No Time To Die: Production Diary

15605615635655662507

Comments

  • edited January 2017 Posts: 6,844
    Well, that's a bit like Samuel L. Jackson saying Quentin Tarantino should direct Bond or Jason Schwartzman saying Wes Anderson should direct a Bond, haha. But the interviewer clearly leads Hardy into it, asking wouldn't it be cool if Chris Nolan directed you as Bond?

    I could actually envision a world where Tom Hardy plays Bond. He's got the rough and the smooth down probably better than anyone, and there are far, far worse candidates out there. At 39, he's in a good position age-wise whether Craig does one more or not. Let's just say, I would not say no to Nolan directing Hardy as Bond for 25 or 26.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    No to either of them honestly. Mendes was already Nolan lite.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited January 2017 Posts: 4,116
    Even if Hardy doesn't meet the height requirements he has the acting ability and far more charisma than most of the names mentioned.

    I don't think Nolan would copy Mendes copying Nolan. Nolan might surprise if given the chance.

    A Nolan/Hardy bill would certainly get the general audience back enthusiastic in my opinion. They might be willing to get back in the cinema after being burned by SP.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Neither of them do it for me. I want another Craig and Campbell picture.
  • talos7 wrote: »

    The Daily Beast interviewed Hardy. Screenrant summarized the Daily Beast interview.

    Here's the URL for the Daily Beast interview.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/15/tom-hardy-on-bond-rumors-and-the-mad-max-fury-road-sequel-s.html
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    I realize that Screenrant that was presenting a summary or the original interview. Thank you for providing the link for those who want to read the full transcript.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited January 2017 Posts: 4,520
    Bond can't do his work alone any more. This should be made more clear with bring back Felix and the guy from QOS (aka Mi6 boss) This should bring M and Moneypenny doing a step back. With Bond of course will try, but he will fail. Shame Denbirgh not turn in to trater like that. There should bring in now somebody the hard way. Tanner should be fired or better he wil be gone for a whyle. Feel more quilty and then opens his eyes.
  • Posts: 9,847
    A few things


    Could they create a Bond universe similar to Marvel etc yes and they could do it in different ways

    For Example
    KEEP THE FOCUS ON BOND

    I know what your saying how can we build a film verse but keep it on bond while I never read the young bond series a lot of people claim how good it was they could in theory do a film series based on those books (keeping it in the 90's) as well as a series of Military Bond books and the official series could continue as normal so let say starting in 2018 we could have

    2018 Bond 25
    2019 Silverfin
    2020 Miltary James bond film (with a british actor in their 20's)
    2021 Bond 26

    etc with different directors and writers on the other bond projects

    OR various sub characters getting their own film

    While we joke about a Romcom featuring May bond' maid hear me out
    Mallory is a really interesting character
    Siliva also an interesting character
    Moneypenny is now an interesting character

    Now obviously all these are at best 2 film shots (sorry now matter how interesting young Mallory was I can't see audience connecting with him for more then 2 films)

    so it would be
    2018 Bond 25
    2019 Mallory Part 1
    2020 Siliva Part 1
    2021 Bond 26
    2022 Moneypenny
    2023 Silva part 2
    2024 Bond 27
    2025 Mallory Part 2

    but beyond all that I would gladly wait till 2019 if it meant a Nolan Hardy team up.. (hey I love craig as much as the next person but Hardy is dream casting for me so...)
  • Posts: 11,119
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    If they're going to keep Tanner around for the future, they really need to give him something better to do. His only purpose lately is to reiterate information we already know, or give us irrelevant dialogue that unnecessarily pokes more holes in the story and with what's going on.

    I'd enjoy a return of Bond flirting with MP in the office, meeting up with M and any higher-ups in his office, and then jumping right to Q's workshop to get his weapons and gadgets, before embarking on his mission (where we may not see the rest of the team at MI6 until the ending of the movie).

    I think it would be a good idea to skip Tanner for Bond #25 and instead let Felix Leiter return.
  • I must also confess to finding it rather unusual that Bond hasn’t dominated the news cycles…What are EON doing? I imagine they wanted a breather after making SP (we know it had a rocky production; also I imagine making one of the most expensive films of all time must be very arduous).

