Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

No Time to Die (Bond 25)

2456726

Comments

  • #2


    Kunkka wrote: »
    Bad is an understatement.... lets pretend it never happened.

    I honestly didn't think Spectre was that bad, not as good as Casino Royale or Skyfall but was a decent Bond. I do agree that they don't need to keep referring back to old Bond references as it didn't work in Spectre. Craig and Nolan would be perfect combo for the next Bond, wouldn't be happy with Tarantino doing one either.

    I re-watched all of the Bonds a year or so ago, was it just me or do the Roger Moore ones really not stand up at all? It was sad for me as Moore was my favourite Bond as a kid :( . Goldfinger is still an absolute classic and stands out as the best of the whole lot.

    Now now, less of the Moore bashing.Roger Moore's Bond movies are of their time and were loved by those audiences. You can't really or fairly compare the Bonds because they all come from different eras and styles.

    When Spielberg and Lucas decided they wanted to make their own series of Bond type movies, they devised Indiana Jones, who clearly derived from Roger Moore's more tongue in cheek version of Bond, rather than Connery's more serious take.

    Moore's Bond action movies belong on the same shelf as the likes of Indiana Jones, Star Wars and the Goonies etc and similar action movies of the 70's and '80's.

    Connery's belong with similar 60's movies like Ipcress Files and Craig's clearly derived from the Bourne movies.

    Interestingly, audiences at the time didn't take to Dalton's more serious take, so guess what, they got Brosnan to return the movies closer in spirit to Moore's movies.

    The Bond movies only returned to 'serious mode' after Bourne changed audiences views of what a spy movie should look like.

    The defense rests M'lud !!!


  • #2


    I really can't relate to this bond, Craig is a fine actor and all but these bond films to me are just so ordinary.

    The action is top rate but its the in-between and endings that really let them down, they are not films i would talk over with friends in a positive

    way.

    I hope they don't go over the top with the next one, just give him a decent villain to fight a good story and make it an hour and a half long.

    Maybe we should have got a hint of Spectre or Blofeld in Casino Royale just to let where the series was heading and maybe dropped one of the films in-between before spectre.

    There way better than the awful stuff Brosnan was forced to do imo, so hopefully they can pull it together and make this on a classic.

    But listen what do i know Quantun of Solace was my favourite so go figure ha ha ha.


  • #2


    Wedwood wrote: »
    Now now, less of the Moore bashing.Roger Moore's Bond movies are of their time and were loved by those audiences. You can't really or fairly compare the Bonds because they all come from different eras and styles.

    When Spielberg and Lucas decided they wanted to make their own series of Bond type movies, they devised Indiana Jones, who clearly derived from Roger Moore's more tongue in cheek version of Bond, rather than Connery's more serious take.

    Moore's Bond action movies belong on the same shelf as the likes of Indiana Jones, Star Wars and the Goonies etc and similar action movies of the 70's and '80's.

    Connery's belong with similar 60's movies like Ipcress Files and Craig's clearly derived from the Bourne movies.

    Interestingly, audiences at the time didn't take to Dalton's more serious take, so guess what, they got Brosnan to return the movies closer in spirit to Moore's movies.

    The Bond movies only returned to 'serious mode' after Bourne changed audiences views of what a spy movie should look like.

    The defense rests M'lud !!!

    Very interesting analysis. Moore's films are very underrated imo. All the Bond films belong to their era and I miss these type of Bond films now. You Only Live Twice, Diamonds Are Forever and Goldfinger mixed serious and fun elements with Connery and Moore followed with such films as The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker and then Brosnan gave us Tomorrow Never Dies, arguably the last of the traditional type Bond films. I feel many remember the more humorous elements from the Moore films and here are some of the common reasons why people view these films poorly and dismiss what are otherwise often fairly serious films:

    People dropping glasses, etc. when Bond does something unusual in a chase, the Margaret Thatcher scene at the end of one film, Bond undercover as a clown, etc. all are pointed out. All these scenes are minor parts of the films and the clown scene is a disguise because he has to lose the cops.

    The use of music or other elements from elsewhere: music/etc from Magnificent Seven, Lawrence of Arabia, Dr Zhivago, Tarzan, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and others have been used in a Bond film.

    The same ending for each with the girl saying 'Oh James'. We forget though this also was carried into Dalton's era.

    All these things are minor and apart from that, Moore's films are not homogenous and vary in terms of humour, gadgets, violence, etc. TSWLM was the most ambitious of the Bond films of the time as was Moonraker and both delivered as solid good natured action films. Live and Let Die and For Your Eyes Only are there for those who want a more down to earth and stripped down believable plot but with the same volume of action. Octopussy for me bridged Bond and Indiana Jones and gave us a film that worked well as both a typical Bond of its era as well as giving a nod to Dr Jones.

