199 replies to this topic

[Pussfeller]

With the exception of Teri Hatcher, Tomorrow Never Dies was pretty much straightforward Bond. DAD would be straightforward Bond if not for the gratuitous MI6 treason angle. I think the problem is that after the Moore era they allowed the villains to become weaker and weaker, until it became necessary to spice things up with wild twists and angsty personal baggage. I've even read that the producers wanted weaker villains, for fear of upstaging Bond. I hope that's not true, because it suggests a total lack of understanding of how the best Bond films work. With a strong, clearly motivated villain, you're halfway there. Everything else flows from that, and there's no need to artificially inject personal complications.

[Dustin]

Villainy is the key, to cite MacLean. Indeed, one major problem of many post-Moore Bond films are villains whose entertainment value seems to have been drastically cut at times.

[Pussfeller]

Yes, that's a very good way to put it. The post-Moore villains simply aren't as entertaining. As cheesy as the Moore films can be, they're great fun to watch, and the villains are memorable. Perhaps the biggest single reason for my excitement about SF is Silva, and how he's been described as a classic villain with great entertainment value.

[AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän]

Villainy is the key, to cite MacLean.

And he was 100% right. As much as I love the character of Bond what makes him really work to me are the antagonists he faces. In Flemings novels we get to know much more about the villains than Bond himself.
And Silva has to be best realized Bond villain in decades.

Edited by AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän, 27 October 2012 - 06:17 PM.

[THX-007]

Easy. Do you know what P & W actually wrote in their first draft? What changed during the work on this scene with the director? What changed during the shooting, due to the actors´ ideas?

Also, some people do like this scene.

If you think that a screenwriter writes a script and it is filmed verbatim then you really do not have any grasp on what the process is like.

No, what did Purvis & Wade write in their first draft?
I fully understand that scripts go through multiple changes and that scripts can change due to an actor's ideas (Raiders of the Lost: Indy vs. the sword guy). But given the rest of the horrible cliche dialogue that makes up DAD and Pierece's criticism of the film and story in retrospective, I'm willing to bet this scene came from the pen of Purvis & Wade.
To sum up Purvis & Wade: their scripts would hit on an interesting idea and never follow up on it. TND & TWINE had interesting ideas if they were pursued or if risks were taken but no they just become straightforward action movies with Bond mowing down tons of people with machine guns. Pierce himself complained about how Bond's captivity in Noth Korea in DAD never influenced the rest of the film. He cuts his hair and shaves his beard and that's it. Granted this could have been due to Lee Tamahori who clearly had some messed ideas relating to the film.

Did you even read what I have to say ?
I want the kind of story, that they were on the path of making.Its about giving what they started an epic conclusion

I do.
After CR I was certainly interesting in Mr. White and this shadowy organization and particulary when I saw the QOS trailers. But nothing QOS did made me more interested in Quantom. Besides Bond managed to get pictures of all the top members of Quantom at the opera so MI6 are now aware of who's involved and have other field operatives after them. Instead of building up mystery about them Bond manages to get all of their mugshots and send them to MI6.

Edited by THX-007, 27 October 2012 - 07:52 PM.

[Simon]

Coming back to the story about Logan writing a two-parter for Bond 24 and 25: I guess that is a brilliant move and probably the best one to follow the massive achievement of SKYFALL. It holds the potential to become an epic Bond adventure, with QUANTUM or SPECTRE returning to create the biggest threat yet. Also, should Craig resign after Bond 25 it would create the possibility for him to go out with a bang and have the next actor start anew, after the big silver anniversary Bond 25 without having to reboot everything again. Just start Bond 26 with a new actor and a new stand-alone mission because the Craig arc has been completed by then.

Here´s the link for Logan´s work on Bond 24 and Bond 25 from today´s Hollywood Reporter: http://www.hollywood...mes-bond-383477

Not pertaining to this quoted post, I agree with an earlier one of yours that says the written word is not filmed verbatim, and trying to unpick what was written by one writer and what by another writer is a useless exercise.

However, having just watched the entire two and a half hour Premiere youtube video, Wade (the blond chap) was kind enough when asked about the initial Bond / Silva scene to assign responsibility and accolade to Logan. Purvis tried to make out that is was purely the way Bardem played the scene, but Wade was adamant that this was down to the creativity of Logan. I think only the writers themselves can truly say who wrote what and how the script developed and for my part, I have never heard of such generosity in ensuring credit where due.

Anyway, nice to hear 24 and 25 are already being considered from a writing perspective. Let's just hope MGM can survive long enough without yet another hiccup.