    But they have been sitting idly on a very valuable piece of IP for far too long. If you wait around even for a year, there is a chance that casual fans and potential new audience members will be distracted by something else.

    I don’t think that making a series of Marvel spin-offs is the right action for Bond. Marvel have a trove of characters to pick from; EON have one: Bond. If there was a spin-off every year it would saturate the brand and stop the films from being “events”. There is zero appetite outside the hard-core fans for movies like “Blofeld Begins” or “The Moneypenny Diaries”. It’s one of the reasons both a Jinx and Wai Lin film never happened. What’s the point?

    When Bond arrives it gets the golden treatment – at least in London. Here we get a royal premiere at the Albert Hall and the marketing makes the film feel significant. Essentially unmissable (Not dissimilar to the buzz surrounding the Force Awakens last year). I can’t imagine a Blofeld movie would have the same allure.

    If Bond was to release a Moneypenny spin-off, etc, these films would struggle to cross $300-500 million and the returns of the actual Bond films would drop in turn. As audiences turn off from the brand.

    Trends and fads come and go – but Bond has endured nearly 60 years following the model they have used. There is no need to go down the “cinematic universe” route.

    Also…………I have to admit the prospect of Christopher Nolan directing Tom Hardy as Bond is too good! Though I’m a little conscious that Mendes did a Nolan impression during his stint. Maybe it’s time to get the real deal or do something a little different (Nicholas Winding Refn, anyone?)
    FFN_FlyUK_Groucho_Club_011416_51947877.jpg


  • Posts: 4,325
    Think Tom Hardy would make an excellent Bond - really enjoying watching him in Taboo at the moment. Like Craig, I think he could take the character to new and interesting places.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I still can't see him as Bond. He's a brilliant actor, sure. And he's tough and masculine and whatnot. But, he still doesn't look the part. He did his secret agent act in the abominable This Means War alongside the ever-flamboyant Chris Pine. He still doesn't seem like Bond to me. Neither he did in Inception that's overtly praised here.
  • Posts: 16,169
    I wouldn't care for any type of Bond spin-off whether it be a Mallory, Q, Tanner, Moneypenny, or Jinx. Hell, why not throw Jack Wade or Sheriff Pepper in while we're at it?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    They tested the idea previously. They didn't succeed. So, that Jinx script is pretty much locked away in a safe deep under the grounds of EON's. A Bond spinoff won't happen.
  • edited January 2017 Posts: 4,325
    They tested the idea previously. They didn't succeed. So, that Jinx script is pretty much locked away in a safe deep under the grounds of EON's. A Bond spinoff won't happen.

    Caisno Royale used some ideas from the Jinx script. MGW and BB were furious when MGM cancelled the project.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Risico007 wrote: »
    A few things


    Could they create a Bond universe similar to Marvel etc yes and they could do it in different ways

    For Example
    KEEP THE FOCUS ON BOND

    I know what your saying how can we build a film verse but keep it on bond while I never read the young bond series a lot of people claim how good it was they could in theory do a film series based on those books (keeping it in the 90's) as well as a series of Military Bond books and the official series could continue as normal so let say starting in 2018 we could have

    2018 Bond 25
    2019 Silverfin
    2020 Miltary James bond film (with a british actor in their 20's)
    2021 Bond 26

    etc with different directors and writers on the other bond projects

    OR various sub characters getting their own film

    While we joke about a Romcom featuring May bond' maid hear me out
    Mallory is a really interesting character
    Siliva also an interesting character
    Moneypenny is now an interesting character

    Now obviously all these are at best 2 film shots (sorry now matter how interesting young Mallory was I can't see audience connecting with him for more then 2 films)

    so it would be
    2018 Bond 25
    2019 Mallory Part 1
    2020 Siliva Part 1
    2021 Bond 26
    2022 Moneypenny
    2023 Silva part 2
    2024 Bond 27
    2025 Mallory Part 2

    but beyond all that I would gladly wait till 2019 if it meant a Nolan Hardy team up.. (hey I love craig as much as the next person but Hardy is dream casting for me so...)

