› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…328329331333334…2507

Comments

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2016 Posts: 8,392
    I wish they would make a Bond film with just one major action sequence it in. These films are so long now, the budgets are so large, and the action is so overblown. When you have to keep chucking in gratuitous action every 20 mins it prehaps shows that your film is lacking in the story department. Actually craft an engaging, intriguing story and people won't miss the action, and then you can make these films for a lot less money. Nowadays it seems they are so impotent in the story department that they just throw in loads of mindless action to make up for it.

    This is why I like the idea of B25 having a new actor and a fresh take. Until Craig leaves I don't think they're going to go back to the drawing board.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    One action sequence is too less. Two or three would be the limit.
  • Tuck91Tuck91
    Posts: 1,680
    Jason Bourne only had two main hard action setpieces.

    They can do it but they dont want to.

    They wont make another CR type film for a while IMO. It wont pull the audience or $$$ similar to something like SF which was more mainstream.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    One action sequence is too less. Two or three would be the limit.

    Not if they made it a thriller with mystery and suspense elements.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited August 2016 Posts: 15,423
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    One action sequence is too less. Two or three would be the limit.

    Not if they made it a thriller with mystery and suspense elements.
    I don't think anyone would watch a Bond film with that premise, nowadays. In the 60s, perhaps. But, not the mainstream audience of today.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,842
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Die Another Day = considered bad

    Casino Royale = considered good

    Quantum of Solace = considered bad

    Skyfall = considered good

    SPECTRE = considered bad

    Bond 25 = considered good?

    Only if Aidan turner is bond


    (Gets handed large bag money)

    :)
  • SonofSeanSonofSean
    Posts: 202
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Whatever script is being written is being written with Craig in mind. I guarantee it. They want him back, they wouldn't just assume he isn't coming back and put all the resources into a script thinking it would be a whole new actor in the role, especially since there is no new actor on the horizon at all. They have time, plenty of it, and since no distributor is in place, there's no rush right now anyway.
    .

    Well, the script for Goldeneye was worked on for quite some time and WAS written (originally) for Dalton, but then Dalton left (was more likely let-go) and then was rewritten with a new 007 in mind. The story they are working on now can easily be modified if Craig bails.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Die Another Day = considered bad

    Casino Royale = considered good

    Quantum of Solace = considered bad

    Skyfall = considered good

    SPECTRE = considered bad

    Bond 25 = considered good?

    Only if Aidan turner is bond


    (Gets handed large bag money)

    :)

    I'll send the check in the mail! :))
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I'm currently in the middle of Homeland Season 5. As I watch this season, I keep thinking about how tense and suspenseful it is. They use real locations (it's filmed primarily in Germany) and keep you on the edge of your seat throughout. These guys know how to do it. There are sequences and plot elements that are very similar to those in Jason Bourne, and I believe they are handled better in this show.

    The Bond folks should really take a look at this team, as should other franchises. The character work is top notch.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    jake24 wrote: »
    I wouldn't be that black and white about it. The script was being developed over the course of two years, and it began to suffer problems after EON were unhappy with Logan's draft. Granted, Purvis and Wade are by no means brilliant, but what we could've gotten with Logan would have been much worse. I agree though, they need to find better ways to spend their money.

    I can't see any defence for EON in that statement. Being developed for 2 years yet they only seem to notice that Logan's efforts are a total shambles seemingly about 5 minutes before shooting started?

    EON should be demanding monthly updates at the very least and then feeding back that they are happy with this but this isnt working and needs changing. I would assume thats how the business works so how did it get to the point where the script is still all over the place when they are about to start filming?
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Don't forget a big explosion.

    Watching the vlog of Mendes dancing round with a stonk on after seeing half the budget just go up in smoke is downright embarrassing and should be used as Exhibit A to anyone who ever suggests he should be allowed anywhere near a Bond film again.
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    One action sequence is too less. Two or three would be the limit.

    Personally I would go for one massive sequence at the start, a decent one at the end of act one, and another massive one at the end of act two with a few assorted smaller fights scattered throughout.

    TLD gets the balance about right: PTS, Aston chase and air base raid/cargo net fight and then a few other small action scenes (safe house raid, prison fight, Whitaker finale).


  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited August 2016 Posts: 10,591
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    I wouldn't be that black and white about it. The script was being developed over the course of two years, and it began to suffer problems after EON were unhappy with Logan's draft. Granted, Purvis and Wade are by no means brilliant, but what we could've gotten with Logan would have been much worse. I agree though, they need to find better ways to spend their money.

