› ›

SPECTRE Production Timeline

1…285286288290291…870

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Walecs wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Thank God none if us are part of the creative process in making these films.

    I disagree. I've read so many good ideas on these boards that if they were applied to movies such as QoS and DAD they would easily be in everyone's top 10.

    For every good idea a fan makes there's at least half a dozen infinitely bad ones.


  • GetafixGetafix
    edited November 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Seems someone else has polished wha N&P wrote. Never heard of him, but from what you can read here, he is quite in demand: These is what's ond related in the aticle, but read the whole thing to get an impression of the man.

    On returning to London, he would start on a rewrite of the forthcoming James Bond movie.

    It was early September, and Butterworth, who divides his time between London and a farm in Somerset, had spent the week in conference with Sam Mendes and Daniel Craig, tweaking story lines for the new Bond movie. (He hates corporate limos and had been conveyed every morning to Pinewood Studios, outside London, on the back of a motorbike.) This was Butterworth’s second Bond; he worked on “Skyfall,” too, making the kind of script changes that his twelve-year-old self, watching the movie at the St. Albans Odeon, would be pleased to see. “You know, like Bond doesn’t have scenes with other men. Bond shoots other men—he doesn’t sit around chatting to them. So you put a line through that.”

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/10/nothing-2

    credit DTD

    Oh great! The guy that helped to make Skyfall what it is is back so we can have more of flawless logic and great original storytelling. I am so excited!

    Is this Butterworth guy for real?

    "Bond doesn’t have scenes with other men. Bond shoots other men—he doesn’t sit around chatting to them. So you put a line through that."

    Christ almighty. Who are these people? Has he actually watched a Bond movie? Ever?

    I've stayed clear of this thread for fear of spoilers, but was intrigued to find out who the new writer was. Wish I hadn't now. Dear oh dear.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,125
    Not sure what he meant by that.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 4,341
    Gotta agree with @Getafix. Bond not talking to other men? Shooting them? In which parallel universe does this happen? If I remember correctly, Bond talks to Sylva a lot in SF and actually stabs him. Did this guy really work on the Skyfall script?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    His 12 year old self must have loved Die Another Day then. That quote already gives me a belly ache.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Since CASINO ROYALE '06 is now ground zero, I would be fine with every third or fourth film going back to the Fleming books in order (after BOND 24, they remake LIVE AND DIE, a few more and we get MOONRAKER, and so on), though I'd like to see The Blofeld Trilogy made consecutively (THE SPY WHO LOVED ME can fit in anywhere, as could the short stories). Probably not going to happen, the producers have stated that they don't want to look back, but this plan would give us enough periodic Fleming to go forward for many decades. Just a dream, like my hop ego see a faithful adaptation of COLONEL SUN someday.

    That's probably not a bad way of going about things to be fair, @Birdleson (it has the benefits of keeping everyone happy!) and may I second your hope to see a faithful version of Colonel Sun regardless of how unlikely it actually is. :(
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Some of the best moments in the series involve Bond talking and having a gentlemanly conversation with...that's right you guessed it, other men!

    Bond and Dr.No at the dinner table
    Bond exchanging words with Grant
    Every encounter Bond had with GF
    Bond winding up Large at the Casino not to mention when he visits him at his home
    The list goes on and on...
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Murdock wrote: »
    His 12 year old self must have loved Die Another Day then. That quote already gives me a belly ache.

    Exactly.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Not sure, this translates the right way. It could be meant just the other way around and what did he mean by "putting a line though that"
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Generally that means you're cutting something out.

    You might underline something to indicate it's good or needs work, but if you put a line through it, that means it's got to go.

    I don't mind multiple people working on the script, but I just wish some of what they said was reassuring.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,125
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Since they tend to follow the successful formla of the last film, its not very likely, they cut on the dialoge. SF was very long and still this successful, whereas QOS, for known reasons, suffered of not enough of that. They won't make this mistake, I am still not sure, what this quote actually means or if it was taken out of a context, so it gives a wrong impression.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Since they tend to follow the successful formla of the last film, its not very likely, they cut on the dialoge. SF was very long and still this successful, whereas QOS, for known reasons, suffered of not enough of that. They won't make this mistake, I am still not sure, what this quote actually means or if it was taken out of a context, so it gives a wrong impression.

    People tend to forget that movies through the past 10 years in general have become quite more realistic. I think it has something to do with a combination of 9/11 (it made us wake up in our real world) and social media (we all are our own little dictator). People still wanna get entertained. But they have become also way more critical; cinema visitors are not stupid anymore. (Over-)Analyzing has become part of our nature. Perhaps that's why the general audience buys realistic drama slightly more than popcorn-action?

    Ah well, perhaps I'm talking nonsense. I was thinking of the success of Nolan's films, "Gravity" and a few others, including Bond. But then there's also "Transformers" and "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles".
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Since they tend to follow the successful formla of the last film, its not very likely, they cut on the dialoge. SF was very long and still this successful, whereas QOS, for known reasons, suffered of not enough of that. They won't make this mistake, I am still not sure, what this quote actually means or if it was taken out of a context, so it gives a wrong impression.

