› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…465466468470471…2507

Comments

  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,537
    Werner Herzog fancies himself as a Bond villain.

    ""I think I would be a good villain in a James Bond movie," Herzog told Business Insider while doing press for his latest documentary, "Into the Inferno," which will be available on Netflix on October 28. "They were fairly weak the last half-dozen of villains in James Bond movies. They weren't that convincing." - Business Insider.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Herzog was quite chilling in a brief role as villain in Jack Reacher. I immediately thought he would be a good choice for a Bond villain. He reminds me a little of Curd Jürgens
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    Herzog was quite chilling in a brief role as villain in Jack Reacher. I immediately thought he would be a good choice for a Bond villain. He reminds me a little of Curd Jürgens

    Yes I agree.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    @bondjames Talking about Herzog, have you seen the trailer for his latest film? He could not only be a Bond villain, but he would do a damn fine job if he directed a Bond film.

  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,277
    Turned out the interview was filmed.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Salt & Fire looks great @DaltonCraig007. I'll be sure to check it out. There's a bit of QoS/SP in the desert scenes.

    Thanks for the link @marketto007. It's interesting that Craig says he can't do the sort of films that Brosnan did and it's also notable that he recognizes that CR's humour was organic and flowed naturally from the moment. Very interesting.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited October 2016 Posts: 8,392
    I just hope they can lure Campbell back and do it again one last time with Bond actor 7. Sorry, Bond actor 007.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    That was a great little snippet of background on Dan's casting. It's so fascinating how random his casting was at the outset, and how it grew into such a big deal over time that it's hard to imagine him not being in the role.
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675
    Now if they'd only post the whole thing. I'd gladly watch it.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited October 2016 Posts: 28,694
    PropertyOfALady wrote: »
    Now if they'd only post the whole thing. I'd gladly watch it.

    There's so many Bond related comments from Dan that we still haven't heard, as well. All we've got are the Bond 25 related stuff reported from some outlets and whatever was quoted in tweets, but outside of that, nothing. I'd love to hear more about him reminiscing on his past films, as I enjoyed what he said about QoS, for however briefly.

    I like hearing him talk period, though, Bond or not.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    That was a great little snippet of background on Dan's casting. It's so fascinating how random his casting was at the outset, and how it grew into such a big deal over time that it's hard to imagine him not being in the role.

    It's an interesting tale, I'll give you that. Nothing, however, tops Lazenby. What a go-getter. B-)
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    Craig brought a rough physicality to the role that I think will be hard to deliver. Personally, at the current output rate, I see only one more Craig movie - and he said he won't do two back-to-back. As long as Bond 25 will be a really good send-off it would be more than fine.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    That was a great little snippet of background on Dan's casting. It's so fascinating how random his casting was at the outset, and how it grew into such a big deal over time that it's hard to imagine him not being in the role.

    It's an interesting tale, I'll give you that. Nothing, however, tops Lazenby. What a go-getter. B-)

    How Laz got casted proves that he wrote the book on being a bullshit artist. It's crazy how much luck went into his casting, and then the strange way it all gradually fell out of his grasp equally so.

    Brosnan has a fascinating history as well, being so close to getting the role in the 80s before NBC took it away from him only hours before he would reach his destiny. At least he got a second shot, and I think it was better that we got Dalton first in retrospect.
  • TuuliaTuulia
    Posts: 2,081
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Werner Herzog fancies himself as a Bond villain.

    ""I think I would be a good villain in a James Bond movie," Herzog told Business Insider while doing press for his latest documentary, "Into the Inferno," which will be available on Netflix on October 28. "They were fairly weak the last half-dozen of villains in James Bond movies. They weren't that convincing." - Business Insider.

    I can definitely see and hear him saying that...
    But I can also imagine him actually being a good Bond villain.
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    @bondjames Talking about Herzog, have you seen the trailer for his latest film? He could not only be a Bond villain, but he would do a damn fine job if he directed a Bond film.

    I'm sure that would be... interesting. The way he likes to make movies and the way blockbusters are made seems totally incompatible.

    I can imagine him acting in a Bond movie, but not directing one.

  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    This is all the footage available from the interview last Friday:






  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,149
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    While AVTAK did feature a Moore way past his expiration date in the role, I concede that by that time he'd earned over a decade of respect and love from fans for playing 007 that it's easy to ignore his more geriatric appearance simply because it's Roger. I don't think even Sean gets as much credit for playing Bond as an older man in DAF, for example, and I think that's because Roger was always all in, always in full effect and "on the ball" in his movies, and you never hear people criticize Sir Roger for feeling tired in the role. He gave 100%, 100% of the time.

    Agreed. I watched Dawson's review of AVTAK on YouTube last night and ok yeah Moore was too old but I really miss those Moore days. For me Bond has never quite regained his footing consistently after Moore left.

    Grant it so did late great Cubby.

