No Time To Die: Production Diary

14384394414434442507

Comments

  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    edited October 2016 Posts: 15,138
    jake24 wrote: »
    Only 64%??

    Reminds me of this scene from Naked Gun 47 secs in...

  • Posts: 19,339
    Benny wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Only 64%??

    Reminds me of this scene from Naked Gun 47 secs in...


    Ive got all the Naked Guns and Police Squad on DVD but i never tire of it...thanks for that wee treat Benster my old friend...brilliant haha !!!

  • Posts: 11,119
    jake24 wrote: »
    Only 64%??

    Well, I took the figures from our forum :-). Given the fact how critical we all are, I think it's a wonderful percentage.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Daniel Craig isn't really more popular than Brosnan has been in his tenure.

    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake. Brosnan was universally loved, even before he was finally officially Bond, people wanted him badly.

    All that Craig is the best since Connery is rubbish. Bond actor 7 will be popular too if the movies will be good.

    Had CR been a mediocre movie Craig might even have been cut short in his tenure.

    In general the actor that plays Bond is overrated in importance. If the movie sucks even the best actor will not save it and get the blame.
    If the movie is an instant classic like CR, anyone could have played Bond.

    I am not bashing Craig here, just saying. You can cast whomever for Bond 25 or 26 if Craig stays.
    If the film is great, even Jamie bloody Bell would work probably.
    If someone like Aidan Turner gets a great Bond film, he'll immediately be branded the best thing since Connery.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake.

    Absolute, categorical bollocks.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    Is Craig being interviewed the entire time or for how long because I saw this pic from a person who is going. Here is a link. ?photo_id=1307350959275539&mds=%2Fphotos%2Fviewer%2F%3Fphotoset_token%3Dpcb.575596485963905%26photo%3D1307350959275539%26profileid%3D100007761526133%26source%3D48%26refid%3D18%26_ft_%3Dqid.6338836855577912976%253Amf_story_key.575596485963905%253Atl_objid.575596485963905%26cached_data%3Dfalse%26ftid%3Du_m_2m&mdf=1Note look at the first photo
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    Is Craig being interviewed the entire time or for how long because I saw this pic from a person who is going. Here is a link. ?photo_id=1307350959275539&mds=%2Fphotos%2Fviewer%2F%3Fphotoset_token%3Dpcb.575596485963905%26photo%3D1307350959275539%26profileid%3D100007761526133%26source%3D48%26refid%3D18%26_ft_%3Dqid.6338836855577912976%253Amf_story_key.575596485963905%253Atl_objid.575596485963905%26cached_data%3Dfalse%26ftid%3Du_m_2m&mdf=1Note look at the first photo
    How you get pics on this thing
  • Posts: 11,425
    Daniel Craig isn't really more popular than Brosnan has been in his tenure.

    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake. Brosnan was universally loved, even before he was finally officially Bond, people wanted him badly.

    All that Craig is the best since Connery is rubbish. Bond actor 7 will be popular too if the movies will be good.

    Had CR been a mediocre movie Craig might even have been cut short in his tenure.

    In general the actor that plays Bond is overrated in importance. If the movie sucks even the best actor will not save it and get the blame.
    If the movie is an instant classic like CR, anyone could have played Bond.

    I am not bashing Craig here, just saying. You can cast whomever for Bond 25 or 26 if Craig stays.
    If the film is great, even Jamie bloody Bell would work probably.
    If someone like Aidan Turner gets a great Bond film, he'll immediately be branded the best thing since Connery.

    Brosnan was universally loved as Bond?

    Count me out of that theory.
  • Posts: 16,169
    Daniel Craig isn't really more popular than Brosnan has been in his tenure.

    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake. Brosnan was universally loved, even before he was finally officially Bond, people wanted him badly.

    All that Craig is the best since Connery is rubbish. Bond actor 7 will be popular too if the movies will be good.

    Had CR been a mediocre movie Craig might even have been cut short in his tenure.

    In general the actor that plays Bond is overrated in importance. If the movie sucks even the best actor will not save it and get the blame.
    If the movie is an instant classic like CR, anyone could have played Bond.

    I am not bashing Craig here, just saying. You can cast whomever for Bond 25 or 26 if Craig stays.
    If the film is great, even Jamie bloody Bell would work probably.
    If someone like Aidan Turner gets a great Bond film, he'll immediately be branded the best thing since Connery.

    Pretty much every current bond is "the best Bond since Connery".
    I once joked that hypothetically if country singer Kenny Rogers was cast as 007, and the promotion team marketed him as the closest to Fleming's Bond, there's enough gullible people out there to buy it and he would also be labeled "the best Bond since Connery".
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Yes. Brosnan was universally loved as Bond and has been the face of many marketing campaigns just because of that.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited October 2016 Posts: 10,591
    Delete
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    RC7 wrote: »
    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake.

    Absolute, categorical bollocks.

    Whenever there is a news article about Spectre, or Skyfall or something Bond in general the reader's comments speak volumes.
    At least in the German-language region.
    So it's not categorical bollocks.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Getafix wrote: »
    Daniel Craig isn't really more popular than Brosnan has been in his tenure.

