› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…12501251125312551256…2507

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Can't we have both? Can't we have someone starting around 40 who can still get four or five films under his belt before retiring and moving on to the next actor? This "movie every three to four years" nonsense only picked up after QoS in the Craig era.

    I mean that's the ideal, but I just don't have faith in them getting the films out that quickly anymore. It does make me long for the 90s*. Okay they weren't as "prestigious" as the movies now, they didn't have the Oscar baiting names and the glossy cinematography, but it was simple and straightforward. It was just okay, here's a new James Bond film, nothing more nothing less. If you like it great, if not then give it two years and another will be along.

    *Not saying this wasn't also true for the 60s/70s/80s but that's before my time, I have some vague memories of seeing TLD at the cinema but I can't really comment on how the releases felt in those days.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't have that kind of faith in them, either, but people are acting like three/four years in between is the norm now and there's no going back, when really this tweak only began after QoS. There's no reason they can't revert back to a similar schedule.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    Posts: 2,115
    jake24 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    What are the chances of getting a Summer 2020 release?
    Very slim. The date is already locked in place.

    Dates get changed. Batman v Superman had three separate dates. Also, the Bond 25 date was announced with no distributor.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    AlexanderWaverly wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    What are the chances of getting a Summer 2020 release?
    Very slim. The date is already locked in place.

    Dates get changed. Batman v Superman had three separate dates. Also, the Bond 25 date was announced with no distributor.
    I agree. It was just a place holder to stake turf. With the apparent delay in getting director or distributor (MGM said it was still ongoing in their last call and Babs has confirmed that the director thing is still in the works despite there also being rumours that it's all been locked), I wouldn't be surprised if that date is moved. Especially given what other films have been announced close to it (WW, SW9 and that Disney flick which is bound to do well).
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I know this doesn't belong here, not sure where to place it, but Judi Dench has yet to see her final performance as M in SP:

    http://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/film/a14771407/judi-dench-still-hasnt-seen-her-final-bond-film/
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I know this doesn't belong here, not sure where to place it, but Judi Dench has yet to see her final performance as M in SP:

    http://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/film/a14771407/judi-dench-still-hasnt-seen-her-final-bond-film/
    She'd be smart to keep it that way if she wants to feel that she went out on a 'high'.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I know this doesn't belong here, not sure where to place it, but Judi Dench has yet to see her final performance as M in SP:

    http://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/film/a14771407/judi-dench-still-hasnt-seen-her-final-bond-film/
    She'd be smart to keep it that way if she wants to feel that she went out on a 'high'.
    She didn't attend the Royal Premiere or something?
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2018 Posts: 11,425
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    As much as a Nolan Craig combo would be great I have to say I hope he is doing Bond 26 because then Hardy as 007 would be almost a definite and he is my current favorite

    Two words: Jack Lowden

    jack%20lowden%20dunkirk%202.jpg?itok=9-1Hjuio

    Yes I liked him in Dunkirk and War and Piece but too much of a pretty boy I think. Doesn’t seem to have quite the right aura either.

    Was watching The Crown Series 2 recently and thought Matthew Goode might have potential. Very good as Anthony Armstrong Jones. Already 39 though....

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Goode

  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    You know, I get the feeling Judi Dench preferred the Brosnan era to the Craig era. And no, I'm not projecting (I think).
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,716
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    Andi1996Ruegg wrote: »
    Why has it to be a given, that a new actor has to do four films or even more?

    Why is this Hardy guy too old for his fourth film when he'd be 54.

    If EoN only produces films every four years now, a fact I actually am only aware since today, then they can't plan with the same actor for more than three or four films maximum anyway if you ask me.

    Yeah, I've said this many times before but I'd rather have a 40 odd year old actor who owns the screen and actually looks like an experienced secret agent for only two or three films, than a baby faced hipster indie looking BBC/HBO drama type for five or six films that we have to wait to grow into the role.

    I'd rather they just went on a film by film basis. Don't think "this actor is great, but he's too old for us to milk for ten sequels". If a 40-50 year old actor comes along and aces the audition then let him have a shot, even if it's just for one or two films.

    That would slow down the releases even more.

