› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…12731274127612781279…2507

Comments

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    SP is just as bloated as DAD is.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Think SP is to much of a mess to really tell if the acting performances are bad or not. The script and story is really, really bad. In fact, with each viewing, it falls down on my list.
    The acting is pretty bad in my view, but then again so is the rest of it. Thankfully we will eventually have the opportunity to forget it, but only in two years time, and only if EON play it smart with B25.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,753
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Think SP is to much of a mess to really tell if the acting performances are bad or not. The script and story is really, really bad. In fact, with each viewing, it falls down on my list.
    Only lasts until your 24th viewing.

    True, haha!
    bondjames wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Think SP is to much of a mess to really tell if the acting performances are bad or not. The script and story is really, really bad. In fact, with each viewing, it falls down on my list.
    The acting is pretty bad in my view, but then again so is the rest of it. Thankfully we will eventually have the opportunity to forget it, but only in two years time, and only if EON play it smart with B25.

    At this point, I really don't know what to expect from EON…
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I think around this time next month, we'll find out something.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited January 2018 Posts: 4,584
    SP is now getting kicked around so badly, I almost feel like standing up and defending it! Is this a bandwagon mentality? LOL

    The film wasn't that bad, not a catastrophe. I thought Waltz did what he could with the part. I found no issues with anyone's performance. I liked Naomi. I really liked Ben (who kind of stole the show). It is a good Bond film up until the 'author of all your pain" part--and that's almost two hours in. The final act is bad, the Blofeld reveal/foster brother stuff is bad. Yes, the chase through Rome was too bland and its suspense was undercut by a phone conversation and an air bag. But there was an awful lot to like in SP.

    Of course, there is a SP appreciation thread for this, but I felt I needed to address it here, as so much speculation about Bond 25 is a response to "bad Spectre." Let's not overreact.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    I agree. SP was good. It wasn’t great, but it deserves more credit than most people around here are giving it.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2018 Posts: 23,883
    It will get the credit (and the criticism) that it deserves from the fanbase, as does every Bond film. I don't think it's the worst film. If had remained the last Craig film (which I had very much hoped it would be) it could arguably have been called, in time, the best last outing a long running actor has had.

    Still, given the polarizing reaction to the film, I think EON have made a mistake by letting it percolate out there (for what will eventually be 4 years) without changing course more dramatically. I believe they should have either brought B25 out sooner to clean this up, or alternatively they should change course more radically with the next one rather than try to close out an era (which I feel has run its course).
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Personally I don't think they have got anything in place yet.

    Lol, and I feel the exact opposite, I believe far more is in place than has been announced.
    The truth probably lies in the middle.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited January 2018 Posts: 15,423
    They've had over two years of decision-making time span. It'd be shamefully bad for them if they hadn't have made prominent choices in this duration. I'm sure there are more at hand than said or revealed. Eon are playing hardball with the PR after the Sony leaks that partly damaged SP's box office.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    They've had over two years of decision-making time span. It'd be shamefully bad for them if they hadn't have made prominent choices in this duration. I'm sure there are more at hand than said or revealed. Eon are playing hardball with the PR after the Sony leaks that partly damaged SP's box office.

    +1
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'm not sure if the Sony leaks damaged SP box office. Nobody I knew personally had read the leaks. The film stood on its own and the opening weekend grosses were particularly strong globally, suggesting interest. It just didn't play well or have good word of mouth and died off much faster than SF, which did the opposite.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    after the Sony leaks that partly damaged SP's box office.
    What? How did the Sony leaks damage SP's Box office? The only thing that damaged its box office was it's awful script.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    after the Sony leaks that partly damaged SP's box office.
    What? How did the Sony leaks damage SP's Box office? The only thing that damaged its box office was it's awful script.
    Every person going about on the social media pages rambling about how they know the whole plot, spoiling everything (I've seen my fair share of them on YouTube alone) that got people's interests pushed down the well is what kept part of the public away from the theatres regardless of what each group or individual was expecting from it.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,415
    TripAces wrote: »
    SP is now getting kicked around so badly, I almost feel like standing up and defending it! Is this a bandwagon mentality? LOL

