SPECTRE Production Timeline

1170171173175176870

Comments

  • edited June 2014 Posts: 7,507
    Ludovico wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    I rewatched YOLT a couple of months ago. Say what you like about the fantastical nature of the plot/Connery but that volcano set is stunning - a real cinematic treat.

    Great set. Poor plot.

    And, to get back on topic, with all of John Logan's flaws as a plot writer, I would take him over Gilbert easily. He only ever wrote one for his Bond movies.

    Why do you blame Gilbert for YOLT's plot? Surely it's Roald Dahl who should take the brunt of your stick.

    True, true, but Dahl did not direct YOLT, TSWLM and MR. In the end, they were Gilbert's movies. He is the one who recycled.

    Cubby Broccoli should get a lot of the "credit"/"blame" for the storyline in those movies as well. As far as I remember the volcano layer was his idea, and so was the thought of Bond in Space. As the sole producer on Spy i reckon he had great influence on that story too.

    Bond plots in general are a collective effort after all, and especially in those days. I think Gilbert was selected to direct those movies because they suited his style, but I doubt he had a lot of influence on the actual story.
  • Posts: 1,680
    I dont think Quantum is going to return during the Craig era. They are going to play it safe with 24 & 25 and make stand alone movies.

    Craig only has two films left and i wouldnt waste them on Quantum. CR & QOS are enough for me.
  • Posts: 6,396
    Ludovico wrote:
    Maibaum contributed to a few more Bond movies.

    Yes but they're not "his" movies are they. Young, Hamilton, Hunt etc should get all the credit for the good movies if at the you willing to apportion blame on a director for the bad ones.
  • Posts: 15,114
    jobo wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I think Lewis Gilbert pretty much operated under the principle of there being a certain "Bond formula" that you need to adhere to (I remember him incidently saying in a radio interview that to him DC's Bond was the "least successful" because there was "no humour whatsoever") . I have my issues with Gilbert's films, but they did have more of a visual twinkle to them than TWINE ever did. TWINE has some good scenes here and there, but lacks punch and suffers from some terrible acting at times (Gilbert's films had some pretty poor acting too to be fair).

    I really don't like Gilbert. For me he is the one who had the series take the twisted road of science fiction and implausible plots and with YOLT was responsible for the first serious drop of quality in Bond movies.

    I rewatched YOLT a couple of months ago. Say what you like about the fantastical nature of the plot/Connery but that volcano set is stunning - a real cinematic treat.

    Great set. Poor plot.

    And, to get back on topic, with all of John Logan's flaws as a plot writer, I would take him over Gilbert easily. He only ever wrote one for his Bond movies.

    Why do you blame Gilbert for YOLT's plot? Surely it's Roald Dahl who should take the brunt of your stick.

    True, true, but Dahl did not direct YOLT, TSWLM and MR. In the end, they were Gilbert's movies. He is the one who recycled.

    Cubby Broccoli should get a lot of the "credit"/"blame" for the storyline in those movies as well. As far as I remember the volcano layer was his idea, and so was the thought of Bond in Space. As the sole producer on Spy i reckon he had great influence on that story too.

    Bond plots in general are a collective effort after all, and especially in those days. I think Gilbert was selected to direct those movies because they suited his style, but I doubt he had a lot of influence on the actual story.

    Yes, absolutely. And I do think sometimes the franchise lots its way, at least to a degree. But in the end, a movie is the work and responsibility of the director. This is why I have such deep admiration for Terence Young.
  • Posts: 15,114
    Ludovico wrote:
    Maibaum contributed to a few more Bond movies.

    Yes but they're not "his" movies are they. Young, Hamilton, Hunt etc should get all the credit for the good movies if at the you willing to apportion blame on a director for the bad ones.

    Yes, true. See above. In the end, the movie is the "child" of the director, even though it is a collective work.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    And why we all ultimately blame Tamahori, Ludovico. :)

    I agree, the director is at the helm and takes the most blame/credit. A script is darn important, though. Fine actors can lift a tepid script. All are important.
  • Posts: 15,114
    A good script is essential. But in the end, again, it is the director that makes the last call on the script. A lot of things went out of control during DAD, but the main culprit was the director, whoever came up with the idea of an invisible car. So this is why I feel marginally safer than during the Brosnan era regarding Purvis and Wade.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I feel way safer, with Mendes at the helm. The director does control the overall vision and look of a film.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited July 2014 Posts: 6,288
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    The dialogue in CR is great, the train sequence is probably the best written scene in a Bond film period.

    It's certainly up there with the best: the GF laser scene, Bond and Fiona in bed in TB, Tracy and Blofeld before the dawn attack in OHMSS (my personal favorite), and, yes, Silva's introduction in SF.
  • edited July 2014 Posts: 2,107
    As I'm currently watching Skyfall again I noticed from M's diaologue that they didn't get the list back. I remembered wrong and thought they got the list back when they raided Silva's island. So who did Silva send the list to. Wasn't it supposed to be so that some of the elements from Skyfall are supposed to be addressed in Bond 24?

