No Time To Die: Production Diary

16986997017037042507

Comments

  • Posts: 9,848
    interesting so it seems that post bond 25 will be another 3-5 year wait... sigh better start looking at 30 year old actors as anyone else will be too old for bond 26 (assuming Craig comes back for bond 25)
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    One film deal is the worst news possible.
    A lose-lose situation for Bond fans.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    One film deal is the worst news possible.
    A lose-lose situation for Bond fans.

    Not so sure, I see it as a suck it and see. Rather than go in to a new long term partnership where too many Chef's stick their spoons in. Or face a similar studio issue to the late 80's stopping the films being made because a company is financial hardship.

    Smart move for me.
  • edited April 2017 Posts: 5,767
    Was posted already, I think on the last page ;-).




    One film deal is the worst news possible.
    A lose-lose situation for Bond fans.
    Think about it: 3-5 years in between films will force the filmmakers to put out serious quality, so that audiences will still remember the films after such a long hiatus. And if they want, they still can explore personal stuff, revisiting the character after a number of years.

    The only thing I wonder about is if they won´t switch to re-casting Bond if so much time passes until the next film?

  • Posts: 1,970
    boldfinger wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    Thanks for the news, @007Blofeld.
    "MGM and Eon are only offering a one-film contract"
    That would at least mean that I don´t need to worry anymore about the Bond franchise trying to mimmick the interweaving of films as Marvel do. With years of waiting for the next distributor in between films, the Bond films will be forced to be convincing standalone films. I appreciate that.

    If they are only doing a 1 film deal for Bond 25 than I think it's safe to say Craig will becoming back.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I don't think this one-film deal is setting in stone a new modus operandi for EON & MGM. They are taking Bond 25 (pointing to be Craig's last), and are seemingly using it and the one-time deal to get it done and wrapped, capping off the era with a final chapter.

    That doesn't mean all the films after will be individually distributed with new deals happening between each subsequent film. EON & MGM may find another longer term partner when Bond #7 is found, but for now they simply want to get Bond 25 done, then likely take a lot of time to sort themselves and plan Bond's future as they had to for Craig. It'll be a helluva process casting a new Bond, finding a new vision for the fresh era and planning where the films could go and what kinds of modern concerns and villains they want to deal with, in addition to get a fresher creative team on (I think P&W will end their Bond careers with #25). I believe post-Bond 25 could be the real wait, but it's a break that'll need to happen as EON will be taking another big step in a new direction that will likely build itself as a thing separate from Craig's run, very much its own beast. They will be planning Bond's future for another possible decade or more, and so they must understandably be sure of the moves they make.
  • Posts: 2,483
    I don't think they were saying they're out of ideas, just that when a cartoon is president, you wonder how a movie character came into real life and got the most powerful position in the world. There's an understandable worry that audiences won't appreciate a fictional adventure when so much of the world is already playing out like a badly written reality TV show. The lines between what can happen in movies and in real life has warped in all the worst ways, and P&W have spotted this.

    I wonder if Maibaum would've been fried at the stake for saying something similar at this time, or during Nixon's day?

    Trump is a "cartoon" only to those who oppose him for ideological reasons. Hence, the opposititionists confuse their own inane ideology with the reality of the president. And fools such as that have no business writing Bond scripts.
  • edited April 2017 Posts: 2,483
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    That's all a subjective matter depending on which side of the fence you are. Others don't have that opinion. No, I'm not getting political here nor trying to spark an argument. That also said, I'm not Trump's biggest fan. But, this has been globally accepted and things are witnessing transition all over the world, with Brexit next in line to that.

    Until someone is recognized as a villain by both sides, and both sides insistently, this figure either side speaks of, whether it's the liberals who allegedly complain how much of fascists conservatives are or the conservatives horrendously antagonizing the liberals by calling them delusionals, shouldn't be touched. Otherwise, you're just declaring war. And that's not what a Bond film should be about. Should it?

    If Bond is partisan, it should at least be in ways that are true from the books. Like being a nationalist, chauvinist, etc.
    Sounds like someone we all know (and some love to hate). He likes the women too. That's the irony of it all.

    Seriously, if they want to ensure the film's longevity with the public over time they should stay away from reality. The world is too political and polarized these days anyway, and I don't want Bond wading into this.

    These idiots should just make sure they give us a villain for the ages (irrespective of current affairs). They should go watch Die Hard or something and hopefully Rickman inspires them.

