No Time to Die Spoilers from post #1449 onward

ManOfMystery · 13-01-2021 11:43am

The goalposts keep moving as lockdowns are reinstated and no-one really knows when society is going to get back to any kind of 'normal'. Some cinema chains may not even return to normal duty if we have another 6-12 months of this and they have no income. Hopefully we'll get to see 007 on a big screen again but they may inevitably have to bite the bullet and go with an on-demand release - going by WW84's return, I can't see them making huge profit if that's the case.

Of course, they can always keep moving the release date, but I suspect they'll want to cast the new Bond sooner rather than later and maintain momentum off the back of this movie's release.

pixelburp · 13-01-2021 12:00pm

What complicates is that nobody can factor in changes in the environment like newer, more virulent strains appearing that have arguably / effectively put the restoration of normality back by another year. At least. I guess it depends how long it'll take to get the vaccination numbers up to the magic "herd immunity" value and that's entirely down to respective countries' strategies.

CastorTroy · 13-01-2021 12:59pm

While they would like to release it, at least they know they're not under the same pressure as the likes of the Marvel movies which are part of a planned series of films.

Dades · 13-01-2021 4:23pm

OU812 wrote: »

It’ll either be the big Xmas tent pole or open next year. They may even have the next bond started by the time it comes out

I think they'd have to delay starting a new Bond, as the mega publicity around recasting would consign Craig to irrelevancy before his final movie had even been released.

pixelburp · 13-01-2021 7:01pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they already start the big Marketing / Press Tour before the cinema release was shelved? If so I wonder how much it has set them back, given (presumably) they'll need to do it all over again whenever they DO get the green-light to release. Would certainly change the nature of what's going to constitute a "success" with the film...

Rodin · 13-01-2021 7:03pm

I fear it'll be rubbish like the last one.

The best part of the last one was the first 10 minutes.

Harry Palmr · 13-01-2021 7:14pm

Surprised they didn't fund some of teh vaccines to be honest!

saintsaltynuts · 13-01-2021 7:36pm

Rodin wrote: »

I fear it'll be rubbish like the last one.

The best part of the last one was the first 10 minutes.

It was a big let down especially after Skyfall.Still though I'd fork out 20 euro to watch the new one at home.

B.A._Baracus · 14-01-2021 1:22pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they already start the big Marketing / Press Tour before the cinema release was shelved? If so I wonder how much it has set them back, given (presumably) they'll need to do it all over again whenever they DO get the green-light to release. Would certainly change the nature of what's going to constitute a "success" with the film...

I guess they don't really care about spending all that to promote it. It's all a tax write off anyways.

But to me all this prolonging it seems like they want to claw back as much as possible. Obvious statement as it's a business. But other studios like Warner Brothers have adapted to covid-19 and releasing their entire 2021 lineup on HBO max. Of course, one could argue that this is going to push and strengthen their streaming service, but once a movie is out there it's on torrent sites.

I kind of don't get it (pushing bond back) what's a fall release gonna do? Most people won't have the vaccine by that point. So cinemas won't be at full capacity. Even if Bond 25 loses so much money they are still gonna make Bond 26.

ManOfMystery · 14-01-2021 3:00pm

They can keep pushing back and pushing back but sooner or later they'll have to bite the bullet, they're only delaying the inevitable. I've seen straight to DVD releases which get canned indefinitely after being shot then released years later when one of the cast suddenly becomes famous and they want to use that fame for PR, but for a property as big as Bond, the studio is going to want to see some kind of return sooner rather than later. It also holds up the inevitable Bond 26 movie.

pixelburp · 14-01-2021 3:29pm

I can sorta sympathise 'cos unlike other major studios, MGM don't have a streaming service (AFAIK) that they can simply move NTtD onto. That locks the film into a cinematic release come what may, there's no other box office potentiality to mine; may also explain the rumoured, slightly barmy figure bandied about that went across the desks of Netflix and Apple+.

DonnaNol · 19-01-2021 9:07am

I think the movie will be lame anyway...

pixelburp · 22-01-2021 3:56am

Officially delayed until 8th October via the Bind Twitter account. Seems like the earliest normality might return in earnest / at the earliest.

Big Gerry · 22-01-2021 4:05am

DonnaNol wrote: »

I think the movie will be lame anyway...

I don't understand why they didn't get rid of craig 5 years ago and bring in a new actor.

Coybig_ · 22-01-2021 5:32am

Everything about this movie screams that it is going to be a disaster.

