No Time To Die: Production Diary

1133713381340134213432507

Comments

  • Posts: 12,474
    FoxRox wrote: »
    DAD over SP I can understand a little, but DAD over SF? I just can’t follow at all.

    Simple. It is just much more intelligently written than SF. Which says a lot about Skyfall.

    I don’t think we’d agree on much...
  • dominicgreenedominicgreene The Eternal QOS Defender
    Posts: 1,756
    Amazing: CR, GE
    Very good: SF, QoS
    Good: TND, DAD
    Meh: TWINE

    And then there's SP...
  • Posts: 4,044
    Dennison wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    GE, CR, SF - Fantastic
    TND, TWINE, SP - Good
    QOS - Godawful

    DAD is so bad it can’t be listed...
    I prefer DAD any day and by a long shot over SF and SP.

    Yeah some top class dialogue in that film - 'Yo momma' 'say hello to gravity'

    At least it was the last time we saw James Bond flirting convincingly.

    Which scene was that?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    vzok wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    GE, CR, SF - Fantastic
    TND, TWINE, SP - Good
    QOS - Godawful

    DAD is so bad it can’t be listed...
    I prefer DAD any day and by a long shot over SF and SP.

    Yeah some top class dialogue in that film - 'Yo momma' 'say hello to gravity'

    At least it was the last time we saw James Bond flirting convincingly.

    Which scene was that?
    This may be controversial, but I thought Brosnan played the Jinx intro scene very well. There was a bit of old school to it. The only problem was the teenage dialogue and Halle's horrendous overacting. If she'd underplayed a bit (and not been so obvious in staring at his package while contemplating a mouthful), the scene would have worked better.

    I quite liked the way he made the moves on Miranda too.

    I've never seen Craig as a convincing womanizer. He seems a bit stiff and scripted.
  • Posts: 1,165
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.
  • Posts: 12,474
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I like how the wait between QOS and SF turned out though, since SF was a separate story and ended up being one of my favorites. Perhaps it will be more like that!
  • Posts: 12,526
    Well? With the Oscar's happening this weekend, hopefully we might get some Director news early next week?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    Well? With the Oscar's happening this weekend, hopefully we might get some Director news early next week?
    That was the initial plan, to my understanding.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    Well? With the Oscar's happening this weekend, hopefully we might get some Director news early next week?
    I don't think the Oscars are all that relevant to a director announcement. We're a couple of months out from something imho.
  • Posts: 12,526
    How long would you say set construction would take? Dependant upon who and what they go with?
  • Posts: 1,031
    FoxRox wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I like how the wait between QOS and SF turned out though, since SF was a separate story and ended up being one of my favorites. Perhaps it will be more like that!

    You've forgotten the retcon - it's not a separate story any more!
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 5,767
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Well I want more from a Bond movie than just "pacing". DAD is simply abysmal in every department. Both SF and SP have flaws but are a much easier watch. Last time I viewed DAD I switched it off midway (I was lucky to get that far!). Something I haven't done with any Bond movie, and that includes Brossa other efforts!
    I wasn´t trying to imply that pacing is SF and SP´s only problem, but I have no problem watching through DAD, even despite Jinx hurting my mind. Everytime however I try to watch SF (by miles the better of Mendes´ efforts) I drop out before the film gets into gear at all.
  • Posts: 1,031
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Dennison wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    GE, CR, SF - Fantastic
    TND, TWINE, SP - Good
    QOS - Godawful

    DAD is so bad it can’t be listed...
    I prefer DAD any day and by a long shot over SF and SP.

    Yeah some top class dialogue in that film - 'Yo momma' 'say hello to gravity'
    What, are you trying to say the last two films had less examples of that?
    DAD works perfectly fine as a persiflage, and its pace is good enough to outshine the ridiculous storyline (which means it has terrific pacing), whereas SF and SP just drag endlessly.

    I was just trying to say what I said - don't remember mentioning any other film than DAD ...
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Well, it's officially March 1st. Let's hope we get some official news/announcements this month. Plus, Daniel Craig's 50th birthday is tomorrow so maybe we'll get some pictures of him.

    (Not holding my breath).
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 2018 Posts: 8,401
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »
    Well, it's officially March 1st. Let's hope we get some official news/announcements this month. Plus, Daniel Craig's 50th birthday is tomorrow so maybe we'll get some pictures of him.

    (Not holding my breath).

    Will the training regiment go out the wind for 48 hours?