    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake. Brosnan was universally loved, even before he was finally officially Bond, people wanted him badly.

    All that Craig is the best since Connery is rubbish. Bond actor 7 will be popular too if the movies will be good.

    Had CR been a mediocre movie Craig might even have been cut short in his tenure.

    In general the actor that plays Bond is overrated in importance. If the movie sucks even the best actor will not save it and get the blame.
    If the movie is an instant classic like CR, anyone could have played Bond.

    I am not bashing Craig here, just saying. You can cast whomever for Bond 25 or 26 if Craig stays.
    If the film is great, even Jamie bloody Bell would work probably.
    If someone like Aidan Turner gets a great Bond film, he'll immediately be branded the best thing since Connery.

    Brosnan was universally loved as Bond?

    Count me out of that theory.

    Every rule has its exception.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    Is Craig being interviewed the entire time or for how long because I saw this pic from a person who is going. Here is a link. ?photo_id=1307350959275539&mds=%2Fphotos%2Fviewer%2F%3Fphotoset_token%3Dpcb.575596485963905%26photo%3D1307350959275539%26profileid%3D100007761526133%26source%3D48%26refid%3D18%26_ft_%3Dqid.6338836855577912976%253Amf_story_key.575596485963905%253Atl_objid.575596485963905%26cached_data%3Dfalse%26ftid%3Du_m_2m&mdf=1Note look at the first photo
    How you get pics on this thing

    Press the picture icon above the post and insert the url in between.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake.

    Who are these 'many' you speak of?
    The millions of people who log into CraignotBond.com every day?

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Brosnan just carried on, Craig redefined Bond that is the difference.

    Craig as far as the general public is concerned and not the fanbase is the most significant actor since Connery, he changed the way the character is perceived.

    EON never had the faith that Brosnan could take the character anywhere new, Craig they did, no his tenure has not been all successful but I would argue it's had more hits than misses than Brosnan which got rapidly worse after GE.

    Craig's contribution to Bond will be recognised far more than Brosnan's I guarantee, only the fanbase element that have a hard on over Craig's acceptance and can't except he's something different and not just the next guy, that was Brosnan, Craig was new start and a significant one at that.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I still believe it is not Craig that changed the character, it was the script, the direction, the many people involved in the production of Casino Royale.
    Of course Craig plays his part in all of this. But I refuse to believe he will be viewed upon any different than Brosnan or Moore in the future, once there is a new established actor.
    Craig gets overrated in importance.
  • edited October 2016 Posts: 16,169
    I hate to say it, but once Bond is recast and if the new guy happens to be a hit in a hit film, Craig's 007 will probably be as thrashed as Pierce has been since 2006, Dalton before him, and Moore before him.
    That's how the cycle seems to play- whatever is current usually considered the best by general cinema goers.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    RC7 wrote: »
    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake.

    Absolute, categorical bollocks.

    I agree, @RC7. Some comments instantly sound sensational for its own sake to the ear, but it could just be me.

    Maybe some forget that Craig was an instrumental part of just why CR was a hit, and he was far and away the best thing about each of his other films, especially QoS, which people always shortchange. Saying otherwise does your statement little favors.

    People that say otherwise also shortchange Connery just the same, remarking that anyone in the Bond role in the 60s would've thrived just as much as him, missing the fact that Connery was a massive part of why those films were big enough hits to be able to be continued, and why to this day he remains the defining face of Bond. That wasn't luck or timing, for Christ's sake, he was just that good.

    I think Daniel has been massively loved and encouraged by the public, and thrived better than some of his past Bond actors from the past while facing astounding backlash from some of the public and media who were angry that his image didn't at first scream Bond. Then CR came and well, most of those mouths were shut up. Since then he's always gotten a majority vote in polls about him returning, including all those I've seen since SP came out, to a staggering degree.

    Throw in his amazing work from behind the camera and he's far and away the most productive and involved Bond actor we've had in terms of getting each of his Bond films off the ground and building them from the ground up, from getting directors and actors involved, deciding on costume design, working with scripting, doing amazing stunts and selecting/influencing the art design and look of each film as well as the promotional materials. Dan has truly done it all, such that it's almost an insult to simply call him a Bond actor.

    Examining Dan just for his acting talents as Bond in front of the camera completely fails to address the other aspects of the production he balances every day of shooting from behind it.

    But this shouldn't be news to many here.
  • Posts: 6,432
    IMO Craig in his first 2 films is extremely good in the role.
  • edited October 2016 Posts: 12,474
    I'll always stand by Craig as a great Bond. Especially in CR.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    IMO Craig in his first 2 films is extremely good in the role.
    The same can be said for the latter 2, IMO.
  • RC7RC7
    edited October 2016 Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake.

    Who are these 'many' you speak of?
    The millions of people who log into CraignotBond.com every day?


    Mate, I'd appreciate an edit to remove my name from this ridiculous comment.
    RC7 wrote: »
    In fact Craig is viewed still, by many, as a mistake.

    Absolute, categorical bollocks.

