No Time to Die production thread

15765775795815821208

Comments

  • ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope. I think we are in for a substantial film and a good 140 - 150 min run time. Personally, I love the long Bonds like OHMSS, CR and SF, so I'm very happy to spend two and half hours in the company of Mr. Bond and everything that goes with him.

    You also have to accommodate about 6 mins for end credits these days too.
  • Posts: 1,499
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope. I think we are in for a substantial film and a good 140 - 150 min run time. Personally, I love the long Bonds like OHMSS, CR and SF, so I'm very happy to spend two and half hours in the company of Mr. Bond and everything that goes with him.

    You also have to accommodate about 6 mins for end credits these days too.

    I was kind of including all the credits.

  • ColonelSun wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope. I think we are in for a substantial film and a good 140 - 150 min run time. Personally, I love the long Bonds like OHMSS, CR and SF, so I'm very happy to spend two and half hours in the company of Mr. Bond and everything that goes with him.

    You also have to accommodate about 6 mins for end credits these days too.

    I was kind of including all the credits.

    Yes, what I was getting at was that a 140-150 film now is a shorter film than say in the 1960s, when credits were shorter.
  • Posts: 1,499
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope. I think we are in for a substantial film and a good 140 - 150 min run time. Personally, I love the long Bonds like OHMSS, CR and SF, so I'm very happy to spend two and half hours in the company of Mr. Bond and everything that goes with him.

    You also have to accommodate about 6 mins for end credits these days too.

    I was kind of including all the credits.

    Yes, what I was getting at was that a 140-150 film now is a shorter film than say in the 1960s, when credits were shorter.

    Sure. OHMSS would be 3 or 4 mins longer now. I suspect they will want to keep NTTD within that 150 min mark and not any longer.

  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    I remember watching Fellowship of the Ring when it released on Bluray, and saw there was still 30-minutes left after Boromir bites it. I thought to myself, "Huh, I don't remember this movie going past this point." Sure enough... thirty-minutes of credits.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,022
    Red_Snow wrote: »

    Don't know. Only provided the Instagram post
  • edited January 2020 Posts: 3,278
    matt_u wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    Here's one to take with a grain of salt of course but...Universal Pictures Russia is giving exhibitors an estimated runtime of...174 minutes

    I've seen the runtime listed as 150mins in the US.

    Looks like we're in for a long one.

    Yeah for sure. Wasn’t the NTTD script 3 pages longer than the SP one? Something close to 150 minutes is what I’m expecting.

    SP script is 130 pages and 203 scenes. NTTD is 133 pages. But it's not saying much. A five minute dialogue-scene is usually much longer than a five minute action scene in scripts. What I do like is that they are not being pushed by executives to limit the runtime to fit in two-hour slots or so, which is luckily a thing of the past. Many movies have been destroyed because of this, hence the many later released director's cuts.
  • Posts: 3,164
    Where did the 133 page script thing come from?

    Looking back through the clapperboard thread and the 3 hour rumour definitely explains the 250+ scene numbers.
  • edited January 2020 Posts: 3,278
    antovolk wrote: »
    Where did the 133 page script thing come from?

    Looking back through the clapperboard thread and the 3 hour rumour definitely explains the 250+ scene numbers.

    The 250 number is B-roll clapperboards. And unless it's a fake, 133 pages have been confirmed because the first page of the script (dated April 12, 2019 and only contains disclaimers and such) has leaked.
  • Posts: 3,164
    Zekidk wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    Where did the 133 page script thing come from?

    Looking back through the clapperboard thread and the 3 hour rumour definitely explains the 250+ scene numbers.

    The 250 number is B-roll clapperboards. And unless it's a fake, 133 pages have been confirmed because the first page of the script has leaked.

    There is a scene 243 first unit clapperboard here -

    By B-roll you're probably mistaking it for second unit, which is where the scene number is preceded by X...and the first 200+ clapperboard that was poster was from that.

    Where did the page leak? First I heard of this...
  • Posts: 3,278
    B-cam crew. Establishing shots and such. You don't see Sandgren there, do you, but Dean Morrish, who is credited with "second asst cam B cam 2 unit" on IMDB.
  • edited January 2020 Posts: 3,164
    Zekidk wrote: »
    B-cam crew. Establishing shots and such. You don't see Sandgren there, do you, but Dean Morrish, who is credited with "second asst cam B cam 2 unit" on IMDB.