    Hard to eat well and exercise when you have the hangover from hell. 3:-O
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I've been concerned with their abilities as film producers for a while now and quite frankly I don't care how long they've been in the game they do NOT get a free pass or excused just because they're the heirs and key holders to the Bond property. They should know better in comparison to the highly questionable decisions they've been making for far too long. I honestly feel they're doing a terrible job as producers, especially given their experience and I feel that outside of casting Craig, they've done nothing to really push the boat out in effectively making changes to usher the franchise forward in a creatively rewarding way.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 5,767
    FoxRox wrote: »
    DAD over SP I can understand a little, but DAD over SF? I just can’t follow at all.
    One of my biggest problems with SF is that after the pts the tempo goes down so much, and the storytelling meanders so broadly, I simply don´t get attracted. M writing obituary, ok. M summoned to headmaster, yeah ok, if some tension would have been built out of that. But no, the next thing is the explosion, ok, explosion is always tense and ramps things up. But then, next scene, again tempo to zero, Bond on the beach. Come on. Ok, now Bond is motivated again and goes home, promising the next gear. But no, personal evaluation, including the preposterous alleged childhood trauma, which in the further proceedings has absolutely no relevance. This is just amazingly bad storytelling, constantly trying to push me away instead of luring me in.
    DAD is dumb, but the story flows and invites me in, and as I said, DAD is a perfect persiflage of a Bond film and doesn´t pretentiously try to be anything else.

  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »
    Well, it's officially March 1st. Let's hope we get some official news/announcements this month. Plus, Daniel Craig's 50th birthday is tomorrow so maybe we'll get some pictures of him.

    (Not holding my breath).

    Will the training regiment go out the wind for 48 hours?

    Hard to eat well and exercise when you have the hangover from hell. 3:-O

    I doubt the training regiment has even begun...

    IF the movie begins filming by the end of this year, Craig probably won't start training until June or July.
  • Posts: 1,165
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I've been concerned with their abilities as film producers for a while now and quite frankly I don't care how long they've been in the game they do NOT get a free pass or excused just because they're the heirs and key holders to the Bond property. They should know better in comparison to the highly questionable decisions they've been making for far too long. I honestly feel they're doing a terrible job as producers, especially given their experience and I feel that outside of casting Craig, they've done nothing to really push the boat out in effectively making changes to usher the franchise forward in a creatively rewarding way.

    I'm coming around to agreeing with you. I was viewing their tenure on Bond with rose tinted glasses, being far too lenient with them. I never thought I'd say this but at this point in time given the mess with B25 (release date announced 6 months ago yet no director or storyline in place) I'd almost before happier if EON did sell on their rights.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    edited March 2018 Posts: 1,165
    FoxRox wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    GE, CR, SF - Fantastic
    TND, TWINE, SP - Good
    QOS - Godawful

    DAD is so bad it can’t be listed...

    Just speak for yourself. I for myself would take it any day of the week over SF and Spectre.
    Shocker. Glad you're keeping things fresh, @noSolaceleft
  • Posts: 4,619
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I've been concerned with their abilities as film producers for a while now and quite frankly I don't care how long they've been in the game they do NOT get a free pass or excused just because they're the heirs and key holders to the Bond property. They should know better in comparison to the highly questionable decisions they've been making for far too long. I honestly feel they're doing a terrible job as producers, especially given their experience and I feel that outside of casting Craig, they've done nothing to really push the boat out in effectively making changes to usher the franchise forward in a creatively rewarding way.
    I have been saying for some time that BB & MGW are simply incompetent as producers, and that a significant percentage of the members of this forum would be better at producing Bond movies than they are. I was mocked, ridiculed, laughed at. The fact that there is a very good chance the production of Bond 25 will turn out to be a disaster (if Boyle + Hodge don't work out, a delay or a disaster would be pretty much unavoidable) proves that I was right once again.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,534
    Amazing - GE, CR
    Great - TND, TWINE, QOS, SF
    Good - DAD
    Shouldn't have been made - SP
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I've been concerned with their abilities as film producers for a while now and quite frankly I don't care how long they've been in the game they do NOT get a free pass or excused just because they're the heirs and key holders to the Bond property. They should know better in comparison to the highly questionable decisions they've been making for far too long. I honestly feel they're doing a terrible job as producers, especially given their experience and I feel that outside of casting Craig, they've done nothing to really push the boat out in effectively making changes to usher the franchise forward in a creatively rewarding way.
    I have been saying for some time that BB & MGW are simply incompetent as producers, and that a significant percentage of the members of this forum would be better at producing Bond movies than they are. I was mocked, ridiculed, laughed at. The fact that there is a very good chance the production of Bond 25 will turn out to be a disaster (if Boyle + Hodge don't work out, a delay or a disaster would be pretty much unavoidable) proves that I was right once again.