    I can't see any defence for EON in that statement. Being developed for 2 years yet they only seem to notice that Logan's efforts are a total shambles seemingly about 5 minutes before shooting started?

    EON should be demanding monthly updates at the very least and then feeding back that they are happy with this but this isnt working and needs changing. I would assume thats how the business works so how did it get to the point where the script is still all over the place when they are about to start filming?
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Don't forget a big explosion.

    Watching the vlog of Mendes dancing round with a stonk on after seeing half the budget just go up in smoke is downright embarrassing and should be used as Exhibit A to anyone who ever suggests he should be allowed anywhere near a Bond film again.
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    One action sequence is too less. Two or three would be the limit.

    Personally I would go for one massive sequence at the start, a decent one at the end of act one, and another massive one at the end of act two with a few assorted smaller fights scattered throughout.

    TLD gets the balance about right: PTS, Aston chase and air base raid/cargo net fight and then a few other small action scenes (safe house raid, prison fight, Whitaker finale).

    I'm not disagreeing with you, but neither of us fully know about what goes on behind the scenes. How much did the leaks reveals in terms of that?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    One action sequence is too less. Two or three would be the limit.

    Personally I would go for one massive sequence at the start, a decent one at the end of act one, and another massive one at the end of act two with a few assorted smaller fights scattered throughout.

    TLD gets the balance about right: PTS, Aston chase and air base raid/cargo net fight and then a few other small action scenes (safe house raid, prison fight, Whitaker finale).

    Precisely, Wiz.
  • JawsIsAliveJawsIsAlive
    Posts: 233
    I often think that modern film making has become too refined for it's own good. Huge, explosive action sequences have become so cheap and easy to construct, while every shot is colour corrected and perfected into oblivion during post production. Nothing looks like real life anymore and everything moves too quickly to breath.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    JawsIsAlive wrote: »
    I often think that modern film making has become too refined for it's own good. Huge, explosive action sequences have become so cheap and easy to construct, while every shot is colour corrected and perfected into oblivion during post production. Nothing looks like real life anymore and everything moves too quickly to breath.

    That is true and a big problem with modern movies.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,329
    JawsIsAlive wrote: »
    I often think that modern film making has become too refined for it's own good. Huge, explosive action sequences have become so cheap and easy to construct, while every shot is colour corrected and perfected into oblivion during post production. Nothing looks like real life anymore and everything moves too quickly to breath.
    I wouldn't say that about SP and it's action sequences. Sluggish.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,329
    DCisared wrote: »
    JawsIsAlive wrote: »
    I often think that modern film making has become too refined for it's own good. Huge, explosive action sequences have become so cheap and easy to construct, while every shot is colour corrected and perfected into oblivion during post production. Nothing looks like real life anymore and everything moves too quickly to breath.
    I wouldn't say that about SP and it's action sequences. Sluggish.
    Although I hear you with the explosions and over use of special effects for no reason.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    They call it visual effects and sound effects, now. ;)
  • JawsIsAliveJawsIsAlive
    Posts: 233
    DCisared wrote: »
    JawsIsAlive wrote: »
    I often think that modern film making has become too refined for it's own good. Huge, explosive action sequences have become so cheap and easy to construct, while every shot is colour corrected and perfected into oblivion during post production. Nothing looks like real life anymore and everything moves too quickly to breath.
    I wouldn't say that about SP and it's action sequences. Sluggish.

    Fair point, although I'd say that was down to poor (or uninterested) direction more than anything - the production values have the same gloss that one would expect of a modern blockbuster. I think they are an excellent demonstration that the most expensive cameras and digital intermediaries in the world can't substitute proper film making.
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    Watching the vlog of Mendes dancing round with a stonk on after seeing half the budget just go up in smoke is downright embarrassing and should be used as Exhibit A to anyone who ever suggests he should be allowed anywhere near a Bond film again

    Now everytime I watch that scene I'm going to have such disgust for it
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited August 2016 Posts: 28,694
    I was cringing at the video feature covering the shooting of that explosion. Such a waste of money for what could have been done with effects or miniatures. When we say we want the stunts to be real, I don't think EON know at times that we mean stuff with actual people doing amazing feats like the old days, and not some handmade pyro show.