    I've always found that Bond is kind of an eternal figure anyway. Sex, alcohol, quips, guns, gambling etc. These are all pretty non-era specific elements, no?
    Yes, but we are in an age where folks make hay over some of these characteristics for political and opportunistic purposes. The PC thought police are everywhere telling us which way to pee. I'm frankly sick of it, and it's probably Bond's most formidable enemy yet. It's a miracle that he has been able to survive, although many of the attributes I love so much about the character aren't palatable to the masses any more. Bond's quip in MR for instance still gets a smile out of me. Not because he's right, but because it tells me something about Bond. He comes around once Holly proves herself.

    Spot on. If Perverse and Weird simply must go political, let them limn the follies and perils of political correctness, a far greater threat to western civilization than any president--even Obama!--or premier.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I don't think they were saying they're out of ideas, just that when a cartoon is president, you wonder how a movie character came into real life and got the most powerful position in the world. There's an understandable worry that audiences won't appreciate a fictional adventure when so much of the world is already playing out like a badly written reality TV show. The lines between what can happen in movies and in real life has warped in all the worst ways, and P&W have spotted this.

    I wonder if Maibaum would've been fried at the stake for saying something similar at this time, or during Nixon's day?

    Trump is a "cartoon" only to those who oppose him for ideological reasons. Hence, the opposititionists confuse their own inane ideology with the reality of the president. And fools such as that have no business writing Bond scripts.

    People oppose him because he's an embarrassment. But we all appreciate you digging up a post from a page back that we were asked to abandon to avoid outcomes like this. It'd be a helluva thing if you actually came on a Bond forum to talk Bond, instead of looking for any excuse to drone on about your old pal Donny as you've done in this thread before, to similar results of groans at your posts. But by all means continue, and see how far it gets you.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    Errors? There are no errors?

    That guy has lost me by:

    "SPECTRE was easily the worst of Craig’s four 007 movies"

    Like most of the SP dissenters, they like SF in comparison despite that film doing so many of the things they hated in the last one.
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree that cutting it after QoS would have been fantastic, especially with the four year break that ensued. Craig in SF is quite a different Bond from the CR/QoS time.

    I also agree on the retro office fit being a bit clichéd. Dench's office was far more contemporary. I never liked that sort of thing (forced retrofit), even when it was done at the end of Revenge of the Sith. I certainly disliked it immensely at the end of Rogue One.

    Totally agree on the forced retrofitting.

    At the very least it makes sense for a traditionalist like Mallory to have such an office, connecting the space to who he is as a man.

    I remember this forum's pages being packed with folks who wanted few things more than a traditional office back, way before SF was an idea in people's heads. I guess it's the same thing that happened with SP's gun barrel. They get it back at the beginning after wanting it for so long, then still don't like it anyway.
    On paper, yes. But it was how it's executed that's bad. It still wasn't a traditional gunbarrel because of the yellow tint and it not opening up to the movie.

    Every gun barrel has a different style with unique tints, shading and effects, that was SP's style.

    I just get sick of the incessant mewling that comes off as very brattish over the whole thing. People should be happy the damn thing is at the front again, and count their blessings. It's another one of those things SP just can't catch a break on with folks, despite it not even being the worst designed gun barrel, though they are all so particular from film to film it's a highly subjective practice anyway.

    C'mon, Eon set themselves up for unrealistic expectations for the gunbarrel back at the beginning after QoS and SF (and arguably CR, but I think that one worked). Someone needed to pull Mendes aside and say, "Just let the gunbarrel flow into the really great opening shot of the hatted skull. The quote isn't working because it breaks up the flow and because it's not as deep as it seems."

    That MGM/Eon are chasing down only a one-picture deal is the strongest sign yet that Craig will return for one more.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    echo wrote: »
    Errors? There are no errors?

    That guy has lost me by:

    "SPECTRE was easily the worst of Craig’s four 007 movies"

    Like most of the SP dissenters, they like SF in comparison despite that film doing so many of the things they hated in the last one.
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree that cutting it after QoS would have been fantastic, especially with the four year break that ensued. Craig in SF is quite a different Bond from the CR/QoS time.

    I also agree on the retro office fit being a bit clichéd. Dench's office was far more contemporary. I never liked that sort of thing (forced retrofit), even when it was done at the end of Revenge of the Sith. I certainly disliked it immensely at the end of Rogue One.

