No Time to Die production thread

15155165185205211208

Comments

  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    Who's going to be on the receiving end of the line, "Bond, James Bond"?

    Paloma would be the most likely candidate.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,589
    TripAces wrote: »
    Who's going to be on the receiving end of the line, "Bond, James Bond"?

    Paloma would be the most likely candidate.

    I'm picturing him to Nomi, either in the Jamaican club or at his retirement house
  • TripAces wrote: »
    Who's going to be on the receiving end of the line, "Bond, James Bond"?

    Paloma would be the most likely candidate.
    I would love to see Rami Malek react to that line! He's going to be a great villain!
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,551
    TripAces wrote: »
    Who's going to be on the receiving end of the line, "Bond, James Bond"?

    Paloma would be the most likely candidate.

    My money would be on Paloma as well
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited December 2019 Posts: 4,247
    Minion wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Well they took 3 years for DAD. It’s not as bad as some say. Change the title to Icarus and get rid of jinx and you have a good bond film

    DAD has way more issues than just the title, as if that has any barring on the quality of the film... getting rid of a Jinx is a good start, but you’ve only touched upon the tip of the iceberg there.

    DAD was an attempt at making an outlandish Bond film. It was such a huge gamble. But at least it doesn't alter anything about Bond's history.if one is watching movies like YOLT now you can't help but think bond & blofeld are foster brothers.
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Mendes was wrong for Spectre.

    That film probably needed a more action oriented director.

    Sure it needed that. Am sure Mendes deep down would be regretting why he returned to direct SP. He would have been happier with jst SF as his masterpiece. One can only wish Christopher Nolan Directed SP.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,551
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Minion wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Well they took 3 years for DAD. It’s not as bad as some say. Change the title to Icarus and get rid of jinx and you have a good bond film

    DAD has way more issues than just the title, as if that has any barring on the quality of the film... getting rid of a Jinx is a good start, but you’ve only touched upon the tip of the iceberg there.

    DAD was an attempt at making an outlandish Bond film. It was such a huge gamble. But at least it doesn't alter anything about Bond's history.if one is watching movies like YOLT now you can't help but think bond & blofeld are foster brothers.
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Mendes was wrong for Spectre.

    That film probably needed a more action oriented director.

    Sure it needed that. Am sure Mendes deep down would be regretting why he returned to direct SP. He would have been happier with jst SF as his masterpiece. One can only wish Christopher Nolan Directed SP.

    I feel like this might be a you thing; I've watched Spectre dozens of times and just recently been watching old Connery films and "brothergate" doesn't enter my mind even once one Blofeld is on screen during the classics.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited December 2019 Posts: 4,247
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Minion wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Well they took 3 years for DAD. It’s not as bad as some say. Change the title to Icarus and get rid of jinx and you have a good bond film

    DAD has way more issues than just the title, as if that has any barring on the quality of the film... getting rid of a Jinx is a good start, but you’ve only touched upon the tip of the iceberg there.

    DAD was an attempt at making an outlandish Bond film. It was such a huge gamble. But at least it doesn't alter anything about Bond's history.if one is watching movies like YOLT now you can't help but think bond & blofeld are foster brothers.
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Mendes was wrong for Spectre.

    That film probably needed a more action oriented director.

    Sure it needed that. Am sure Mendes deep down would be regretting why he returned to direct SP. He would have been happier with jst SF as his masterpiece. One can only wish Christopher Nolan Directed SP.

    I feel like this might be a you thing; I've watched Spectre dozens of times and just recently been watching old Connery films and "brothergate" doesn't enter my mind even once one Blofeld is on screen during the classics.

    Yeah, it could be me....but am jst saying it might get into one's head once in a while. Even if YOLT, OHMSS, DAF have nothing to do with the foster brother thing.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    The foster brother thing is so inconsequential it doesn’t even register for me. When Waltz appears in NTTD it won’t really mean much anymore.
  • Posts: 12,473
    The foster brother thing is so inconsequential it doesn’t even register for me. When Waltz appears in NTTD it won’t really mean much anymore.

    Agreed. As dumb and unnecessary as it is, it doesn’t get to me like it does for many others. It just feels like an afterthought in the film. I’d wager it won’t be brought up in NTTD.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    I barely even acknowledge the foster brother angle in SP itself, and I’m a fan of the film and don’t even have any major issues with the concept.
  • DrClatterhandDrClatterhand United Kingdom
    Posts: 349
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,551
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited December 2019 Posts: 4,247
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all.