    You were laughed at and mocked for very good reason. The idea they’re incompetent is laughable. You haven’t the slightest clue what you’re talking about.
  • Posts: 4,619
    RC7 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I've been concerned with their abilities as film producers for a while now and quite frankly I don't care how long they've been in the game they do NOT get a free pass or excused just because they're the heirs and key holders to the Bond property. They should know better in comparison to the highly questionable decisions they've been making for far too long. I honestly feel they're doing a terrible job as producers, especially given their experience and I feel that outside of casting Craig, they've done nothing to really push the boat out in effectively making changes to usher the franchise forward in a creatively rewarding way.
    I have been saying for some time that BB & MGW are simply incompetent as producers, and that a significant percentage of the members of this forum would be better at producing Bond movies than they are. I was mocked, ridiculed, laughed at. The fact that there is a very good chance the production of Bond 25 will turn out to be a disaster (if Boyle + Hodge don't work out, a delay or a disaster would be pretty much unavoidable) proves that I was right once again.

    You were laughed at and mocked for very good reason. The idea they’re incompetent is laughable. You haven’t the slightest clue what you’re talking about.
    They are repeating the very same mistakes again and again. What happened during the pre-production of Spectre is enough to label them incompetent, and now they are very close to a disastrous production again.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,401
    Not only that but they seem incapable of learning from the past. With each successive tenure they start off small, but lose the reins midway through and end up careering into a ditch (sorry, I'm snowed in where I live and the sight of these kids playing on their sleds threw up a metaphor that I couldn't pass up). I don't really think anyone behind Bond has a passion for it anymore. Barbara only has an interest in this Bond, so the thought of moving on from it as the market dictates leaves her apathetic. I really hope they hand over to Nolan once Craig leaves, as that's probably what's best for the franchise and Cubby's legacy.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2018 Posts: 23,883
    They certainly give the impression that they're flying by the seat of their undies, that's for sure. Whether the reality is somewhat different I'm not sure.

    I don't know enough about their internal viewpoints to form an opinion, but from where I'm sitting they've certainly shown us that don't have a clue how to deliver formula properly. Instead, they've gone off on creative tangents, for better (in some cases) and for worse (in other cases).

    I may be wrong, but I just get a feeling they need a shakeup in some way shape or form, with new blood in the form of an actor, a director, a writer or even a corporate partner. That's why Boyle/Hodge is at least a bit encouraging, but I sincerely hope for more fundamental shifts.
  • Posts: 684
    Even if SP had been better thought out on the production side, and better received by the fans here, or even if the gap years since QOS had been kept down, the desire for some sort of shakeup would still now be with us, to some extent. For the simple reason that we're in the midst of the longest-tenured era in series history. I think wanting some sort of change after 13 years is natural, no matter how much good or bad resulted of that decade-plus.
  • RC7RC7
    edited March 2018 Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I've been concerned with their abilities as film producers for a while now and quite frankly I don't care how long they've been in the game they do NOT get a free pass or excused just because they're the heirs and key holders to the Bond property. They should know better in comparison to the highly questionable decisions they've been making for far too long. I honestly feel they're doing a terrible job as producers, especially given their experience and I feel that outside of casting Craig, they've done nothing to really push the boat out in effectively making changes to usher the franchise forward in a creatively rewarding way.
    I have been saying for some time that BB & MGW are simply incompetent as producers, and that a significant percentage of the members of this forum would be better at producing Bond movies than they are. I was mocked, ridiculed, laughed at. The fact that there is a very good chance the production of Bond 25 will turn out to be a disaster (if Boyle + Hodge don't work out, a delay or a disaster would be pretty much unavoidable) proves that I was right once again.

    You were laughed at and mocked for very good reason. The idea they’re incompetent is laughable. You haven’t the slightest clue what you’re talking about.
    They are repeating the very same mistakes again and again. What happened during the pre-production of Spectre is enough to label them incompetent, and now they are very close to a disastrous production again.

    You have zero information about B25 and a minute slither about SP. I could tell you some very interesting facts regarding SP that would light up this forum. The leaks have you deluded, Sir, but then as they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. You’re testament to that.

    There’s a very astute Arctic Monkeys lyric that talks of the naysayers as ‘Thinking ‘bout things, but not actually doing the things’. You fall firmly into that camp. You’ve no first hand knowledge of the process so your sweeping statements carry no weight. Others are a little more measured in their negativity and don’t come across as childish.
    Strog wrote: »
    Even if SP had been better thought out on the production side, and better received by the fans here, or even if the gap years since QOS had been kept down, the desire for some sort of shakeup would still now be with us, to some extent. For the simple reason that we're in the midst of the longest-tenured era in series history. I think wanting some sort of change after 13 years is natural, no matter how much good or bad resulted of that decade-plus.