    Just one example: Say 3 films per actor, every 3 years + 4 years for each recast. That makes 14 years between each actor's debut. Multiply by 4 actors, and that's about 12 new Bond films from 2022 to (around) 2075. I'd have seen 9 films in my lifetime from my birth to my 28th birthday, and a further 12 films between my 29th birthday to my 84th birthday. By comparison, @Birdleson (born in 1962), has seen 16 films when he reached 27 years of age (which will be my age in 2 months' time).
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    Andi1996Ruegg wrote: »
    Why has it to be a given, that a new actor has to do four films or even more?

    Why is this Hardy guy too old for his fourth film when he'd be 54.

    If EoN only produces films every four years now, a fact I actually am only aware since today, then they can't plan with the same actor for more than three or four films maximum anyway if you ask me.

    Yeah, I've said this many times before but I'd rather have a 40 odd year old actor who owns the screen and actually looks like an experienced secret agent for only two or three films, than a baby faced hipster indie looking BBC/HBO drama type for five or six films that we have to wait to grow into the role.

    I'd rather they just went on a film by film basis. Don't think "this actor is great, but he's too old for us to milk for ten sequels". If a 40-50 year old actor comes along and aces the audition then let him have a shot, even if it's just for one or two films.

    That would slow down the releases even more.

    Would it? Three or four year gaps seem to be the norm now anyway but if they did manage to get back on a two year schedule (seeming very unlikely at this point) I don't see why recasting would slow them down. It's one more part to cast, a very important part yeah but that shouldn't add an extra year or two to the whole process.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited January 2018 Posts: 15,716
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    Andi1996Ruegg wrote: »
    Why has it to be a given, that a new actor has to do four films or even more?

    Why is this Hardy guy too old for his fourth film when he'd be 54.

    If EoN only produces films every four years now, a fact I actually am only aware since today, then they can't plan with the same actor for more than three or four films maximum anyway if you ask me.

    Yeah, I've said this many times before but I'd rather have a 40 odd year old actor who owns the screen and actually looks like an experienced secret agent for only two or three films, than a baby faced hipster indie looking BBC/HBO drama type for five or six films that we have to wait to grow into the role.

    I'd rather they just went on a film by film basis. Don't think "this actor is great, but he's too old for us to milk for ten sequels". If a 40-50 year old actor comes along and aces the audition then let him have a shot, even if it's just for one or two films.

    That would slow down the releases even more.

    Would it? Three or four year gaps seem to be the norm now anyway but if they did manage to get back on a two year schedule (seeming very unlikely at this point) I don't see why recasting would slow them down. It's one more part to cast, a very important part yeah but that shouldn't add an extra year or two to the whole process.

    If they go back to a 2 year schedule, your plan would work. But if these 3 to 4 year gaps are the norm, that's it for the franchise if they recast every 3 films. Even if they manage to recast within 3 years, that still gives 12 new Bond films post-Craig until 2070. Meaning of the 37 Bond films that will be in existence by 2070, 24 of them have already been released as of November 2015.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    They don t follow the same schedule now as just a couple decades ago, so thinking they will keep the current modus operandi over the next two generations is a bit presumptuous.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    Andi1996Ruegg wrote: »
    Why has it to be a given, that a new actor has to do four films or even more?

    Why is this Hardy guy too old for his fourth film when he'd be 54.

    If EoN only produces films every four years now, a fact I actually am only aware since today, then they can't plan with the same actor for more than three or four films maximum anyway if you ask me.

    Yeah, I've said this many times before but I'd rather have a 40 odd year old actor who owns the screen and actually looks like an experienced secret agent for only two or three films, than a baby faced hipster indie looking BBC/HBO drama type for five or six films that we have to wait to grow into the role.

    I'd rather they just went on a film by film basis. Don't think "this actor is great, but he's too old for us to milk for ten sequels". If a 40-50 year old actor comes along and aces the audition then let him have a shot, even if it's just for one or two films.

    That would slow down the releases even more.

    Would it? Three or four year gaps seem to be the norm now anyway but if they did manage to get back on a two year schedule (seeming very unlikely at this point) I don't see why recasting would slow them down. It's one more part to cast, a very important part yeah but that shouldn't add an extra year or two to the whole process.

    If they go back to a 2 year schedule, your plan would work. But if these 3 to 4 year gaps are the norm, that's it for the franchise if they recast every 3 films. Even if they manage to recast within 3 years, that still gives 12 new Bond films post-Craig until 2070. Meaning of the 37 Bond films that will be in existence by 2070, 24 of them have already been released as of November 2015.