    What are you talking about?
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,541
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    They tested the idea previously. They didn't succeed. So, that Jinx script is pretty much locked away in a safe deep under the grounds of EON's. A Bond spinoff won't happen.

    Caisno Royale used some ideas from the Jinx script. MGW and BB were furious when MGM cancelled the project.
    Which ideas?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    They tested the idea previously. They didn't succeed. So, that Jinx script is pretty much locked away in a safe deep under the grounds of EON's. A Bond spinoff won't happen.

    Caisno Royale used some ideas from the Jinx script. MGW and BB were furious when MGM cancelled the project.
    That'd be the parkour scenes, I gather?

    Then, it's that kind of detour that led them to reboot the series with a new actor later on.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited January 2017 Posts: 40,976
    ggl007 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    They tested the idea previously. They didn't succeed. So, that Jinx script is pretty much locked away in a safe deep under the grounds of EON's. A Bond spinoff won't happen.

    Caisno Royale used some ideas from the Jinx script. MGW and BB were furious when MGM cancelled the project.
    Which ideas?

    I was wondering the same thing, myself. CR is fantastic, so surely the ideas from 'Jinx' were better suited in that than a Jinx spinoff nobody would be lining up to see.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I'm all for Nolan as the next Bond director. I'm ambivalent about Hardy however. He's an exceptional actor, but I'd prefer someone with a more polished look next time out, to serve as a more clear contrast to predecessor Craig.
  • talos7 wrote: »
    I realize that Screenrant that was presenting a summary or the original interview. Thank you for providing the link for those who want to read the full transcript.

    I hope I didn't make it sound like I was criticizing. I saw the Screenrant story first (via Twitter). I just try to find the original if possible.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited January 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Nolan would make the most depressing Bond film, as would Joss Whedon.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I must also confess to finding it rather unusual that Bond hasn’t dominated the news cycles…What are EON doing? I imagine they wanted a breather after making SP (we know it had a rocky production; also I imagine making one of the most expensive films of all time must be very arduous).

    But they have been sitting idly on a very valuable piece of IP for far too long. If you wait around even for a year, there is a chance that casual fans and potential new audience members will be distracted by something else.

    I don’t think that making a series of Marvel spin-offs is the right action for Bond. Marvel have a trove of characters to pick from; EON have one: Bond. If there was a spin-off every year it would saturate the brand and stop the films from being “events”. There is zero appetite outside the hard-core fans for movies like “Blofeld Begins” or “The Moneypenny Diaries”. It’s one of the reasons both a Jinx and Wai Lin film never happened. What’s the point?

    When Bond arrives it gets the golden treatment – at least in London. Here we get a royal premiere at the Albert Hall and the marketing makes the film feel significant. Essentially unmissable (Not dissimilar to the buzz surrounding the Force Awakens last year). I can’t imagine a Blofeld movie would have the same allure.

    If Bond was to release a Moneypenny spin-off, etc, these films would struggle to cross $300-500 million and the returns of the actual Bond films would drop in turn. As audiences turn off from the brand.

    Trends and fads come and go – but Bond has endured nearly 60 years following the model they have used. There is no need to go down the “cinematic universe” route.

    Also…………I have to admit the prospect of Christopher Nolan directing Tom Hardy as Bond is too good! Though I’m a little conscious that Mendes did a Nolan impression during his stint. Maybe it’s time to get the real deal or do something a little different (Nicholas Winding Refn, anyone?)
    FFN_FlyUK_Groucho_Club_011416_51947877.jpg


    I 100% agree with this.

    Some people aren't thinking clearly. Marvel Studios' main task was to establish a cinematic universe because the characters are there to be utilised. The principle of it makes sense and fundamentally works and they've managed to execute it incredibly well. Now, just because it works for them it doesn't mean it works for Bond. There is no Bond "universe" as such because everything revolves around him; this one character. As much as Felix may have his fans, no one gives a shit about Felix, M, Q, MP or anyone else other than Bond to create separate franchises on. It's not a profitable strategy for EoN and Bond IS the sole attraction. I have no idea what @Risico was talking about with all those spin offs but that's just not going to happen.