    I'd have to agree with that. had the legal troubles not occurred we probably would have had another 2 films with Tim. His 3rd might have been his GF or TSWLM, and seen another resurgence of big Bond popularity. Now days we'll get a hit film- then it's years before another solid entry comes out.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    delete (sorry Jason)
  • BounineBounine
    edited October 2016 Posts: 2,598
    I'm proud to say that I haven't seen a single one of the supposed Bond contenders act. ;)
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Some "contenders". ;)
  • BounineBounine
    edited October 2016 Posts: 2,598
    bondjames wrote: »
    Salt & Fire looks great @DaltonCraig007. I'll be sure to check it out. There's a bit of QoS/SP in the desert scenes.

    Thanks for the link @marketto007. It's interesting that Craig says he can't do the sort of films that Brosnan did and it's also notable that he recognizes that CR's humour was organic and flowed naturally from the moment. Very interesting.

    Yeah, they pretty much got the humour right in CR, then they messed it up again post CR. Atleast, they got it right for one movie. I've always said that the humour in Bond films needs to be natural. I just don't think many of these artificial one liners have the same impact that they used to. They've been played.

    I wish Campbell would come back. For me, he's the only director (post John Glenn) to fully get the contemporary, cinematic Bond, while remaining relatively faithful to Bond's literary roots. He can handle all the facets - drama, action etc.

    I remember the immortal words of Cambell prior to CR's release: "gone are the awful one line clankers." This was like music to my ears. The man knows what he's talking about. Campbell would bring us back to a splendid, fresh, gritty Bond again with a consistent feel and tone to it, coupled with a sound story which is the reinvention we once again need after the wishy washy garbage that Mendes gave us in Spectre.
  • JawsIsAliveJawsIsAlive
    edited October 2016 Posts: 233
    Campbell is past it, we should be looking forward rather than trying to relive past glories.

    As for Moore, I think he only did two films that were objectively any good (TSWLM and FYEO), and even those are marred with an inconsistent tone and some dreadful comic relief. He should have quit after OP, AVTAK is easily one of the worst Bond films and Moore's age is a large part of that.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,196
    " Campbell is past it"

    Many would have said that prior to his being chosen for Casino Royale; it had been 11 years since Goldeneye. I would love to see him back to bookend Craig's era.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    He may be past it, but past is prologue as they say. He's the only one in the past 20 years who's shown he really can deliver a top notch Bond film with all the fundamental aspects beautifully balanced and in tune. He's done that twice imho.

    Mendes certainly delivered a superior Bond film with SF in my view, but it was a different kind of Bond film. An outlier in concept and approach.

    Campbell is the man if one desires a return to 'pure Bond' at his best. That's why I truly believe the man has to be an adviser at the very least on the next film. I have more faith in him than I do the current producers.
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    Having said that, my understanding is that Campbell was offered every Bond film after GoldenEye up to when he accepted to do Casino Royale, would he even be interested?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    bondjames wrote: »
    He may be past it, but past is prologue as they say. He's the only one in the past 20 years who's shown he really can deliver a top notch Bond film with all the fundamental aspects beautifully balanced and in tune. He's done that twice imho.

    Mendes certainly delivered a superior Bond film with SF in my view, but it was a different kind of Bond film. An outlier in concept and approach.

    Campbell is the man if one desires a return to 'pure Bond' at his best. That's why I truly believe the man has to be an adviser at the very least on the next film. I have more faith in him than I do the current producers.


    Absolutely. =D>
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    He may be past it, but past is prologue as they say. He's the only one in the past 20 years who's shown he really can deliver a top notch Bond film with all the fundamental aspects beautifully balanced and in tune. He's done that twice imho.

    Mendes certainly delivered a superior Bond film with SF in my view, but it was a different kind of Bond film. An outlier in concept and approach.

    Campbell is the man if one desires a return to 'pure Bond' at his best. That's why I truly believe the man has to be an adviser at the very least on the next film. I have more faith in him than I do the current producers.


    Absolutely. =D>

    Yes I have to agree as well.

  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited October 2016 Posts: 2,138
    Campbell produced two of the finest outings for any Bond. A real crafts man who just grasps the right balance between story and action. But he has already said he has no interest in another, that doing a second was at a push. A shame really as he is second only to Terence Young.

    I really like the idea of Edward Zwick what he did on Blood Diamond was incredible and he worked with Dan on Defiance. I see he just directed the new Jack Reacher but yet to see it.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    GE is dire IMO. Have never understood why people like it so much. Dreary, tacky tedium.

    Campbell definitley showed a different side with CR, which is mainly excellent.

    However, if you bear in mind that Campbell wanted to cast Henry Cavill I think that rules him out as an adviser on the future of Bond.

    I'm not sure Bond could have survived Cavill's dire acting after Brosnan.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    @Getafix, couldn't disagree more regarding GE, but yes, Cavill would've been an awful, awful choice. However, I won't disregard all of the great ideas brought forth by Campbell, simply because he had one real bad idea regarding casting.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @Getafix, couldn t agree more regarding GE.
Sign In or Register to comment.