No Time To Die: Production Diary

18178188208228232507

Comments

  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I wouldn't compare Craig to Tom Cruise honestly. Cruise is a bona fide movie star of the first order. One of the all time greats, who is in probably his last decade of being an action hero (something which he is also very well known for over multiple decades).

    Daniel Craig is a first and foremost a film/theatre actor. One who happens to be the current James Bond (an unusual and atypical role for him).

    They're really catering to different markets.
    bondjames wrote: »
    001 wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    The difference between Cruise and Craig:

    1. DC spent most of his life smoking. 2. DC likes beer. A lot.

    The problem is each of their faces ages according to their lifestyles. I absolutely believe that DC can have the physique needed for Bond for quite some time, but his face is not aging well. Especially compared to Cruise.

    Spot on!

    Cruise had face lifts as had most of that generation. Knowing DCs face, I can tell, he didn't. Not that I am against it, if it looks good afterwards. But don't suggest, a Cruise or whoever looks good just because. Not true. But DC being the freak he is, peobably won't go that route.

    I don't know if Tom had a face lift,don't care, but he is very fit and always keen to do action films like Mi and other films.

    Daniel doesn't seem to be interested in doing Bond films anymore ,he prefers doing plays and films that are less physically demanding.
    I wouldn't compare Craig to Tom Cruise honestly. Cruise is a bona fide movie star of the first order. One of the all time greats, who is in probably his last decade of being an action hero (something which he is also very well known for over multiple decades).

    Daniel Craig is a first and foremost a film/theatre actor. One who happens to be the current James Bond (an unusual and atypical role for him).

    They're really catering to different markets.

    Yes, agreed. Plus doing the job and stay relevant is Cruise very reason of living......

    Yes i agree, Tom loves making movies.

    But Daniel can pick and choose what he does now whether he does plays or movies because he is wealthy from making the bond films.

    It sounded like making Spectre was an awful experience for him.

    That's why i don't think he will be bond again.
    12 + years is enough for him to be known as James Bond. 2005 - 2017 ?
    That beats Sir Rog's record 1973 -1985.


  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    I just remember the Infamous "Slash my Wrists" comment he made which seemed like he had a tough shoot making Spectre.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    I just remember the Infamous "Slash my Wrists" comment he made which seemed like he had a tough shoot making Spectre.

    Which was a sarcastic joke on his part. If you see the interview he says that, He's clearly chuckling as he's saying it.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    Murdock wrote: »
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    I just remember the Infamous "Slash my Wrists" comment he made which seemed like he had a tough shoot making Spectre.

    Which was a sarcastic joke on his part. If you see the interview he says that, He's clearly chuckling as he's saying it.

    A lot of people believe he was serious about it.

    It was a stupid thing to say and will never be forgotten by a lot of fans.

    But he's only human and everyone makes mistakes. I'm sure he regrets saying it.


  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    There you go.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,400
    001 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    I just remember the Infamous "Slash my Wrists" comment he made which seemed like he had a tough shoot making Spectre.

    Which was a sarcastic joke on his part. If you see the interview he says that, He's clearly chuckling as he's saying it.

    It was a stupid thing to say and will never be forgotten by a lot of fans.

    he regrets saying it.

    Indeed, they need someone who's better with the press.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    001 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    I just remember the Infamous "Slash my Wrists" comment he made which seemed like he had a tough shoot making Spectre.

    Which was a sarcastic joke on his part. If you see the interview he says that, He's clearly chuckling as he's saying it.

    It was a stupid thing to say and will never be forgotten by a lot of fans.

    he regrets saying it.

    Indeed, they need someone who's better with the press.

    Try putting yourself in his shoes.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    001 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    I just remember the Infamous "Slash my Wrists" comment he made which seemed like he had a tough shoot making Spectre.

    Which was a sarcastic joke on his part. If you see the interview he says that, He's clearly chuckling as he's saying it.

    It was a stupid thing to say and will never be forgotten by a lot of fans.

    he regrets saying it.

    Indeed, they need someone who's better with the press.

    Maybe someone like Trump you think ? :) Also known as "The Donald"
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    There you go.


    Spectre wasn't the happiest hour of my Bond movie watching experience. :)

    A lot of fans on this site ,including me, think that he was part of the decision making process on Spectre, but in the interview he says he wasn't.
    Sam took it away from him to let him concentrate on his acting.

    I think his acting in Spectre was the worst of any of the Bond films he's made.
    Casino Royale being the best of course.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    001 wrote: »
    001 wrote: »
    For the record, Daniel openly stated that Spectre was the happiest hour of his Bond moviemaking experience.

    Really ? Haven't read that.

    There you go.


    Spectre wasn't the happiest hour of my Bond movie watching experience. :)

    A lot of fans on this site ,including me, think that he was part of the decision making process on Spectre, but in the interview he says he wasn't.
    Sam took it away from him to let him concentrate on his acting.

    I think his acting in Spectre was the worst of any of the Bond films he's made.
    Casino Royale being the best of course.
    That's purely subjective, of course.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,400
    Ironically the character is supposed to be at his most confident and assured of any of Craig's four films, yet its decisively Craig's least confident performance of the lot.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Ironically the character is supposed to be at his most confident and assured of any of Craig's four films, yet its decisively Craig's least confident performance of the lot.

    The nonsense coming out of your mouth gets worse and that means something. He was indeed very assured and confident in Sp. Talking bs won't bring Turner the role, try to remember that.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited July 2017 Posts: 15,423
    And here's to wonder if this year is going to be another desert, devoid of any solid information regarding the future of our next film. I wonder if this Rhythm Section with Blake Lively will affect development on 'Bond 25'.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    And here's to wonder if this year is going to be another desert, devoid of any solid information regarding the future of our next film. I wonder if this Rhythm Section with Blake Lively will affect development on 'Bond 25'.

