SPECTRE Production Timeline

12930323435870

Comments

  • edited June 2013 Posts: 3,494
    I'm going to try and come down somewhere in the middle of these Moneypenny musings myself until I hear more as to the exact nature of what Mendes is speaking about. What he envisions and what will be could be very different scenarios.

    Now if I had my way, the role of Moneypenny would always be more traditional than not. I see no reason to change that on an artistic level and agree that it lends to confusion as to her actual role. They can't keep flip-flopping on this, she needs to be much more one role than another so either she's a secretary or a field agent and not some dual purpose character. I definitely do not want to see Moneypenny in car chases and shootouts as we saw in SF anymore than I want those crass and cheesy lines of Sam Bond's "Smuttypenny" to return in it's place. Had enough of both and this is too divergent of the spirit of the character as Fleming wrote her.

    That said, I fear the winds of change away from tradition will continue to blow. This started with the hiring of Judi Dench and the expansion of her role as M and we've seen this happen with Moneypenny as well. Now instead of minor character actors playing these minor roles, EON hires movie stars. They command more in the way of salary and like any business, their paycheck must be earned. There is no way that they will be satisfied with Naomie Harris limited to one or two traditional scenes. Same as Whishaw and that goes double for Fiennes who probably does get double what they get in salary. So while I'm disheartened to hear Mendes muse what he has, I'm not surprised by it. Not one bit. @OBrady's response to @Wizard in his 2nd paragraph is going to be the new standard for the old formula and what @Wizard wants, as much as I'd also enjoy, isn't ever going to happen.

  • pachazo wrote:
    Bounine wrote:
    No thanks. Horrible idea. I dislike the whole Moneypenny back story anyway. That was one thing but to have her out in the field yet again is just wrong. It would be veering too far from what Fleming envisioned. That's too much of a change. It's wrong. Penny in the Moneypenny DIaries ended up doing a bit of spying and even this I wasn't entirely happy with (they are great books though) but she was far from an action woman like Harris's character is.

    Agreed. I also didn't like her new origin story but I can accept it as a interesting twist on the character if they just keep it to one movie. Bond doesn't need a sidekick.

    Except Felix?

    But yes, keep Moneypenny in the office. That's what she does. That's who she is.

    My inner pessimist is coming out and making me think that they're going to go too far into the introspective/do things differently/explore his motivations, and really mess up the classic stuff. Then they'll overcompensate for Bond 25 and make it too over the top and the Bond series will be on the wane yet again.

  • edited June 2013 Posts: 5,767
    Shardlake wrote:
    While this has been reset at the end of SF with familiar traits put in place for a new beginning I think it will more likely be a new take on these characters and not a film like one of the prime Connery's those expecting Bond sent out to save the world type film have clearly not noticed that the world has moved on and this would simply look absurd things have moved on whether your fan boy fantasies have or not.
    It wouldn´t be absurd in any way to have Craig in a traditional Connery/Moore/Dalton type of story.

    To have three consecutive films with Bond having to deal mainly with personal problems is much more absurd, as is the wish of many fans to have Chris Nolan make a Bond film, which would most probably again deal with personal issues of the protagonist.

    After having re-installed all those traditional elements like MP as M´s secretary, male M in traditional office, and Q, it would be really absurd to drop one or more of those ideas again immediately in the next film. It would make large amounts of SF´s story redundant. That has nothing to do with fan boy fantasies.


    What he envisions and what will be could be very different scenarios.
    He shouldn´t envision too much at all as far as side characters are concerned. He should envision a rich adventure for Bond. How can one creatively improvise on a building if the foundation isn´t solid? I enjoy very much the team appearance of the Enterprise crew, but Bond films are Bond films, and not MI6 films. Or are they?

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    boldfinger wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    While this has been reset at the end of SF with familiar traits put in place for a new beginning I think it will more likely be a new take on these characters and not a film like one of the prime Connery's those expecting Bond sent out to save the world type film have clearly not noticed that the world has moved on and this would simply look absurd things have moved on whether your fan boy fantasies have or not.
    It wouldn´t be absurd in any way to have Craig in a traditional Connery/Moore/Dalton type of story.

