No Time To Die: Production Diary

15065075095115122507

Comments

  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2016 Posts: 2,138
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    SonofSean wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still just want to know who is writing the darn thing

    Hopefully not Logan, although he did seem to come in tow with Mendes. From what I read about Spectre it took Jez Buttrworth and an embarrassing climb down to reproach to Neal Purvis and Robert Wade to fix the holes and add some humour to Logan's script. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I would give the gig to Mark Gatiss. A self proclaimed super fan his writing on Sherlock and guest writing on Dr Who went down well. he is a really creative guy and I think he could nail a classic adventure.

    Mark Gatiss? Oh yeah! Excellent choice. Does wonderful work on Sherlock and Doctor Who. Great novelist to boot and a life-long Bond afficionado. The only issue is that EON keep things very much "in house" (if that's a term). What I mean is that they prefer someone who will do go to script meetings and write down what they're told to (ahem, Purvis and Wade). It's very much by committee and, alas (such as what happened with Spectre), by the numbers. Heck, even Daniel Craig had a crack at writing QOS!

    Mark Gatiss has publicly said he would never write a Bond film, sorry, he wants to experience them as a fan rather than write them.

    DC wrote stuff for QoS in extenuating circumstances, it was by accident rather than by design.

    Well this is awkward, please read Interview Nov 11, 2015

    http://www.tor.com/2015/11/11/get-ready-to-love-mark-gatiss/

    "I’d love to write a Bond film. It’s the one that’s eluded me. Me and Steven we both wanted to do Bond. I did From Russian With Love on radio!”


    Steven referred to is Moffat, the man who made Dr Who a success again.

    :^o
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.

    I disagree. It's very cinematic Bond, see OHMSS.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    SonofSean wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still just want to know who is writing the darn thing

    Hopefully not Logan, although he did seem to come in tow with Mendes. From what I read about Spectre it took Jez Buttrworth and an embarrassing climb down to reproach to Neal Purvis and Robert Wade to fix the holes and add some humour to Logan's script. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I would give the gig to Mark Gatiss. A self proclaimed super fan his writing on Sherlock and guest writing on Dr Who went down well. he is a really creative guy and I think he could nail a classic adventure.

    Mark Gatiss? Oh yeah! Excellent choice. Does wonderful work on Sherlock and Doctor Who. Great novelist to boot and a life-long Bond afficionado. The only issue is that EON keep things very much "in house" (if that's a term). What I mean is that they prefer someone who will do go to script meetings and write down what they're told to (ahem, Purvis and Wade). It's very much by committee and, alas (such as what happened with Spectre), by the numbers. Heck, even Daniel Craig had a crack at writing QOS!

    Mark Gatiss has publicly said he would never write a Bond film, sorry, he wants to experience them as a fan rather than write them.

    DC wrote stuff for QoS in extenuating circumstances, it was by accident rather than by design.

    Well this is awkward, please read Interview Nov 11, 2015

    http://www.tor.com/2015/11/11/get-ready-to-love-mark-gatiss/

    "I’d love to write a Bond film. It’s the one that’s eluded me. Me and Steven we both wanted to do Bond. I did From Russian With Love on radio!”


    :^o

    Not all, he's changed his mind since then, he's capricious like that.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.

    I disagree. It's very cinematic Bond, see OHMSS.
    Which part of OHMSS would you like me to see?
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited November 2016 Posts: 2,138
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    SonofSean wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still just want to know who is writing the darn thing

    Hopefully not Logan, although he did seem to come in tow with Mendes. From what I read about Spectre it took Jez Buttrworth and an embarrassing climb down to reproach to Neal Purvis and Robert Wade to fix the holes and add some humour to Logan's script. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I would give the gig to Mark Gatiss. A self proclaimed super fan his writing on Sherlock and guest writing on Dr Who went down well. he is a really creative guy and I think he could nail a classic adventure.

    Mark Gatiss? Oh yeah! Excellent choice. Does wonderful work on Sherlock and Doctor Who. Great novelist to boot and a life-long Bond afficionado. The only issue is that EON keep things very much "in house" (if that's a term). What I mean is that they prefer someone who will do go to script meetings and write down what they're told to (ahem, Purvis and Wade). It's very much by committee and, alas (such as what happened with Spectre), by the numbers. Heck, even Daniel Craig had a crack at writing QOS!

    Mark Gatiss has publicly said he would never write a Bond film, sorry, he wants to experience them as a fan rather than write them.

    DC wrote stuff for QoS in extenuating circumstances, it was by accident rather than by design.