    Totally agree on the forced retrofitting.

    At the very least it makes sense for a traditionalist like Mallory to have such an office, connecting the space to who he is as a man.

    I remember this forum's pages being packed with folks who wanted few things more than a traditional office back, way before SF was an idea in people's heads. I guess it's the same thing that happened with SP's gun barrel. They get it back at the beginning after wanting it for so long, then still don't like it anyway.
    On paper, yes. But it was how it's executed that's bad. It still wasn't a traditional gunbarrel because of the yellow tint and it not opening up to the movie.

    Every gun barrel has a different style with unique tints, shading and effects, that was SP's style.

    I just get sick of the incessant mewling that comes off as very brattish over the whole thing. People should be happy the damn thing is at the front again, and count their blessings. It's another one of those things SP just can't catch a break on with folks, despite it not even being the worst designed gun barrel, though they are all so particular from film to film it's a highly subjective practice anyway.

    C'mon, Eon set themselves up for unrealistic expectations for the gunbarrel back at the beginning after QoS and SF (and arguably CR, but I think that one worked). Someone needed to pull Mendes aside and say, "Just let the gunbarrel flow into the really great opening shot of the hatted skull. The quote isn't working because it breaks up the flow and because it's not as deep as it seems."

    That MGM/Eon are chasing down only a one-picture deal is the strongest sign yet that Craig will return for one more.

    Not to keep harping on this, but it's just text that flashes for a few seconds, and it is highly relevant to the story that unfolds. That's basically it. And I enjoyed the gun barrel-less opening to SF more than I did most that are introduced via the gun barrel, so in that case I can see why it wasn't used, and why it was held off a bit for CR for the same reason. I may be a heretic for it, but my sunny day won't be sent all stormy by twenty seconds of misplaced footage that still remains in the movie regardless of when it shows up.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Maybe this points to Craig returning for a finale. If it meant him returning for a final film, then waiting a few years again for the next one with a new leading man, I can absolutely live with that.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,540
    I certainly hope the one picture deal suggests that Craig is seriously considering returning one last time. But I do also wonder if MGM sees itself being able to self distribute by the time Bond 26 comes around, hence the one picture deal.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,306
    echo wrote: »
    Errors? There are no errors?

    That guy has lost me by:

    "SPECTRE was easily the worst of Craig’s four 007 movies"

    Like most of the SP dissenters, they like SF in comparison despite that film doing so many of the things they hated in the last one.
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree that cutting it after QoS would have been fantastic, especially with the four year break that ensued. Craig in SF is quite a different Bond from the CR/QoS time.

    I also agree on the retro office fit being a bit clichéd. Dench's office was far more contemporary. I never liked that sort of thing (forced retrofit), even when it was done at the end of Revenge of the Sith. I certainly disliked it immensely at the end of Rogue One.

    Totally agree on the forced retrofitting.

    At the very least it makes sense for a traditionalist like Mallory to have such an office, connecting the space to who he is as a man.

    I remember this forum's pages being packed with folks who wanted few things more than a traditional office back, way before SF was an idea in people's heads. I guess it's the same thing that happened with SP's gun barrel. They get it back at the beginning after wanting it for so long, then still don't like it anyway.
    On paper, yes. But it was how it's executed that's bad. It still wasn't a traditional gunbarrel because of the yellow tint and it not opening up to the movie.

    Every gun barrel has a different style with unique tints, shading and effects, that was SP's style.

    I just get sick of the incessant mewling that comes off as very brattish over the whole thing. People should be happy the damn thing is at the front again, and count their blessings. It's another one of those things SP just can't catch a break on with folks, despite it not even being the worst designed gun barrel, though they are all so particular from film to film it's a highly subjective practice anyway.

    C'mon, Eon set themselves up for unrealistic expectations for the gunbarrel back at the beginning after QoS and SF (and arguably CR, but I think that one worked). Someone needed to pull Mendes aside and say, "Just let the gunbarrel flow into the really great opening shot of the hatted skull. The quote isn't working because it breaks up the flow and because it's not as deep as it seems."

    That MGM/Eon are chasing down only a one-picture deal is the strongest sign yet that Craig will return for one more.

