› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…10651066106810701071…2507

Comments

  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Major_Boothroyd wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    @GetCarter Thanks, appreciate that and I am glad someone agrees!

    @Dennison I would personally like to see something of the tone of Thunderball or Goldeneye. Not full blown 'epic' in the vein of YOLT or TSWLM. As much as I love those two it would be too jarring!

    My feelings are the same. There are a wealth of reasons as to why Spectre disappointed me but one of them was that it was the perfect opportunity to go a little more over the top, a little lighter and they didn't take it. There were touches - the couch landing, the old Italian driver, the crater base and Goldfinger's car coming to pick them up. But they had to weigh it down with foster brothers and Madeleine Swann saying 'I love you' and decisions between love and duty - it felt like a film trying to break free into epic frivolity - but being restrained by attempts to plumb emotional depths. I actually liked Craig's performance and felt that he was aiming for Connery cool and if the narrative had let him he could have got there. The end of SF is perfectly set up to lead into any direction toward DN or TB or OP - yet they went for more of the same.

    I know that B25 will be more of the same too. So my expectations are more tempered than after SF's exhilarating ending. I'll enjoy the hell out of B25 and I'm grateful that Craig is back for one more - but I'm really curious to see where they go from B26 onwards.
    I can relate. I feel the same way about Spectre
    Craig himself was finding his stride, but the film itself was a miss.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    I am beginning to think that with SP, the old adage is true: if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.

    Want lighter? They tried to make it lighter.
    Want more humor (as Cleese whined): They tried to include humor.
    Want "classic" Bond tropes? They offered classic Bond tropes, like the opening gun barrel and a train fight.
    Want a henchman? They gave you a henchman.
    Want the grittiness of previous Bonds? They put in some of the grittiness.
    Want the big production? Boy, did they ever give you a big production.

    And on and on.

    Problem is, in trying to include a bit of everything for all tastes, they had a mess on their hands.

    SP was a disappointing film -- the trailers (especially the teaser) set us up for that failure. But it was NOT a lousy film. Not at all.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,615
    It takes a level of guts as a Director to have a consistant tone all the way through (like it or lump it). You need to have a clear view/vision of exactly what you want the end result to be and you have to realise that some will not like the result but more than that will like the result. Mendes did this with SF and failed with SP
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited October 2017 Posts: 11,425
    NSGW wrote: »
    http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1709990/what-would-bring-goldeneye-and-casino-royales-director-back-to-james-bond

    Interesting interview with Martin Campbell asking if he would return to direct another Bond film. I didn't realise he was offered the chance to return multiple times during the Brosnan era.

    Interesting to hear him talk about it like that. Hadn't realised how opposed he was to doing two with the same actor. Bit odd if you ask me, esp given the history of repeat directors in the series the success they've had developing different actors at various times.

    I doubt EON are banging at his door any more these days though.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    I'm not convinced Spectre's shortcomings have anything to do with its variety, its "everything for all tastes." I think the combination of elements it provides is theoretically sound, and as it is, the film flows adequately between humor, grit, drama and romance, but the script required more work to juggle and develop all those elements adequately. They needed to get rid of the dead weight that is the foster brother idea; if they really wanted to flesh out Blofeld, they were better off doing it through his relationship with another character (Mr. White, perhaps). Cutting London from the end would have improved the structure of the film and made it flow better, as well as giving the audience the full-on villain lair climax it was hinting at anyway. (As it is, Spectre is too long, not unlike The Dark Knight.) Finally, they could have used the running time regained from doing away with London to develop Madeleine's character a bit more, perhaps by having her enter the story in a different way, by herself and without Bond, so that she had a couple of scenes in which she was all by herself. Also, they could've had her be separated from Bond in the climactic sequence and act on her own, at least for a while, to help to save the day.

    There's a great Bond film struggling to emerge in Spectre. The elements are mostly in place, but the script needed a couple more drafts. As it is, though, it's eminently watchable and enjoyable, and it has plenty of good qualities.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited October 2017 Posts: 4,585
    mattjoes wrote: »
    I'm not convinced Spectre's shortcomings have anything to do with its variety, its "everything for all tastes." I think the combination of elements it provides is theoretically sound, and as it is, the film flows adequately between humor, grit, drama and romance, but the script required more work to juggle and develop all those elements adequately. They needed to get rid of the dead weight that is the foster brother idea; if they really wanted to flesh out Blofeld, they were better off doing it through his relationship with another character (Mr. White, perhaps). Cutting London from the end would have improved the structure of the film and made it flow better, as well as giving the audience the full-on villain lair climax it was hinting at anyway. (As it is, Spectre is too long, not unlike The Dark Knight.) Finally, they could have used the running time regained from doing away with London to develop Madeleine's character a bit more, perhaps by having her enter the story in a different way, by herself and without Bond, so that she had a couple of scenes in which she was all by herself. Also, they could've had her be separated from Bond in the climactic sequence and act on her own, at least for a while, to help to save the day.

