No Time To Die: Production Diary

1153415351537153915402507

Comments

  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,534
    Just have Bond mention that things didn't work out with Madeleine and that Spectre has been neutralized and go from there.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 17,753
    Remington wrote: »
    Just have Bond mention that things didn't work out with Madeleine and that Spectre has been neutralized and go from there.

    That would be a good way to introduce a stand-alone mission, for sure.
  • Posts: 832
    Bond 25 won’t feel tacked on at all. The cr- sp continuity is far too convoluted.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 12,837
    I don't think SP will be mentioned directly. Maybe Bond will be retired at the start or back at MI6 with Madeline being vaguely referenced but that's about it. Definitely don't think Blofeld will be involved.

    And I was annoyed at the idea of that at first because why bother doing another Craig film if it's just going to casually brush the last one (the last one which tried to make out that this era was one big connected saga) under the carpet. And YOLT is my favourite of the books so I was annoyed they seem to have missed another chance to do it properly.

    But I've come to terms with it. Craig is back now and at the end of the day I think a more stand alone film could be a good thing after such a long gap. I want it to feel fresh and exciting after four years, I don't think following up such a long gap with Spectre 2 would have been the right call in the end. Plus Danny Boyle is one of my favourite directors. I'd rather him have the freedom to do what he wants than carry on with somebody else's story.
  • Posts: 12,466
    Not sure why some people want Bond 25 to be connected to SP. Ignoring continuity is what the Bond series has been best known for; that’s where SP messed up. No need to even mention Maddy or Blofeld; it’s been a long enough gap. Maybe a mention about Spectre/Blofeld but no in-depth stuff preferably. I don’t think Boyle and Hodge will continue from SP directly at all. That’s what we probably would have gotten instead with P&W’s script.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Not sure why some people want Bond 25 to be connected to SP. Ignoring continuity is what the Bond series has been best known for; that’s where SP messed up. No need to even mention Maddy or Blofeld; it’s been a long enough gap. Maybe a mention about Spectre/Blofeld but no in-depth stuff preferably. I don’t think Boyle and Hodge will continue from SP directly at all. That’s what we probably would have gotten instead with P&W’s script.

    Yes. And as an add on, when Boyle says this script came from an idea, I think we will find that not only was this an original idea, not attached to the Mendes sequels, but a wholly original idea to the film series (with heavy doses of Fleming as inspiration).
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    peter wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Not sure why some people want Bond 25 to be connected to SP. Ignoring continuity is what the Bond series has been best known for; that’s where SP messed up. No need to even mention Maddy or Blofeld; it’s been a long enough gap. Maybe a mention about Spectre/Blofeld but no in-depth stuff preferably. I don’t think Boyle and Hodge will continue from SP directly at all. That’s what we probably would have gotten instead with P&W’s script.

    Yes. And as an add on, when Boyle says this script came from an idea, I think we will find that not only was this an original idea, not attached to the Mendes sequels, but a wholly original idea to the film series (with heavy doses of Fleming as inspiration).

    Man, I do like the sound of that!
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited May 2018 Posts: 10,591
    Do we think this can be a Peter Morgan/Bond 23 situation? The meat of his Once Upon A Spy draft heavily inspired what came to be Skyfall. He wasn't too pleased about not being credited on the film.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    jake24 wrote: »
    Do we think this can be a Peter Morgan/Bond 23 situation? The meat of his Once Upon A Spy draft heavily inspired what came to be Skyfall. He wasn't to pleased about not being credited on the film.

    No, I think this idea came from Boyle, and no one else.

    Common sense would suggest that Boyle is not the type of filmmaker to come in only to direct the third Mendes film, or take from an unproduced script from another writer.

    In fact, he had no desire to direct a Bond film (as well documented), UNTIL he came up with this idea.

    Running parallel to his past comments of "wanting to stay a Bond fan " instead of directing a film, has also been his very wonderful comments about reading and re-reading the Fleming novels-- something a good catholic boy shouldn't have been doing (he expressed it with such glee)... Remember, he said these comments years before being involved with 25.

    I think it's a good bet to consider his 007 film will be significantly tighter in budget, based on those "naughty" Fleming stories that he has re-read, and has no bearing with the Mendes sequels, but very much is grounded in DC Bond's world.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited May 2018 Posts: 6,290
    I don't think SP will be mentioned directly. Maybe Bond will be retired at the start or back at MI6 with Madeline being vaguely referenced but that's about it. Definitely don't think Blofeld will be involved.