    Not to keep harping on this, but it's just text that flashes for a few seconds, and it is highly relevant to the story that unfolds. That's basically it. And I enjoyed the gun barrel-less opening to SF more than I did most that are introduced via the gun barrel, so in that case I can see why it wasn't used, and why it was held off a bit for CR for the same reason. I may be a heretic for it, but my sunny day won't be sent all stormy by twenty seconds of misplaced footage that still remains in the movie regardless of when it shows up.

    It's not ruining my sunny day either but I do think it could have been done better.
  • Posts: 1,970
    I am perfectly fine with waiting a long time for a new Bond for Bond 26. I just right now want them to finish the Craig storyline. No more open ended finishes to his movies. End the Craig era for good.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I think It I also pointing to Craig coming back,but I think it will be a stand-alone to finish things.

    I think Blofeld will be put back in the locker for a while.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I am perfectly fine with waiting a long time for a new Bond for Bond 26. I just right now want them to finish the Craig storyline. No more open ended finishes to his movies. End the Craig era for good.

    Amen to that! I would love some kind of definitive ending for Craig. He deserves an epic conclusion.
  • Posts: 5,767
    To me an epic conclusion would be a terrific film that holds me in a tight grip from start to finish. No matter if with or without Blofeld.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited April 2017 Posts: 8,410
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    I do also wonder if MGM sees itself being able to self distribute by the time Bond 26 comes around, hence the one picture deal.

    That's the more logical conclusion to draw.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    The rumblings of them being able to shoot if it all lines up with "a gap in Craig's schedule," can I assume that's post-'Purity'? Last time I checked, he didn't have anything else on his schedule to film.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited April 2017 Posts: 10,591
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    The rumblings of them being able to shoot if it all lines up with "a gap in Craig's schedule," can I assume that's post-'Purity'? Last time I checked, he didn't have anything else on his schedule to film.
    You are correct. Purity is the only thing left on his slate.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    If they can manage to film it all (like they've said) by the end of the year, perhaps they can start production on 'Bond 25' at some point next year. A man can dream, but I won't get optimistic just yet.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,540
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    If they can manage to film it all (like they've said) by the end of the year, perhaps they can start production on 'Bond 25' at some point next year. A man can dream, but I won't get optimistic just yet.

    'Purity' could well be affected by the WGA strike as well. Hopefully, at the scripts for the first season are completed and they can at least begin filming on that.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    If they can manage to film it all (like they've said) by the end of the year, perhaps they can start production on 'Bond 25' at some point next year. A man can dream, but I won't get optimistic just yet.

    'Purity' could well be affected by the WGA strike as well. Hopefully, at the scripts for the first season are completed and they can at least begin filming on that.

    That would be nice. I'd be surprised if they plan on shooting soon and they've yet to get all the episodes written - aren't there 20 episodes or so? Surely that was completed a while back.
  • Posts: 6,601
    What makes you think, the episodes are not written? As far as I know, they start shooting around summer.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    Germanlady wrote: »
    What makes you think, the episodes are not written? As far as I know, they start shooting around summer.

    Don't think anyone's saying that, just that we hope all of the scripts are done and finalized, which I'm under the impression they are if they plan on shooting soon.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Very interesting... It seems that some predictions here, like @bondjames were correct, in that MGM and EON are shooting for just a one picture deal for this hoopla. This could mean they're closing out Craig's films with a final entry as seems sensible, after which point they'll take the time to think about their options and how they want to distribute in the future before jumpstarting another man's era. In short, post-Bond 25 will be a period of possible rebirth for the Bond team as they carry through a re-analyzation of what 007 needs to be in its next form, and how they could best realize a particular vision with new or old partners.
    Thanks @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7. It was just a hunch I had, based on a review of the rumours I had been reading from various sources and MGM's possible future with an IPO etc.

    If I can take this one step further, I believe (like you and others) that this points to a high possibility that Craig will be back, but not a certainty. I think the distributor will have some say in the matter, and even in a one picture deal, the direction will be important to whoever gets involved. Again, recent comments and rumours I have read lead me to this conclusion. It's still up in the air, and it's not Craig's decision.

    From my perspective, in a one picture deal I would prefer Craig. Better someone we know, and then they can formulate a long term plan going forward.

    Once again, MGM's machinations run the risk of throwing Bond into a loop post Bond 25.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    Eon is just doing Craig's next movies by a film by film basis.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    Eon is just doing Craig's next movies by a film by film basis.

    I'm sure they're only going with one more for Craig at most, especially if they're looking for a one picture deal with a new distributor.
Sign In or Register to comment.