[Mavalant]

I know we all know but this two part story is still a rummor

[SecretAgentFan]

Easy. Do you know what P & W actually wrote in their first draft? What changed during the work on this scene with the director? What changed during the shooting, due to the actors´ ideas?

Also, some people do like this scene.

If you think that a screenwriter writes a script and it is filmed verbatim then you really do not have any grasp on what the process is like.

No, what did Purvis & Wade write in their first draft?
I fully understand that scripts go through multiple changes and that scripts can change due to an actor's ideas (Raiders of the Lost: Indy vs. the sword guy). But given the rest of the horrible cliche dialogue that makes up DAD and Pierece's criticism of the film and story in retrospective, I'm willing to bet this scene came from the pen of Purvis & Wade.
To sum up Purvis & Wade: their scripts would hit on an interesting idea and never follow up on it. TND & TWINE had interesting ideas if they were pursued or if risks were taken but no they just become straightforward action movies with Bond mowing down tons of people with machine guns. Pierce himself complained about how Bond's captivity in Noth Korea in DAD never influenced the rest of the film. He cuts his hair and shaves his beard and that's it. Granted this could have been due to Lee Tamahori who clearly had some messed ideas relating to the film.

Once again, you assume you know what P & W wrote and blame them for everything you did not like. And taking an actor´s statement for being the inside truth exposes your lack of knowledge about the industry. C´mon, Brosnan complaining about the one-liners or the scripts only serves one purpose: to protect himself. He could have refused to say anything he didn´t like and he probably did. I would not be surprised if some of the one-liners were his invention. Only when critics complained he probably distanced from those "bad scripts".

[AgentBentley]

Amazing news, but we'll have to wait and see how he pulls it off. That means we'll have at least two more Craig Bond movies, and that is good news.
Just hope they don't go from making us wait 4 years to oversaturating us with one movie shortly after the other.

[Codenamed: Priest]

I'm in agreement that P&W need to go some of their stuff has been a little paperthin. They seem to have a need to put M in harms way and question Bond and his methods way too much, their best villain was Renard and he was only a henchman and as for Gustav Graves, I could go on. Time we got back to Bond being left to do what he does best in the field, mostly on his own. As for JL doing a two-part story arc, it's interesting but what kind of cliffhanger will he leave us on in between and, how long is he planning on taking with the follow up in Bond 25? Don't forget all the mishaps we've had, I mean, how many years did we have to wait for Goldeneye, Casino Royale and Skyfall? The idea scares me to be honest.

[Tony_OO_Black]

I very much doubt we'll be waiting four years for Bond 24. Three at most, and it'll likely be two given how Skyfall seems to be breaking box office records according to early calculations.

[Skudor]

http://www.dailymail...vie-motion.html

Sorry if this has been posted elsewhere on the boards somewhere but what does everybody think?

Personally, I say it's about time. I've grown tired of the two, though nothing was personally wrong with them (Die Another Day aside).

Frigging fantastic. I won't put a downer on P&W, they've had a long run for whatever reason and their work has included some good ideas - and resulted in some good movies. But it was clearly time to move on.

[SecretAgentFan]

I'm in agreement that P&W need to go some of their stuff has been a little paperthin. They seem to have a need to put M in harms way and question Bond and his methods way too much, their best villain was Renard and he was only a henchman and as for Gustav Graves, I could go on. Time we got back to Bond being left to do what he does best in the field, mostly on his own. As for JL doing a two-part story arc, it's interesting but what kind of cliffhanger will he leave us on in between and, how long is he planning on taking with the follow up in Bond 25? Don't forget all the mishaps we've had, I mean, how many years did we have to wait for Goldeneye, Casino Royale and Skyfall? The idea scares me to be honest.

I am neither P nor W - but I still would like to point out that it obviously was not their need to put M in harms way and question Bond too much. Having Judi Dench as M was also an obligation to give her more to do. And questioning Bond´s motives and loyalty is a clear part of the Craig arc.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Frankly Pussfeller,
I really found Bond getting interessting when they came on board and I loved the idea of how Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace were connected.
I loved the fact that you really feel Bonds rage in CR when he's fighting Quantum in the colapsing building,the way that rage continues with Quantum Of Solace.The way they gave subtle hints of a huge organisation involved without even mentioning the name once ! The algerian love knot neckless, I felt the whole planning was beautifull.