    Every franchise has darker and more humorous entries. With Indiana Jones for example, Temple of Doom was the darkest with Last Crusade being the most humorous and Raiders being a balance of humour and serious. Even in Mad Max you had the Bruce Spence characters there to add a bit of humour. Action franchises always do this and Roger Moore's Bond films fitted in well with what other films did in this era.


  • #2


    AllForIt wrote: »
    I though Casino Royal was pretty good, well the best one for years in fact after all those dire Brosnon movies. How disappointing was that - I though Brosnon was going to be the best bond ever. Well he could have been if the script wasn't so poor or the movies so low budget. That invisible car thing was just cringe. Anyhoo Skyfall for me was totally in a different league and I love the score by Thomas Newman which he composed again for in Spectre. I didn't think Spectre was as bad as some made out, I liked it and wasn't expecting it to be as good as Skyfall. It's a pity Mendez is not directing another but I hope the next one is of the same style of the last 2.

    I feel for a time the Bond franchise was unsure where it was going. Early on, it was an easy format: Connery and Lazenby had films defined by Blofeld and SPECTRE. Then, the theme of détente and cooperation between Bond and Russian agents defined Moore's era and Dalton's first film. Then the series went into its experimental period.

    Realities like the end of the cold war changed things drastically. The Gogol character was made redundant and instead for Dalton's second film, we get a revenge against a drug dealer story. It was a good film and a precursor to Craig's era.

    I like Brosnan's first 2 films a lot. But there appeared a big effort to bring the franchise back to the Moore era. The last 2 of Brosnan's films for me left a mixed legacy. The World Is Not Enough was quite enjoyable up to the climax which was poor. The whole flooding of the submarine part was boring and seemed to drag on forever. However, a good shootout in the caviar factory compensated.

    Die Another Day is not as bad as some would have you believe but there are certain flaws. Every possible Bond cliche was crammed into the film. The invisible car was a step too far and the most infamous moment in a Bond film for sure. The chase itself was a derivative of the one from Goldfinger and used as recently as Tomorrow Never Dies. The plot is a ripoff of Diamonds Are Forever. Overall though there is good action but the excellence of Goldeneye was replaced by what were just a going through the motions set of clichés and ripoff scenes from past films.

    Casino Royale came at the right time and the new direction of the series was welcome. The excesses of films like Die Another Day were left behind and replaced with a grittier feel. Skyfall is a classic too and Quantum is underrated. SPECTRE is by no means a bad film but there are just some flaws. The main flaw was the rebooted Blofeld and his backstory. The personalisation of the enemy worked perfect in Goldeneye and Skyfall but not as well here. The climax was poor too and some of the overused clichés were creeping back into the film and had been absent in Skyfall and its predecessors.

    There is debate over which type of Bond film is best. The one thing for certain is the franchise has always reinvented itself and has lasted a lot longer than people initially predicted.


  • #2


    Craig has confirmed Bond 25 will be his last. Source

    Doesn't he basically say this every time? It's a good negotiating tactic when it comes to money if the studio is under the impression that you want to walk away.

    Also, didn't it leak earlier in the year that he had signed a 150 million contract for two more Bond movies? He followed the rumour by going on american talk show tv and announcing he'd be back for the next bond.


  • #2


    Doubt he'll do another one after this. First off he'll be too old for the modern style Bond. Second I'd say audiences will begin to tire of him as Bond. They'll want fresh blood after this one.

    Do we know who the director is?


  • #2


    007 From Sinelity Comes Incontinence.

    Timothy Dalton returns as 007 stationed in an old folks home telling tales of how he was once the greatest of her majesty's secret service.


  • #2


    Danny Boyle is out.

    Danny Boyle Exits As Bond 25 Director Amid Creative Differences
    Danny Boyle, who had been set as director of the next installment of the James Bond franchise, is leaving the production, producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli said today on Twitter.

    It’s unclear how this might impact the distribution plans of the latest in the 007 franchise. New U.S. co-distributors MGM and Annapurna had already set a November 8, 2019 release date for the pic, which will bow first on October 25, 2019 in the UK as part of Universal’s new international and home entertainment rights deal.

    Craig is back for his fifth film as 007, with a script that Boyle’s Trainspotting partner John Hodge wrote based on an idea by Boyle.

    https://deadline.com/2018/08/danny-boyle-out-bond-25-director-creative-differences-1202449330/
    Michael G. Wilson, Barbara Broccoli and Daniel Craig today announced that due to creative differences Danny Boyle has decided to no longer direct Bond 25.


    https://twitter.com/007/status/1031951674544476160


  • #2


    Sounds like they wanted him to make the film they wanted as opposed to the one he wanted. How very Disney.