    But DAD ended that, I believe.

    Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2019 Posts: 16,413
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    If NTTD crosses the 1billion mark, Do we think the Next Bond will be casted sooner?
    No, I think they'll take as long as they need to cast James Bond. Characteristically they tend not to rush things and will take as long as they need, and when they have tried to get the films out quicker, it hasn't always worked out (Quantum of Solace, Spectre), concretely in my opinion proving that taking their time can heavily benefit the films (Casino Royale, Skyfall).

    It's interesting, and probably unsurprising, to note that the two most unsuccessful films of the Craig-era are the ones that were churned out quicker, so could we possibly see the "delay" of No Time to Die as a blessing in disguise?
    Look how quickly the other guys can make great Mission Impossible movies though. It shouldn't be impossible (ho ho).
    I mean I'm not really one to comment on this because I only really like MI: Fallout, not really a big fan of the previous entries, but even then I think the Mission Impossible and the James Bond films are very different products of the spy genre.

    To me the Mission Impossible is an action-packed blockbuster, whereas the James Bond franchise is a different kettle of fish, and while the James Bond franchise also includes action, it has more to think about than just what action set pieces do we want to see Tom Cruise in this time? And I'm sure the MI franchise would also have major delays if it suffered the same problems...

    Different productions, different rules.

    What’s different? Buying some suits and a posh car? You think that takes three extra years? :)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    He’d never do it out of loyalty to MI, but I’d love that too. No one else seems to have such talent for structuring a blockbuster movie at the moment: they just work so well.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all.

    But DAD ended that, I believe.

    Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.

    Exactly....not OTT, but the right balance....The Living Daylights had Dalton in serious mode.but the movie still had a few optional extras. And Timothy Dalton was even the one who started the gritty bond thing. Only he was jst ahead of his time.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    An interesting gadget would be a smartphone that blocks all tabloid content... :-?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    If NTTD crosses the 1billion mark, Do we think the Next Bond will be casted sooner?
    No, I think they'll take as long as they need to cast James Bond. Characteristically they tend not to rush things and will take as long as they need, and when they have tried to get the films out quicker, it hasn't always worked out (Quantum of Solace, Spectre), concretely in my opinion proving that taking their time can heavily benefit the films (Casino Royale, Skyfall).

    It's interesting, and probably unsurprising, to note that the two most unsuccessful films of the Craig-era are the ones that were churned out quicker, so could we possibly see the "delay" of No Time to Die as a blessing in disguise?
    Look how quickly the other guys can make great Mission Impossible movies though. It shouldn't be impossible (ho ho).
    I mean I'm not really one to comment on this because I only really like MI: Fallout, not really a big fan of the previous entries, but even then I think the Mission Impossible and the James Bond films are very different products of the spy genre.

    To me the Mission Impossible is an action-packed blockbuster, whereas the James Bond franchise is a different kettle of fish, and while the James Bond franchise also includes action, it has more to think about than just what action set pieces do we want to see Tom Cruise in this time? And I'm sure the MI franchise would also have major delays if it suffered the same problems...

    Different productions, different rules.

    What’s different? Buying some suits and a posh car? You think that takes three extra years? :)
    Quite a few things actually. Again, different production. Different rules.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    If NTTD crosses the 1billion mark, Do we think the Next Bond will be casted sooner?
    No, I think they'll take as long as they need to cast James Bond. Characteristically they tend not to rush things and will take as long as they need, and when they have tried to get the films out quicker, it hasn't always worked out (Quantum of Solace, Spectre), concretely in my opinion proving that taking their time can heavily benefit the films (Casino Royale, Skyfall).

    It's interesting, and probably unsurprising, to note that the two most unsuccessful films of the Craig-era are the ones that were churned out quicker, so could we possibly see the "delay" of No Time to Die as a blessing in disguise?
    Look how quickly the other guys can make great Mission Impossible movies though. It shouldn't be impossible (ho ho).
    I mean I'm not really one to comment on this because I only really like MI: Fallout, not really a big fan of the previous entries, but even then I think the Mission Impossible and the James Bond films are very different products of the spy genre.

    To me the Mission Impossible is an action-packed blockbuster, whereas the James Bond franchise is a different kettle of fish, and while the James Bond franchise also includes action, it has more to think about than just what action set pieces do we want to see Tom Cruise in this time? And I'm sure the MI franchise would also have major delays if it suffered the same problems...

    Different productions, different rules.