The return of characters from the last installment which was not good. Specifically the completely uninteresting love interest (who he married?!?) and the worst Blofeld in any Bond movie ever.

A black woman (DIVERSITY) becoming the new 007, making fun of Bond and taking the p*ss out of him. Embarassing writing.

A sterile, mopey Bond who has remained stone faced and depressed for the previous 4 movies, with extraordinarily little character development.

The fact that Danny Boyle dropped out due to unhappiness with the script.

The fact that Pheobe Waller Bridge was brought in to perform rewrites. Any soundbites out of her tell you what everybodies priorities were on this guaranteed mess.

Pheobe - “There’s been a lot of talk about whether or not [the Bond franchise] is relevant now because of who he is and the way he treats women,”

Has there? Do James Bond fans go into movies worried about the way that he treats women? It's hardly a big worry for the audience.

Pheobe - “It has just got to evolve, and the important thing is that the film treats the women properly.”

Right, at least everybody has their priorities in order.

And here's Barbara Broccoli with more worrying sh*te :

Barbara - The Me Too movement has had a huge impact - rightfully, thankfully - on society, and these films should reflect that, as everything we do should

Yes, we need to make sure that the script, above all, respects and promotes the Me-Too movement.

ManOfMystery · 22-01-2021 10:24am

Coybig_ wrote: »

Everything about this movie screams that it is going to be a disaster.

The return of characters from the last installment which was not good. Specifically the completely uninteresting love interest (who he married?!?) and the worst Blofeld in any Bond movie ever.

A black woman (DIVERSITY) becoming the new 007, making fun of Bond and taking the p*ss out of him. Embarassing writing.

A sterile, mopey Bond who has remained stone faced and depressed for the previous 4 movies, with extraordinarily little character development.

The fact that Danny Boyle dropped out due to unhappiness with the script.

The fact that Pheobe Waller Bridge was brought in to perform rewrites. Any soundbites out of her tell you what everybodies priorities were on this guaranteed mess.

Has there? Do James Bond fans go into movies worried about the way that he treats women? It's hardly a big worry for the audience.

Right, at least everybody has their priorities in order.

And here's Barbara Broccoli with more worrying sh*te :

Yes, we need to make sure that the script, above all, respects and promotes the Me-Too movement.

You're not far off with all of this, especially the mopey Bond. I don't for a minute think he should be walking around with a perma-smile but Roger Moore and Sean Connery always came across (as deadly as they were meant to be) as enjoying their job and the *perks* of their job, whilst Craig looks like he's in permanent angst.

I don't know if that's how his character is written to behave, or if it's an idionsyncrasy of Daniel Craig in the role. His other roles have been very different so difficult to compare.

I'd like to see Henry Cavill give it a shot, he had an easy charm in Man from UNCLE (closest thing I can compare to Bond) - mix that with his aggression and physicality in Mission Impossible and you might have a Bond who's deadly but looks like he enjoys his work. If they're allowed to do that in this woke age.

pixelburp · 22-01-2021 10:29am

I don't get the impression Craig is that bothered with the role anymore, not least since Skyfall. I don't blame him; like the series or loath it, Bond isn't exactly much for an actor to bite into, bar a good payday. Skyfall did something interesting with the character, but then Spectre went into cookoo land with its own attempts at "drama". Craig probably should have been replaced a couple movies back, but then in the cold light of day, what has been the hit rate of Bond since Brosnan joined anyway? 2/4 for Craig, 1/4 for Brosnan. YMMY obviously for Invisible cars

I get it's not necessarily a popular opinion, and the box office may not reflect it, but the series kinda needs a rest IMO. Let it die (another day) for a decade, the appetite and energy come back 'cos they just feel so rote these days. Feels like a film series nobody cares to make.

mikhail · 22-01-2021 10:45am

I like Cavill, and he's great in UNCLE which is definitely a good point of comparison, but I'm not keen on them casting an American any more than the idea of casting a woman. They've been thinking about an American in the role forever though, to try to appeal better to the US market. Clint Eastwood, Adam West, and Burt Reynolds were considered for Diamonds Are Forever, and James Brolin for Octopussy, for example. At some point, the character ceases to have anything in common with Bond other than being an MGM-made spy movie, and maybe not even that if they manage to sell the company.