    There's a great Bond film struggling to emerge in Spectre. The elements are mostly in place, but the script needed a couple more drafts. As it is, though, it's eminently watchable and enjoyable, and it has plenty of good qualities.


    Yes, the elements you present here are issues, too. I agree 100%: the script wasn't quite done and they rushed it.
    Getafix wrote: »
    NSGW wrote: »
    http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1709990/what-would-bring-goldeneye-and-casino-royales-director-back-to-james-bond

    Interesting interview with Martin Campbell asking if he would return to direct another Bond film. I didn't realise he was offered the chance to return multiple times during the Brosnan era.

    Interesting to hear him talk about it like that. Hadn't realised how opposed he was to doing two with the same actor. Bit odd if you ask me, esp given the history of repeat directors in the series the success they've had developing different actors at various times.

    I doubt EON are banging at his door any more these days though.

    I am not on the Campbell bandwagon. I love CR but find that parts of it have NOT aged well at all. There are scenes that look like they were staged and filmed for the Lifetime network.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    Back to the subject of the composer, the first minute of this track is extremely Barry-esque.

  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    And this.

  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Both excellent,especially the Incredibles...that score is brilliant..my fave Disney film.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    Either George S Clinton or Michael Giacchino would clearly be good candidates for Bond 25 if they bring these sorts of sounds.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Either George S Clinton or Michael Giacchino would clearly be good candidates for Bond 25 if they bring these sorts of sounds.

    I cant argue with that,agreed.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2017 Posts: 23,883
    The Incredibles came out during the long break between DAD & CR. I remember shaking my head in disbelief that as Bond fans we had to put up with what was dished out during the 90s, when a composer existed who could capture the greatness of Bond and do the sound justice.

    Giacchino still has the goods. His War for the Planet of the Apes score this summer was excellent.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    The Incredibles 2 is coming out next summer, isn't it? I can't wait to hear what Giacchino will bring for this sequel, 14 years after the original film. And of course Mission Impossible 6 comes out around that time too, has it been confirmed that the composer of 'Rogue Nation' is also coming back?
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    // the script wasn't quite done and they rushed it.//

    Rushed it? Logan's hiring was announced in November 2012 and he didn't turn in a first draft until March 2014.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Well on seeing all the praise being heaped on BladeRunner 2049? Surely BB and MGW are swayed to wards DV now? We already know DC is a big fan of him?
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    Director for Bond 26 perhaps? http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1709990/what-would-bring-goldeneye-and-casino-royales-director-back-to-james-bond
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Oh please yes. I really want Martin Campbell back to close the book on Craig's run.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    Doesn't look like he'd be intetested based on his statements in the above article.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    FYI the SP Production Timeline ran a measly 870 pages.
  • Ottofuse8Ottofuse8
    Posts: 832
    PropertyOfALady wrote: »
    FYI the SP Production Timeline ran a measly 870 pages.

    Estimates of total by bond 25 release?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    Ottofuse8 wrote: »
    PropertyOfALady wrote: »
    FYI the SP Production Timeline ran a measly 870 pages.

    Estimates of total by bond 25 release?
    Close to 3000, I'm sure.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I always felt that Campbell would only be interested if a new Bond actor were introduced. He brought in Dench too, so I'm sure that gave him added excitement. He's still in great shape but may be too old by the time B26 comes along. Shame. He would take it back to where I would prefer it to be in terms of tone and style.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited October 2017 Posts: 15,717
    The only problem for me is EON can't depend on the talent of Campbell to introduce a new Bond actor forever. Let's assume that Campbell does Bond 26 and introduces Bond #7, this would mean that Bond #8 will debut in the early to mid 2030's, and would be the first debut film not helmed by Campbell in almost 50 years - TLD with Dalton in 1987 being the last time.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited October 2017 Posts: 4,585
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    // the script wasn't quite done and they rushed it.//

    Rushed it? Logan's hiring was announced in November 2012 and he didn't turn in a first draft until March 2014.