    What’s different? Buying some suits and a posh car? You think that takes three extra years? :)
    Quite a few things actually. Again, different production. Different rules.

    But great Scotch ;)
  • edited December 2019 Posts: 2,599
    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.
    [/quote]

    Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all. [/quote]

    But DAD ended that, I believe.

    Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.[/quote]

    Exactly....not OTT, but the right balance....The Living Daylights had Dalton in serious mode.but the movie still had a few optional extras. And Timothy Dalton was even the one who started the gritty bond thing. Only he was jst ahead of his time. [/quote]

    **************************************

    Craig can be light in conversations with other characters excluding M but he shouldn’t be cracking jokes during action scenes.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Do we think the Gunbarrel will be done in an inventive way in NTTD?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2019 Posts: 16,413
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    If NTTD crosses the 1billion mark, Do we think the Next Bond will be casted sooner?
    No, I think they'll take as long as they need to cast James Bond. Characteristically they tend not to rush things and will take as long as they need, and when they have tried to get the films out quicker, it hasn't always worked out (Quantum of Solace, Spectre), concretely in my opinion proving that taking their time can heavily benefit the films (Casino Royale, Skyfall).

    It's interesting, and probably unsurprising, to note that the two most unsuccessful films of the Craig-era are the ones that were churned out quicker, so could we possibly see the "delay" of No Time to Die as a blessing in disguise?
    Look how quickly the other guys can make great Mission Impossible movies though. It shouldn't be impossible (ho ho).
    I mean I'm not really one to comment on this because I only really like MI: Fallout, not really a big fan of the previous entries, but even then I think the Mission Impossible and the James Bond films are very different products of the spy genre.

    To me the Mission Impossible is an action-packed blockbuster, whereas the James Bond franchise is a different kettle of fish, and while the James Bond franchise also includes action, it has more to think about than just what action set pieces do we want to see Tom Cruise in this time? And I'm sure the MI franchise would also have major delays if it suffered the same problems...

    Different productions, different rules.

    What’s different? Buying some suits and a posh car? You think that takes three extra years? :)
    Quite a few things actually. Again, different production. Different rules.

    But none that you’re actually able to name when asked ;)
    Again, if one big action film can do it then another should be able to. Because you see some aesthetic differences onscreen does not mean they follow different rules behind the scenes. They all get made by people doing the same jobs.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    Bounine wrote: »
    True and it may not be solely to do with the characters Maybe she drew inspiration from characters from Fleming’s books that featured in his novels
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all.

    But DAD ended that, I believe.

    Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.

    Exactly....not OTT, but the right balance....The Living Daylights had Dalton in serious mode.but the movie still had a few optional extras. And Timothy Dalton was even the one who started the gritty bond thing. Only he was jst ahead of his time.

    Craig can be light in conversations with other characters excluding M but he shouldn’t be cracking jokes during action scenes.

    That does remind me of that bit in QoS which, although not actually a joke, just really didn’t work: when he jumps down on the baddie’s jeep and yells “you and I had a mutual friend!” before he shoots the guy. It was just so unnatural and weird to talk like that.
  • J_Bryce777J_Bryce777 San Francisco
    Posts: 78
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    I think a way to freshen Bond up would be to take it to the past. Bring it back to the 60s, even the 50s. Bring in some sci-fi elements with the gadgets that would fit the Cold War era. And perhaps even take it to the next level and just make Bond rated R. There is surely a market for it. It isn't tweeners and high schoolers will be the ones at the front of the line of a Bond movie.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    The foster brother thing is so inconsequential it doesn’t even register for me. When Waltz appears in NTTD it won’t really mean much anymore.

    I think some see this more than others, possibly if there was some action set pieces that were thrilling and full of suspense. Even the PTS isn't as good as the previous films.

    After that each set piece is as limp as the next, the relationship between Bond and Swann is just not convincing and the foster brother angle aside Waltz is just not that exciting as Oberhauser and his reveal as ESB just doesn't register at all.

    Both of those end set pieces, the base one is tension less and the London one is yawn inducing. Skyfall wasn't loaded with action, although its PTS leaves SP's standing and the Scotland climax is explosive and thrilling.

    It seems that NTTD is going to follow on from SP, if it makes sense of SP that will be an achievement in itself and if Waltz gets to deliver in his appearance the performance we expected from the 2 time Oscar winner. Maybe it will make the bitter pill that is SPECTRE that much easier to swallow.

    I never want to see Daniel Craig shoehorned into a film that would have better suited Pierce, that also might be another a reason why I feel the way about it I do.