    People tend to forget that movies through the past 10 years in general have become quite more realistic. I think it has something to do with a combination of 9/11 (it made us wake up in our real world) and social media (we all are our own little dictator). People still wanna get entertained. But they have become also way more critical; cinema visitors are not stupid anymore. (Over-)Analyzing has become part of our nature. Perhaps that's why the general audience buys realistic drama slightly more than popcorn-action?

    Ah well, perhaps I'm talking nonsense. I was thinking of the success of Nolan's films, "Gravity" and a few others, including Bond. But then there's also "Transformers" and "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles".

    I don't see, how this is an answer to my post, GG.
  • Pierce2DanielPierce2Daniel
    Posts: 4,409
    Butterworth has in fact spoken in the past about his work with Bond as well as the work he has done as a script doctor.

    http://www.theartsdesk.com/theatre/theartsdesk-qa-playwright-jez-butterworth
    http://charlieehay.ideastap.com/Media/774ba68f-4299-4913-b9da-a14100e72075/welcome-to-my-opinion/jez-butterworth-masterclass

    It's likely his work on Bond 24 will be similar to his work on Skyfall and he's just there to work on the script for a few weeks.

    He's also recently had his play 'Mojo' play in the West End in London starring Skyfall and Bond 24's very own Q, Ben Whishaw:

    ben-whishaw-baby-in-mojo-at-the-harold-pinter-theatre-photo-credit-simon-annand.jpg
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited November 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).

    Absolutely. They are what mark Bond apart from the general clamour of action nonsense. For what it's worth I actually thought QoS had several quite enjoyable little quieter scenes (Bond with Mathis, Felix, Greene and of course the ending) in there amongst the frantic action.
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).

    Absolutely. They are what mark Bond apart from the general clamour of action nonsense. For what it's worth I actually thought QoS had several quite enjoyable little quieter scenes (Bond with Mathis, Felix, Greene and of course the ending) in there amongst the frantic action.

    I once heard the rumor that Mathis was supposed to tell essentially Flemings original QoS Shortstory during the Airplane Lounge Scene while Bond was brooding over his Martinis. I always thought this was a splendid idea, but obviously Mr Forster didn't share my opinion, though for the life of me I will never get why. Probably didn't suit his "fast as a bullet" vision.
    This is one of the reasons, why I would prefer them to get able and professional directors instead of "geniuses" on the ego trip and why I would want Nolan to mind his own business and leave Bond alone.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited November 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Matt_Helm wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).

    Absolutely. They are what mark Bond apart from the general clamour of action nonsense. For what it's worth I actually thought QoS had several quite enjoyable little quieter scenes (Bond with Mathis, Felix, Greene and of course the ending) in there amongst the frantic action.

    I once heard the rumor that Mathis was supposed to tell essentially Flemings original QoS Shortstory during the Airplane Lounge Scene while Bond was brooding over his Martinis. I always thought this was a splendid idea, but obviously Mr Forster didn't share my opinion, though for the life of me I will never get why. Probably didn't suit his "fast as a bullet" vision.
    This is one of the reasons, why I would prefer them to get able and professional directors instead of "geniuses" on the ego trip and why I would want Nolan to mind his own business and leave Bond alone.

    I see where you're coming from. I like the idea of an extended Mathis storytelling scene, although the initial meeting in Italy is also nice, as is the existing plane sequence. But a little more meat on the bones would certainly not have done QoS any harm.

    Nolan is a difficult one for me. I am not his biggest fan (Batman didn't really do it for me - much prefer the Keaton/Burton/Nicholson version) but I don't want a return to the Brosnan era with really not very good directors taking a turn with every film. Those Brosnan films were so depressing. Just uninspired on every conceivable level. I actually prefer a high quality of bad, like SF, than I would a return to DAD or TWINE. So Nolan might not be perfect, but at least you'd have some idea of what you'd be getting and know that some genuine thought and passion had gone into the movie.

    But you are right - there must be a happy medium. A good, proven action-thriller director, without too much ego who is willing and able to sign on for three or four films and give a bit of consistency. Who knows, may be Nolan could turn out to be just what Bond needs.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,125
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).

    Absolutely. They are what mark Bond apart from the general clamour of action nonsense. For what it's worth I actually thought QoS had several quite enjoyable little quieter scenes (Bond with Mathis, Felix, Greene and of course the ending) in there amongst the frantic action.

    Oh there were some quiet moments, but not enough of them. The movie would have benefited from an extra 10 minutes.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well, let's not read too much into it. Still, strange that someone doing stage work mainly says such a thing.

    And, for the record, I do find the quiet moments in Bond movies not only important, but essential, and often very enjoyable. They can make or break a movie; TND and QOS for instance suffered from a lack of them (and I like QOS).

    Absolutely. They are what mark Bond apart from the general clamour of action nonsense. For what it's worth I actually thought QoS had several quite enjoyable little quieter scenes (Bond with Mathis, Felix, Greene and of course the ending) in there amongst the frantic action.

    Oh there were some quiet moments, but not enough of them. The movie would have benefited from an extra 10 minutes.