    I can picture how this all went down on set.

    Effects supervisor: "Hey, Sam, you raving asshat, you know we can just do this with miniatures, right? No need to waste this much cash on-"

    Mendes: "Sorry, mate, I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome and loud this explosion is, or how equally awesome this awesome Guinness World Record is in my hands right here. Look at the beautiful gold plaque with my name on it-MY NAME. Look how it shines when I hold it in the direction of the sun. Lush, totally lush, it is. Biggest explosion in film history. Come at me, Spielberg. Ball's in your court, rookie."

    [The cast and crew all face-palm, and Dan literally slashes his wrists with shrapnel from the explosion out of sheer embarrassment and shame]
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    I hope that record gets broken soon and Mendes cries about it.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I hope that record gets broken soon and Mendes cries about it.
    By Spielberg. ;)
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited August 2016 Posts: 10,591
    Christ, Mendes really gets bashed to death on these forums doesn't he?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    One action sequence is too less. Two or three would be the limit.

    Not if they made it a thriller with mystery and suspense elements.

    @Mendes4Lyfe , we are on the same page in this case. Why does a Bond film have to be synonymous with large, explosive action scenes? I'd prefer a low key, low budget Bond film that makes use of one great location. Where the tension and story (mission) far outweigh the action. When the action does occur I'd prefer it to be more character based, more meaningful and more down to Earth. Save the big explosions (which can be excellent) for every third or fourth film, like your YOLT or your TSWLM, when it is appropriate and carries weight.

    Yes, I much prefer to explore one location in depth than to glide over 3 or 4.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Like I said earlier, Homeland nails it on all fronts (location, plot, character, tension).

    I fully agree on staying in one location primarily and exploring it. What a difference that would make. As long as it's a scenic spot (like Japan in YOLT or Egypt in TSWLM) I say do it.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2016 Posts: 9,117
    jake24 wrote: »
    Christ, Mendes really gets bashed to death on these forums doesn't he?

    For this pointlessly expensive indulgence?



    Yes he does and rightly so.

    I think in his position I'd be too worried about what a state the script was in to be high on the euphoria of something that Derek Meddings could have executed just as well with miniatures for about £250.
    Birdleson wrote: »

    I'd prefer a low key, low budget Bond film that makes use of one great location. Where the tension and story (mission) far outweigh the action. When the action does occur I'd prefer it to be more character based, more meaningful and more down to Earth.

    Sounds suspiciously like a little film some of you might have seen called OHMSS.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Like I said earlier, Homeland nails it on all fronts (location, plot, character, tension).

    I fully agree on staying in one location primarily and exploring it. What a difference that would make. As long as it's a scenic spot (like Japan in YOLT or Egypt in TSWLM) I say do it.

    I watched the first season of HOMELAND, and I see what you're saying. My only complaint was that I didn't buy into some of the twists and revelations.
    Actually, the first season was primarily based in the US, but yes, the plot, character, tension etc. was first class, if a little exaggerated as you say.

    I was more referring to season 5 (which I'm currently watching, and which is set in Germany). Season 4 was set in Pakistan but they used Cape Town South Africa as a stand-in. Still, it was very atmospheric.
  • MilovyMilovy
    edited August 2016 Posts: 676
    I remember when Casino Royale was being produced, Martin Campbell claimed that the film would feature only one explosion - and that was a selling point. Now EON's trying to set the world record for biggest explosion ever. How quickly they lost the plot on their whole "reboot" idea. I mean, they cut Moneypenny and Q because those characters were part of a stale formula - and then they're back within 2 films and getting more screen time than ever before. Blah.

    As for explosions, action, etc... I think Bond films should feature a few fantastic stunts (e.g. bungee jump, Aston crash & flip), brutal fisticuffs (e.g. Bond vs. 006, Bond vs. Obanno, Shanghai fight), and the occasional inventive action set-piece (e.g. parkour, helicopter fight in SP). I wouldn't mind if they stopped demolishing a building in every single film's climax.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited August 2016 Posts: 4,116
    jake24 wrote: »
    Christ, Mendes really gets bashed to death on these forums doesn't he?

    Yea because he's better than what he gave us. And because Bond deserves better. We deserve better!!!
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    So we have to make do with the MI series for all the qualities the 007 franchise used to show. We get the next personal story with Craig and a huge waste of money on basically a sluggish snoozefest.
Sign In or Register to comment.