    The film wasn't that bad, not a catastrophe. I thought Waltz did what he could with the part. I found no issues with anyone's performance. I liked Naomi. I really liked Ben (who kind of stole the show). It is a good Bond film up until the 'author of all your pain" part--and that's almost two hours in. The final act is bad, the Blofeld reveal/foster brother stuff is bad. Yes, the chase through Rome was too bland and its suspense was undercut by a phone conversation and an air bag. But there was an awful lot to like in SP.

    Of course, there is a SP appreciation thread for this, but I felt I needed to address it here, as so much speculation about Bond 25 is a response to "bad Spectre." Let's not overreact.

    +1. SP most certainly isn't that bad. Shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as DAD, which still features at the bottom of most people's lists here and quite rightly. Those first two hours of SP do contain some good stuff!
  • BT3366BT3366
    Posts: 1,917
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    after the Sony leaks that partly damaged SP's box office.
    What? How did the Sony leaks damage SP's Box office? The only thing that damaged its box office was it's awful script.
    Every person going about on the social media pages rambling about how they know the whole plot, spoiling everything (I've seen my fair share of them on YouTube alone) that got people's interests pushed down the well is what kept part of the public away from the theatres regardless of what each group or individual was expecting from it.

    Sorry, but if you asked the large part of the general public they wouldn't have likely taken notice nor given a toss about the leaks.

    Every person? Hardly.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    BT3366 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    after the Sony leaks that partly damaged SP's box office.
    What? How did the Sony leaks damage SP's Box office? The only thing that damaged its box office was it's awful script.
    Every person going about on the social media pages rambling about how they know the whole plot, spoiling everything (I've seen my fair share of them on YouTube alone) that got people's interests pushed down the well is what kept part of the public away from the theatres regardless of what each group or individual was expecting from it.

    Sorry, but if you asked the large part of the general public they wouldn't have likely taken notice nor given a toss about the leaks.

    Every person? Hardly.
    I should've elaborated myself a bit more... Every person who read the leaked script...

    Just look for the comments under the trailers on YouTube alone. And I'm not talking about Tumblr yet.
  • BT3366BT3366
    Posts: 1,917
    I have no doubts there are several people who did react that way who read it. The net brings out people who love to make their thoughts known, especially if it has a controversial theme to it.

    Still, it seems as if these a lot of these people would be on the fence to begin with rather than waiting to see the finished product. I'm more into avoiding the spoilers as much as possible and even if I had read it I'd still want to see the actual film before deciding my feelings on it.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I'm also like that. I read the leaked script(s) and still went to see the film the first day it opened and on first screening. But, what I'm basing my thoughts off on the claim that the Sony leaks hurt SP's BO by a small portion was killing off people's expectations... Some expected Skyfall Part Two, for instance, but a reader of the leaked script denies that it is, so that would send some groups (even if they're not by a large amount of numbers compared to the more stable fans/audience) away. A couple of people I know read an article or two about the leaked outline said they're in no rush to seeing it, and get it when it comes out on BluRay, because they found it less exciting than SF.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    They've had over two years of decision-making time span. It'd be shamefully bad for them if they hadn't have made prominent choices in this duration. I'm sure there are more at hand than said or revealed. Eon are playing hardball with the PR after the Sony leaks that partly damaged SP's box office.