    Agreed. A little space for the story (which I think is better than some make out) to breath would have done wonders. And it could have still kept its generally nippy pacing.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    I find it completely ridiculous that they are incapable of finding a screenwriter who is capable of writing a Bond screenplay from start to finish completely on his or her own, without any help.

    Logan will have delivered a finished screenplay - but how you imagine one individual knocking out a screenplay without input from elsewhere and somehow still managing to satisfy the needs and whims of the studio, the producers etc, all of which are constantly in flux, I don't know. These things always pass through various hands and will continue to.

    Absolutely. It's quite rare for a screenplay to be written by just one writer. Just look at most screen and tv credits - generally two, three or more writers are credited. It's more common for independently produced films (with less money to spend on writers) to stay with a single writer, but on big budget studio pics there is so, so much intense pressure on the Producers and Execs to deliver a hit film (on schedule and within budget) that they tend to jump to a new writer if they feel the present writer isn't delivering what they want or need. In tv this is extremely common - I have personal experience of it.

    Also, a writer can become, after months or sometimes even years working on a project, just too close to the material to be truly objective when changes are required or complete re-thinks are asked for. A fresh set of eyes can be the answer, hence getting talent like Jez Butterworth to come in to (objectively) polish a (very developed) script which is close to going into production like Bond 24.

    And then there are the writers' professional schedules. Many writers have other projects going on or lined up, so they might have a window of say 4 - 6 months in which they can dedicate most of their time to a specific script. (Logan has many projects to juggle). This is always happening to me and writer friends. Two months back I delivered a first draft of a script to the producers who had hired me for the job. I had two weeks still free to do some revisions for them, which I did, but then I had to start work on a previous project (for which I was already contracted to do a 3rd draft). So it means I was simply not available to do further work on the first project and so the producers hired a new writer to take over from me - in fact someone I know well and recommended to them. Happens all the time.

    That is sort of my take on the writing process. It's reassuring hearing that from someone in the business; thanks, @ColonelSun.

    Thanks to Germanlady for your news tidbits; you always have good findings - you do have eyes everywhere! :)

    Mulling over the music possible news - that is all interesting. Very. I'm picturing Adele singing the title song, with other artists' work throughout the film perhaps.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Not too sure what to make of a fourth writer now employed on the film? And if the Adele story turns out to be fact? Does this mean another ballad for the title song? I was hoping for something along the lines of YKMN, LALD, or AVTAK!
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    Uhhh I don't want Adele to sing the theme again.
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    edited November 2014 Posts: 1,970
    Some_Kind_Of_Hero wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    No they won't... makes no sense. That's their bread and butter...and alot of others including the novels.

    I really don't get that reasoning. Everything they are doing now is to reinvent not kill off. Maybe non fans may strongly advocate that....but no doubt it. The movie would bomb and no studio would in their right mind greenlight that.

    The trouble is that in this age of reboots they could easily kill Bond off in an actor's last film and then start all over again without consequences. They could even end the very film in which Bond dies with "James Bond Will Return." And just why would they do this? To be daring, to different, to be artistic, or simply because the current trend in cinema is to make every franchise darker, grimmer, and with more gravitas. We certainly don't have to worry about this with Bond 24, and personally I think they'll opt to end Craig's tenure on a grand, optimistic note considering the way his films have been arcing, but the possibility exists.

    I agree and I feel its very likely to happen. And the movie won't bomb at all it would probably do very very well
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I don't ...pointless ...how does death equal artistic??
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I agree and I feel its very likely to happen. And the movie won't bomb at all it would probably do very very well
    Based on what?
  • xolanixolani
    Posts: 130
    really? THIS, for Bond? Tried to listen to some of these songs and imagine a "Bondian" version - couldn't do it. I'll believe this rumor when it is confirmed!


  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    Murdock wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I agree and I feel its very likely to happen. And the movie won't bomb at all it would probably do very very well
    Based on what?

    Just my feeling you don't have to agree.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    Never heard of FKA twigs before, just listen to one of her songs and I think they should hire her to write and perfrom the song. She is so much more interesting and contemporary than Adele. Bond movies should NEVER be nostalgic and trying to recreate the Shirley Bassey sound will always be a bad idea.
  • BounineBounine
    edited November 2014 Posts: 2,599
    "Of the character and the dos-and-don'ts of scripting for 007, Butterworth comments, "You know, like Bond doesn't have scenes with other men. Bond shoots other men - he doesn't sit around chatting to them. So you put a line through that.""

    Good God. More bad news. Sounds like all the dialogue and character driven scenes are being flushed down the toilet in favour for action, action and more action. These films will never change. Action is fine and is part of Bond but why they won't take a little time out for some decent dialogue driven scenes is beyond me. They'll never change. So, now we have Moneypenny back in the field, what sounds like more humour than in SF and CR, unnecessary throwaway lines and now this. Not looking good. What Newman had said before most of his stuff was probably re-written in favour of endless, pointless acton, was encouraging. He was all for further developing Bond's character. Now however, I just can't see this happening. Just more of the same. I don't know why I bother actually thinking that we might get something a little different for once.
Sign In or Register to comment.