It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I really like the sinking house ending, and I think Vesper's death was a great emotional resolution to the whole set-piece. Was it the only way they could have handled it? Absolutely not. However, I still find it immensely satisfying on its own terms.
I like the sequence as such. It's quite an original concept within the series and Craig really shows off his action skills once again with a few bloody awesome moves. But, it's probably the one bit in an otherwise perfect film that could have been omitted -- or somehow, in part at least, transported to QOS, a film with more than enough room for an extra segment.
I will give it that. To this day, I'm still not quite sure at times what's real and what's miniatures. Hell, same goes for the airport sequence (though that's more obvious to me now).
I still love CR, I've just been able to be a bit more critical towards it in recent years. It has a couple of issues that keep it from being the best of the lot but it's still fantastic and always up there as a favorite of mine (and will forever remain my second favorite of the era).
The hate comes from people not understanding the realities of being a working writer in this space of nine-figure budgets.
Number of Craig Bond films? I've got 6, so count me Happy & Glorious.
Leaving out 007 Legends though…*shutters in terror*
Nope. For me it's a set piece that calls attention to itself. Literally, it doesn't work for me. As a metaphor for Bond's life collapsing around him, it works. He is left in the rubble and ruin of his relationship with Vesper.
Same here!
I like your thinking.... :))
Maybe there lies the problem. P&W should be left to write the script without any outside interference. Who knows, maybe now that they have been around such a long time in the franchise, this time they'll be trusted to be left alone, without execs meddling.
If they turn out a script that is very Fleming for the next one, I'll be happy.
I've taken advice from the people on here. They said "if you don't like NTTD, ignore it, there'll be another along in time".
It's like CR '67 to me. A movie that features a character called James Bond that I don't have as part of my Bond collection, (I do have the soundtrack CD, but that came out before the movie).
I sleep much better now!
And I'm loved even more on here for it.
Talking about "Bond26" will be very confusing then. ;-)
I have often wondered why this is though? Why is it basically inconceivable to let one or maximum two writers complete the work in its entirety from start to finish?
I can imagine a big part of it is because likely the scripts wouldn't be as strong under those one or two writers alone.
@peter obviously knows more about this, but even in my more limited experience much of getting a script into shape is rewriting and getting notes back. Some writers are just stronger at, say, punching up dialogue or knowing how to craft action sequences (indeed many do this for a living). So that fresh pair of eyes/input is needed. I've worked on even low budget short films that brought in other writers because their input/that sort of situation. Heck, even if an AI were advanced enough to generate a workable script it'd need to produce several different drafts/revisions to make it workable.
That and I suspect there can be stuff like availability issues, demands/revisions that are made later into the day etc.
Possibly. But I suspect (and of course, I could always be wrong) it has more to do with how effectively those 'head creatives' (so the executive producers, possibly director etc) have managed the direction of the film.
Possibly, but it really depends. Take something like Dr. Strangelove for example - obviously it's considered one of the best films (or at least comedies) of all time, but it famously started from a vague idea that Kubrick had about the threat of nuclear war. He started by loosely adapting a novel which was not a comedy, and alongside working with the writer Peter George he had input from two academics who had written about this topic. After presumably several treatments and drafts, Kubrick seemingly came to the conclusion that it worked best as a black comedy and Terry Southern was brought in. That's of course not where the creative input for the film ends as between Peter Sellers' extensive improvisation and what was worked out during the shooting/editing process, one can argue that there were quite a number of cooks working on that particular broth. I'm sure many other examples exist, and how a film turns out is due to many different people working on it.
I always thought they teased Vespers death from the novel, before the shower scene. Bond walks into Vesper's room, ominous cue in the score, Bond hears the shower running then spots the broken glass. I was fully expecting Bond to find Vesper overdosed on her bed, when I saw CR opening night. That was a great bit of misdirection by Campbell.
If you named a load of your favourite big movies though, I bet they were made with the same process.
They spend a lot of money on these things- if it didn't work they wouldn't do it.
And no doubt several were not; there is no locked in formula.
EDIT: And Oppenheimer got nominated for a total of 13 Oscars! Had the two Sound categories not been united 3 years ago, it would have received 14 nominations, which is the record!!!!
For Bond it's the norm, and it's been that way since the beginning really. Look at the number of writers who wrote drafts of TSWLM, many of which had scraps that made it into the finished script (six writers were commissioned, and that's not including the two who did eventually receive credit, nor does it include the two that we know of who did uncredited rewrites). Hell, DN had three credited writers, and one uncredited one that we know of.