    And I was annoyed at the idea of that at first because why bother doing another Craig film if it's just going to casually brush the last one (the last one which tried to make out that this era was one big connected saga) under the carpet. And YOLT is my favourite of the books so I was annoyed they seem to have missed another chance to do it properly.

    But I've come to terms with it. Craig is back now and at the end of the day I think a more stand alone film could be a good thing after such a long gap. I want it to feel fresh and exciting after four years, I don't think following up such a long gap with Spectre 2 would have been the right call in the end. Plus Danny Boyle is one of my favourite directors. I'd rather him have the freedom to do what he wants than carry on with somebody else's story.

    Well stated, sir!

    I wanted more continuity after CR (especially after years of botched continuity--Felix aged how many years between TLD and LTK?), but after SP, I don't give a fig about continuity. I just want a good film.

    The better Bonds of recent years are surprising (CR, SF). So here's hoping that Boyle's take on Bond is equally surprising.
  • Posts: 12,466
    @peter The way you put it, the more excited I get for Bond 25!!!
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    I guess I just think after getting the rights to Blofeld and Spectre back after the long legal battles, why use them in only one film?
  • Posts: 12,466
    I guess I just think after getting the rights to Blofeld and Spectre back after the long legal battles, why use them in only one film?

    They’ll be back in the next era again probably. If not, they are still there for other purposes besides the films - games or whatever other Bond media they want to use them in.
  • Posts: 12,526
    Thank bloody goodness we FINALLY have something OFFICIAL!!!!!!! Roll on the next few months where other things are confirmed!!! At last exciting times ahead!!!
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited May 2018 Posts: 12,480
    I am intrigued and hopeful about this script being about an idea Boyle had and scripted solely by his long-time screenwriting partner. Whatever this idea is, EON liked it enough to go with it 100%. It was not at all based on P&W's script. Totally other than that. Quite interesting.

    My thoughts on "the Blofeld factor" ~

    I did enjoy Spectre, and it certainly brought in Blofeld and left him as a dangling character not finished off. I expected all along for Bond 25 to pick up with Blofeld (with or without Madeline) because it was definitely set up to be continued. EON acquired the rights to the character - the most famous villain of all in Fleming - so why would they not continue with Blofeld? Why would they drop him?

    Thinking of it in the light of this particular director and how the new script came about (the little we know; it was at least not the usual route) ... I have no big qualms regarding the Blofeld factor. Here's why.

    I say that because with a really good script, they could keep Blofeld in the film in a variety of ways, including:
    1) Follow up to the ending of SP for initial continuity and to get the question of what happened next out of the way - but then set him aside in a plausible way and the rest of the film be a stand alone, totally different arena.

    2) Have Blofeld and another villain be the running antagonists in this story, either finishing off Blofeld for good ... or not ...(why not milk that for at least one more film, with the new Bond actor, after Craig?).
    I think Blofeld with the next Bond actor is probably a good idea. Therefore, I see at least one more film featuring Blofeld, even if not featured with Bond 25 with Craig.

    3) Have the film be stand alone all along until the final 10 or 15 minutes, then bring Blofeld in, again in some plausible way (so we think 'Aha! great!' and not groan out loud in the theatre) to ensure that he will menace Bond in the next film, reassuring fans that Blofeld, as well as Bond, shall return.

    OR

    Simply no mention of Blofeld at all. 100% stand alone film with no mention of him or what happened in SP. That would also mean no mention of Spectre the organization.

    I am fine with any route they take with a great script. I mean really ... many elements are important to a good (preferably great) Bond film; but besides the actor playing Bond, I feel 2nd most important really is the script.

    So now I feel quite positive and really don't feel like wondering in depth 'Oh what will they do with Blofeld?' I am hopeful and happy to actually be intrigued. This feels fresh ... whether a fresh new shiny golden incredibly GREAT Bond film we applaud, or we end up saying 'What fresh hell is this?' - I don't know yet. But I am feeling quite positive these days about Bond 25.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I guess I just think after getting the rights to Blofeld and Spectre back after the long legal battles, why use them in only one film?

    They’ll be back in the next era again probably. If not, they are still there for other purposes besides the films - games or whatever other Bond media they want to use them in.

