› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…4142444647…2507

Comments

  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited January 2016 Posts: 5,767
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    I'd be welcoming McQuarrie to the Bond world as a fan, but Gilroy? Oh no. He's one of the worst writers I've ever known. Imagine if we are complaining about Purvis and Wade, what we'd do with Tony Gilroy handling a Bond story. Just ask Matt Damon how dissatisfied he was (along with Paul Greengrass) with the first three Bourne film scripts that they had to hire a co-writer to reconstruct the screenplays.
    I don´t know much about Gilroy, but if Damon and Greengrass had been really that dissatisfied with him they wouldn´t have brought him back after the first film.
    I'm not making this up, mate. Here's the article:
    http://www.eonline.com/news/280292/the-bourne-animosity-matt-damon-slams-writer-for-career-ender-movie

    And to think of the recent installment in the series, Tony Gilroy is not involved, which explains it all for me.
    You wrote that Damon was dissatisfied with the first three Bourne scripts, while the article you now refer to speaks only of a draft for the third one, and it even implies that Gilroy a) wasn´t even tasked from the start with writing more than a draft, and b) did a lazy job. Lazy does not equal talentless. Damon himself said he was hurt by the laziness because he values Gilroy´s talent.
    And of course being lazy isn´t a calling card for being called in the next time. But it would be at least as logical if they looked for some fresh point of view when they want to bring Bourne back after nine years and especially after Bourne remembered his full identity. It´s not rare that a writer runs out of ideas after two or three films with the same main character.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    boldfinger wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    I'd be welcoming McQuarrie to the Bond world as a fan, but Gilroy? Oh no. He's one of the worst writers I've ever known. Imagine if we are complaining about Purvis and Wade, what we'd do with Tony Gilroy handling a Bond story. Just ask Matt Damon how dissatisfied he was (along with Paul Greengrass) with the first three Bourne film scripts that they had to hire a co-writer to reconstruct the screenplays.
    I don´t know much about Gilroy, but if Damon and Greengrass had been really that dissatisfied with him they wouldn´t have brought him back after the first film.
    I'm not making this up, mate. Here's the article:
    http://www.eonline.com/news/280292/the-bourne-animosity-matt-damon-slams-writer-for-career-ender-movie

    And to think of the recent installment in the series, Tony Gilroy is not involved, which explains it all for me.
    You wrote that Damon was dissatisfied with the first three Bourne scripts, while the article you now refer to speaks only of a draft for the third one, and it even implies that Gilroy a) wasn´t even tasked from the start with writing more than a draft, and b) did a lazy job. Lazy does not equal talentless. Damon himself said he was hurt by the laziness because he values Gilroy´s talent.
    And of course being lazy isn´t a calling card for being called in the next time. But it would be at least as logical if they looked for some fresh point of view when they want to bring Bourne back after nine years and especially after Bourne remembered his full identity.
    Yes, I did write that. Because I've read it somewhere, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it here. I'll post the link to that article once I track it down.

    Now, my personal analysis on Gilroy:
    That said, the second Bourne film wasn't too much of a good one compared to the first and the third. And while I liked the spin-off, there wasn't much of a story to offer other than elements of evasion and brilliant action sequences. And back to the third film, the script that Gilroy submitted was rewritten by Scott Z. Burns and George Nolfi, and that alone says something, doesn't it? It's best to move on and leave things that no longer work behind.
  • Ed83Ed83
    Posts: 1,181
    I like Fiennes well enough, but I think M is suited to a much smaller background role. If that means finding a lesser known actor that would accept the minor role and less pay than so be it. I think as long as M has an authoritative sense and respectability about him it will do justice to the character. I don't have to see M running around with a gun getting involved in everything though.
  • dandandandan
    Posts: 92
    Ed83 wrote: »
    I don't have to see M running around with a gun getting involved in everything though.

    I don't WANT to see M running around with a gun getting involved in everything though.

    :)


  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,853
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    I'd be welcoming McQuarrie to the Bond world as a fan, but Gilroy? Oh no. He's one of the worst writers I've ever known. Imagine if we are complaining about Purvis and Wade, what we'd do with Tony Gilroy handling a Bond story. Just ask Matt Damon how dissatisfied he was (along with Paul Greengrass) with the first three Bourne film scripts that they had to hire a co-writer to reconstruct the screenplays.
    I don´t know much about Gilroy, but if Damon and Greengrass had been really that dissatisfied with him they wouldn´t have brought him back after the first film.
    I'm not making this up, mate. Here's the article:
    http://www.eonline.com/news/280292/the-bourne-animosity-matt-damon-slams-writer-for-career-ender-movie

    And to think of the recent installment in the series, Tony Gilroy is not involved, which explains it all for me.
    You wrote that Damon was dissatisfied with the first three Bourne scripts, while the article you now refer to speaks only of a draft for the third one, and it even implies that Gilroy a) wasn´t even tasked from the start with writing more than a draft, and b) did a lazy job. Lazy does not equal talentless. Damon himself said he was hurt by the laziness because he values Gilroy´s talent.
    And of course being lazy isn´t a calling card for being called in the next time. But it would be at least as logical if they looked for some fresh point of view when they want to bring Bourne back after nine years and especially after Bourne remembered his full identity.
    Yes, I did write that. Because I've read it somewhere, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it here. I'll post the link to that article once I track it down.

