Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

From Sussex with Love? Budget rumours.


76 replies to this topic

#31 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 09:59 AM

The Mirror never fails to print something negative and sniping about the new Bond film whilst it’s in production. Their dislike of the series is only exceeded by their dislike of Daniel Craig. Now the two have been put together… well, the only thing that surprises me is that they didn’t try to work in some rubbish about him throwing a tantrum and refusing to wear his Speedos in the cold British seaside waters.

File this under bitter, twisted, made-up junk. ie anything in The Mirror about Bond.

#32 Captain Tightpants

Captain Tightpants

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4755 posts
  • Location::noitacoL

Posted 18 January 2012 - 12:13 PM

Uh-oh - it's gone viral. A lot of publications like Times of India have believed this story and re-posted it.

#33 Pussfeller

Pussfeller

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4089 posts
  • Location:Washington, D.C.

Posted 18 January 2012 - 12:51 PM

Of course it has! Remember the "no action scenes" malarkey, and how that snowballed?

As Kananga would say, the story is an old one, the record a clear one. A publication with no reputation at stake has once more created a piece of specious fiction, based on a few rumors and half-truths. This fiction will be regurgitated by other publications of incrementally higher repute, until even credible newspapers begin to report it. (You know, "journalism".) If the crapball gathers enough momentum, it will be necessary for someone from the production to squelch it.

If people are inclined to believe this, or even just to "wait and see", it's because they have no memory of the way these papers work. And noting that the story is plausible says nothing about its veracity. The more plausible a tabloid is, the less I believe it.

#34 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 01:24 PM

Remember that dreadful witch at the press conference that launched Craig as Bond?

Her name is Fiona Cummins and she was there to represent… yes, you guessed it, The Daily Mirror.

She managed to get in two questions (yes two!) and both were irrelevant to the business at hand and were intended as snipes at Dan’s personal life. It created quite an uncomfortable atmosphere. She then skulked back up the road to Farringdon where she penned that poisonous write-up “Meet James Bland”, part of which had the audacity to criticise his looks.

How a greasy-haired harridan such as Cummins could have the cheek to comment disparagingly on anyone’s appearance is beyond me.

#35 Royal Dalton

Royal Dalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4542 posts

Posted 18 January 2012 - 01:33 PM

If people are inclined to believe this, or even just to "wait and see", it's because they have no memory of the way these papers work. And noting that the story is plausible says nothing about its veracity. The more plausible a tabloid is, the less I believe it.

Or, maybe it's because we should just "wait and see" instead of jumping to our own conclusions?

#36 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 01:40 PM

If people are inclined to believe this, or even just to "wait and see", it's because they have no memory of the way these papers work. And noting that the story is plausible says nothing about its veracity. The more plausible a tabloid is, the less I believe it.

Or, maybe it's because we should just "wait and see" instead of jumping to our own conclusions?



Should we “wait and see” with every bit of rubbish spun-out by every notorious liar in the world?
Not worth it in my opinion.

#37 Royal Dalton

Royal Dalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4542 posts

Posted 18 January 2012 - 01:42 PM


If people are inclined to believe this, or even just to "wait and see", it's because they have no memory of the way these papers work. And noting that the story is plausible says nothing about its veracity. The more plausible a tabloid is, the less I believe it.

Or, maybe it's because we should just "wait and see" instead of jumping to our own conclusions?



Should we “wait and see” with every bit of rubbish spun-out by every notorious liar in the world?
Not worth it in my opinion.

We don't know that it is rubbish yet.

#38 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 01:53 PM

We don't know that it is rubbish yet.



But there is absolutely no reason to believe it or even give it the time of day. This is compounded by the fact that it comes from an organisation full of notorious liars.
There might be a grain of truth in there somewhere - perhaps Eon has looked at a location situated on the British coast for some reason. But the Mirror has contorted it into their usual bile.

Experience tells me that this is at the very least 99% rubbish.

#39 Royal Dalton

Royal Dalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4542 posts

Posted 18 January 2012 - 02:01 PM

Where's the bite? It's a pretty matter-of-fact report from what I can see.

"Everyone is confident this will be one of the best Bonds ever," doesn't sound like much of an attack on James Bond to me.

#40 Pussfeller

Pussfeller

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4089 posts
  • Location:Washington, D.C.

Posted 18 January 2012 - 02:02 PM

We aren't obliged to believe any given claim unless and until it can be positively refuted. If someone tells me there's an invisible teapot on Mars, my response isn't to "wait and see". There's every reason to dismiss this as rubbish. In the unlikely event that it turns out to have been true, I'll reconsider my assessment of this publication.

#41 Skudor

Skudor

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9286 posts
  • Location:Buckinghamshire

Posted 18 January 2012 - 02:09 PM

It's not the size, it's how you use it!

Try to make something down to earth, with less big action, less need for location work then it comes together nicely. Try to make a big and bombastic location and action fest then you'd better have the money or it will look cheap.