ManOfMystery · 22-01-2021 11:08am

mikhail wrote: »

I like Cavill, and he's great in UNCLE which is definitely a good point of comparison, but I'm not keen on them casting an American any more than the idea of casting a woman. They've been thinking about an American in the role forever though, to try to appeal better to the US market. Clint Eastwood, Adam West, and Burt Reynolds were considered for Diamonds Are Forever, and James Brolin for Octopussy, for example. At some point, the character ceases to have anything in common with Bond other than being an MGM-made spy movie, and maybe not even that if they manage to sell the company.

Cavill isn't American. He's British.

loyatemu · 22-01-2021 11:10am

mikhail wrote: »

I like Cavill, and he's great in UNCLE which is definitely a good point of comparison, but I'm not keen on them casting an American any more than the idea of casting a woman. They've been thinking about an American in the role forever though, to try to appeal better to the US market. Clint Eastwood, Adam West, and Burt Reynolds were considered for Diamonds Are Forever, and James Brolin for Octopussy, for example. At some point, the character ceases to have anything in common with Bond other than being an MGM-made spy movie, and maybe not even that if they manage to sell the company.

serious missed opportunity there :pac:

OU812 · 22-01-2021 12:08pm

They could fix the yawn around 007 quite easily by spinning off a couple of TV shows focusing on other characters.

Q Branch, Moneypenny, and another one or two double 0s to broaden the diversity. Have them all cameo in each other’s shows and explain the change of person who is James Bond through the shows.

The same way Agents of Shield or Mandalorian get to fill in background and re-invigorate the movies.

bigar · 22-01-2021 4:09pm

mikhail wrote: »

Clint Eastwood, Adam West, and Burt Reynolds were considered for Diamonds Are Forever.

loyatemu wrote: »

serious missed opportunity there :pac:

And he turned them down saying that Bond should be played by a Brit.

B.A._Baracus · 24-01-2021 2:14am

Big Gerry wrote: »

I don't understand why they didn't get rid of craig 5 years ago and bring in a new actor.

Personally I don't mind Craig but I reckon as to why he still has the gig is because his Bond movies are some serious earners. Skyfall made a billion alone in the box office. Hollywood really does take the mantra of 'if it ain't broken don't fix it' to heart.

flasher0030 · 24-01-2021 10:57am

Big Gerry wrote: »

I don't understand why they didn't get rid of craig 5 years ago and bring in a new actor.

I cannot understand how there could be negativity around Daniel Craig. After Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan's stint, the bond character had just morphed into a cartoon. Especially Brosnan's Bond. Just a sleazy smart-ass. Casino Royale thankfully changed all that. And something new and exciting was created. Maybe for some, the next 3 films didn't rise to Casino Royale. But for me, they were top notch. If I saw that Did Another Day or The World is Not Enough was on TV, it would cross my mind to watch it. But if any of Craig's movies were on, I would.
Have only watched Spectre the once when it was released. Must give it another look.

Dades · 25-01-2021 12:27pm

flasher0030 wrote: »

I cannot understand how there could be negativity around Daniel Craig...

Have only watched Spectre the once when it was released. Must give it another look.

I rewatched Spectre last year and don't plan to do so again for a long time.

Craig started off (really) great but has only become more joyless as his films progressed. I'm not saying there has to be eyebrow cocking and double-taking pigeons, but many have become weary of his weary face. The spark has gone.

Henry Cavill is my undoubted first draft pick for Bond.

Rodin · 25-01-2021 12:31pm

They don't see the irony of the film in that when the black woman can't handle it, the white man saviour swoops on?

loyatemu · 25-01-2021 1:10pm

Rodin wrote: »

They don't see the irony of the film in that when the black woman can't handle it, the white man saviour swoops on?

in the new film? Have you seen it?

Dades · 25-01-2021 5:09pm

Rodin wrote: »

They don't see the irony of the film in that when the black woman can't handle it, the white man saviour swoops on?

Better to keep casting white people for him to save I guess. Couldn't have a black face in there in case they needed Bond's help and Twitter got wind.

OU812 · 27-01-2021 8:59pm

Looks like they may be considering/have to do reshoots before release date to replace some of the tech/product placement in the movie

pixelburp · 27-01-2021 9:23pm

It says a lot about how fast the "Consumer Society" moves that a mere calendar year is enough to cause ructions in those paying for product placement. Given the year just past I"d not have thought there was that much new and shiny in the world of tech anyway, but there you go.

No Time to Die **Spoilers from post #1449 onward**

Comments

No Time to Die Spoilers from post #1449 onward