    Whenever there is a news article about Spectre, or Skyfall or something Bond in general the reader's comments speak volumes.
    At least in the German-language region.
    So it's not categorical bollocks.

    The other week you were telling us how SP was regarded as one the greatest films of all time in Switzerland. Slightly at odds with your new concept that Craig is 'still' seen as a mistake.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I'm conservative there. A Bond actor should only act and nothing more like it was in Cubby's days.

    Craig did his part in CR. But it was really the movie itself that saved Craig from the constant negativity towards him before CR hit the theaters.

    Just take away Eva Green from CR and imagine what would happen to the movie. If anyting SHE was what made CR a success acting wise. She plays Dan right to the wall in each and every scene and don't forget Mads Mikkelsen. Dan got lucky with his supporting cast which elevated him to a better level.

    Again, I'm not bashing Craig. I love CR, I love QoS and I love SP, but I try to look at the bigger picture.
    The reality is Craig will fast take Brosnan's place once the new actor has two movies in his portfolio.
  • Posts: 6,432
    jake24 wrote: »
    IMO Craig in his first 2 films is extremely good in the role.
    The same can be said for the latter 2, IMO.

    CR and QoS I think play to DC's strengh, his last two films departed from that and highlighted DC's weaknesses.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I'm conservative there. A Bond actor should only act and nothing more like it was in Cubby's days.

    Craig did his part in CR. But it was really the movie itself that saved Craig from the constant negativity towards him before CR hit the theaters.

    Just take away Eva Green from CR and imagine what would happen to the movie. If anyting SHE was what made CR a success acting wise. She plays Dan right to the wall in each and every scene and don't forget Mads Mikkelsen. Dan got lucky with his supporting cast which elevated him to a better level.

    Again, I'm not bashing Craig. I love CR, I love QoS and I love SP, but I try to look at the bigger picture.
    The reality is Craig will fast take Brosnan's place once the new actor has two movies in his portfolio.

    I think it's pretty apparent that Dan's performance was what stopped him from facing negative backlash from critics and the collective audience, and reactions from that time will tell you that, as he's praised to high heaven, deservedly so. It was, after all, Dan who commanded the action, the poker scenes, filled out the suits better than any since Sean and he who was 1/2 the reason the film worked in the romance department alongside Eva. It wasn't just a one-sided acting situation like it can so often be with a Bond actor and his Bond girl, especially when the actresses they pick are only chosen for their looks and nothing else. It's a huge part of the reason why Vesper has made such an impression too, not just for what Eva did, but for how Dan acted and reacted beside her.

    Personally I couldn't be happier with how much EON have moved away from the Cubby method. The films feel now more than ever a true team effort between the cast and crew, and not just a few higher-ups telling everyone else what to do without much communication or suggestions for improvement in between. This approach in Dan's hands has been executed quite successfully, and it shows in how bankable he has remained as Bond, and why he is always hunted after to return.

    But he's still not a crucial part of the puzzle at all, no, no, no.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited October 2016 Posts: 9,020
    If all that were the case the Bond franchise would be finished once Craig leaves.
    That will not happen. The franchise will do well without him once a new actor has taken his place.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    If all that were the case the Bond franchise would be finished once Craig leaves.
    That will not happen. The franchise will do well without him once a new actor has taken his place.

    Are you pissed? It's almost as if you're not actually reading posts.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    If all that were the case the Bond franchise would be finished once Craig leaves.
    That will not happen. The franchise will do well without him once a new actor has taken his place.

    Let's not get asinine here, for Christ's sake. We all know the character is bigger than the actor at this point, and Bond will always go on. Dan is a special Bond, just as Sean was special, but time moved on and the series had to move on, because the actors moved on.

    Just because that inevitability exists doesn't mean a Bond actor is any less crucial during their time as Bond. Sean was instrumental in why the 60s was such a hit decade, just as Dan is a crucial part of why his era has been received the way he has, and why his interpretation of the character has captivated so many. When Sean left, his effect was still felt, as crucial as he was, though the series obviously had to go on and should've. But the fact that the franchise moved on never lessened his impact, even to this day.

    Nobody says the series ends when Dan's tenure does-that'd be an imbecilic notion that I can't believe was mentioned-but stating that the continuation of the franchise seemingly proves that an actor means jack squat to the series is just...foolish.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited October 2016 Posts: 4,043
    I can't remember one review saying that either Eva or Mads were what made the film regardless of the quality they both displayed.

    It was Dan all the way that was what got the most headlines, that was what definded the praise for the film.

    Jason you my friend are clutch at straws with those comments, I remember when it came out and the media did a complete U-turn on their neagativity as soon as the evidence was on the screen.

    CR's greatest success was Daniel Craig period and none of your revisionism is going to change that.

    Craig won't be perceived like Brosnan is now when the next Bond arrives. Craig's contribution will figure a great deal in who gets the role next and it won't be someone with the dramatic capabilities of Brosnan in 1995.

    Babs has had too much of what an actor like Craig has bought to the role to hand this to some pretty boy with little acting talent.
Sign In or Register to comment.