What I'm saying is, I don't care if the budget is cut or not cut. It's how they use what they have that counts - but I'd be worried if there were last minute changes. In a scenario where they had plan A that was going to cost them $200m to make but had been forced to cut this to $150m once the cameras are rolling, we would see the impact on the screen. If the budget was slimiline to begin with I'm sure they would cope.

But frankly, unless they play me a clip from someone's voice mail, I simply don't believe anything red tops print. Safer that way.

#42 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 02:13 PM

Where's the bite? It's a pretty matter-of-fact report from what I can see.

"Everyone is confident this will be one of the best Bonds ever," doesn't sound like much of an attack on James Bond to me.



It’s not so much an outright attack as a series of snipes.
The notion that Bognor can stand in for Bali is intended to make Eon sound ridiculous.
The Budget cuts talk is intended to make the whole thing sound cheapjack and uncertain.
The “but everyone involved thinks it will be great anyway” stuff is just intended to make the filmmakers sound deluded and foolish.

We aren't obliged to believe any given claim unless and until it can be positively refuted. If someone tells me there's an invisible teapot on Mars, my response isn't to "wait and see". There's every reason to dismiss this as rubbish. In the unlikely event that it turns out to have been true, I'll reconsider my assessment of this publication.


Exactly.

#43 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 02:32 PM

It's not the size, it's how you use it!



That’s as may be.
But said film would have to be written and pre-produced with that budget in mind.
It is quite a different thing to take a film though writing and preproduction with one budget in mind only to have that slashed by a significant percentage during filming.
I have absolutely no reason to believe that Sony would do that to Eon. And even less reason to think that Eon would stand for it.

#44 The Dove

The Dove

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16671 posts
  • Location:Colorado Springs, Colorado

Posted 18 January 2012 - 03:47 PM

" I never believe what I read in the press anyway.." - 007 in "Tomorrow Never Dies" What a load of bollocks this Mirror article is! I think back to the "From Script To Screen" documentary on the UE of Die Another Day. In the part where all the rumors and tabloid garbage is discussed, Ian Freer (?) from Empire Magazine does state that the tabloids do tend to run with blatently false bits of Bond news just to sell a few more issues and such..

#45 Royal Dalton

Royal Dalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4542 posts

Posted 18 January 2012 - 04:39 PM


Where's the bite? It's a pretty matter-of-fact report from what I can see.

"Everyone is confident this will be one of the best Bonds ever," doesn't sound like much of an attack on James Bond to me.



It’s not so much an outright attack as a series of snipes.
The notion that Bognor can stand in for Bali is intended to make Eon sound ridiculous.
The Budget cuts talk is intended to make the whole thing sound cheep jack and uncertain.
The “but everyone involved thinks it will be great anyway” stuff is just intended to make the filmmakers sound deluded and foolish.

It doesn't read that way to me. But I suppose these things are open to individual interpretation.

#46 Skudor

Skudor

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9286 posts
  • Location:Buckinghamshire

Posted 18 January 2012 - 04:45 PM

It's not the size, it's how you use it!

That’s as may be. But said film would have to be written and pre-produced with that budget in mind. It is quite a different thing to take a film though writing and preproduction with one budget in mind only to have that slashed by a significant percentage during filming. I have absolutely no reason to believe that Sony would do that to Eon. And even less reason to think that Eon would stand for it.


Which is pretty much what I wrote... so why the selective quoting? :-)

#47 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 05:07 PM

It's not the size, it's how you use it!

That’s as may be. But said film would have to be written and pre-produced with that budget in mind. It is quite a different thing to take a film though writing and preproduction with one budget in mind only to have that slashed by a significant percentage during filming. I have absolutely no reason to believe that Sony would do that to Eon. And even less reason to think that Eon would stand for it.


Which is pretty much what I wrote... so why the selective quoting? :-)



Sorry about that, it’s just that you seemed to be arguing from both sides.
So I just attached my point to the first bit. As I say, sorry – it now seems a bit unfair when I read it back. :-)

#48 stone7

stone7

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 21 posts

Posted 18 January 2012 - 08:56 PM

The Evening Standard also reported the same story, certainly not a tabloid paper. Adds to the resonance of the story as I doubt they would publish this without any form of confirmation.

Say it isn't so ...

#49 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 18 January 2012 - 09:00 PM

I hope we're in for some gratuitous Sussex and violence.

#50 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 18 January 2012 - 10:27 PM

The Evening Standard also reported the same story, certainly not a tabloid paper.


Yes it is and a particularly foul one at that.

It used to be the London sister paper of the Daily Mail, until it was sold off, and has similar principals and outlooks. Anyway, now it’s a trashy freebie shoved into the hands of anyone too knackered after a day’s work to just say “NO!”.

#51 Captain Tightpants

Captain Tightpants

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4755 posts
  • Location::noitacoL

Posted 18 January 2012 - 10:54 PM

Say it isn't so ...

If you read the actual story, they trace it back to The Mirror. Look at this:

The new James Bond is to be filmed on beaches in Bognor Regis and Wales after locations in India, China and Bali were ruled out because of budget cuts.