    I don't know if I'm being thick but I still don't see how that makes a difference. What I'm saying is recasting more often shouldn't have any effect on how long or short the gaps between films are.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,162
    I really don't believe 3-4 year gaps were ever really the intention of the producers, especially when recasting Bond. Obstacles aside, they just sort of let it gradually happen.

    This really began post TWINE when DAD was given an extra year to give Pierce a break and make the 40th anniversary. The 4 year gap following was wasted on the JINX spin-off, toying with and then not being able to come up with another vehicle for Pierce, and finally deciding to reboot and recast.

    Back on schedule for QoS.

    Then another four year gap due to the MGM bankruptcy situation.

    With SF such a massive Oscar winning hit, Barbara and Michael might have felt there was no need to rush for a 2014 release. Or they might have been tired. Who knows? Either way they held out and we got Mendes back. At this point long gaps have become the new normal and there seems to be no need to rush a new Bond film into production. In addition, MGM may have laid off on the pressure to get the films out every two years as in the past.
    Now we're in the middle of another 4 year wait. The reason this time? Daniel needed a break and Barbara is enjoying her other projects.
    At this point, I'm expecting an even longer break after B25. Mickey G will probably be retired, and Barbara well into her 60's and probably more focused on other interests.
    In this day and age, getting a new James Bond movie in theaters on a regular basis just isn't a priority anymore.
    Perhaps, B25 will be a massive hit, an excellent film, give Eon it's second wind and pave the way for the series' future?
    My hope is that when a new Bond is recast, they at least have an intention of reverting back to a regular schedule.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I have little doubt that things will be back on a more frequent schedule once MGM finalizes its future, once there is a new Bond actor, and once there is a new 'long term' distributor. Those are the 3 things that need to occur. If history is any guide they will blast out of the blocks with the new guy and give us two films in reasonably close succession to establish him in the public consciousness. RE: A long break between B25 and B26: I don't see it, given the wastage of time that has occurred between SP and B25.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,162
    bondjames wrote: »
    I have little doubt that things will be back on a more frequent schedule once MGM finalizes its future, once there is a new Bond actor, and once there is a new 'long term' distributor. Those are the 3 things that need to occur. If history is any guide they will blast out of the blocks with the new guy and give us two films in reasonably close succession to establish him in the public consciousness. RE: A long break between B25 and B26: I don't see it, given the wastage of time that has occurred between SP and B25.

    I do hope you're right about there not being a longer break in between B25 and B26. There has certainly been enough time wasted in the past 15 years, and none of us are getting any younger.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I have little doubt that things will be back on a more frequent schedule once MGM finalizes its future, once there is a new Bond actor, and once there is a new 'long term' distributor. Those are the 3 things that need to occur. If history is any guide they will blast out of the blocks with the new guy and give us two films in reasonably close succession to establish him in the public consciousness. RE: A long break between B25 and B26: I don't see it, given the wastage of time that has occurred between SP and B25.

    I do hope you're right about there not being a longer break in between B25 and B26. There has certainly been enough time wasted in the past 15 years, and none of us are getting any younger.
    True. Trust me on this. Babs and Craig have been doing it their way for some time. It's going to change once he's gone and once everything is sorted out behind the scenes. That's likely to happen sooner rather than later given the increasing importance of the James Bond brand in the fickle movie business. It is being underleveraged and the money men know it.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    wasn’t the gap between SF and SP because mendes was busy
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    bondjames wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I have little doubt that things will be back on a more frequent schedule once MGM finalizes its future, once there is a new Bond actor, and once there is a new 'long term' distributor. Those are the 3 things that need to occur. If history is any guide they will blast out of the blocks with the new guy and give us two films in reasonably close succession to establish him in the public consciousness. RE: A long break between B25 and B26: I don't see it, given the wastage of time that has occurred between SP and B25.

    I do hope you're right about there not being a longer break in between B25 and B26. There has certainly been enough time wasted in the past 15 years, and none of us are getting any younger.
    True. Trust me on this. Babs and Craig have been doing it their way for some time. It's going to change once he's gone and once everything is sorted out behind the scenes. That's likely to happen sooner rather than later given the increasing importance of the James Bond brand in the fickle movie business. It is being underleveraged and the money men know it.
    This is the key point I think.
  • Andi1996RueggAndi1996Ruegg Hello. It's me, Evelyn Tremble.
    Posts: 2,005
    So if the two producers are soon retiring because of age, new producers will take over, possibly young ones that have all the energy in the world that Cubby/Saltzman and then Barbra/Michael had.
    With a new actor coming as well, I'm sure, for monetary reasons alone, new Bond films will be made very regular again.
    Especially if a bigger distributor/film company like Warner or Disney would take over.