    Very true.
  • StrelikStrelik Spectre Island
    edited March 2018 Posts: 108
    According to The Hollywood Reporter (March 1, 2018), Danny Boyle's next film will be a musical comedy. The likelihood of Boyle directing Bond 25 is now uncertain unless its release date is pushed back:
    Director Danny Boyle and Love Actually screenwriter Richard Curtis have teamed up for an untitled comedy.... Universal is eying a shoot for [Boyle's musical film] as early as summer if casting can come together....

    Rumors swirled in February that Boyle was a candidate to direct the new James Bond movie, but that project remains in flux thanks to a stalled director search. Insiders say that this music-inspired comedy will be Boyle's next movie. If Bond producer Eon Productions does want Boyle, it will have to wait and potentially even shift the release date of Nov. 8, 2019.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/danny-boyle-richard-curtis-team-universal-comedy-1089881

    If this news is correct, then either Boyle isn't directing Bond 25 or Bond 25 will be delayed.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    doubleoego wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    Is anyone else a bit worried by how Babs and Mick are handling the Bond 25 scenario? They really seem to have given Craig so much power and it's leading to a bit of a clusterf*ck when it comes to settling on a story and finding a director.

    At first I thought the 4 year wait between SP & B25 was a cautionary thing due to getting burned with rushing QOS into production but then again, they had another long wait between SF and SP and rushed that too. Looks like a case of history repeating itself here.

    I've been concerned with their abilities as film producers for a while now and quite frankly I don't care how long they've been in the game they do NOT get a free pass or excused just because they're the heirs and key holders to the Bond property. They should know better in comparison to the highly questionable decisions they've been making for far too long. I honestly feel they're doing a terrible job as producers, especially given their experience and I feel that outside of casting Craig, they've done nothing to really push the boat out in effectively making changes to usher the franchise forward in a creatively rewarding way.

    Despite seeing what a total shambles Disney have made of the new Star Wars trilogy I find myself struggling to disagree with you.

    They got lucky with SF thanks to the Olympics, Adele and the 50th anniversary bump but, writer's strike notwithstanding, QOS was flawed, SF got away with it, but again the script is very Emmenthal like, and the less said about SP's script the better. And that's just the last 10 years.

    GE is a reasonably solid entry (although personally I find the script too front loaded - we spend far too long in Monaco and with Natlaya so that by the time Bond actually gets on his mission half the film is over) but TND, TWINE and DAD have, respectively, a computer game script, an overly melodramatic but at least reasonably original script and a good initial idea but utterly botched script.

    The best script by far of the post Cubby era is CR and I don't think it's a coincidence that it's the only one that has a Fleming spine.

    I'm not criticising their ability to organise the general logistics of such mammoth undertakings but some of their artistic decisions, particularly regarding the writing and ceding too much authority to their star and director, are questionable in the extreme.

    The parallels between EON and Arsenal's current predicament are striking. We're a long time since the trophy filled years of the 60s and despite the odd FA Cup triumph (GE, CR) we seem to be stuck in a rut of diminishing returns. The question is would we prefer to continue to keep blind faith with an EON who seem to be consistently behind the curve (the Bourne and Dark Knight copying was pretty tragic for a series that used to be the brand leader of action cinema, not to mention that when it comes to spectacular stuntwork MI is the go to franchise nowadays) or would we prefer a change, without being really sure what that means?

    In EON we trust? Before SP I would have unequivocally stated yes. But now I'm simply not sure.

    They don't help things with this apparent need (seemingly at the expense of Bond) to make other films that no one is particularly interested in seeing. If they don't want to make Bond films any more then fine - sell the rights to someone who does. I think I'd rather take the gamble of a new owner than people who no longer seem bothered about making Bond films and just go through the motions after increasingly long gaps.
    I have been saying for some time that BB & MGW are simply incompetent as producers, and that a significant percentage of the members of this forum would be better at producing Bond movies than they are. I was mocked, ridiculed, laughed at.

    With good reason. I agree that some of their decisions have been terrible but that's not the same as one of us mugs (and I'm very much including you there) taking control of the whole thing and delivering it on time and on budget.

    All they really need is someone to tell them 'Stop. That's a shocking idea. Think about what you are doing' from time to time to keep them on the straight and narrow. That they apparently need someone to do this is pretty depressing though.
    The fact that there is a very good chance the production of Bond 25 will turn out to be a disaster (if Boyle + Hodge don't work out, a delay or a disaster would be pretty much unavoidable) proves that I was right once again.

    'Once again'? I think we all missed the first time.

    I also have rather low hopes for B25 but the idea that something based entirely on your supposition that hasn't even happened yet can be regarded as proof and vindication of your spoutings is rather misguided to say the least.
    They are repeating the very same mistakes again and again. What happened during the pre-production of Spectre is enough to label them incompetent,

    Agree with this.

    and now they are very close to a disastrous production again.

    Don't agree with this as their is simply not enough data to base it on. Not optimistic though.
Sign In or Register to comment.