    Well this is awkward, please read Interview Nov 11, 2015

    http://www.tor.com/2015/11/11/get-ready-to-love-mark-gatiss/

    "I’d love to write a Bond film. It’s the one that’s eluded me. Me and Steven we both wanted to do Bond. I did From Russian With Love on radio!”


    :^o

    Not all, he's changed his mind since then, he's capricious like that.

    Aye, whatever =))

    If Eon called and offered it to him there is no way he would say no.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    SonofSean wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still just want to know who is writing the darn thing

    Hopefully not Logan, although he did seem to come in tow with Mendes. From what I read about Spectre it took Jez Buttrworth and an embarrassing climb down to reproach to Neal Purvis and Robert Wade to fix the holes and add some humour to Logan's script. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I would give the gig to Mark Gatiss. A self proclaimed super fan his writing on Sherlock and guest writing on Dr Who went down well. he is a really creative guy and I think he could nail a classic adventure.

    Mark Gatiss? Oh yeah! Excellent choice. Does wonderful work on Sherlock and Doctor Who. Great novelist to boot and a life-long Bond afficionado. The only issue is that EON keep things very much "in house" (if that's a term). What I mean is that they prefer someone who will do go to script meetings and write down what they're told to (ahem, Purvis and Wade). It's very much by committee and, alas (such as what happened with Spectre), by the numbers. Heck, even Daniel Craig had a crack at writing QOS!

    Mark Gatiss has publicly said he would never write a Bond film, sorry, he wants to experience them as a fan rather than write them.

    DC wrote stuff for QoS in extenuating circumstances, it was by accident rather than by design.

    Well this is awkward, please read Interview Nov 11, 2015

    http://www.tor.com/2015/11/11/get-ready-to-love-mark-gatiss/

    "I’d love to write a Bond film. It’s the one that’s eluded me. Me and Steven we both wanted to do Bond. I did From Russian With Love on radio!”


    :^o

    Not all, he's changed his mind since then, he's capricious like that.

    Aye, whatever =))

    Yeah, whatever, where ever, who ever, come on!
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.

    I disagree. It's very cinematic Bond, see OHMSS.
    Which part of OHMSS would you like me to see?

    The whole shebang.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.

    I disagree. It's very cinematic Bond, see OHMSS.
    Which part of OHMSS would you like me to see?

    The whole shebang.

    ;)
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.

    I disagree. It's very cinematic Bond, see OHMSS.
    Which part of OHMSS would you like me to see?

    The whole shebang.
    I don't see the connection... Or if you mean by Tracy's death... Other than burying his head in her veil, I didn't hear him whimpering or see him shedding a tear...
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.

    I disagree. It's very cinematic Bond, see OHMSS.
    Which part of OHMSS would you like me to see?

    The whole shebang.


    :-bd
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.

    I disagree. It's very cinematic Bond, see OHMSS.
    Which part of OHMSS would you like me to see?

    The whole shebang.
    I don't see the connection... Or if you mean by Tracy's death... Other than burying his head in her veil, I didn't hear him whimpering or see him shedding a tear...

    It's all in the film all 2hrs 22 mins, the whole mother of a shebang of a film.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?
  • Posts: 4,325
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.

    Me too, it's like Christmas. Maybe Bond is a cry baby in that one like he is in Skyfall? The Tragedian fool.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?
    You tell me.
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?
    You tell me.

    Sorry, you've lost me.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064757/

    If you missed that Bond film.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.

    Me too, it's like Christmas. Maybe Bond is a cry baby in that one like he is in Skyfall? The Tragedian fool.

    All joking aside, Lazenby was the best hand to hand combat actor to have played Bond, he a Bear in that film.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    Please, folks. Let's keep this one on topic.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?
    You tell me.

    Sorry, you've lost me.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064757/

    If you missed that Bond film.
    Nope. I've seen that "shebang of a film". Who banged who again?
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.

    Me too, it's like Christmas. Maybe Bond is a cry baby in that one like he is in Skyfall? The Tragedian fool.

    All joking aside, Lazenby was the best hand to hand combat actor to have played Bond, he a Bear in that film.

    Absolutely.
  • Posts: 4,325
    jake24 wrote: »
    Please, folks. Let's keep this one on topic.

    Yes, I agree, let's talk Bond 25, as we all agree that DC isn't the archetypcal screen Bond.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.

    Me too, it's like Christmas. Maybe Bond is a cry baby in that one like he is in Skyfall? The Tragedian fool.