    To have three consecutive films with Bond having to deal mainly with personal problems is much more absurd, as is the wish of many fans to have Chris Nolan make a Bond film, which would most probably again deal with personal issues of the protagonist.

    After having re-installed all those traditional elements like MP as M´s secretary, male M in traditional office, and Q, it would be really absurd to drop one or more of those ideas again immediately in the next film. It would make large amounts of SF´s story redundant. That has nothing to do with fan boy fantasies.


    What he envisions and what will be could be very different scenarios.
    He shouldn´t envision too much at all as far as side characters are concerned. He should envision a rich adventure for Bond. How can one creatively improvise on a building if the foundation isn´t solid? I enjoy very much the team appearance of the Enterprise crew, but Bond films are Bond films, and not MI6 films. Or are they?

    You are a fan and want this kind of thing but Craig's Bond is unlikely to appear in a GF, TB, his films are more likely to be like OHMSS, I'm not saying I like this more personal and anguished take on 007 but SF was huge, I don't think they'll drop that for the sake of a few fans grumblings when the masses lapped it up.
  • Posts: 4,408
    More Mendes news. The director has dropped out of helming the pilot for John Logan's new show - possibly Bond 24 related?
    http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/13/the-orphanages-ja-bayona-to-direct-sam-mendes-and-john-logans-penny-dreadful/
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    More Mendes news. The director has dropped out of helming the pilot for John Logan's new show - possibly Bond 24 related?
    http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/13/the-orphanages-ja-bayona-to-direct-sam-mendes-and-john-logans-penny-dreadful/

    Which means he will be free much earlier than antecipated (Penny Dreadful was supposed to start filming in September). Good find @Pierce2Daniel!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Sandy wrote:
    More Mendes news. The director has dropped out of helming the pilot for John Logan's new show - possibly Bond 24 related?
    http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/13/the-orphanages-ja-bayona-to-direct-sam-mendes-and-john-logans-penny-dreadful/

    Which means he will be free much earlier than antecipated (Penny Dreadful was supposed to start filming in September). Good find @Pierce2Daniel!

    This is very encouraging news. Does this mean 2014 might still be on?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Ha! Mendes will return for Bond 24. [Mallory voice] It's obvious.[/Mallory voice].

    This will give Mendes enough time to iron out a few things with the script if it needs tweaking and other preliminary logistics for an early 2014 shoot. Come on Mendes, you complimented Greengrass for surpassing supremacy with ultimatum, do the sane cot dammit and give us something more exciting and something to fist punch the air with Bond 24.
  • Posts: 12,526
    Sandy wrote:
    More Mendes news. The director has dropped out of helming the pilot for John Logan's new show - possibly Bond 24 related?
    http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/13/the-orphanages-ja-bayona-to-direct-sam-mendes-and-john-logans-penny-dreadful/

    Which means he will be free much earlier than antecipated (Penny Dreadful was supposed to start filming in September). Good find @Pierce2Daniel!

    This is very encouraging news. Does this mean 2014 might still be on?

    Very good find and very encouraging news indeed! Hopefully after the weekend we may get more hints as to what is going to happen? Especially as Charlie would have then opened to the public! :-bd
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited June 2013 Posts: 13,355
    The more time Mendes can give Bond before he has to do King Lear the better. Maybe he can come off of that and start filming straight away?

    Next month could be what we've all been waiting for.
  • Posts: 2,483
    Shardlake wrote:
    While I'm not really keen on the idea of Moneypenny being out in the field with Bond, those expecting an old fashioned Bond adventure with 24 are likely to be deeply disappointed while the idea of an old fashioned style entry might get the likes of The Wizard hard, I don't think the masses would accept Bond like this within the Craig era.

    While this has been reset at the end of SF with familiar traits put in place for a new beginning I think it will more likely be a new take on these characters and not a film like one of the prime Connery's those expecting Bond sent out to save the world type film have clearly not noticed that the world has moved on and this would simply look absurd things have moved on whether your fan boy fantasies have or not.

    In an age of Islamic terrorists who think nothing of blowing up skyscrapers and hacking people to death on city streets in broad daylight; in an age of nuclear proliferation into that Islamic world (viz Iran), now more than ever is the time for a Bond who "saves the world." The world in 2013 is more dangerous than it was in 1963.