    If Cubby was alive they would making a Bond film this year. He was a legend.

    Do you think Cubby would have cast DC as bond ?
  • Posts: 6,601
    I don't think making a Bond film then and now can be compared - at all.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I don't think making a Bond film then and now can be compared - at all.

    Hi Germanlady

    Do you think Cubby would have cast DC as bond ?
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    I don't think he would have; he would have gone with a more traditionally handsome actor.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I don't think making a Bond film then and now can be compared - at all.

    Me neither. Not saying they couldn't be more consistent, but it's certainly not the same. It's hard for them to maintain appeal in what is a unsustainably overcrowded marketplace.

    I don't understand the 'Would Cubby have cast DC?' question. The implication is that it was a bad idea, when it was clearly the opposite.
  • edited July 2017 Posts: 463
    I believe Brosnan would have definitely continued in the role for a couple of years. Pierce was his guy. So no, I don't think so.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    Bad idea? Not at all, just a different vision of the character..
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited July 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I don't think making a Bond film then and now can be compared - at all.
    Definitely.

    Back then, there were no franchise competitions and Bond was a solid survivor. People may argue that Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films and some other one-time or two-timers made shedload of money and whatnot, but none of them had been stable and ongoing film franchises until Marvel Cinematic Universe was given life with the extreme success of The Avengers (2012). The rest (DCEU) followed that trend.

    Now, we've got dozens of franchises churning out materials that have been existing over millions of publications for each issue for over 75 years, all backed by major corporations like Walt Disney and Warner Bros.

    Bond is nowhere near like that, and a box office failure will result them in loss of money and therefore public interest. Bond is a family business and isn't backed by major corporations so with this IP, the producers have to play it careful. There are certain limits they can't pass and there are certain standards they have to stick to. So, no. I don't think either Michael or Barbara will be going out of their heads to do something stupid that might cost them the franchise. It's all about strategy.

    The James Bond film series can't compete regularly with the likes of MCU, DCEU, Star Wars and other blockbuster franchises stabilized by major monster corporations that are drowning the movie market since the 2010s. Danjaq don't have these sort of resources nor the budget to release a movie every year without taking precautions. They've got to play it right and hit the right spot. I can't blame Babs or Mike for not giving us Bond films more often than they used to. It's a whole lot of different market now.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    RC7 wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I don't think making a Bond film then and now can be compared - at all.

    Me neither. Not saying they couldn't be more consistent, but it's certainly not the same. It's hard for them to maintain appeal in what is a unsustainably overcrowded marketplace.

    I don't understand the 'Would Cubby have cast DC?' question. The implication is that it was a bad idea, when it was clearly the opposite.

    No implication intended. Maybe Cubby would have cast DC ? But i don't think so personally.

    Babs doesn't have the same clout as Cubby did, and being a woman in Hollywood and co doesn't help because they are a sexist bunch i think.

    They make Spiderman reboots every few years.
    Batman movie every 2 years.
    Even the Fast and Furious films are made every 2 years or so.

    Why can't they make Bond films every 2-3 years again ?
  • Posts: 1,031
    CrzChris4 wrote: »
    I believe Brosnan would have definitely continued in the role for a couple of years. Pierce was his guy. So no, I don't think so.

    He favoured Tim Dalton over the Broz.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Dennison wrote: »
    CrzChris4 wrote: »
    I believe Brosnan would have definitely continued in the role for a couple of years. Pierce was his guy. So no, I don't think so.

    He favoured Tim Dalton over the Broz.
    That's because he was committed to a TV Series and he didn't want a Bond actor to be related to a TV Series.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    001 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I don't think making a Bond film then and now can be compared - at all.

    Me neither. Not saying they couldn't be more consistent, but it's certainly not the same. It's hard for them to maintain appeal in what is a unsustainably overcrowded marketplace.

    I don't understand the 'Would Cubby have cast DC?' question. The implication is that it was a bad idea, when it was clearly the opposite.

    No implication intended. Maybe Cubby would have cast DC ? But i don't think so personally.

    Babs doesn't have the same clout as Cubby did, and being a woman in Hollywood and co doesn't help because they are a sexist bunch i think.

    They make Spiderman reboots every few years.
    Batman movie every 2 years.
    Even the Fast and Furious films are made every 2 years or so.

    Why can't they make Bond films every 2-3 years again ?

    Barbara has plenty of clout in Hollywood. They can make a film every two years, the question is how that slots into an already overcrowded marketplace. Cubby operated in a very different era.
  • Posts: 1,031
    Dennison wrote: »
    CrzChris4 wrote: »
    I believe Brosnan would have definitely continued in the role for a couple of years. Pierce was his guy. So no, I don't think so.

    He favoured Tim Dalton over the Broz.
    That's because he was committed to a TV Series and he didn't want a Bond actor to be related to a TV Series.

    Exactly - he favoured the Daltonator.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited July 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Dennison wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    CrzChris4 wrote: »
    I believe Brosnan would have definitely continued in the role for a couple of years. Pierce was his guy. So no, I don't think so.

    He favoured Tim Dalton over the Broz.
    That's because he was committed to a TV Series and he didn't want a Bond actor to be related to a TV Series.

    Exactly - he favoured the Daltonator.
    More like he had to, given an unfavourable option (TV Series contract) in the cards.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,400
    I think a 3 year schedule is ideal in this day and age. Back in the 70's and 80's there were fewer options of entertainment. Videogames weren't around much (or in their infancy), there was no internet etc. Nowadays there are so many options, so many franchises and other media to enjoy that I think people in general are less inclined to watch Bond films at the cinema every two years. 3 years is the right amount, IMO.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I agree, three years is about right.
Sign In or Register to comment.