    Yes, SPECTRE will be back sooner or later. It just doesn’t make sense for Danny Boyle to make the third Mendes film. That’s not what he’s about as a filmmaker.

    However, this will be grounded in DC Bond’s world (so I doubt it will feel tacked on).
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited May 2018 Posts: 4,584
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    So much of the last 10+ years is being cleansed away, slowly. I find it very refreshing and am looking forward to what comes next. New beginnings.
    bondjames wrote: »
    From jamesbonddownunder today looks like jany tamine is out

    This could be the best news I've read all year. Hooray!

    Indeed! Boyle was a sure thing so no surprise there, but I really didn't expect Temime is out. Great news!
    I sincerely hope whoever replaces her doesn't go for the spandex cut again.

    That was Tom Ford's influence.

    Craig works with Ford on Bond's look; the costume designer just goes along with it. The suits will be as tight (or loose) as Craig wants. I have noticed since SP's release, that Craig himself is going with looser cuts, especially with his jeans. So I would think his Ford suits will do the same in B25.

    Was it Tom Ford's influence really though?

    Tom Ford was used on QoS and that film has the best cut of suits of all the Craig-bond films. I seem to remember Tamime going on about wanting a tighter fit and the suits being closer to Craig's body during the production for SF and harping on about how great Craig's body is. Whoever the costume designer was for QoS needs to be brought back.

    Anyone working on a Bond film as a prerequisite should be made to study all 6 60s era Bond films for overall reference.

    I would have to dig up the interviews; but I do remember DC talking about working with Ford on the suits and the fit of those suits. I believe the tight fit was 100% Craig’s idea/preference. He wanted an athletic look. Unlike many in these boards, I didn’t find the tight fits to be a problem. I didn’t like or dislike DC’s suits in SF or SP any more or less than CR and QoS. Overall, though, I thought the costume design in CR to be a little behind DC’s other three films: the Madagascar outfit, the flare chinos, the black cardigan w/ blue T-shirt and gray slacks, the all blue Venice outfit...all bad.
  • Posts: 1,220
    TripAces wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    So much of the last 10+ years is being cleansed away, slowly. I find it very refreshing and am looking forward to what comes next. New beginnings.
    bondjames wrote: »
    From jamesbonddownunder today looks like jany tamine is out

    This could be the best news I've read all year. Hooray!

    Indeed! Boyle was a sure thing so no surprise there, but I really didn't expect Temime is out. Great news!
    I sincerely hope whoever replaces her doesn't go for the spandex cut again.

    That was Tom Ford's influence.

    Craig works with Ford on Bond's look; the costume designer just goes along with it. The suits will be as tight (or loose) as Craig wants. I have noticed since SP's release, that Craig himself is going with looser cuts, especially with his jeans. So I would think his Ford suits will do the same in B25.

    Was it Tom Ford's influence really though?

    Tom Ford was used on QoS and that film has the best cut of suits of all the Craig-bond films. I seem to remember Tamime going on about wanting a tighter fit and the suits being closer to Craig's body during the production for SF and harping on about how great Craig's body is. Whoever the costume designer was for QoS needs to be brought back.

    Anyone working on a Bond film as a prerequisite should be made to study all 6 60s era Bond films for overall reference.

    I would have to dig up the interviews; but I do remember DC talking about working with Ford on the suits and the fit of those suits. I believe the tight fit was 100% Craig’s idea/preference. He wanted an athletic look. Unlike many in these boards, I didn’t find the tight fits to be a problem. I didn’t like or dislike DC’s suits in SF or SP anymore than CR and QoS. Overall, though, I thought the costume design in CR to be a little behind DC’s other three films: the Madagascar outfit, the flare chinos, the black cardigan w/ blue T-shirt and gray slacks, the all blue Venice outfit...all bad.

    CR's costume design definitely didn't age quite as well, but I quite enjoyed the suits in SF and SP (in Skyfall I thought his hair length was more of an issue than anything). Also say what you will, but I know a few non-Bond fans who were personally inspired to step up their wardrobe and wear slimmer fitting suits, etc. after seeing Skyfall.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 2,917
    I guess I just think after getting the rights to Blofeld and Spectre back after the long legal battles, why use them in only one film?