    Now, my personal analysis on Gilroy:
    That said, the second Bourne film wasn't too much of a good one compared to the first and the third. And while I liked the spin-off, there wasn't much of a story to offer other than elements of evasion and brilliant action sequences. And back to the third film, the script that Gilroy submitted was rewritten by Scott Z. Burns and George Nolfi, and that alone says something, doesn't it? It's best to move on and leave things that no longer work behind.



    And yet you claim you liked Bourne Legacy a film written and directed by Tony Gilroy

    Like I said previously in my opinion in a perfect world bond 25 would be like this

    The Hildebrand Rarity written by Chris Mcquarrie and Tony Gilroy (story by Chris Mcquarrie and Ian Fleming) directed by Tony Gilroy Novelization by Brad Meltzer Title song by Yes (or rush either way I am happy)

    Yeah I get that I am over the moon will I though probably not.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I wonder if we'll ever get novelizations, nowadays... They're not much of a big deal in this day and age. ;)

    I don't know, perhaps it was the winter setting in Legacy that I liked. But, still, when you look at the story, it doesn't seem to have a big goal, other than Renner's character, Aaron Cross travelling around the globe to get a supply of the pills that keep him alive. Like I said, I liked it for the action sequences and incidental elements. That is all.

    Don't depend on my opinion, mate. Yours as good as mine and anyone else's. If you like it, so be it. :-bd
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Ralph Fiennes was recently a guest on 'The Graham Norton Show' where he spoke briefly about M. Here is the part relevant to Bond 25:

    Graham: [...] We just enjoyed you in your last outing as M in 'SPECTRE'. And now you're sticking with that, you're M forever, for awhile anyway.
    Ralph: I've got one more I think, and then it's up to them whether they want me back.

    He also speaks about his on set relationship with Judi Dench in 'Skyfall'

    This was actually reported here a few weeks back, the very same night it was aired. It does indeed bode well in hoping Craig will be back at least for one more
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Ed83 wrote: »
    I like Fiennes well enough, but I think M is suited to a much smaller background role. If that means finding a lesser known actor that would accept the minor role and less pay than so be it. I think as long as M has an authoritative sense and respectability about him it will do justice to the character. I don't have to see M running around with a gun getting involved in everything though.

    Good post.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2016 Posts: 23,883
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Ed83 wrote: »
    I like Fiennes well enough, but I think M is suited to a much smaller background role. If that means finding a lesser known actor that would accept the minor role and less pay than so be it. I think as long as M has an authoritative sense and respectability about him it will do justice to the character. I don't have to see M running around with a gun getting involved in everything though.

    Good post.
    Agreed. Also, I found Fiennes a little too brusque in the role in SP (especially in the opening office scene). It was almost too stern. I liked him more in SF, where he was able to play off of Dench.

    Lee was better able to bring that balance between disciplined mentor where needed and jovial fatherly figure in my view. I may have felt this way because Fiennes/Craig are too close in age, I'm not sure.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,999
    This might surprise a lot of members, but I actually do like the prospect of Fiennes staying on as M for more films, based of what was seen of him in Skyfall. But at the same time, I agree with what some are saying about a lesser known actor accepting a smaller role of M in the films.
  • daltondalton
    Posts: 1,631
    I actually would like Fiennes to stay on in the role for a while. That said, if his departure led to them recasting the MI6 team and led to an actor being cast as M who didn't require the amount of screentime that Dench and Fiennes have had, then that would be the best thing for the franchise moving forward.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I think most of us would want Fiennes to stay indefinitely. I'd love to know his position on the role. They clearly craft the script to accommodate him as much as they can, but he strikes me as the kind of bloke who wouldn't be so bothered about taking on a more Lee-esque role in terms of screen time. I don't think M has to be completely desk bound, but they could probably slim down his man of action type role. I'd be keen to see him butt heads with an international peer, head of the CIA perhaps.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2016 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    I'd be keen to see him butt heads with an international peer, head of the CIA perhaps.
    As would I, and as they did so well in the past with Gogol.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited January 2016 Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    I'd be keen to see him butt heads with an international peer, head of the CIA perhaps.
    As would I, and as they did so well in the past with Gogol.

    Given we're already so balls deep into reboot territory now voicing reservations scarcely matters any more what do we think about Gogol being rebooted? Someone like that Swedish guy from Sherlock could pull it off I reckon with a bit more menace than dear old Walter.

    The Russians could be doing some dodgy deal with SPECTRE. Perhaps even have the Russian government putting pressure on the UK to release Blofeld rather than another tiresome contrived escape?

    M and Gogol could have a clandestine meeting where he explains some compelling reason why they have to let Blofeld go. SPECTRE has possession of the Russian launch codes or some such.