    This gets often cited as a reason for the deafening silence but I don't buy it. CR's script was known (and in detail explained on a movie website) well before the shooting started but that didn't hurt the movie a bit. Actually I think that in this age of Twitter, Facebook and you name it is almost impossible to keep things so well under a blanket. It would take extra ordinary effort even to try the (almost) impossible and why should they bother? Thus my prediction, that they won't be able to meet their own dateline.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,584
    I am certain that DC and Babs saw this, and the contract for Bond 25 was further amended: DC will cut back on his own stuntwork. LOL (This is NOT for the squeamish):

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tom-cruise-ankle-break-slow-motion-mission-impossible_us_5a6c469ae4b0ddb658c6bb1f
  • bondbat007bondbat007
    Posts: 1,407
    TripAces wrote: »
    SP is now getting kicked around so badly, I almost feel like standing up and defending it! Is this a bandwagon mentality? LOL

    The film wasn't that bad, not a catastrophe. I thought Waltz did what he could with the part. I found no issues with anyone's performance. I liked Naomi. I really liked Ben (who kind of stole the show). It is a good Bond film up until the 'author of all your pain" part--and that's almost two hours in. The final act is bad, the Blofeld reveal/foster brother stuff is bad. Yes, the chase through Rome was too bland and its suspense was undercut by a phone conversation and an air bag. But there was an awful lot to like in SP.

    Of course, there is a SP appreciation thread for this, but I felt I needed to address it here, as so much speculation about Bond 25 is a response to "bad Spectre." Let's not overreact.

    This needed to be said. I'm glad somebody did. I hope Bond 25 improves but let's not get crazy here in saying SP was on the same level as DAD or anything like that. So thank you
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,466
    SP has sunken to the lower section of my Bond ranking, but I still like several things about it. Once you reach the third act though it totally falls apart. But yes, DAD is worse I think. In this latest Bondathon I’ve had DAD was my clear choice for the bottom spot with no real competition.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    TWINE & DAD are objectively at the bottom of the pile for me. I can't remember where I have SP. I think it's around 20 or thereabouts. The production quality elevates it for me, rather than the performances or script. Subjectively I prefer to watch DAD over TWINE & SP though.

    I'm just glad that by the end of next year I can finally put SP behind me for good. Waltz (and hopefully Swann) not returning is helpful, and so far we have no confirmation on Team Scooby, which I also am quite grateful for.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,466
    I wouldn’t mind seeing the MI6 gang return, but they need to be limited like the 60s versions were (probably too much to expect, but at least less screentime than SP please). I don’t think returning Waltz or Swann is a very good idea. I’m hoping for big news in March.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    About millenials being offended by watching the Bond films: Go to hell. Damn it‘s so annoying everybody seems to be offended by anything these days ... So if so then I as part of the male audience of Star Wars 8 feel offended that every male character was a jerk or idiot.

    I wand Bond be the killer and womanizer he has always been.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    About millenials being offended by watching the Bond films: Go to hell. Damn it‘s so annoying everybody seems to be offended by anything these days ... So if so then I as part of the male audience of Star Wars 8 feel offended that every male character was a jerk or idiot.

    I wand Bond be the killer and womanizer he has always been.
    +1
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    About millenials being offended by watching the Bond films: Go to hell. Damn it‘s so annoying everybody seems to be offended by anything these days ... So if so then I as part of the male audience of Star Wars 8 feel offended that every male character was a jerk or idiot.

    I wand Bond be the killer and womanizer he has always been.
    +1

    +2
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Yes @SeanCraig ... and those offended by Bond? Guess what? You don’t hafta watch the movies (and no one’s asking you too either!)
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    About millenials being offended by watching the Bond films: Go to hell. Damn it‘s so annoying everybody seems to be offended by anything these days ... So if so then I as part of the male audience of Star Wars 8 feel offended that every male character was a jerk or idiot.

    I wand Bond be the killer and womanizer he has always been.
    +1

    +2

    +3, most specifically I WANT HIM TO BE A WOMANIZER
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    I can say with confidence that a large portion of the people being offended by content in the early Bond films are the same kind of people who comment things like "James Bond is just a code-name so of course a black man/white woman/transgender person can play the role" on Facebook articles about Idris Elba dropping not so subtle hints.

    I'm not too worried about them.
Sign In or Register to comment.