No Time To Die: Production Diary

16046056076096102507

Comments

  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    SP was their attempt at Bond formula. So I don't think they will repeat, but who knows with EON. If they do, it will likely go too far to the absurd.

    Well written, story driven movies are best. GE is not DN, FRWL, OHMSS, CR, etc. GE is a carbon copy of Bond and other action movies. If you're going to pine for things, I would pick the best.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    They need to make another film in the vein of Goldeneye. GE is the last truly good movie & "Bond" movie put together. CR was just a good film, not a good cinematic Bond film.
    I agree, if you mean 'formula Bond film'. I've always said that I believe GE was the last great 'formula' Bond film. There was a hint of the personal, yes, but it didn't overwhelm the narrative.

    The standard elements that make a Bond film great were all present and nicely executed with some modern touches. I don't think it's a coincidence that this was the last film made while Cubby was still with us.

    It's the latest EON film that I can watch in that same carefree way in which I enjoy the earlier classics. I agree that it's time for another one of these. We're long overdue.

    Yes, I get that feeling too, but I feel like they should not go back on what we have seen in the Craig era, in terms of that extra realism, either. There is no reason why they should be mutually exclusive. They did the fun adventure Bond with Goldeneye, they did the more realistic portrayal with Casino. The next natural step, the third point on the triangle if you will, is to see what happens when those two sides are combined into one.
    Some think that was achieved with SP. I'm afraid I disagree completely.

    The possible issue with trying to combine it is that one ends up with a mess tonally. It takes a deft touch to pull it off properly.

    I agree though, that would be a nice thing to see.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    Okay guys now something more controversial
    I am firmly against a black bond , woman Bond any of that
    I'm a minority but I don't give a shit I want my bond to be pure British white man none of this liberal media crap

    Agreed :-bd
  • Posts: 16,169
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    :)) Then Barbara Broccoli calls in to the line and yells out "Horseshit!"
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126

    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    I would throw a party so hard if that happened I think everyone would \m/ B-) <:-P :-bd =))
  • edited February 2017 Posts: 6,844
    A little more realistically, he'll say: "We're looking to get things going on the next Bond sometime in the next few years, and as I've mentioned we'll be looking at releasing a new one every 3-4 years after that. Until the next financial/ownership hullabaloo, where you can expect occasional 6-10 year gaps. Exciting times ahead for James Bond fans!"
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    :)) Then Barbara Broccoli calls in to the line and yells out "Horseshit!"

    I'm upset with those two I feel like their out of ideas and don't care for the franchise anymore so much so that a 2 year cycle will never happen under them I almost want them to sell the rights
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    The cycle that ended in 1999?
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,138
    RC7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    The cycle that ended in 1999?

    But it ushered in longer wait times between films. Giving us just five Bond films from 1999 - present. Was this to flesh out the stories, create better scripts...or because the film industry just got a whole lot harder to produce films.
    The two year cycle up to 1999 had given us 8 Bond films in the same 18 year time frame. So have we missed out on 3 Bond films?
    Reading these pages, and I'd include myself to some degree, but there are fans who would like to see a return to the old 'formula' Bond film on a 2 year cycle. Could it be done however. And how did they do it for all them years, yet struggle to now.

  • edited February 2017 Posts: 4,325
    Benny wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    The cycle that ended in 1999?

    But it ushered in longer wait times between films. Giving us just five Bond films from 1999 - present. Was this to flesh out the stories, create better scripts...or because the film industry just got a whole lot harder to produce films.
    The two year cycle up to 1999 had given us 8 Bond films in the same 18 year time frame. So have we missed out on 3 Bond films?
    Reading these pages, and I'd include myself to some degree, but there are fans who would like to see a return to the old 'formula' Bond film on a 2 year cycle. Could it be done however. And how did they do it for all them years, yet struggle to now.

    This is true but there have been extenuating circumstances during the Craig era. Originally QoS was to come out in May 2008 (they were starting on the script whilst CR was in production), less than 2 years after CR but the director they wanted decided he couldn't go through with it. Skyfall was originally going to come out in 2011 (admitedly now a 3 year gap) but came out in 2012 due to MGM - the first Hobbit film also was supposed to come out in 2011 rather than 2012. Spectre was planned for 2014 (back to a 2 year gap) but they waited for Mendes to be available.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Benny wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    The cycle that ended in 1999?

    But it ushered in longer wait times between films. Giving us just five Bond films from 1999 - present. Was this to flesh out the stories, create better scripts...or because the film industry just got a whole lot harder to produce films.
    The two year cycle up to 1999 had given us 8 Bond films in the same 18 year time frame. So have we missed out on 3 Bond films?
    Reading these pages, and I'd include myself to some degree, but there are fans who would like to see a return to the old 'formula' Bond film on a 2 year cycle. Could it be done however. And how did they do it for all them years, yet struggle to now.

    To miss out on 3 Bond film chances is woeful.
    I also pray for the 2 year cycle but maybe Babs and MGW need to go before that will happen.
    Maybe this area needs freshening up and a new change applied.