    That's second unit. B-roll means someone shooting BTS footage.
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    edited January 2020 Posts: 3,022
    antovolk wrote: »
    Where did the 133 page script thing come from?

    Looking back through the clapperboard thread and the 3 hour rumour definitely explains the 250+ scene numbers.

    I got the first page of the script, with '133 pages' in print. Technically the script has 132 pages since the first page just have 'Bond 25' and the usual danjaq info

    Posted by an unknown crew member in April but deleted within an hour or so.
  • Posts: 3,278
    antovolk wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    B-cam crew. Establishing shots and such. You don't see Sandgren there, do you, but Dean Morrish, who is credited with "second asst cam B cam 2 unit" on IMDB.

    B-roll means someone shooting BTS footage.

    B-roll is supplemental or alternative footage intercut with the main shot. They are often using a different clapperboard-system from the 1st unit.

    There's a nice explanation here:
    https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/what-is-b-roll/
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope. I think we are in for a substantial film and a good 140 - 150 min run time. Personally, I love the long Bonds like OHMSS, CR and SF, so I'm very happy to spend two and half hours in the company of Mr. Bond and everything that goes with him.

    It’s a date, @ColonelSun
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    I rewatched QoS last night, and I wouldn't have minded an extra 30-60 minutes to flesh it out. The more the better I say, as long as the content warrants it.
  • edited January 2020 Posts: 1,469
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope.
    On it being emotionally epic, as Largo said in NSNA, "We'll see". Emotionally epic in a film can mean a lot of things, from the sweep of events, to romance between the characters, to how well the film evokes emotion from the viewer. Personally I'll be glad to get the romance with Madeleine behind us and hope Bond doesn't have long-term women partners in the future. You don't necessarily need romance on the screen to evoke emotion from a viewer. In the end, it's always about Bond, not Mr. and Mrs. Bond. For me it comes down to the story; how well the story is told; and how the camera is used. This is why I think the producers need to really examine the stories they tell and probably get new writers. Obviously I say this not having seen NTTD, but we know Madeleine is involved and that Purvis and Wade again have co-written it. Plus, as much as I've enjoyed the Craig films and what he's brought to the role, I think his acting range is a bit limited when it comes to showing emotional chemistry with a woman partner; for instance, I admire Connery and Moore's acting more in scenes with women, though the times then were a little different. I also prefer that Bond's involvement with women emotionally be at a bare minimum, though sex and flirting are more his style. In terms of evoking emotion, I think of all the great Bond films and exceptional scenes in any Bond film--or pick any great films--that evoke emotion because they originated from a relevant premise in the story and were crafted well! With just the right camera angle, closeup, and edit, holding each scene for just the right amount of time, to build audience involvement.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I hope 2 hrs. That is fine with me, and a little over is fine with me, too.
    https://variety.com/2020/film/features/james-bond-no-time-to-die-barbara-broccoli-michael-wilson-1203466601/
  • Posts: 16,221
    174 minutes seems a bit excessive to me. I vividly recall forum members expressing excitement over the projected run time for SPECTRE.

    I felt SPECTRE should have been trimmed a minimum of ten minutes as the pacing wasn't nearly on par with OHMSS or CR.

    I personally don't want a 3 hour plus Bond film. Save that for GONE WITH THE WIND or THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    peter wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope. I think we are in for a substantial film and a good 140 - 150 min run time. Personally, I love the long Bonds like OHMSS, CR and SF, so I'm very happy to spend two and half hours in the company of Mr. Bond and everything that goes with him.

    It’s a date, @ColonelSun

    "better make that 3"
  • Posts: 17,814
    I definitely prefer a shorter runtime – no matter how good the film is. I want the Bond films to be comparable to a short but exciting punk song you can put on at any time rather than a longer, epic track you need to be in the mood and/or have time for.
  • Posts: 16,221
    I definitely prefer a shorter runtime – no matter how good the film is. I want the Bond films to be comparable to a short but exciting punk song you can put on at any time rather than a longer, epic track you need to be in the mood and/or have time for.

