - 30" TVC</a> from <a href="https://vimeo.com/user1329043">gotgotneed</a>; on <a href="https://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>;

  • Posts: 1,296
    Is there another place to put posts about Spectre merchandize?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    There is a whole thread dedicated to it, called Spectre collectibles and other random junk, or something like that.
  • Posts: 1,296
    That post should go there, and I see that prodcution has wrapped on Spectre now so.....

    Break it open make it happen :)
  • edited November 2015 Posts: 203
    I was shocked by this revelation by Pierce Brosnan? Barbra crying over loosing him as bond? how very unprofessional? or was it an act? i thought she hated him? who to believe? what is she going to do when DC leaves? slit her wrists?

    “I was in the Bahamas, working on a movie called 'After The Sunset' and my agents called me up and said, ‘Negotiations have stopped. [Producers Barbara Broocoli and Michael Wilson] are not quite sure what they want to do. They’ll call you next Thursday’ " the actor says in the book. "I sat in Richard Harris’s house in the Bahamas, and Barbara and Michael were on the line —‘we’re so sorry.’ She was crying, Michael was stoic and he said, ‘You were a great James Bond. Thank you very much,’ and I said, ‘Thank you very much. Goodbye.’ That was it. I was utterly shocked and just kicked to the curb with the way it went down.”
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I think Barbara may have been choked up a little. With Bond it's not just about business but also family. Babs had known Pierce for about 15 years before he even got the role so whatever tge circumstances were in taking the movies forward it was always going to be a little sad parting ways. I don't think there's anything unprofessional about her response.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    mnhettia wrote: »
    what is she going to do when DC leaves? slit her wrists?
    Heaven forbid.
    mnhettia wrote: »
    Michael was stoic and he said, ‘You were a great James Bond. Thank you very much,’ and I said, ‘Thank you very much. Goodbye.’ That was it. I was utterly shocked and just kicked to the curb with the way it went down.”
    This couldn't have been easy for him to take.
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I think Barbara may have been choked up a little. With Bond it's not just about business but also family. Babs had known Pierce for about 15 years before he even got the role so whatever tge circumstances were in taking the movies forward it was always going to be a little sad parting ways. I don't think there's anything unprofessional about her response.
    I agree. Nothing unprofessional about it. This was difficult for everyone concerned, but a strategic decision had been made, and for the better imho. Unfortunately, there were casualties, regrettably.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yep. Casualties in these instances are unavoidable but like you said, it was a strategic decision for the greater good.
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 630
    New series of collectibles and products, there are some products used by crew during the production:
    http://www.jborbisnonsufficit.com/2015/11/25/brand-new-objects-in-007-online-shop/
  • http://www.dga.org/Events/2015/Dec2015/Spectre_QnA_1115.aspx

    Great interview between Mendes and Bennett Miller.

    Spectre002.ashx

    It's pretty in-depth on the spoilers.

    -Mendes reveals the heart of the movie is the love affair with Madeline.
    -He says the Tangier sequence in the middle of the film is his favourite in the film
    -Mendes says that Jez Butterworth deserved a credit for his work on Skyfall
    -Mendes talks about the influence of Kingsley Amis on the SP's torture sequence
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I think I'm one of the few people who have grown tired of anything Mendes has to say. I actually enjoyed SP but the problems of the movie leave me feeling a tad salty, especially after having to wait 3 years for it.

    See, Mendes knows how to talk and highlight intricacies that may or may not be there in his Bond films but the overall execution for cohesiveness of the story and; establishing characters and relationships with the needed gravity to create an impact that really resonates and isn't jarring or half baked simply aren't there and it's frustrating. This is how I feel and I enjoyed SP. I really feel sorry for those who were disappointed and thought the film was terrible because I understand how underwhelmed they must feel.

    I think the majority of what Mendes feels he wants to articulate simply didn't translate onto the screen the way it should have nor the way he tries to convince himself and others that it did. I appreciate Mendes' contribution to the series but for both his movies he's had an incredible amount of preproduction time to really solidify a snazzy script but the end result for both have been comparatively lacklustre.

    I'm not interested in a director waxing lyrical tryinh to be clever or after the fact overanalyzing the content of his movie and having not really delivered especially given the time and resources dedicated to the production. Mendes is done and the series really needs a new creative scribe and new director to take stewardship over the next Bond film.
  • Posts: 5,745
    So that interview is with Bennett Miller.. director of Capote, Moneyball, Foxcatcher..

    What if he gets Bond 25? That would be.. interesting.

    Screw it, call it Blofeld! Make the film specifically about Blofeld and Bond, in a very dramatic film. Get a writer and make it with heavy dialogue! Put them at a table with dinner!

    You have Chris Corbould, a director now, who could handle the actions scenes and even the second unit! Give us a very dramatic film with Waltz and Craig and Seydoux to finish out Craig's era.

    They could easily make up for the lack of backstory between Craig and Waltz with one dinner and some great dialogue in a dramatic setting.

    Why am I okay with this?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I'm not interested in a director waxing lyrical tryinh to be clever or after the fact overanalyzing the content of his movie and having not really delivered especially given the time and resources dedicated to the production. Mendes is done and the series really needs a new creative scribe and new director to take stewardship over the next Bond film.
    The one thing we know about EON is that they listen to the market. They are listening now. They will make adjustments and I think you're right. Mendes is probably out. There won't be the same excitement to wait around for him even if he does agree to come back. The question is, will Craig stick around without Mendes? I think you and I are on the same page - if he does, great, but if not, that's fine too.

    SP was fun enough and it's got rewatch value, but it's mediocre at best imho, it definitely cost way too much, and we waited too long for it. We deserved more, and they will deliver with B25. I'm sure of it.
  • Posts: 1,680
    I hate to say it but I am in agreement, Mendes has delivered one great film & one good film.