    Then when Bond gets wind of it Dan could channel his inner Broz and declare 'I'm going aftah him!'

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    The Russians could be doing some dodgy deal with SPECTRE. Perhaps even have the Russian government putting pressure on the UK to release Blofeld rather than another tiresome contrived escape?

    M and Gogol could have a clandestine meeting where he explains some compelling reason why they have to let Blofeld go. SPECTRE has possession of the Russian launch codes or some such.
    I do like this idea. Russia is fast becoming the bad guy in geopolitics again, and some kind of SPECTRE involvement with them for common interests (boosting world oil prices perhaps?) could be interesting.

    Regarding actors, I've always wanted to see Steven Berkoff back in a Bond film, even if for a brief role. He is such a charismatic actor, and even acted with Craig in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.
  • SerialHitmanSerialHitman Plotting my revenge
    Posts: 45
    I'm currently very happy with the MI6 team, especially M and Q. I would very much like them all to stick around for a while, even after Craig leaves. The presence of some familiar faces could help ease the transition when Craig leaves the role and the next actor comes in.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    I'm glad Fiennes is returning although that was to be expected.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    I'd be keen to see him butt heads with an international peer, head of the CIA perhaps.
    As would I, and as they did so well in the past with Gogol.

    Given we're already so balls deep into reboot territory now voicing reservations scarcely matters any more what do we think about Gogol being rebooted? Someone like that Swedish guy from Sherlock could pull it off I reckon with a bit more menace than dear old Walter.

    I wouldn't mind this. Incidentally the guy you're talking about is Mads Mikkelsen's brother, Lars.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Then he isn t Swedish, but Danish. These things matter to us Scandinavians and no one else.
  • Crazysoul95Crazysoul95
    Posts: 3,336
    Can't believe the next film will be the 25th! A quarter to a hundred, we'll get there. Eventually...
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited February 2016 Posts: 9,117
    Crazysoul95 wrote: »
    Can't believe the next film will be the 25th! A quarter to a hundred, we'll get there. Eventually...

    Not in any of our lifetimes. 76 more to go at 3 years per film. Even our great grandchildren probably won't live to see B100.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited February 2016 Posts: 15,722
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    Crazysoul95 wrote: »
    Can't believe the next film will be the 25th! A quarter to a hundred, we'll get there. Eventually...

    Not in any of our lifetimes. 76 more to go at 3 years per film. Even our great grandchildren probably won't live to see B100.

    If it takes 60 years to make 20 more films, I'll be 84 years old when Bond 44 will be released.
  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    Posts: 1,092
    SerialHitman wrote: »
    I'm currently very happy with the MI6 team, especially M and Q. I would very much like them all to stick around for a while, even after Craig leaves. The presence of some familiar faces could help ease the transition when Craig leaves the role and the next actor comes in.

    Couldn't agree more. I love M, Q, and Moneypenny as they are. I can't see how they could be better right now. I want some continuity like they had in the old days when Bernard and Lois and Desmond stuck around to welcome in new Bonds once Connery left. We need that kind of continuity again.
  • bondboy007bondboy007
    Posts: 267
    ^I totally agree with that. Which is why I was kind of hoping they'd cast a lesser known actor as M. I'd love to keep the current group together for years - although I would also like to see their screen time cut down dramatically in the coming films.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    Comparatively, do we know how much screen time the current staff had in SF and SP and how much they had in previous movies, especially DN and FRWL? And how about James Bond himself?
  • OldScoool98OldScoool98
    Posts: 22
    For me Ralph Fiennes is perfect as M! And he should not be replaced.
  • JohnHammond73JohnHammond73 Lancashire, UK
    Posts: 4,151
    I think Ralph Fiennes is a decent M and I definitely want to see him back. However, I'd like to see a return to the normal role of M, as we saw in the days of Bernard Lee, not as part of Team Bond with Q and Moneypenny.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,599
    Shark_0f_Largo wrote: »
    I think Ralph Fiennes is a decent M and I definitely want to see him back. However, I'd like to see a return to the normal role of M, as we saw in the days of Bernard Lee, not as part of Team Bond with Q and Moneypenny.

    I agree, but since the actors who play the role respectively I would assume require a decent salary to play the roles. I highly doubt that EON would continue to pay Fiennes, Harris and Wishaw a hefty salary for a little more than just a cameo role.

  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,853
    I would like Fiennes M to actually do some assigning of missions.. I don't mind him doing more in action i just would love for him to assign missions.


    Actually with Mallory's IRA background am I the only one who Hopes Craig comes back for 2 more films and the second one involves 007 taking on say a Rogue IRA faction. (heck they could even utlize the Man with the golden gun's plot somewhat with having the IRA brainwash 007 to kill their old advisarary.)

    but yeah my issues with spectre (and Skyfall somewhat) didn't involve Fiennes as M who I thought wasinspirid casting.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    I think after Dan's final film (Bond 25) it will be a whole recasting as i think the other regulars will not carry on without him.
Sign In or Register to comment.