CR wasn’t originally written to have sequel, they (forcedly, I would say) introduced a continuation story to capitalize the success of CR.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

Frankly Pussfeller,
I really found Bond getting interessting when they came on board and I loved the idea of how Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace were connected.
I loved the fact that you really feel Bonds rage in CR when he's fighting Quantum in the colapsing building,the way that rage continues with Quantum Of Solace.The way they gave subtle hints of a huge organisation involved without even mentioning the name once ! The algerian love knot neckless, I felt the whole planning was beautifull.

CR wasn’t originally written to have sequel, they (forcedly, I would say) introduced a continuation story to capitalize the success of CR.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

The difference between CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM OF SOLACE, compared to the planned BOND 24 and BOND 25, is that the two-story arc wasn't planned out and written before the first of those two movies. CASINO ROYALE was written in such a way that could set up a sequel, but the QUANTUM OF SOLACE plot wasn't fleshed out until afterwards. John Logan has an opportunity here to write a genuine double bill, with everything mapped out. It might just work.

I agree. but I would precise that CR was written in such a way that could set up not just one particular sequel, but a lot of them as the reboot or retcon of a series that it was, just like I think th last chapter of the novel was written to open the doors for a literary series when they say that Bond: "would attack the arm that held the whip and the gun/ He would go after the threat behind the spies, the threat that made the spy"; and the final confrontation with Mr. White in CR it's just a reflection of those lines.

[univex]

Just wanted to say that, after seeing SF yesterday, I have to reiterate my opinion regarding P&W departure:

YES!!!

Logan´s the man now. Cmon, just channel Fleming and we´ll be alright.

[Scrambled Eggs]

Just to throw out an idea...

If the basic blueprint for Bonds 24 & 25 have been agreed upon, with the same writer scripting both - what are the chances that they might be filmed back to back?

So, 24 ends on a true cliffhanger and 25 comes along very quickly afterwards - maybe just a year between them.

It probably would mean to have a largely identical cast. Those films that did get a back to back production - I can at the moment only think of BACK TO THE FUTURE II & III and LORD OF THE RINGS - were for the most part concerned with the same characters and storyline. If something like this was tackled - and I'm not sure Eon will go that route - they would probably have to have a cliffhanger or some major surprise towards the end of 24 to avoid giving a 'been there, done that' impression for 25.

But aren't the main and key supporting roles already spoken for anyway?

You'd probably have the same super villain in both movies. Possibly the same Bond girl - perhaps there'd be a love story running through the two films but that wouldn't be essential.

Danny Boyle directs a Bond two parter, one in 2014 and the next in 2015. I'm excited already.

[Dustin]

Just to throw out an idea...

If the basic blueprint for Bonds 24 & 25 have been agreed upon, with the same writer scripting both - what are the chances that they might be filmed back to back?

So, 24 ends on a true cliffhanger and 25 comes along very quickly afterwards - maybe just a year between them.

It probably would mean to have a largely identical cast. Those films that did get a back to back production - I can at the moment only think of BACK TO THE FUTURE II & III and LORD OF THE RINGS - were for the most part concerned with the same characters and storyline. If something like this was tackled - and I'm not sure Eon will go that route - they would probably have to have a cliffhanger or some major surprise towards the end of 24 to avoid giving a 'been there, done that' impression for 25.

But aren't the main and key supporting roles already spoken for anyway?

You'd probably have the same super villain in both movies. Possibly the same Bond girl - perhaps there'd be a love story running through the two films but that wouldn't be essential.

Danny Boyle directs a Bond two parter, one in 2014 and the next in 2015. I'm excited already.

Well, for the time being it's mostly fan speculation anyway.

But story-wise such a move would also call for some kind of heavy revelation, twist or hook to tie the following film to the former. I can't help but thinking of things we've seen only recently, attack on SIS, abduction of main character, death of Bond's girl or ally. And it's probably too early to have something along those lines again. The only other direct two-parter didn't work too well in terms of story integrity, so the pressure would be on to have a solid story this time.

On the other hand you do not want to just have one huge oversized five hour monstrosity cut down the middle. Even a back to back effort of BOND 24 & 25 would have to bring a distinct change of tone and atmosphere to the game, otherwise you could just condense it to one single film. It would have to approach the whole thing like KILL BILL, where both parts do have their own characteristics while still telling one story.

[The Shark]

Having Judi Dench as M was also an obligation to give her more to do.

Only starting with TWINE.

[THX-007]

Easy. Do you know what P & W actually wrote in their first draft? What changed during the work on this scene with the director? What changed during the shooting, due to the actors´ ideas?

Also, some people do like this scene.