    I think we are talking about when the draft was delivered to Mendes, some time in Summer 2014 and when shooting began in December. There was a rush to get the script in shape, with Purvis, Wade, and Butterworth brought in to fix it. They still didn’t have it in shape.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    TripAces wrote: »
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    // the script wasn't quite done and they rushed it.//

    Rushed it? Logan's hiring was announced in November 2012 and he didn't turn in a first draft until March 2014.

    I think we are talking about when the draft was delivered to Mendes, some time in Summer 2014 and when shooting began in December. There was a rush to get the script in shape, with Purvis, Wade, and Butterworth brought in to fix it. They still didn’t have it in shape.

    The draft was delivered in March 2014. Not the summer. After some back and forth, it was in the summer of 2014 that Purvis and Wade were summoned back. That's when everyone concerned decided new (or in this case new/old) writers were needed.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    Put another way, between November 2012 and summer 2014 (in which a treatment, first draft and revisions were delivered), it was decided to shift gears. After the arrival of Purvis & Wade, new drafts were delivered in fall 2014 and again on Dec. 1, 2014. That's more than two years after Logan's hiring was announced.

    Still more changes took place after the Dec. 1, 2014 draft.

    Yes they still didn't have it in shape. But you can't say *two years* wasn't enough time.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited October 2017 Posts: 16,351
    Logan's always been bad with franchises. He wrote the script for Star Trek Nemesis which sunk that franchise for almost a decade until J.J. Abrams rebooted it. Having him tackle a Bond script by himself was always going to end badly.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    Murdock wrote: »
    Logan's always been bad with franchises. He wrote the script for Star Trek Nemesis which sunk that franchise for almost a decade until J.J. Abrams rebooted it. Having him tackle a Bond script by himself was always going to end badly.

    Too bad Gary Barber didn't realize that in November 2012 when he announced the hiring of Logan to write Bond 24 and 25.
  • BounineBounine
    Posts: 2,599

    TripAces wrote: »
    I am beginning to think that with SP, the old adage is true: if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.

    Want lighter? They tried to make it lighter.
    Want more humor (as Cleese whined): They tried to include humor.
    Want "classic" Bond tropes? They offered classic Bond tropes, like the opening gun barrel and a train fight.
    Want a henchman? They gave you a henchman.
    Want the grittiness of previous Bonds? They put in some of the grittiness.
    Want the big production? Boy, did they ever give you a big production.

    And on and on.

    Problem is, in trying to include a bit of everything for all tastes, they had a mess on their hands.

    SP was a disappointing film -- the trailers (especially the teaser) set us up for that failure. But it was NOT a lousy film. Not at all.

    This is something I've been saying since the Brosnan era - inconsistency doesn't work. Unless a Bond film with Craig, returns to the gritty, darker tone of CR, QOS and SF, then Bond 25 will just be very average for me, as is Spectre. Craig can't pull off the lighthearted humour like Connery and Moore, anyway.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Denis Villeneuve to me seems a very open-minded, transparent director who, like Daniel Craig, has his heart on his tongue. He openly admits his desires and wishes regarding film projects to the media. And that leaves some interesting analysis in his thoughts.

    Last week he said:
    “It’s true — I’ve been in discussions with (producer) Barbara Broccoli and (actor) Daniel Craig. It’s a magnificent project; I would love to do a James Bond, but I don’t know how it would fit with my current projects. We’ll have to see.”

    And yesterday he said:
    “I cannot talk about that. But let’s say that for me to do a Bond movie would be a deep, deep pleasure.”

    To me it seems that it's not only a confirmation that Villeneuve is in talks with EON Productions, but that it could very well happen. He has become more careful in his wordings, and that could be a sign that he's seriously considering the job.

    And now it becomes pretty much exciting as well, since he also confirmed to be working on two other film projects (though he hasn't signed anything yet):

    A] Directing Sony Pictures' "Cleopatra", which will be produced by former Sony CEO Amy Pascal and Scott Rudin. And...
    B] Directing Legendary Pictures/Universal Pictures' adaptation of "Dune", of which the screenplay is currently written by Eric Roth.

    And now option C], directing Bond #25, seems to become a very serious option Villeneuve is considering now. It's now only a matter of which of these three film projects he'll do first?:

    A] "Cleoptra"
    B] "Dune", or
    C] "Bond #25"

    This will be a thriller!

Sign In or Register to comment.