    Better to not use them than misuse them further. Before 2015 I vociferously argued in favor of resurrecting Blofeld and Spectre. I was excited about how Fleming's creations could be resurrected into the modern world and confident that the people who brought us CR and SF were suited to the job. So I was burnt very badly by Spectre, which presented a miscast Blofeld that had nothing to do with Fleming's original. Ideally Blofeld would have been introduced as a reclusive, sinister, behind-the-scenes mastermind. Instead Spectre used up the character in one go and made him radioactively silly with that moronic pseudo-stepbrother backstory.

    But since Blofeld is in prison, leave him there. Wait a few years until a few few films have passed to recast the character and wipe out his 2015 origin. But Spectre the organization is still immediately reusable. Perhaps it has regrouped under a new leader and is back to its old tricks in the shadows. Since Bond cannot fight Russians or Islamists, he often needs to combat a freelance, non-ideological terrorist organization, and Spectre is the classic original version. And since Spectre has always had a corporate nature, this makes it well-suited for our modern world of stateless multinational vampire conglomerates. One of the few good things Spectre the film did was to give the organization a very modern scheme: taking advantage of the surveillance mania of Western democracies. That is a guide for how it should work--as a multinational octopus, operating under various subsidiaries and aliases, that subtly insinuates itself into the gray areas of government and spycraft (as Fleming noted, before Thunderball Spectre was in the business of selling information to and performing work for the British and French secret services).

    As for Ms. Swann, four years will have passed since Spectre and it will be easy to account for her absence with no more than a tossed-off line, since she has very few fans. We all know Bond would never be happy with the fatal combination of one woman and no exciting spywork. The boredom would kill him.

    In any case, if Mr. Boyle decides to pretend as if Spectre had never happened, I doubt anyone but a few hardcore Bond fans would be really annoyed.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    @Revelator, excellent post, couldn't agree more. I also felt like introducing Blofeld near the end of an actor's era was a horrible idea; they should've spent a few years, after re-acquiring the rights, fine-tuning some ideas and angles they could take for his re-introduction into the series. I would've loved the next era kicking off with what appears to be a straight-forward, standalone mission, only to reveal Blofeld at some point, and have him weaved through the rest of the era, perhaps taking the stage as the main villain in the final film. Ahh, what could've been.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @Revelator, excellent post, couldn't agree more. I also felt like introducing Blofeld near the end of an actor's era was a horrible idea; they should've spent a few years, after re-acquiring the rights, fine-tuning some ideas and angles they could take for his re-introduction into the series. I would've loved the next era kicking off with what appears to be a straight-forward, standalone mission, only to reveal Blofeld at some point, and have him weaved through the rest of the era, perhaps taking the stage as the main villain in the final film. Ahh, what could've been.

    If they ever decide to use them again (a good few years from now hopefully), then I hope that's how they do it. First film of a new actor with a surprise Blofeld/SPECTRE reveal at some point setting up future films.

    I also think we don't need to see their first meeting again whenever they're next used, even if we've had a reboot or two by then. They could already know eachother, just keep it vague. I think hinting at a long history between them already would be better for selling him as Bond's arch enemy than reintroducing him again as a new villain Bond hasn't met.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Well, I think a good few years from now would be what some fans on here want, yes, but probably not necessarily the general public.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I wouldn't miss him if I never saw him again quite frankly. He's never been done real justice in the films and to some extent has been tainted on account of his most recent appearance, at least imho. Best to let him rest.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    The general public doesn't care.
    That's what some I've surveyed seem to say, with one noting that his return in SP felt like a retrograde step.

    I think it may be because he's still most famously associated with the Connery era of the 60's, and many people have seen those films over the years and internalized his character with that period.

    Pleasance's visually iconic characterization was also used as the template for Dr. Evil, further sullying the character.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Interesting. I suppose the general public does not care much about any of the characters, then. Except Bond. Just to have a fun and exciting film to watch; that's it. Well, EON cares about the character of Blofeld and went thru effort to get it. I don't mind whenever Blofeld returns, but I feel sure he will.
  • Posts: 1,970
    peter wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I guess I just think after getting the rights to Blofeld and Spectre back after the long legal battles, why use them in only one film?

    They’ll be back in the next era again probably. If not, they are still there for other purposes besides the films - games or whatever other Bond media they want to use them in.

    Yes, SPECTRE will be back sooner or later. It just doesn’t make sense for Danny Boyle to make the third Mendes film. That’s not what he’s about as a filmmaker.