    Precisely.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,580
    Thrasos wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope.
    On it being emotionally epic, as Largo said in NSNA, "We'll see". Emotionally epic in a film can mean a lot of things, from the sweep of events, to romance between the characters, to how well the film evokes emotion from the viewer. Personally I'll be glad to get the romance with Madeleine behind us and hope Bond doesn't have long-term women partners in the future. You don't necessarily need romance on the screen to evoke emotion from a viewer. In the end, it's always about Bond, not Mr. and Mrs. Bond. For me it comes down to the story; how well the story is told; and how the camera is used. This is why I think the producers need to really examine the stories they tell and probably get new writers. Obviously I say this not having seen NTTD, but we know Madeleine is involved and that Purvis and Wade again have co-written it. Plus, as much as I've enjoyed the Craig films and what he's brought to the role, I think his acting range is a bit limited when it comes to showing emotional chemistry with a woman partner; for instance, I admire Connery and Moore's acting more in scenes with women, though the times then were a little different. I also prefer that Bond's involvement with women emotionally be at a bare minimum, though sex and flirting are more his style. In terms of evoking emotion, I think of all the great Bond films and exceptional scenes in any Bond film--or pick any great films--that evoke emotion because they originated from a relevant premise in the story and were crafted well! With just the right camera angle, closeup, and edit, holding each scene for just the right amount of time, to build audience involvement.

    I’m not sure I agree with you but I must say you’ve chosen perhaps the best screen name for anyone on a Bond forum I’ve ever seen. Guts indeed!
    :)
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    edited January 2020 Posts: 1,165
    Certainly not the precedent set by the Craig films, bar QoS. Maybe next actor.
  • edited January 2020 Posts: 5,767
    Thrasos wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    BB and MGW have described the film (basically) as both emotionally epic and epic in cinematic scope.
    On it being emotionally epic, as Largo said in NSNA, "We'll see". Emotionally epic in a film can mean a lot of things, from the sweep of events, to romance between the characters, to how well the film evokes emotion from the viewer. Personally I'll be glad to get the romance with Madeleine behind us and hope Bond doesn't have long-term women partners in the future. You don't necessarily need romance on the screen to evoke emotion from a viewer. In the end, it's always about Bond, not Mr. and Mrs. Bond. For me it comes down to the story; how well the story is told; and how the camera is used. This is why I think the producers need to really examine the stories they tell and probably get new writers. Obviously I say this not having seen NTTD, but we know Madeleine is involved and that Purvis and Wade again have co-written it. Plus, as much as I've enjoyed the Craig films and what he's brought to the role, I think his acting range is a bit limited when it comes to showing emotional chemistry with a woman partner; for instance, I admire Connery and Moore's acting more in scenes with women, though the times then were a little different. I also prefer that Bond's involvement with women emotionally be at a bare minimum, though sex and flirting are more his style. In terms of evoking emotion, I think of all the great Bond films and exceptional scenes in any Bond film--or pick any great films--that evoke emotion because they originated from a relevant premise in the story and were crafted well! With just the right camera angle, closeup, and edit, holding each scene for just the right amount of time, to build audience involvement.
    Very well put, @Thrasos.




    I definitely prefer a shorter runtime – no matter how good the film is. I want the Bond films to be comparable to a short but exciting punk song you can put on at any time rather than a longer, epic track you need to be in the mood and/or have time for.
    I want it to mesmerise me no matter how long or short it is. It can be a short but exciting punk song as much as it can be Pink Floyd´s Echoes, as long as its groove doesn´t let me stray.
  • Posts: 388
    I definitely prefer a shorter runtime – no matter how good the film is. I want the Bond films to be comparable to a short but exciting punk song you can put on at any time rather than a longer, epic track you need to be in the mood and/or have time for.

    I tend to agree, but if it’s good or great, then let this be an epic finale to Craig’s era.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited January 2020 Posts: 4,343
    They won't release a 3 hour Bond film, even tho NTTD will not be a short one. I still believe it will be the first Bond film to break the 150 minutes mark. SP was 148, with at least 10 minutes spent for credits and theme song. On a side note, I love long movies.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I do like a longer Bond film. If well done, it will not lag.
  • Posts: 1,469
    mtm wrote: »
    I’m not sure I agree with you but I must say you’ve chosen perhaps the best screen name for anyone on a Bond forum I’ve ever seen. Guts indeed!
    :)
    Yassou!

  • In terms of pure content, i.e. excluding studio logos and everything from the moment the first end credit appears, OHMSS is still unbeaten champion in terms of length. Including end credits is a weaselly way of bumping up runtime and is an unfair comparison. Spectre is I believe a good 10 seconds shorter. Rami Malek
Sign In or Register to comment.