  • #2


    Give Christopher McQuarrie a chance


  • #2


    Lady Gaga rumoured for acting role plus to do the song


  • #2


    JP Liz V1 wrote: »


    That's good. I liked her character. I guess that means Waltz won't be returning because I presume he would have mentioned him too.



    She is the first Bond girl to return since Sylvia Trench from Dr No and From Russia With Love.



    Maud Adams was a Bond girl in The Man With The Golden Gun and Octopussy but she played two different roles.


  • #2


    Be surprised if Waltz didn't come back; after all, Blofeld didn't die at the end of Spectre.

    It could be a surprise casting, so he won't be on the posters etc, but he'll be in the movie, Like Matt Damon in Interstellar. Not sure if they've ever done that with Bond before.


  • #2


    Oscar winner Rami Malek linked for villian role


  • #2


    JP Liz V1 wrote: »
    Oscar winner Rami Malek linked for villian role

    Meh.


  • #2


    I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate he'll be playing an evil Silicon Valley tech genius or hacker.


  • #2


    pixelburp wrote: »
    I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate he'll be playing an evil Silicon Valley tech genius or hacker.

    "Silicon Valley, you say?"

    L6-H2_x7_400x400.jpg


  • #2


    Maybe I'm being cynical but seems more like a diversity box ticking exercise to counter act hints at misogyny and/or sexism. Waller-Bridge has an offbeat unusual writing style which I think would go against the grain of the extremely over protective Broccolis.


  • #2


    p to the e wrote: »
    Maybe I'm being cynical but seems more like a diversity box ticking exercise to counter act hints at misogyny and/or sexism. Waller-Bridge has an offbeat unusual writing style which I think would go against the grain of the extremely over protective Broccolis.

    You're being cynical :)

    "Craig, who lives in New York with his wife Rachel Weisz, is a fan of Fleabag, which reached the end of its second and probably last series on BBC1 last Monday, and also of Killing Eve, which Waller-Bridge developed.

    Waller-Bridge has been in New York for the past few weeks, latterly performing in a stage version of Fleabag, which ends on Sunday.

    Sources close to the film in the US said that while in the country she discussed with Craig how to improve the script of Bond 25, which the 007 actor felt needed some “polishing”, by introducing more humour and the offbeat style of writing she is best known for."


    By all accounts Craig appears to be calling shots, but was probably part of the deal to keep him playing Bond for a little longer.


  • #2


    I'm starting to worry the franchise has ran out of steam. The last three have been pretty dismal affairs. Would hate to see them sink into mediocrity.


  • #2


    If that article is true then kudos to Craig for seeing that the franchise has moved too far from its roots.

    Bond has become Bourne. After Spectre it needs that injection of "wit and quirkiness", and maybe Waller-Bridge is the one to add it.


  • #2


    pixelburp wrote: »
    You're being cynical :)

    "Craig, who lives in New York with his wife Rachel Weisz, is a fan of Fleabag, which reached the end of its second and probably last series on BBC1 last Monday, and also of Killing Eve, which Waller-Bridge developed.

    Waller-Bridge has been in New York for the past few weeks, latterly performing in a stage version of Fleabag, which ends on Sunday.

    Sources close to the film in the US said that while in the country she discussed with Craig how to improve the script of Bond 25, which the 007 actor felt needed some “polishing”, by introducing more humour and the offbeat style of writing she is best known for."


    By all accounts Craig appears to be calling shots, but was probably part of the deal to keep him playing Bond for a little longer.

    Very interesting. I wonder has Craig got involved with the writing process for any of the other Bonds.

    It's odd that with Craig they basically hit the reset button away from the naff humour and over the top gadgets and went more "Bourne". Hopefully they don't go crazy with the humour and we get back to Roger Moore type antics.


  • #2


    pixelburp wrote: »

    By all accounts Craig appears to be calling shots, but was probably part of the deal to keep him playing Bond for a little longer.

    I wonder did Craig and Boyle clash hence his exit

    I just can't imagine Craig's Bond funny


  • #2


    Nothing major revealed in that. Good to see Ana De Armas and Billy Magnussen in the cast; I wonder will Magnussen be in more a comedic role as that's his area. No word on Waltz but that doesn't he won't show up in it as a surprise.

    It's strange they didn't announce the title though; unless they still don't have one.


  • #2
  • #2


    Ana de Armas is smoking hot. I'm sure she's a talented actress also. Rami Malak looks about as villainous as Mr.Tumble.

    Was hoping they'd bring back Bautista for a bit of old school menace.

    Casting looks a bit too 'woke', unless they put Moneypenny back behind her desk. The plot will probably reference climate change or the Windrush scandal no doubt


Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.