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 think you’re right.
Re: the candidates list he swears he knows nothing other than, of course one exists. But it’s clear to this family that DC is Bond until officially retired. He said, again, swearing he knows nothing, it will be someone just under the radar— as most of us assume.
War.
I'm sorry for bugging you before, I was just curious!
@MaxCasino -- no apologies. it was a very exciting day, even to get a morsel, lol!! And you were definitely not bugging me. It was the best I could share at the moment. I genuinely hope to get more as it develops. And, unless it's seriously damaging information (damaging to my contact or my relationship to him), I will always share what I can.
I am genuinely excited about B25, manly because of CF. He's a wonderful and visual storyteller. I also think, and I'm assuming on my partner, there's an excitement about the production amongst the creatives as well.
Fingers crossed.
Definitely what I first thought of when Tunisia was mentioned here. I must admit, the prospect of Cadiz being used really doesn't excite me as production travelled there just 5 films ago.
I am as well. I was meh on Boyle, and far more optimistic with CJF. Thanks for your contributions, @peter, btw. It's nice we have people like you here. I see even @ColonelSun popped by, cool.
---
It seems many here are quite excited about Rami Malek. I'm not familiar with his work, so I can't comment on his acting. - I have seen two movies he was apparently in (Ain't Them Bodies Saints and The Master), but I don't remember him in either (yeah well, small supporting roles). There's no way in hell I was ever going to even consider contributing to the Bohemian Rhapsody BO, so that'll be a hard pass from me. (A sort of pity in that in different circumstances - preferably a better movie and definitely a different director - I'd be quite interested in a Freddie Mercury movie, and would have seen it months ago.)
I have been rolling my eyes at Malek quite a bit recently, though. He hasn't exactly been handling the press with the movie all that well - both regarding how the movie handled the person he played, and regarding questions about its director. Just not a good look at all. It's a month to the Oscars, and it'll be interesting to see if he continues the way he has so far (a bad idea... and the latest I heard he was digging a hole for himself instead of finally getting smart), or if someone gives him good advice that he actually listens to.
In short: so far I'm not excited about the possibility of having him in a Bond movie, but we'll see...
Just for the record it would be extremely out of character for what we've seen so far in SP. As mentioned in SP Madeleine left her father because she had enough of his sick life as a spy. Then, after falling in love with Bond, she leaves him once she realize he will never change and stop. She explicitly says: "I can't go back to this life". She's not the type of woman who sits home waiting her "fiancé" to come and go, neither a distraction. She will be the first main Bond girl to come back in the next chapter of the series in 58 years so there must been a better reason than just distracting Bond. We'll see.
Interesting bit about Tunisia... looks like the movie is goin to have a lot of connection with SP.
I´m not sure how much I care About These Story Details. For sure the Soap opera Relations must stop, but my main gripe with the last two films remains Mendes´ style not at all klicking with me. So I guess I have Nothing to worry About now. I see CF more in the veign of Marc Forster, as far as off path ambitious directors are concerned.
Fukunaga showed two things as a director: his ability to switch genres with powerful imagery and strong performances, and his maniacal attention to the psychology of his characters. His best works always dealt with protagonists suffering some mental issues. So I'm expecting a Bond movie with a more edgy direction - yet not extreme as QoS - than the last two with a lot of focus on Bond's psyche. I think Fukunaga's approach to Bond is going to be like the opposite of Forster, since you mentioned him. Forster used style and concept as a tool to hide the movie tiny plot and characters writing, making an abstract Bond picture fast as a bullet, with no coordinates, the most conceptual Bond movie ever. On the other hand I predict Fukunaga will make a more "formally" classical Bond movie - maybe with just some technically extreme standout sequences like in Maniac and TD - but with a never seen before in the saga attention to the psychology of Bond as a human being. Which is also goin to be interesting material for Craig as an actor to work with.
Hi @Tuulia , thanks for the kind words. And yes, Colonel Sun is a cool dude. I've read a couple of scripts he has in development and they're damn good. He's a genuine talent with a very rich history in the film industry (not only in the James Bond world; this guy literally went "flying with Superman" a story he can tell while he was working on one of the SM films).