    However, this will be grounded in DC Bond’s world (so I doubt it will feel tacked on).
    He can still make his own film with Blofeld.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 12,837
    bondjames wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    The general public doesn't care.
    That's what some I've surveyed seem to say, with one noting that his return in SP felt like a retrograde step.

    I think it may be because he's still most famously associated with the Connery era of the 60's, and many people have seen those films over the years and internalized his character with that period.

    Pleasance's visually iconic characterization was also used as the template for Dr. Evil, further sullying the character.

    I think it's all about how well they do it. The public might know Blofeld (probably not by name) because of how visually iconic he is, but I doubt many are really attached to the character. But then think about all the superhero films. Nobody knew half these characters existed until a few years ago. But because they do it in a way that resonates, so and so from the comics turning up is actually a huge deal.

    I think that's how they could get people on board with Blofeld. Sounds dumb but just do it well basically. Make him a really good bad guy and really sell him as Bond's arch enemy. Then because of how he's presented you'll get people going online and looking him up as well as geek/film/pop culture sites running articles about why he's such a big deal.

    They should use how iconic he is to their advantage though to be fair, so that people who have a vague idea of who he is catch on. I think the Pleasance scar in SP was a bit much though. Not sure he really needs the nehru suit either. I think long as you give him the cat and introduce him as the big head of the table bad guy then that should be enough.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I guess I just think after getting the rights to Blofeld and Spectre back after the long legal battles, why use them in only one film?

    They’ll be back in the next era again probably. If not, they are still there for other purposes besides the films - games or whatever other Bond media they want to use them in.

    Yes, SPECTRE will be back sooner or later. It just doesn’t make sense for Danny Boyle to make the third Mendes film. That’s not what he’s about as a filmmaker.

    However, this will be grounded in DC Bond’s world (so I doubt it will feel tacked on).
    He can still make his own film with Blofeld.

    You’re right, but I’ll make you a friendly bet of some kind that Blofeld will not even be mentioned in B25.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    The general public doesn't care.
    That's what some I've surveyed seem to say, with one noting that his return in SP felt like a retrograde step.

    I think it may be because he's still most famously associated with the Connery era of the 60's, and many people have seen those films over the years and internalized his character with that period.

    Pleasance's visually iconic characterization was also used as the template for Dr. Evil, further sullying the character.

    I think it's all about how well they do it. The public might know Blofeld (probably not even be name) because of how visually iconic he is, but I doubt many are really attached to the character. But then think about all the superhero films. Nobody knew half these characters existed until a few years ago. But because they do it in a way that resonates, so and so from the comics turning up is actually a huge deal.

    I think that's how they could get people on board with Blofeld. Sounds dumb but just do it well basically. Make him a really good bad guy and really sell him as Bond's arch enemy. Then because of how he's presented you'll get people going online and looking him up as well as geek/film/pop culture sites running articles about why he's such a big deal.

    They should use how iconic he is to their advantage though to be fair, so that people who have a vague idea of who he is catch on. I think the Pleasance scar in SP was a bit much though. Not sure he really needs the nehru suit either. I think long as you give him the cat and introduce him as the big head of the table bad guy then that should be enough.
    I agree with you that it's definitely about how well they do it. His iconic status matters, but the past can be forgotten with the right interpretation. Something groundbreaking and intense. Something so different from the past that the predecessor attempts are cast aside in the consciousness by the public.

    As you said, it's been done before in the superhero genre. Nolan and Ledger did that perfectly with The Joker. Jack who? That's what was required, but we didn't get it. Instead they relied on an actor's reputation.

    I agree on the scar and Nehru jacket as well. Completely unnecessary and rather idiotic move in my view, because all it did was draw unfavourable comparisons with the storied and iconic past (as well as a famous parody) when they should have been blazing a new path. I don't think the cat is necessary either. It's a bit of a cliche.

    The issue now is that he has been reintroduced poorly. People will remember, for the wrong reasons. It's best to let him lie for at least 20 years imho. Then come back with a new, and daring interpretation.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,787
    For years I endured isolated but very vocal claims that Quantum of Solace was an abomination and failure, the name Quantum would never be spoken in following films, and Mr. White's character played by Jesper Christensen is never to be seen again. Not how it played out.

    The detail for the scar on Blofeld's face and Nehru jacket may be telling. That kind of commitment to retake the character from the ridiculous (the last Austin Powers movie was 2002) could be a train that already left the station. It just needs to be done well in BOND 25, and audience will love it.
Sign In or Register to comment.