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
Batista in Fiat 500?!?!?!.... =)) =)) =))
i would piss myself with laughter..
Batista in Fiat 500?!?!?!.... =)) =)) =))
i would piss myself with laughter..[/quote]
So maybe it belongs to one of the Bond girls, perhaps Lea Seydoux, as @AdaShelby said?
unless things change, we can probably rule out Arnold for Bond 24..
I live in hope.
Image someone posting on this forum before Skyfall, "Imagine Bond can not rely anymore on MI6 and has to use his own stuff, then he opens the door of a garage, and, then let's play the Bond theme : there is the DB5 full of gadgets ready to rock".
How many here would have explained this would be boring, silly, incoherent, etc... ? The problem is that some here "knows for sure" what works and what doesn't work, what Mendes will do, and what he'll never do. It's almost as if the work of a director had no effect at all, they all decide what kind of story is ok or not.
On the contrary... a good director can turn a fan fiction in a good movie, a bad director can turn a great novel in a bore fest.
I don't say that to introduce Blofeld, if this is the case, Mendes will "obviously" use the image of Waltz stroking a cat, even only for a visual gag.
But I dont think anyone can say it will definitely *not* happen because it's silly. Art is about iconography. In one tenth of a second, a complex background is understood by the audience, and you think a director will not consider using it ?
I know this isn't an image from Bond 24, but I could totally imagine a scene revolving around this image in the film.
I'm not an Italian speaker, but the language is quite close to French.
Serbia is a glitch from your online translation. "In serbo" in this text rather means something like "Not to mention..."
As for the tuxedo, this is something from the writer's imagination. The text reads like : "Bond will parachute from an helicopter (in a tuxedo, who knows ?) ... "
The start of principal photography of nearly all big budget movies other than the Bond films is much less close to their release dates. Most people explain this discrepancy by saying that most big budget movies have far more visual effects shots than the Bond films and therefore the post-production of those movies take much longer.
But what about the new Mission:Impossible movie for example? That movie won't be much more VFX heavy than Bond 24 and still, they started filming that a whole 16 months before its release date. Why don't they ever start filming the Bond films less close to the their premieres? You can nearly always hear complaints about the post production schedules being too tight, don't they want to make those a bit longer?
From my experience working in the film industry, it's the post production stage that can be lengthy. How long the director and editor take to cut a film can of course depend on how clear the directors vision is and what shots he thinks work well and not as well. Eon leave enough time for shooting but they don't seem to give the directors and editors much time in post as you have said. It's nice to have a bit more time to play around, chopping and cutting shots. Some other big budget movie makers get longer. As to why Eon don't give them longer for post production and start shooting the film earlier, I don't know. Seems a little crazy to me. The longer they have, the better a film can look in some cases. I don't know whether they've had pre-production issues, but surely they can't have on every film!
I think Sony Pictures has a say in this as well. Paramount and Tom Cruise can be relatively "liberal" with their production approach to the new M:I film. And don't forget, there was a four year gap between M:I 4 and the upcoming 5th installment. Bond films still follow up each other with -on average- a 3 year gap. At least between SF and Bond 24.
Moreover, I think here it becomes quite clear that from a quality perspective, Bond is superior to M:I. Yes, we saw already great stunt videos from Tommy Cruise. But it's still important to see how it works out in the screenplay. And there's "Bond" has made bigger quality leaps since CR. I prefer a lengthy pre-production, because the screenplay is the "root canal" for a good film. The M:I-screenplay's IMO are less focused on character, and more on "a great stunt ride".
Moreover, it's a production choice. Bond films ever since GE -and earlier than that- always had a short post production period. So EON's habit of production is like set in stone. Why change that huh? The Bond-vehicle has always worked like that.
One last thing, as a film I found SF miles better than M:I 4. Perhaps we "nitpicking fans" think differently, but at least out there that's the case. It also had a bigger impact if you ask me, SF that is. Just look at the box office. No matter how critical we are about SF, there was a lot of love for that film. Reviews from M:I 4 were good, but those of SF were mostly better.
So in essence it's merely a matter of "production habit". Paramount/Skydance/Cruise do it like this, Sony/MGM/EON do it like that. It's as simple as that. And I see no point in adopting the "Cruise-style", if the "EON-style" already works perfectly.