India was scrapped months ago, and there were never any plans to film in Bali. Plus, we already know Daniel Craig is en route to Shanghai before joining production in Turkey.

As has already been said, The Mirror does not like Bond, and they will take any chance they get to discredit it.

#52 univex

univex

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2310 posts

Posted 18 January 2012 - 11:34 PM

I hope we're in for some gratuitous Sussex and violence.

Very good.

#53 Germanlady

Germanlady

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1381 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 18 January 2012 - 11:46 PM


Say it isn't so ...

If you read the actual story, they trace it back to The Mirror. Look at this:

The new James Bond is to be filmed on beaches in Bognor Regis and Wales after locations in India, China and Bali were ruled out because of budget cuts.

India was scrapped months ago, and there were never any plans to film in Bali. Plus, we already know Daniel Craig is en route to Shanghai before joining production in Turkey.

As has already been said, The Mirror does not like Bond, and they will take any chance they get to discredit it.


He is? I must have missed that.

#54 Matt_13

Matt_13

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5969 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 19 January 2012 - 12:01 AM

Un mot sur Skyfall où vous reprenez du service comme 007 pour la troisième fois?
Le film sortira à l'occasion du 50e anniversaire du premier James Bond, Docteur No. Sam Mendes et moi sommes bien conscients de l'énorme responsabilité vis-à-vis de cette franchise. A savoir rester fidèles à un univers très particulier tout en continuant à lui insuffler de la modernité et faire de Bond un héros aussi réaliste et crédible que possible. J'ai interdiction de dévoiler quoi que ce soit sur l'intrigue mais je peux dire que le script est vraiment réussi, à la différence de celui de Quantum of Solace. Je peux aussi vous promettre un Bond intense et bourré d'action non-stop avec de nouveaux personnages en plus des anciens habituels. Et quelques séquences tournées à Shanghaï...

http://www.lefigaro....a-o-je-suis.php

the last sentence at least means there will be some shooting in Shanghai. Doesn't confirm he will be there, but why else would he mention that?


Thank you.

#55 kneelbeforezod

kneelbeforezod

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1131 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 19 January 2012 - 12:27 AM

I was told about 2 months ago by a friend of a friend who is working on the film that "filming in Shanghai has been scrapped, they're building sets at Pinewood now". So this ties in with that.

I know it's a bit vague, but the source of that remark is definitely trustworthy and in a position to know. Maybe extensive scenes in Shanghai are now just a few establishing shots? Who knows?

I wonder if they'll use that technique they used in Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, where they faked it digitally so it looked like Tom Cruise was walking outside the Kremlin. They clearly didn't set foot anywhere near the Kremlin. A shame if that's how they do it.

#56 Matt_13

Matt_13

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5969 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 19 January 2012 - 12:31 AM

I was told about 2 months ago by a friend of a friend who is working on the film that "filming in Shanghai has been scrapped, they're building sets at Pinewood now". So this ties in with that.

I know it's a bit vague, but the source of that remark is definitely trustworthy and in a position to know. Maybe extensive scenes in Shanghai are now just a few establishing shots? Who knows?

I wonder if they'll use that technique they used in Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, where they faked it digitally so it looked like Tom Cruise was walking outside the Kremlin. They clearly didn't set foot anywhere near the Kremlin. A shame if that's how they do it.


Craig said they were shooting in Shaghai in the interview above. I'd say he's pretty trustworthy. We know that interiors will be shot at Pinewood (they practically always are), but the exteriors will be the real Shanghai, as will the "other parts of China" Mendes promised.

#57 kneelbeforezod

kneelbeforezod

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1131 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 19 January 2012 - 12:33 AM

Craig said they were shooting in Shaghai in the interview above. I'd say he's pretty trustworthy. We know that interiors will be shot at Pinewood (they practically always are), but the exteriors will be the real Shanghai, as will the "other parts of China" Mendes promised.

Cool, I actually hope I'm wrong. I'm seeing that friend again soon so will grill him!

#58 Garth007

Garth007

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Location:La Plata, MO

Posted 19 January 2012 - 03:56 AM

I haven't seen this in the forums. I hope this isn't true.
http://zeenews.india...fall_104182.htm

#59 Captain Tightpants

Captain Tightpants

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4755 posts
  • Location::noitacoL

Posted 19 January 2012 - 04:04 AM

First of all, shooting was never planned for Bali. Secondly, Daniel Craig has said that shooting will take place in Shanghai, and is believed to be going there now. And thirdly, you yourself commented on this story when it was posted in the Tabloid Trash Bin (it was just taken from another website):

OK, first I've heard of this but it sounds like total tabloid cr#p to me.

yeah i saw that too. that makes no sence. I say total BS.

Finally, reading this article, it attributes the original story to The Daily Mirror, who absolutely despise Bond and will not hesitate to run a story making it look bad.

#60 The Dove

The Dove

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16671 posts
  • Location:Colorado Springs, Colorado

Posted 19 January 2012 - 04:10 AM

More utter tabloid crap...Pay it no mind..