    As for Moneypenny, I don't want her to be the new Felix Leiter, and I trust Mendes (and Micolli) are not foolish enough to go that route.

  • Posts: 2,483
    Shardlake wrote:
    While I'm not really keen on the idea of Moneypenny being out in the field with Bond, those expecting an old fashioned Bond adventure with 24 are likely to be deeply disappointed while the idea of an old fashioned style entry might get the likes of The Wizard hard, I don't think the masses would accept Bond like this within the Craig era.

    While this has been reset at the end of SF with familiar traits put in place for a new beginning I think it will more likely be a new take on these characters and not a film like one of the prime Connery's those expecting Bond sent out to save the world type film have clearly not noticed that the world has moved on and this would simply look absurd things have moved on whether your fan boy fantasies have or not.
    I'm glad you brought this up. I wasn't sure if I was the only one who interpereted the ending of Skyfall this way, but I didn't necessarily see it as a return to old school Bond. I took it as returning familiar elements from the Bond films of old and ushering them into the new era of Bond. Actually I felt that much of the final act reinforced that idea. The return and the demolition of the DB5 and Skyfall signaled a sort of paying respect to the past and what came before, but letting go and moving on into a new era.

    Didn't see it that way at all. Virtually all of SF was highly traditional and very reverential toward the past. Even the denouement signaled the return of a traditional Bond. The destruction of the DB was not symbolic, it was a plot device to enhance Silva's villainy and Bond's rage.
  • Good points @Shardlake and @Perilagu_Khan. I can see both points of view. We'll find out in the next year, possibly 2, where EON is going now that the past has been reconciled with the present.

    I find these recent developments, short of some word from Mendes and EON that contradicts them, to be a solid indicator that a 2014 release is still quite possible. It's very telling that Mendes has dropped out of several projects that could have compromised him directing BOND24 early next year.

    I know that @Samuel001 has mentioned dates allotted for film releases and indicated November 2015 as still being available, but I can see that changed very quickly (and the studios can and I have seen them so do before) if this film starting shooting early in 2014. There's absolutely no way it will stay in the "can" for a year or more, the series is way too big at this point in time and people simply won't stand for it. It would make even less sense the way secret details leak out now. They'll rearrange release dates to accommodate the new film, especially given SF's huge box office.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I know that @Samuel001 has mentioned dates allotted for film releases and indicated November 2015 as still being available, but I can see that changed very quickly (and the studios can and I have seen them so do before) if this film starting shooting early in 2014. There's absolutely no way it will stay in the "can" for a year or more, the series is way too big at this point in time and people simply won't stand for it. It would make even less sense the way secret details leak out now. They'll rearrange release dates to accommodate the new film, especially given SF's huge box office.

    Absolutely.

    And after SF Bond is a behemoth for other films to shy away from. If EON say its Nov 14 then its for other films to worry about and change their release dates.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Didn't see it that way at all. Virtually all of SF was highly traditional and very reverential toward the past. Even the denouement signaled the return of a traditional Bond. The destruction of the DB was not symbolic, it was a plot device to enhance Silva's villainy and Bond's rage.
    I hope you are right Khan. It would sure be fun to get something resembling an old-time Connery style adventure. In other words Bond on mission and without any personal baggage to sort out. Craig does have the ability to play Bond like Connery did, so it would seem like a wasted opportunity if not taken advantage of, in my humble preference for the series direction, of course.

    However, I "fear" that what @battleshipgrey suggested might be possible too, ie this:
    "I took it as returning familiar elements from the Bond films of old and ushering them into the new era of Bond."
    I use scare quotes for "fear" as even if this is the case, it could still be a good film, despite not being what I would prefer.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Anyway, somewhere not too long ago Morten Tyldum was mentioned as candidate for director. Here it says he´s tied to two projects in the immediate future, so that should rule him out.

    http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=105661
    "Morten Tyldum to Direct Ghostman
    Source: Deadline , Roger Hobbs
    June 20, 2013
    19 0

    Headhunters director Morten Tyldum is set to helm the upcoming Warner Bros. adaptation of Roger Hobbs recent novel Ghostman. Published earlier this year, the crime thriller is officially described as follows:

    When a casino robbery in Atlantic City goes horribly awry the man who orchestrated it is obliged to call in a favor from "Jack." Only thirty or so people are sure this man exists, some believe he's dead, and none know anything at all about his true identity. Those are closely guarded trade secrets, to say the least, for an exceptionally trained, experienced, and talented criminal. But as he struggles to clean up the mess left in the wake of the bungled Atlantic City heist, he finds himself increasingly more visible as he's pursued simultaneously by the FBI and other interested, if mysteriously elusive, parties--a situation that requires every gram of his skill, ingenuity, and self-protective instincts, especially when offense and defense become meaningless terms.