If you think that a screenwriter writes a script and it is filmed verbatim then you really do not have any grasp on what the process is like.

No, what did Purvis & Wade write in their first draft?
I fully understand that scripts go through multiple changes and that scripts can change due to an actor's ideas (Raiders of the Lost: Indy vs. the sword guy). But given the rest of the horrible cliche dialogue that makes up DAD and Pierece's criticism of the film and story in retrospective, I'm willing to bet this scene came from the pen of Purvis & Wade.
To sum up Purvis & Wade: their scripts would hit on an interesting idea and never follow up on it. TND & TWINE had interesting ideas if they were pursued or if risks were taken but no they just become straightforward action movies with Bond mowing down tons of people with machine guns. Pierce himself complained about how Bond's captivity in Noth Korea in DAD never influenced the rest of the film. He cuts his hair and shaves his beard and that's it. Granted this could have been due to Lee Tamahori who clearly had some messed ideas relating to the film.

Once again, you assume you know what P & W wrote and blame them for everything you did not like. And taking an actor´s statement for being the inside truth exposes your lack of knowledge about the industry. C´mon, Brosnan complaining about the one-liners or the scripts only serves one purpose: to protect himself. He could have refused to say anything he didn´t like and he probably did. I would not be surprised if some of the one-liners were his invention. Only when critics complained he probably distanced from those "bad scripts".

Okay so enligthen me. What did P&W write in their script? Do you have the script?

[Scrambled Eggs]

But aren't the main and key supporting roles already spoken for anyway?

You'd probably have the same super villain in both movies. Possibly the same Bond girl - perhaps there'd be a love story running through the two films but that wouldn't be essential.

Danny Boyle directs a Bond two parter, one in 2014 and the next in 2015. I'm excited already.

Well, for the time being it's mostly fan speculation anyway.

But story-wise such a move would also call for some kind of heavy revelation, twist or hook to tie the following film to the former. I can't help but thinking of things we've seen only recently, attack on SIS, abduction of main character, death of Bond's girl or ally. And it's probably too early to have something along those lines again. The only other direct two-parter didn't work too well in terms of story integrity, so the pressure would be on to have a solid story this time.

On the other hand you do not want to just have one huge oversized five hour monstrosity cut down the middle. Even a back to back effort of BOND 24 & 25 would have to bring a distinct change of tone and atmosphere to the game, otherwise you could just condense it to one single film. It would have to approach the whole thing like KILL BILL, where both parts do have their own characteristics while still telling one story.

Yeah it's just speculation, but speculation is fun.

If its correct that they are trusting one writer with sole responsibility for the next two films, it suggests that Logan has pitched something phenomenal.

Just suppose for a moment that the key point in Logan's two movie pitch is a humdinger of a cliffhanger at the end of 24 - Bond in danger, England in danger, World in danger or all 3, but in a way we've never seen before. Thats the sort of exciting idea which could have inspired EON to show such faith in him, is it not?

I agree entirely with your second paragraph - what if the first part embraces YOLT/Moonraker Bond movie making, but the follow up delivers a gritty back to basics, more emotional film along OHMSS lines?

[DamnCoffee]

Hoping the end of Bond 24 will have a From Russia With Love novel style ending. It's gotta be done sooner or later.

[Emma]

I really hope that they film Bond 24&25 back to back. As opposed to waiting two years between each film. That way Daniel won't (look) too old. From an interview I saw with DC I don't think that he expects to be in the role past age 50.

[SolidWaffle]

I just don't it to be called (whatever title) Part 1 and (same title) Part 2.

[S K Y F A L L]

I just don't it to be called (whatever title) Part 1 and (same title) Part 2.

I don't think you have to worry about that, I don't think they would ever dare.

[TheManwiththeWaltherPPK]

Hoping the end of Bond 24 will have a From Russia With Love novel style ending. It's gotta be done sooner or later.

I would love an adaptation of that, but it's too similar to Bond's apparent death in Skyfall to do in the very next movie/

[triviachamp]

Having Judi Dench as M was also an obligation to give her more to do.

Only starting with TWINE.

Yeah that was after she won her Oscar. Before that she wasn't particularily well known outside of the UK.

[univex]

Hoping the end of Bond 24 will have a From Russia With Love novel style ending. It's gotta be done sooner or later.

Wouldn´t that be cool? And then Bond 25 could end with Bond with the girl on his arms, perhaps.

[SolidWaffle]

I just don't it to be called (whatever title) Part 1 and (same title) Part 2.

I don't think you have to worry about that, I don't think they would ever dare.

I do hope so.