    I supposed Quantum could have got the list from Silva. What if Quantum indeed was somehow watching over Silva's shoulders. Logan writing Skyfall with P&W, and Logan also writing Bond 24 and with P&W brought back, wouldn't it be possible they included Quantum. It wouldn't take anything away from Skyfall's status as an independent story. What does everyone think?

    Oh, and welcome back to our two champs. Don't cockup this, pals.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,288
    SharkBait wrote:
    As I'm currently watching Skyfall again I noticed from M's diaologue that they didn't get the list back. I remembered wrong and thought they got the list back when they raided Silva's island. So who did Silva send the list to. Wasn't it supposed to be so that some of the elements from Skyfall are supposed to be addressed in Bond 24?

    I supposed Quantum could have got the list from Silva. What if Quantum indeed was somehow watching over Silva's shoulders. Logan writing Skyfall with P&W, and Logan also writing Bond 24 and with P&W brought back, wouldn't it be possible they included Quantum. It wouldn't take anything away from Skyfall's status as an independent story. What does everyone think?

    Oh, and welcome back to our two champs. Don't cockup this, pals.

    The "NOC" (more like "knockoff") list was one of the weakest elements of SF.

    I think Mendes stated that thematic elements would be carried over from SF--aging, etc. Personally, I found it interesting to see Bond off his game in the first third of the film. And I'm hoping that they do something with Mallory's backstory, not as the focus as in SF, but it feels like a setup for...something.
  • edited July 2014 Posts: 2,107
    It was refreshing and different, so I say go for it. Just don't give him a gray beard and haven't slept for days, haven't changed my clothes in a while, tired eyes look :p But keep the seasoned agent thing.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    It would be nice to see something new now that he's "back," in a sense: seeing Bond in his home, having breakfast, smoking, in his office, etc. Something to that effect.
  • Posts: 2,107
    I'm waiting what they're going to do with Mallory. Fiennes was ny favorite casting choise in Skyfall.
  • Posts: 15,114
    SharkBait wrote:
    As I'm currently watching Skyfall again I noticed from M's diaologue that they didn't get the list back. I remembered wrong and thought they got the list back when they raided Silva's island. So who did Silva send the list to. Wasn't it supposed to be so that some of the elements from Skyfall are supposed to be addressed in Bond 24?

    I supposed Quantum could have got the list from Silva. What if Quantum indeed was somehow watching over Silva's shoulders. Logan writing Skyfall with P&W, and Logan also writing Bond 24 and with P&W brought back, wouldn't it be possible they included Quantum. It wouldn't take anything away from Skyfall's status as an independent story. What does everyone think?

    Oh, and welcome back to our two champs. Don't cockup this, pals.

    I always thought they'd have the list, they just didn't know who Silva sent it to, if he sent it. I need to rewatch it.
  • edited July 2014 Posts: 2,107
    Watched today, and they don't know to whom he may have sent the list. So, there's still that. But like Quantum could be and might have been gone and be done with in between the movies, so could this matter be resolved...stilll... hoping at least Quantum would rear its ugly head.
  • Posts: 15,114
    SharkBait wrote:
    I'm waiting what they're going to do with Mallory. Fiennes was ny favorite casting choise in Skyfall.
    SharkBait wrote:
    I'm waiting what they're going to do with Mallory. Fiennes was ny favorite casting choise in Skyfall.

    I think the new M deserves his own thread.
  • edited July 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Why has Bond's secretary never made an appearance. Can't remember what her name is. She is mentioned in MR (novel).
  • edited July 2014 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    Why has Bond's secretary never made an appearance. Can't remember what her name is. She is mentioned in MR (novel).

    I think its Mary Goodnight in the novels (far better character than she was in MWTGG).
  • RC7RC7
    edited July 2014 Posts: 10,512
    Getafix wrote:
    Why has Bond's secretary never made an appearance. Can't remember what her name is. She is mentioned in MR (novel).

    Loelia Ponsonby.

    As for the question - I can only assume MP became too established.
  • Posts: 11,425

    RC7 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Why has Bond's secretary never made an appearance. Can't remember what her name is. She is mentioned in MR (novel).

    Loelia Ponsonby.

    As for the question - I can only assume MP became too established.

    That's her! Bring in Loelia!
  • Posts: 5,745
    Getafix wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Why has Bond's secretary never made an appearance. Can't remember what her name is. She is mentioned in MR (novel).

    Loelia Ponsonby.

    As for the question - I can only assume MP became too established.

    That's her! Bring in Loelia!

    Does anybody else remember the time I brought this up? The thread nearly closed. But anyways, I'm all for this. There is major girl role for a British actress for B24 supposedly.
  • edited July 2014 Posts: 5,745
    Double post.
  • Posts: 15,114
    They could use her as a Bond girl, using her as secretary may be redundant with Moneypenny, unless they make her a very different character. But judging how people winge about Bill Tanner, I am not sure Loelia Ponsonby would be well accepted.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Why has Bond's secretary never made an appearance. Can't remember what her name is. She is mentioned in MR (novel).