    Tyldum will soon make his English-language debut with the Alan Turing biopic The Imitation Game. Benedict Cumberbatch and Keira Knightley are both attached to star.

    The feature film version will work from an adapted screenplay by Peter Craig with Kevin McCormick producing through his Langley Park Pictures."
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960
    Anyone care to give me a quick rundown on what's gone on this past week and a half? I only caught snippets of the confirmation that Penelope Cruz was not in the running for 'Bond 24,' and that Mendes was going to wait to see how his play went in its first week before deciding on whether he would return or not. Anything else I missed?
  • Posts: 9,843
    nope All is Quiet on the Western Front.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yep, it's been quiet but you know what? I think it's fair to say Mendes is returning. It would be incredibly stupid and bad business practise on EoN's part to allow Mendes to essentially string them along to simply wait and see how happy he is in July for a definitive answer, especially as, he ruled himself out previously, made a big deal about it and then now has re-entered negotiations to come back.
    I suspect EoN are moving things forward on the quiet and waiting for the majority of the summer tentpole movies to die down before releasing updates on Bond 24.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    I can't see them leaving Bond out of a whole PTS sequence again.

    Agreed. TSWLM changed the whole concept of the PTS.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    echo wrote:
    I can't see them leaving Bond out of a whole PTS sequence again.

    Agreed. TSWLM changed the whole concept of the PTS.

    I think the whole point of a PTS is to grab the audience from the start, and a PTS without Bond would be much less exciting.
  • Posts: 9,843
    So Radcliffe is "rumored" to play the next Bond Villian according to Latino post.

    http://www.latinospost.com/articles/21891/20130620/james-bond-24-news-update-daniel-radcliffe-next-villain.htm
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    The article merely states that Radcliffe would rather like to be cast as a Bond villain not that he's in anyway, shape or form going to be one. Also that comment about Penelope Cruz is also inaccurate so. That piece of "news" us one to ignore really.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 421
    Poor Radcliffe. Huge stardom at a young age, develops into one of the most annoying people on the planet. Safe to say a Radcliffe appearance would make me want to go into hiding.

    [Inappropriate comment edited - JM7]
  • Posts: 2,483
    Risico007 wrote:
    So Radcliffe is "rumored" to play the next Bond Villian according to Latino post.

    http://www.latinospost.com/articles/21891/20130620/james-bond-24-news-update-daniel-radcliffe-next-villain.htm

    I certainly wouldn't want Raddy anywhere near Bond, but I do wonder if a boy wonder would make for a unique and effective Bond villain. Looking back, none of the Bond villains have been extremely young, and I daresay only Elektra was younger than Bond, and she inherited her villainy rather than earning it. What about some mad, boy genius in his early twenties as a villain? It's a thought, anyway.

  • Posts: 9,843
    Agreed and I did put "rumored" in quotes
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited June 2013 Posts: 13,355
    Renard and Graves were also younger than Bond. I'm sure there are a few more.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Alec too.
  • Posts: 2,483
    But the age difference in those cases was rather insignificant, IMO. Bond didn't seem much older than Renard, Graves and Alec. When I speak of an age and experience disparity, I'm thinking along the lines of Bond and Q in Skyfall. The difference there was stark, and we've never had that with Bond and his primary adversary.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    AgentJM7 wrote:
    Poor Radcliffe. Huge stardom at a young age, develops into one of the most annoying people on the planet. Would almost commit if I saw him anywhere near a Bond film...

    I don't know what is more sad, the fact that a website would take a comment from Radcliffe to mean he is going to be the next Bond villain or the fact that some fans would get so lathered up about they are going to commit.

    Is this murder or suicide?

Sign In or Register to comment.