  • Posts: 2,107
    The good thing about this is that my dvd/bluray shelf won't get too full, when they're not releasing these films every two year.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    The cycle that ended in 1999?

    But it ushered in longer wait times between films. Giving us just five Bond films from 1999 - present. Was this to flesh out the stories, create better scripts...or because the film industry just got a whole lot harder to produce films.
    The two year cycle up to 1999 had given us 8 Bond films in the same 18 year time frame. So have we missed out on 3 Bond films?
    Reading these pages, and I'd include myself to some degree, but there are fans who would like to see a return to the old 'formula' Bond film on a 2 year cycle. Could it be done however. And how did they do it for all them years, yet struggle to now.

    To miss out on 3 Bond film chances is woeful.
    I also pray for the 2 year cycle but maybe Babs and MGW need to go before that will happen.
    Maybe this area needs freshening up and a new change applied.
    I'm all for the two year cycle (I can live with three if it must be, but no more). If this is what must be done to get us back on track, then so be it.

    Having said that, their track record of late with the four+ year gap (CR, SF, GE) is far superior to anything they've been able to pull off on the three year gap (DAD, SP), or the two year gap (QoS, TND, TWINE), which is quite sad really.
  • Posts: 16,169
    Benny wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    The cycle that ended in 1999?

    But it ushered in longer wait times between films. Giving us just five Bond films from 1999 - present. Was this to flesh out the stories, create better scripts...or because the film industry just got a whole lot harder to produce films.
    The two year cycle up to 1999 had given us 8 Bond films in the same 18 year time frame. So have we missed out on 3 Bond films?
    Reading these pages, and I'd include myself to some degree, but there are fans who would like to see a return to the old 'formula' Bond film on a 2 year cycle. Could it be done however. And how did they do it for all them years, yet struggle to now.
    Since LTK, the series' productivity has been cut in half. Granted, the six year gap was pretty much out of Cubby's hands, but the current gaps really seem to be a a choice Eon makes. The 4 years between QoS and SF were due no doubt to the bankruptcy situation, but I really believe Eon could have, after DAD produced a Bond film in between that and CR.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Yep, Brosnan's fifth and final.
  • Posts: 16,169
    I'd be okay with a two and a half year gap let an occasional Bond come out in the summer as they did when I was a kid.
    Now we're averaging three films per decade (if we're lucky), when it used to be five to six. It's not like we're getting any younger. For me it's kind of sad to think that by the time I get to Roger's AVTAK age, there will probably be only a small handful of Bond films released when really there could be at least seven more.
  • edited February 2017 Posts: 11,425
    Benny wrote: »
    Personally I feel TLD is where the formula ended. LTK is revenge based. Then from GE onwards they started looking deeper and deeper into Bond. Peeling back the skin if you will. Paris, a woman he loved. The shoulder injury and Elektra in TWINE. Being detained and a suspect briefly in DAD.
    Those films didn't follow the old formula.

    Totally agree that TLD is the last of the old school Bonds.

    LTK marks the start of that break from the past (although still has a lot of the old elements).

    I sincerely believe that Richard Maibaum played a central role in ensuring the two year cycle was kept to, while still ensuring quality stories and scripts.

    What EON lacks is a quality, reliable writing team who can enable them to bang these films out at the required standard.

    Yes they did two a year from 95 to 99, but the quality was (IMO) abysmal.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Yep, Brosnan's fifth and final.

    He definitely had a 5th film in him,and I think he would have been fine making one more,and deserved a better send off.

  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    barryt007 wrote: »
    He definitely had a 5th film in him,and I think he would have been fine making one more,and deserved a better send off.
    Yes, for sure! He was a great Bond and he did not deserve ending on such a low point. While actually that's the second half of the film - the first is pretty decent actually. However, he would've been good for at least one more film.
  • Posts: 1,970
    Brosnan for sure had a 5th film in him. Not only did he want it but the fans waned him for 1 more Bond as well. The only people who didn't want it was Babs and MGW.

    I do wonder if Cubby was still running things in 2002-2004 would Brosnan 5th film be made?

    I feel if the fans wanted it Cubby would of gave it to them.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    It's about quality, not frequency. Or maybe it isn't for some people - spoon feed me every two years and I'm done.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    I much prefer QOS to SP, DAD and GE and I much prefer TWINE or TND to DAD. The question is whether they're willing to work harder for a better product. Wanting a new bond film every 2 years does not mean you want to be spoon fed crap.
  • I agree, they've put out significantly better films on their 2 year gaps than on their 3 year gaps. It can be done.
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Brosnan for sure had a 5th film in him. Not only did he want it but the fans waned him for 1 more Bond as well. The only people who didn't want it was Babs and MGW.

    I do wonder if Cubby was still running things in 2002-2004 would Brosnan 5th film be made?

    I feel if the fans wanted it Cubby would of gave it to them.