    I will say this, Mendes isnt %100 responsible for all the films misdeeds. The producers & writers hold weight. Mendes can turn a mediocre script into a relatively good film.

    The only reason Id want to see him do another one is if the script is a masterpiece.

    The true test for Mendes IMO would have been for him to direct CR. That would have been interesting.
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,022
    I enjoyed the movie but I really think B25 should do away with Moneypenny and Q, just like in CR. Just focus on Bond. Make it real again. In Spectre, Hinx beat the crap out of bond and he had no bruises or nothing. In CR, Bond scrapes his face on the ground and has scabs for the next few scenes.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    How about going back to the old ways? Like... having Bond in the field, mission not being personal but professional, a few gadgets every now and then, and appealing plot that does not connect with politics? And please no more love interests, the latest era is full of them. Just regular lady friends would be nice.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 4,341
    tqb wrote: »
    I enjoyed the movie but I really think B25 should do away with Moneypenny and Q, just like in CR. Just focus on Bond. Make it real again. In Spectre, Hinx beat the crap out of bond and he had no bruises or nothing. In CR, Bond scrapes his face on the ground and has scabs for the next few scenes.

    The scenes with Q in it were among the most entertaining ones and they did not feel out of place. Q needs to stay on, as does M. Moneypenny not so much. It is nice to know now how that personal relationship with Bond developed, which was never explained in the Connery films, but now that that's settled, I think it would be OK to leave her behind the desk.
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    The true test for Mendes IMO would have been for him to direct CR. That would have been interesting.

    It would have been four hours long with underwhelming action sequences and annoying subplots diverting from the main story, no thank you. Mendes had two chances and he didn't match CR with either. He crapped on the reboot with SF and crapped on the Bond universe with SP. He said he's done and that's a good thing. And mind you I liked SF and even more so SP, but he isn't right for JB and that's apparent in the individual films and treatment of the series.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    DoctorNo wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    The true test for Mendes IMO would have been for him to direct CR. That would have been interesting.

    It would have been four hours long with underwhelming action sequences and annoying subplots diverting from the main story, no thank you. Mendes had two chances and he didn't match CR with either. He crapped on the reboot with SF and crapped on the Bond universe with SP. He said he's done and that's a good thing. And mind you I liked SF and even more so SP, but he isn't right for JB and that's apparent in the individual films and treatment of the series.
    Not to mention that Mendes would have made Bond and LeChiffre half-brothers.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Seems like the general consensus on here is that Mendes got lucky with SF & his work on SP was lazy & overdramatic.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Seems like the general consensus on here is that Mendes got lucky with SF & his work on SP was lazy & overdramatic.

    To describe it as lazy is itself lazy.
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    I don't consider SF lucky. Only in its mass success. Neither movie was lazy, they were misguided. I consider SP to have many improvements over SF on the single movie level, but some more errors on the series level.
  • Posts: 6,601
    RC7 wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Seems like the general consensus on here is that Mendes got lucky with SF & his work on SP was lazy & overdramatic.

    To describe it as lazy is itself lazy.

    It certainly wasn't lazy, as they killed themselves over getting it right.
    So calling it lazy isn't doing them justice, even if someone dislikes the film or wants to know, why the "errors" are there. IMO, they got so caught up in their own ideas (Mendes and DC), that it would have been good, if someone would have brought up the differences between their ideas and the actual execution.

    All in all, I still believe, this is the film, they wanted and giving it a bit more depth would have made the difference between good and great.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Germanlady wrote: »
    All in all, I still believe, this is the film, they wanted and giving it a bit more depth would have made the difference between good and great.
    I agree. I think it's what they wanted to make, based on the interviews I've seen. I agree also that it could be better....just some more time in post production perhaps and a few tweaks here and there allowing more elucidation, as well as some trimming elsewhere, could have improved it a lot for me.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,537
    As much as I enjoyed both SF and SP, I think there was to greater a jump between the two. With SF being so different to past Bond films, and having the double exposure of the 50th Anniversary and the London Olympics they likely gained many fans who other wouldn't have seen the films or really found them that appealing. Then with SP they've gone so gung ho with the belief that it has to be bigger to be better, on top of all the nods to previous Bond films, that they lost there way, and likely quite a lot of the new fans they picked up from SF.

    To go from Bond-lite to uber-Bond in the space of two films is just too much. I think they needed at least a shade of grey in the middle to build up to SP and all it's Bondiness. It feels a bit forced and desperate to drop it on us all at once like that.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    SP was fun enough and it's got rewatch value, but it's mediocre at best imho, it definitely cost way too much, and we waited too long for it. We deserved more, and they will deliver with B25. I'm sure of it.

    I'm getting a bit tired of you actually. No matter how civilised you are in your comments...no matter how objective your comments may sound, it's that constant "but" that starts to irritate me. And before the "but" you mention the positives, which is followed after the "but" by huge sermons that are mostly negative.

    Obviously, it's your personal opinion, and I appreciate it. But please take things into perspective. "SPECTRE" is no "DAD". "SPECTRE" is no "TMWTGG". "SPECTRE" is no "DAF" or "AVTAK". And at times it sounds like that is actually the case. That "SPECTRE" isn't in your TOP 10 of best Bond films (and I believe you have the film in your TOP 10 at #9 or #10), but firm at the Bottom 5 of worst Bond films.

    If we apply your standards on Bond films, then I think you will be equally disappointed in Bond #25, Bond #26, etc. People have accused me many times of "expecting too much". Box office-wise, quality-wise. But I still frikkin' enjoy it! And therefore it really would help the atmosphere, even the objectivity in here, if you start stating the negatives before your famous "but"s, followed by the positives right after it.
Sign In or Register to comment.