By the way, we had some truly magnificent Bond scoops in the past two weeks. Christoph Waltz & Blofeld. And you know what? That news has gone viral like...a virus :-P. I mean, at this stage I think it's already safe to say Bond 24 will be slightly more successful than M:I 5. Simply put: Bond is just bigger. And we all know it. I think another One Billion Dollar Bond is in the making again. Bond rocks.
I think that longer post production periods could only benefit the franchise.
Won't be any surprise if this will be a billion dollar Bond. Even if the film is crappy like DAD each film still makes more than it's predecessor. One reason being that Bond is such a big name. What will certainly hinder my enjoyment of Bond 24 is the cheesy throwaway lines that just don't suit Craig along with the stupidity of putting Moneypenny back in the field. Then there's this supposed damn personal angle yet again, involving Hans's son. 8-|
This has me thinking: What if Blofeld is re-imagined to be something akin to M's arch-rival/heir-equivalent? Or maybe he is a higher up in Mi6 that unknowingly sets up SPECTRE?
That's just a 14 month old rumor. Putting Moneypenny back in the field won't happen, since it would not make any sense.
I think you're right. Now, this is going to sound ridiculous, and it's extremely pointless at this point, but:
If they wanted Moneypenny to have more field work, they should have done it in Skyfall? How? Ditch the Kincade character, and have Moneypenny go with M. and Bond to the house and fight Silva. At the end of it, she's in the room when Judi's M. dies with Bond, her and James have a critical and currently missing 'moment' of bonding. M.'s death is what motivates her to quite field work and Mallory insists she stays as his head advisory and secretary. I would have been fine with that approach.
But @PanchitoPistoles, you're indeed correct. It's too late now.
Wow, that actually would have been pretty good. It would have tied the climax in nicely with the PTS, too, where Bond, M, and Moneypenny were the three principal players in the drama of his being shot, and like you suggest, it would have more firmly established Moneypenny as the lead Bond girl of the picture despite not being romantically linked with 007.
SF: 92% on Rottentomatoes, 7,8 on IMDB
MI:4 93% on Rottentomatoes, 7,4 on IMDB
With pleasure, @Gustav_Graves , with pleasure.
Daniel Craig in Rome: James Bond will parachutes down on Ponte Sisto. The 24th 007 movie [will be] filmed in Italy
Breathtaking chases through the historical center, gymkhanas, fights, and even a car which flies on [the river] Tevere.
Meanwhile, Bond lands with a parachut on Ponte Sisto, in the center of the eternal city. Partly filmed in Rome, where filming is planned on 19th february-12th march 2015, the new film of 007 - produced by MGM and directed by Sam Mendes (who also did Skyfall) and Daniel Craig once again playing the most charming secret agent ever - has got spectacular scenes through palaces and millenary monuments.
Three locations for as many scenes with a high adrenaline rate have already been planned in Borgo Vittorio, next to Vatican, with a running car which will clash into a Fiat 500 at night, another fast chase, again at night, through Corso Vittorio Emanuele II, then on Lungo Tevere, where a car falls in the water of the river after a spectacular flight. The most memorable scene will be however when Bond (perhaps wearing a tuxedo? Who knows) will parachute, again at night, from a helicopter which will be flying over the city and will landon the bridge whose building was ordered by Papa Sisto in the XV century to link Piazza Trilussa, heart of Trastevere, to the other shore of the city.
Bond 24 will also film in Campania, inside Caserta's Royal Palace.
Rome is sounding quite exciting! And what a nice contrast to Austria. I really love the locations for this film!
The truth is Eon work very hard and start work on the next Bond very quickly after the last one. But these are huge (very complex) films to produce, so delivering a new film on average every 2 to 3 years is a massive undertaking. (Consider the years between Indy films, or Star Wars and other franchises.) So the story and script development takes time in itself. The release date is set (all studios do this), so they have a deadline, and knowing how long the script process will take, means they end up with about 15/16 months of actual production time - remember Bond 24 has been in pre-production since the summer. They have a 5/6 month shoot and a tightly scheduled (but doable) 5 month post production to meet the release date. If they could start shooting earlier, they would, but finalizing the script and then the dealing with the sheer size of the production eats up time and of course money. The budget ultimately dictates how long a schedule (pre-shoot-post) can stretch. That's the reality of large scale, big budget filmmaking.
Re: Mission Impossible 5 - from what I hear they do not have a completed script and are writing huge chunks of story as they progress, so they are going to need that longer post-production time for sure.
Either way, I think he'll have hair just to avoid comparisons.