    All joking aside, Lazenby was the best hand to hand combat actor to have played Bond, he a Bear in that film.

    Absolutely.
    Thirded.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.

    Me too, it's like Christmas. Maybe Bond is a cry baby in that one like he is in Skyfall? The Tragedian fool.

    All joking aside, Lazenby was the best hand to hand combat actor to have played Bond, he a Bear in that film.

    Absolutely.
    Thirded.

    But he was a bit of a tragedian hero too.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.

    Me too, it's like Christmas. Maybe Bond is a cry baby in that one like he is in Skyfall? The Tragedian fool.

    All joking aside, Lazenby was the best hand to hand combat actor to have played Bond, he a Bear in that film.

    Absolutely.
    Thirded.

    But he was a bit of a tragedian hero too.
    "Best hand to hand combat actor". That's what was said, and I agreed. Craig is right up there with him CQB-wise.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Now that brings me to the question... Are we talking about the same OHMSS?

    There's another one?

    Never been this excited.

    Me too, it's like Christmas. Maybe Bond is a cry baby in that one like he is in Skyfall? The Tragedian fool.

    All joking aside, Lazenby was the best hand to hand combat actor to have played Bond, he a Bear in that film.

    Absolutely.
    Thirded.

    But he was a bit of a tragedian hero too.
    "Best hand to hand combat actor". That's what was said, and I agreed. Craig is right up there with him CQB-wise.

    Absolutely, now back to Bond 25 ...
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.

    What is your point?
    In Skyfall he gave a very great acting performance. Very theatrical. But, the way he played it wasn't very Bond-like at times... Most of the times. It indeed seemed to me as if he was playing a different character. While in Spectre, he played Bond at his best. The cinematic Bond as we know him, hence the best Bond performance.

    @Devlin, have you read YOLT? I would say Craig's performance in SF as a wounded, pill-popping washed-up drunk goes very much hand in hand in how Fleming described Bond in mourning (after Tracy's death).
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited November 2016 Posts: 15,423
    peter wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.

    What is your point?
    In Skyfall he gave a very great acting performance. Very theatrical. But, the way he played it wasn't very Bond-like at times... Most of the times. It indeed seemed to me as if he was playing a different character. While in Spectre, he played Bond at his best. The cinematic Bond as we know him, hence the best Bond performance.

    @Devlin, have you read YOLT? I would say Craig's performance in SF as a wounded, pill-popping washed-up drunk goes very much hand in hand in how Fleming described Bond in mourning (after Tracy's death).
    I have. But, you might want to go back a few pages to see what I was referring to. ;)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    We need a lighter touch to direct. But also someone good at action, atmosphere, and suspense. A workman will do fine, but a highly competent and accomplished one who knows when to add an occasional creative flourish. Basically we need Martin Campbell, no substitutes.

    This is a perpetuating problem. Many fans and the producers are afraid to REALLY shake things up so they go back to the same tired well or extend their hands out, reaching for their safety blanket. Campbell is a mediocre director at best in general but he knows how to make incredible Bond movies; now is he the only one capable of doing this? Of course not; which is why it's sad to see a number of people still throwing his name around after all these years. God forbid he makes a subpar 3rd entry, the way his fans will turn on him will be swift and vicious. Move on. EoN need to ditch their creative team and bring in new talent, widen the pool and get people who are capable of doing the job.

    First of all, British and Commonwealth directors only in this day and age is a silly stipulation that needs to be irrevocably thrown out. Secondly, Purvis and Wade NEED to go. Let's get fresh eyes and perspectives of writers who've read and studied Fleming's work. Thirdly, be sensible with the budget. No one really gives a crap about the db10. It's not iconic and it was a rather wasteful resource to include in the movie considering the cost that went into making them and the terrible way it was utilised.

    In a nutshell, Bond needs impassioned people who can tell a great story that's gripping, dynamic and excellently made. Relying on past and aged talent reeks of uninspired and desperation. I don't give a damn how long the Bond series has been running for but the fact that we've only had 2 Bond films since 2010 and we're fast approaching 2020 which means at best by then we may have only 3 films in 10 years with a great leading man goes to show that the series needs to take its own advice as conveyed in Skyfall; this old dog needs to learn some new tricks. If EoN need to speak to, rub shoulders with or even flat out pilfer creative strategies from rival studio execs then so be it. By any means necessary. Things need to change for the better and that starts with the process for selecting writers and a director needing a serious revision.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited November 2016 Posts: 8,400
    Delete.
Sign In or Register to comment.