    I think when Cubby got too old there was already Barbra and Michael in place, established for a long time.
    The situation is different now (as far as I know) and therefore no easy passing of the torch to get fresh energized people on the Bond production.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Andi1996Ruegg wrote: »
    So if the two producers are soon retiring because of age, new producers will take over, possibly young ones that have all the energy in the world that Cubby/Saltzman and then Barbra/Michael had.
    With a new actor coming as well, I'm sure, for monetary reasons alone, new Bond films will be made very regular again.
    Especially if a bigger distributor/film company like Warner or Disney would take over.

    I think when Cubby got too old there was already Barbra and Michael in place, established for a long time.
    The situation is different now (as far as I know) and therefore no easy passing of the torch to get fresh energized people on the Bond production.

    One producer would be Greg Wilson, who seems to be a shit who knows nothing and I’m not sure who the other producer would be
  • Andi1996RueggAndi1996Ruegg Hello. It's me, Evelyn Tremble.
    Posts: 2,005
    Ah, so one producer is set already? Is Greg Michael's son then?
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Andi1996Ruegg wrote: »
    Ah, so one producer is set already? Is Greg Michael's son then?

    Yeah but he’s a fool and doesn’t deserve the franchise until he proves himself
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    If they announced the director of Bond 25 tomorrow, which names would NOT shock you? My list: Nolan, Villeneuve, Mendes, Demange, Mackenzie. Any other name WOULD shock me.
  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    edited January 2018 Posts: 2,115
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    wasn’t the gap between SF and SP because mendes was busy

    No. Barbara Broccoli, during publicity for Skyfall, said Eon would not be hurried by a studio, it would do future movies at its schedule, not a studio's schedule.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/14/entertainment/la-et-mn-skyfall-next-james-bond-movie-20121113

    //"Sometimes there are external pressures from a studio who want you to make it in a certain time frame or for their own benefit, and sometimes we’ve given into that," Broccoli said. "But following what we hope will be a tremendous success with 'Skyfall,' we have to try to keep the deadlines within our own time limits and not cave in to external pressures."//

    A Sony executive announced that Bond 24 would come out in 2014. Broccoli and Daniel Craig, in a joint interview, said the executive spoke rashly.

    http://collider.com/daniel-craig-barbara-broccoli-skyfall-interview/#more-162975

    //Last week Rory, the president of distribution of Sony, announced Bond 24 for I guess late 2014…

    Broccoli: He was getting a little overexcited (laughs). We’re just actually focusing on this movie. One hopes that in the future we’ll be announcing other films, but no one’s officially announced it.

    Craig: No one’s announced anything. He got a little ahead of himself (laughs). It’s very nice that he has the confidence to be able to do that, but we haven’t finished this movie yet.//

    SPECTRE was never going to come out in 2014. Eon was resisting it from the get-go.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    If they announced the director of Bond 25 tomorrow, which names would NOT shock you? My list: Nolan, Villeneuve, Mendes, Demange, Mackenzie. Any other name WOULD shock me.
    All of those but Mendes have been rumoured in the rags and so none of the above would shock me either.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I still think Villeneuve is talking BS about not being able to get to making B25 because of Dune. Something tells me he's very well on board. His appraisal of Craig and willing to work with him on a Bond film gives it away, because we know Craig himself won't be making another one after the upcoming entry in the series.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    I still think Villeneuve is talking BS about not being able to get to making B25 because of Dune. Something tells me he's very well on board. His appraisal of Craig and willing to work with him on a Bond film gives it away, because we know Craig himself won't be making another one after the upcoming entry in the series.
    It would surprise me if he were to be announced at this stage as I totally buy the stuff he's been saying in the press with regards to Dune being his sole priority, but I sincerely hope you're right.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited January 2018 Posts: 13,789
    With respect, it wouldn't surprise me at all for Craig to do BOND 26.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Oh I have no doubt he'll keep going until someone gives him the boot.
Sign In or Register to comment.