    Loelia Ponsonby.

    As for the question - I can only assume MP became too established.

    That's her! Bring in Loelia!

    Does anybody else remember the time I brought this up? The thread nearly closed. But anyways, I'm all for this. There is major girl role for a British actress for B24 supposedly.

    I vaguely remember. If they hadn't brought MP back, she'd have been a great addition and point of difference for the Craig canon. She's also secretary to the other 00's, which in itself creates another level of interest. My main worry would be that her name is particularly antiquated, not to say it couldn't work, though. As it is, I can't see it ever happening - your man on the street wouldn't understand the significance.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    SaintMark wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    I love the way the SF haters are making out the earlier scripts by the veterans were utter gold, seriously give me CR, QOS and SF over dreck like DAF, LALD or MR for that matter.

    I think some people have rose tinted specs on when they look at the earlier films, some of the dialogue in the earlier period was cringe worthy.

    I do not hate SF or QoB but honestly they did not have the best of scripts on which they shot the movie, even DC admits that with QoB (Oh my god, the man is a hater!)

    And to be honest a lot of the earlier movies were overall pretty great and denying that is somewhat hatefull. Might I add denying the strength of 007's past heritage is a poor show for anybody calling himself a James Bond fan. All three movie you consider dreck are great movies and have a lot that could make this era a better one.
    Shardlake wrote:
    Anything to knock this new era and then making out the older films screenplays were genius is just laughable.

    I do not need to knock out this new era, it is perfectly capable of doing it by itself. If the next Bond movie is as poor as QoB & SF I hope that the next performer is for Bond 25. And with any delays on production DC is getting older and might just pass the baton. He does no longer have to do it for the dosh.

    That's entirely a matter of opinion, you might well think them classics and yes I've been a Bond fan since 1977 but I don't look at the old films as solid gold classics.

    We've a difference of opinion and I would say CR, SF and QOS to some degree are much better made films in my opinion. I would say you are just as a poor show as me with your constant complaining of the DC era.

    Just because you like the older films doesn't make your opionion anymore valid plus I'm willing to move with the times whereas you'd likely be happy if they were museum pieces that had not moved on one bit or that is what I get the impression with criticism of this era and the constant brown nosing of the older films.

  • edited July 2014 Posts: 908
    Shardlake wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    I love the way the SF haters are making out the earlier scripts by the veterans were utter gold, seriously give me CR, QOS and SF over dreck like DAF, LALD or MR for that matter.

    I think some people have rose tinted specs on when they look at the earlier films, some of the dialogue in the earlier period was cringe worthy.

    I do not hate SF or QoB but honestly they did not have the best of scripts on which they shot the movie, even DC admits that with QoB (Oh my god, the man is a hater!)

    And to be honest a lot of the earlier movies were overall pretty great and denying that is somewhat hatefull. Might I add denying the strength of 007's past heritage is a poor show for anybody calling himself a James Bond fan. All three movie you consider dreck are great movies and have a lot that could make this era a better one.
    Shardlake wrote:
    Anything to knock this new era and then making out the older films screenplays were genius is just laughable.

    I do not need to knock out this new era, it is perfectly capable of doing it by itself. If the next Bond movie is as poor as QoB & SF I hope that the next performer is for Bond 25. And with any delays on production DC is getting older and might just pass the baton. He does no longer have to do it for the dosh.

    Just because you like the older films doesn't make your opionion anymore valid plus I'm willing to move with the times whereas you'd likely be happy if they were museum pieces that had not moved on one bit or that is what I get the impression with criticism of this era and the constant brown nosing of the older films.

    Brown nosing? The fact alone that someone states he considers the first bond movies were better and more solidly scripted doesn't make him a brown Noser. Even the so much vaunted CR has some real script issues logic wise and SF solidly holds the title of being the one movie in the franchise that is holding less logic than a Donald Duck comic book. Richard Maibaum might not have been a genius,but he was very very able for sure. Something that certainly can't be said of Mr Logan!
  • Posts: 11,425
    Just out of interest, if they are talking about starting filming in December now, is it realistic to release the film in November 2015? Just asking out of curiosity. Presumably it will put a lot more pressure on the schedule, but with no suggestion that the release will be delayed, EON must be confident they can manage with a significantly reduced schedule.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited July 2014 Posts: 40,968
    @Getafix, CR started shooting in the beginning of January, concluded around mid-July, and released in mid-November in London, so yes, it's plausible if filming does indeed start in December.

    I believe then that the only thing it will really push back (if you're following the SF schedule) is story information, the trailers/teasers, etc.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Getafix wrote:
    Just out of interest, if they are talking about starting filming in December now, is it realistic to release the film in November 2015?

    Yes, perfectly feasible. It will just rely on all involved being relatively decisive. It's not a bad thing imo. A lot of decent films have shot on a limited time-scale (which this still won't be) and a shorter window for the edit is also not a bad thing (depending on your editor).
Sign In or Register to comment.