    Absolutely Cubby would have given Brosnan a 5th. Guaranteed success? Popular with the audiences? No question. This is the guy who asked Roger back until he was nearly 60 and who wanted to sign Dalton up through the 90s despite the unusually long gap following LTK.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Hopefully we will soon get some news; things around here are really slooooowing down.

    Yes, we need something concrete soon. Anyone know when that Barber thing is? When specifically?

    It will be in March, but I don't have the precise date. Last year it was around March 24.

    MGM will report fourth-quarter and year-end financial results and have a conference call with analysts and investors. It was during the March 2016 conference call that Barber said Bond movies would come out on a three- to four-year cycle.
    It will be interesting to see what he says this time

    I'd love him to say: " we expect the Bond movies to return to their traditional 2 year cycle beginning with B25 due out in November 2018."

    The cycle that ended in 1999?

    But it ushered in longer wait times between films. Giving us just five Bond films from 1999 - present. Was this to flesh out the stories, create better scripts...or because the film industry just got a whole lot harder to produce films.
    The two year cycle up to 1999 had given us 8 Bond films in the same 18 year time frame. So have we missed out on 3 Bond films?
    Reading these pages, and I'd include myself to some degree, but there are fans who would like to see a return to the old 'formula' Bond film on a 2 year cycle. Could it be done however. And how did they do it for all them years, yet struggle to now.

    To miss out on 3 Bond film chances is woeful.
    I also pray for the 2 year cycle but maybe Babs and MGW need to go before that will happen.
    Maybe this area needs freshening up and a new change applied.
    I'm all for the two year cycle (I can live with three if it must be, but no more). If this is what must be done to get us back on track, then so be it.

    Having said that, their track record of late with the four+ year gap (CR, SF, GE) is far superior to anything they've been able to pull off on the three year gap (DAD, SP), or the two year gap (QoS, TND, TWINE), which is quite sad really.

    1,2,3,4,5 years-it really doesn t matter when it comes to quality as has been proven.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    It's about quality, not frequency. Or maybe it isn't for some people - spoon feed me every two years and I'm done.

    Yeah, remember those completely rubbish Bonds FRWL, GF, and TB they rushed out in a single year? I hope we never see Bond films of that quality again!
  • RC7RC7
    edited February 2017 Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    It's about quality, not frequency. Or maybe it isn't for some people - spoon feed me every two years and I'm done.

    Yeah, remember those completely rubbish Bonds FRWL, GF, and TB they rushed out in a single year? I hope we never see Bond films of that quality again!

    You mean those films in the 60s? When Bond became and remained the only phenomenon?

    Whether you like it or not cinema has changed, dramatically. Production, marketing, distribution... Yes, obviously they could release a film every two years, but competition is fierce - release a middling dud and you're fucked. You can harp on until the cows come home about SP being shite, but it pulled in big numbers, sold a bucket load on disc and can still be purchased from any random supermarket 14 months down the line.

    The goal posts have moved. Right now they're about keeping Bond's head above the parapet. Whether you, I, or anyone else agree with that model is moot, it's what they feel they have to do to keep Bond front and centre at this moment in time.

    It's not as simple as saying 'I want, I want' and I can't be arsed to go into the minutiae of 'why', because a little thought leads you to the answer.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    It's about quality, not frequency. Or maybe it isn't for some people - spoon feed me every two years and I'm done.

    Yeah, remember those completely rubbish Bonds FRWL, GF, and TB they rushed out in a single year? I hope we never see Bond films of that quality again!

    You mean those films in the 60s? When Bond became and remained the only phenomenon?

    Whether you like it or not cinema has changed, dramatically. Production, marketing, distribution... Yes, obviously they could release a film every two years, but competition is fierce - release a middling dud and you're fucked. You can harp on until the cows come home about SP being shite, but it pulled in big numbers, sold a bucket load on disc and can still be purchased from any random supermarket 14 months down the line.

    The goal posts have moved. Right now they're about keeping Bond's head above the parapet. Whether you, I, or anyone else agree with that model is moot, it's what they feel they have to do to keep Bond front and centre at this moment in time.

    It's not as simple as saying 'I want, I want' and I can't be arsed to go into the minutiae of 'why', because a little thought leads you to the answer.

    Which is a completely different argument from it being all about quality. But okay, if it's all about money-making, I'd say the Bond films have always made good money (though Dalton's made a little less and that wasn't a frequency issue). The Star Wars films and Marvel films are being cranked out one a year now. Are they suffering at the box-office? Personally, I'm less concerned about how many zeros Spectre's take has behind it and more about the actual quality of the film. Quality Bond films can be released every two years and still make good money. Furthermore, I'd suggest the longer they keep Bond out of the public consciousness, the more difficult it will be for them to compete. But as you say it's all moot and neither you and I nor anyone else here can tell the producers what to do. Why are you so adamant though that the producers are deliberately releasing the Bond films on the timeframes that they have been for, I guess, market optimization purposes? From the look of it, their production schedules over the last few films have been dictated almost entirely by matters of out of their hands—things like strikes and cast and crew availaibility.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I have decided to start exercicising now. Once every four years for max effect.
Sign In or Register to comment.