    Whatever the case, when things really pick up for Bond 25 I hope the film can at least deliver on the hype like how it used to be. Bond should never ever be lacklustre especially in this day and age.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I'm not rooting for a spinoff as my posts above state, but the "nobody gives a shit about Felix" is a bit too far from the truth. There's a comic book that's already experimenting that and so far it's gotten very positive reviews, so you never know.

    But, as for M, Q and Moneypenny? I've nothing to disagree with them not being given a toss about. Because they are nothing but tools and instruments to move the plot. Nothing beyond that.
  • My understanding is that the Jinx script was generally accepted as rather good. No one was more frustrated with DAD than EON and they didn’t want to jump in and make another spectacle-laden Bond film.

    Whilst Jinx was a total flop of a character in DAD, the plan was to reinvent her majorly. The Jinx project was essentially EON’s attempt at making a smaller budgeted more gritty and realistic spy thriller.

    The plot would have followed Jinx, who was merely an analyst for the NSA. She later gets embroiled in a plot which forces her into the field. Stephen Frears wanted to direct (apparently he wanted to work with Halle Berry badly) and Javier Bardem was sought to play the villain (this was probably the role he was talking about being offered on the Skyfall press tour).

    The general tone and feel of the Jinx script was adopted in CR. I don’t know if actual scenes or moments were directly lifted, but the scripts share the same tone. Even if you watch the CR making-of documentary, Barbara admits that the Jinx script gave her confidence to make CR.

    It’s VERY VERY HARD to be convinced that a Jinx film could actually be good. But the evidence is that the script was impressive.

    Loads of info on it can be found in Matthew Field and Ajay Chowdhury’s book.
    Nolan has clearly been inspired by Bond throughout his career. The only problem is whether he’d want to inherent the series in its current state. Interestingly, Baz wrote that he was in loose talks to direct Bond 24 before Mendes jumped back.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2325894/Dark-Knight-rise-James-Bond-Christopher-Nolan-approached-direct-007-film.html

    If Bond was to go to Warner Bros, maybe it could be a concerted effort to get him to stay and do his 007 film. Nolan would be a fool to turn down the chance to work with Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw and Naomie Harris just because he didn’t cast them. All fantastic actors.

    I doubt he'd do his own trilogy - maybe a one-off?

    nolan-bond.jpg
    Dream Team?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    If it's Nolan, I'd want a new Bond actor and a completely new Nolan picked cast. Let him control his creative vision from start to finish. It will be killer imho.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I'm not rooting for a spinoff as my posts above state, but the "nobody gives a shit about Felix" is a bit too far from the truth. There's a comic book that's already experimenting that and so far it's gotten very positive reviews, so you never know.

    But, as for M, Q and Moneypenny? I've nothing to disagree with them not being given a toss about. Because they are nothing but tools and instruments to move the plot. Nothing beyond that.

    The thing is, a Felix comic getting good reviews isn't an indicator that it can be turned into a successful movie franchise. The 2 mediums are very different and Felix' pop culture status outisde of Bond fans is essentially non existent. There's no adequate audience for such a vehicle.

    What could such a film offer that makes it stand out from every other CIA-centric movie out there? I don't think Bond will show up to cameo as that would diminish the character. The only way I see a Felix movie working is if it has a budget under $20million and released on Amazon or Netflix. It certainly doesnt warrent a theatrical release and even then, is it really worth EoN's time? Such a resource should be dedicated to Bond only; as he's the profitable IP and who audiences want to see. As things are we barely get Bond as we'd like and to delay that further in favour of a side character is far from agreeable.

    Bourne tried to establish an Aaron Cross franchise, it failed. Brosnan himself tried to turn the positively-reviewed november man novels into a franchise, did one movie and the prospect of an intended franchise is now dead. The way I see it, a Felix franchise from a business perspective is a waste of time but hey, if 2016 taught us anything, it's that stranger things have happened and I could be entirely wrong.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    It'd be like watching Jean-Luc Godard directing a La Nouvelle Vague film if Nolan gets it. We wouldn't want the Bond series to be dragged down to that joint furthermore do we?
  • Posts: 4,325
    Denis Villeneuve for me.
Sign In or Register to comment.