Anyways, we got a morsel of information and I was happy to share. It may give small hint to where the film is heading. And I like to hear how Gregg Wilson's in charge of the location crew (which means he's a very active producer, learning the ropes by tackling huge responsibilities. Gives a little more weight to the argument that I learned he will be taking over his father's position for B26).
Re: Malek and the director: very dicey situation, isn't it? Everyone may have dropped the ball on this one-- producers on down. Up until recently, everyone kept mum about the allegations (almost as if they thought that if they kept quiet, it would all go away).
And then a reply was expected from an actor.
I personally don't think it's his job to have to answer these questions-- but the producers. And once the producers respond, the actors should be given orders to follow the lines that they've been given.
I certainly understand your discomfort with the entire situation.
Here is an article of Malek's recent response:
https://www.wmagazine.com/story/rami-malek-bryan-singer
https://www.screendaily.com/features/first-man-cinematographer-linus-sandgren-on-creating-the-films-spectacular-imax-sequences/5135775.article
Finally some good news.. glad to hear it
This is surprising to say the least. Sandgren has shot pretty much all his features on film - 35mm - and on First Man even utilised 70mm for the moon sequences.
It's even weirder when you look at his Wiki and see that someone has helpfully included all the technical specs of his films. All Sandgren's Hollywood films were shot on film stock:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Sandgren
CJF has shot digital on Beasts and Manaic - maybe this has swung his decision-making. Though, I have read interviews where CJF speaks passionately about shooting film and his preference for it over digital. I think there were practical and commercial reasons (locations and Netflix requirements) that forced his hand on the aforementioned films.
Here's a recent music video Sandgren shot for Paul McCartney (featuring Emma Stone) that was shot on digital
Also speaking of Fukunaga's POV but I believe he's been fairly 50/50 in terms of film/digital on his films & shows - as @Pierce2Daniel pointed out above.
Based on what he said about an arc, I suspect you could be right. As long as this exploration is not too heavy handed and the film works on other more basic levels I'll be ok with it.
This is indeed interesting. Does anyone know what the benefits of this could be? Is it cheaper? Could there possibly be more night shots which benefit from this approach, like in SF? I'm pretty sure I remember an interview with Craig and Mendes where they both expressed some reservations about digital - apparently there was a lot of after the fact adjustment required because certain actors looked harsh and had to be softened. Also he made a comment about all the time needed to make digital look like film, so why not use film. So it's interesting that they are going back to digital.
I mean someone like Nolan would say film is cheaper!
But it's just apples and oranges, if anything digital does make things easier logistically when it comes to the workflow (no need to digitise the dailies, longer takes and so on) and some costs can come down from that for sure. For the record, the London finale in SP was partially shot on the Alexa 65 which is what I presume they'll be using here - it's really the go to for major films shooting digital.
A DOP close friend and colleague uses Cooke lenses, which are softer, on the Alexa to help give a more filmic look in camera. He shot the latest series of Luther this way.
Say what you will about Spectre but Hoyte van Hoytema made it look impeccable with his masterful atmospheric way of filming, on actual 35mm film that is.
I imagine Fukunaga and Sandgren are planning something more naturalistic in look - think True Detective Series 1, American Hustle meetBeasts of No Nation.
I don't think it'll be as overly glossy as Casino Royale - maybe more like Deakins' work on Skyfall or Blade Runner 2049. I think it'll be much more modern and slick than the more nostalgic and gauzy Spectre.
I mean, Beasts was shot digitally and looked great - but the lighting in Manaic was flat. I think it was deliberate as Fukunaga wanted a slightly 90s-video look for the retro-future world of that show. But still...
As long as it's not as dull and uninspired as the Marvel cinematography. Even Black Panther looked like trash.
I have to disagree, but not with the use of 35mm film. I think it was beautiful in it's own way, but the film looked weird. At some points, the actors looked like CGI-constructs, especially at Blofeld's base when Madeleine is shown her father's death. However, there are some exceptions, like the scene between Madeleine and Bond in the L'Americaine.
Talking of that Heineken advert, I wonder when we'll see it. Given that it was filmed when we had the original release date and now it's moved to February. The summer of 2019 perhaps?