    When I watched Knives Out yesterday there was a mini doc on 1917 with Mendes talking about the technique that they used and you could see he was very proud of it. If only he'd employed some element of that to SPECTRE, there clearly was a film that he would have gladly walked away from if he could have, he even said that he didn't think he had another one in him, if only he'd stuck with that thought.

    I think he feared his reputation would have been damaged by it, whatever idea he and Logan had cooked up was nixed and whatever it was P&W cobbled together did not fire him up. It says it all that the trailer for 1917 says from the director of Skyfall and not SPECTRE.

    If only they'd done what they'd done with NTTD we might well have got a film worthy of its title, I think the delays for NTTD are going to show it was worth the wait. Unlike SP which stank of a rush job which Craig clearly wasn't happy with, hence the infamous comment that has dogged him ever since.

    I think a good few have come accept it for what it is and enjoy it on that basis but some of us expected much better I guess. I just wasn't expecting just another entry after the way Skyfall ended.

    NTTD looks like something very special.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    mtm wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    True and it may not be solely to do with the characters Maybe she drew inspiration from characters from Fleming’s books that featured in his novels
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all.

    But DAD ended that, I believe.

    Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.

    Exactly....not OTT, but the right balance....The Living Daylights had Dalton in serious mode.but the movie still had a few optional extras. And Timothy Dalton was even the one who started the gritty bond thing. Only he was jst ahead of his time.

    Craig can be light in conversations with other characters excluding M but he shouldn’t be cracking jokes during action scenes.

    That does remind me of that bit in QoS which, although not actually a joke, just really didn’t work: when he jumps down on the baddie’s jeep and yells “you and I had a mutual friend!” before he shoots the guy. It was just so unnatural and weird to talk like that.

    More weird than Ethan talking to a helicopter in fallout or smashing the two helicopters to get detonator.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    @mtm
    You occasionally slip in a double post. Please avoid that by making use of our edit button. Thank you.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2019 Posts: 16,413
    J_Bryce777 wrote: »
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    I think a way to freshen Bond up would be to take it to the past. Bring it back to the 60s, even the 50s. Bring in some sci-fi elements with the gadgets that would fit the Cold War era. And perhaps even take it to the next level and just make Bond rated R. There is surely a market for it. It isn't tweeners and high schoolers will be the ones at the front of the line of a Bond movie.

    I think doing Bond period is probably just going to cost too much money, or they have to reduce the scale quite a lot: something like Man From Uncle isn’t as big in scope as a Bond.
    Rated R I don’t love the idea of: I think parents should be able to take their kids to a Bond.
    mtm wrote: »
    Bounine wrote: »
    True and it may not be solely to do with the characters Maybe she drew inspiration from characters from Fleming’s books that featured in his novels
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I'd love for Christopher McQuarrie to direct the next film with a new actor. Imagine him and PW-B writing. Exciting.

    My main concern would be, how to keep Bond relevant in a world where M:I exists, and how to coexist successfully with M:I which IMO is doing better in the film world than Bond has been lately (Spectre vs. Rogue Nation and the follow up Fallout for example), than making Bond more like M:I and competing directly with it.
    They both need to have their own, unique places in the spy film world so they can both exist and be successful.

    Yeah, I think Bond needs his Gadgets back & his somewhat Sci-Fi elements back without making the plot weak. ....these were the things about bond that marvelled the world in the first place. Movies like GF started that all.

    But DAD ended that, I believe.

    Still, Bond can lighten up a bit without going back to the sky-is-the-limit '60s. It's all about finding the right balance.

    Exactly....not OTT, but the right balance....The Living Daylights had Dalton in serious mode.but the movie still had a few optional extras. And Timothy Dalton was even the one who started the gritty bond thing. Only he was jst ahead of his time.

    Craig can be light in conversations with other characters excluding M but he shouldn’t be cracking jokes during action scenes.

    That does remind me of that bit in QoS which, although not actually a joke, just really didn’t work: when he jumps down on the baddie’s jeep and yells “you and I had a mutual friend!” before he shoots the guy. It was just so unnatural and weird to talk like that.

    More weird than Ethan talking to a helicopter in fallout or smashing the two helicopters to get detonator.

    Yeah much weirder. It was such a clunky sentence and he had to rush it out, despite it being something you’d say in a much calmer way- it just didn’t fit there.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    @mtm
    I have just merged your next double post. See last post on previous page. I must once again urge you to avoid double posting by making use of the edit button.
Sign In or Register to comment.