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

Bond 24 script being reworked....by Purvis and Wade?!


190 replies to this topic

#91 Agent Spriggan Ominae

Agent Spriggan Ominae

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Aiea,Hawaii

Posted 16 July 2014 - 10:27 PM

Everytime these guys (P&W) are mentioned, I think of the ending in TWINE. How fantastic that the hero did not let the villain blow everything up, but how can we now blow everything up to get a good ending?

Christmas: The hydrogen gas level is too high. One spark and the reactor will blow (Purvis's idea). I have to stop it!
Bond: Go to the top of the submarine. I'll meet you in the torpedo bay. Go!
Bond: The reactor is flooded. So it's safe even if this place blows
(Wade's idea).

 

*One spark*

 

Sub blows up.

 

For what it's worth I understand how they came up with ending. For the sake the movie/storytelling they already made the actual reactor kinda sci-fi compared to the real thing but the idea of the Hydrogen explosion is legit. Renard was trying to get the reactor to meltdown completely and detonate in a massive nuclear blast, which is something that they averted at Chernobyl. To get a massive nuclear detonation from a reactor the conditions need to just right and the fuel needs to meltdown into one solid mass. That was averted in the film. The presence of Hydrogen gas indicates that a partial meltdown had occurred/ fuel rods were exposed to air. They Hydrogen gas would have went to the top of the sub, the spark triggered it and the force of the blast split the sub open and the reactor which was flooded would not pose as big a threat underwater. Essentially most of the time when you hear "reactor coolant" they are talking about water. In real life I think the soviets have disposed of sub reactors by sinking them in the ocean. The explosion in Dr. No was most likely a massive Hydrogen blast. Bond let the reactor go critical which boiled away the water exposing the rods and created massive amounts of Hydrogen which eventually ignited and detonated. The Hydrogen explosion in TWINE is probably the most realistic part of the stuff involving the reactor. For the most part it works because few people know that much about reactors, and they're still doing story things like in Craig's films i.e CR Le Chiffre's stock plot, in SF Silva's hacking skills, there's a hint of reality but for the sake of the storytelling they'll cheat a little and make things more flashy or simple or not fully explain something because they figure we won't fully comprehend it anyway and in big picture it's not something we as an audience are intended to dwell on.

 

Kinda off topic but on the subject of scripts, anyone else find the unproduced scripts for GE and TND a little eerie now? In GE the target originally was the World Trade Centers and TND there was a plot to cause a Nuclear Meltdown in asia. In real life they was 9/11 and then Fukushima, and the really crazy thing, and I'm not saying I believe everything I hear and read but there have been some claims and accusations that Fukushima was actually engineered by a shadowy cabal that was blackmailing Japan. Supposedly Boris Berezovsky was a member of the faction that was threatening Japan and then now he's since "suicided" and there was his his associate Alexander Litvinenko who was poisoned by eating of all things "RADIOACTIVE SUSHI" while he was at a restaurant meeting with an Italian expert on Nuclear waste clean up. Supposedly this all goes back to the sunken Kursk in 2000 and some warheads were removed and if the rumor are true still floating around out and one of them was used to trigger the quake and it was planted by a deep sea drilling research vessel, The Chikyo Maru that was in the region of the quake in the months before Fukushima happened. Sounds almost like AVTAK. Makes you wonder some times.            



#92 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 17 July 2014 - 03:29 PM

Everytime these guys (P&W) are mentioned, I think of the ending in TWINE. How fantastic that the hero did not let the villain blow everything up, but how can we now blow everything up to get a good ending?

Christmas: The hydrogen gas level is too high. One spark and the reactor will blow (Purvis's idea). I have to stop it!
Bond: Go to the top of the submarine. I'll meet you in the torpedo bay. Go!
Bond: The reactor is flooded. So it's safe even if this place blows
(Wade's idea).

 

*One spark*

 

Sub blows up.

 

And you know that these were ideas by Purvis or Wade because... ?

 

Don´t tell me because you have watched the movie and it listed these two as scriptwriters.



#93 AMC Hornet

AMC Hornet

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5857 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 10:27 PM

It's not like we all won't be there on opening night anyway. 

;)



#94 rubixcub

rubixcub

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 752 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 19 July 2014 - 07:16 PM

 IMO there was a difference in style & dialogue that crept in the same time P&W did -- TWINE being a soap opera and DAD being too much cheese in the humor -- and even in the Craig era, I feel like I can spot P&W dialogue by it's stiffness and the fact it doesn't sound like the way people actually talk, "take your ego out of the equation", for example, or the over-severity with which they invested M ("one more word and I'll have you killed").

 

It's a different time now, and tastes have changed.  I don't really think their style ever completely worked, and I don't think it'll work now.  There is a lot of smart humor in a lot of today's entertainment, and plenty of writing talent out there who could help move Bond forward.  (I personally wouldn't mind the likes of "Sherlock" show-runner Mark Gatiss taking a pass at the dialogue.)  I almost get the sense that P&W are being brought in because the powers that be are in a bind and under a time crunch, and P&W are the safest, or at least the most familiar, port in the storm.

 

Dave



#95 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 20 July 2014 - 05:18 AM

 IMO there was a difference in style & dialogue that crept in the same time P&W did -- TWINE being a soap opera and DAD being too much cheese in the humor -- and even in the Craig era, I feel like I can spot P&W dialogue by it's stiffness and the fact it doesn't sound like the way people actually talk, "take your ego out of the equation", for example, or the over-severity with which they invested M ("one more word and I'll have you killed").

 

It's a different time now, and tastes have changed.  I don't really think their style ever completely worked, and I don't think it'll work now.  There is a lot of smart humor in a lot of today's entertainment, and plenty of writing talent out there who could help move Bond forward.  (I personally wouldn't mind the likes of "Sherlock" show-runner Mark Gatiss taking a pass at the dialogue.)  I almost get the sense that P&W are being brought in because the powers that be are in a bind and under a time crunch, and P&W are the safest, or at least the most familiar, port in the storm.

 

Dave

 

So you "feel like you can spot P&W dialogue"?  

 

Newsflash: you can´t.  You´re just succumbing to a general perspective that keeps on being sustained on a message board without any evidence.  Or did you read the first draft of their scripts?  Those which did not already get peppered with "suggestions" by producers, studio executives, directors, actors and all their spouses, children etc.?


Edited by SecretAgentFan, 20 July 2014 - 05:21 AM.


#96 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 05:33 AM

To be fair, it's also hard to defend the writers because, by the same virtues that suggest that we don't know their actual weaknesses due to rewrites, meddling, etc., we also don't know their strengths either.  Suffice to say, though, that they've been given writing credit on the last five Bond films, and I can't really say that the writing on any of them (save for perhaps Casino Royale, but even though it may be somewhat well written, it's a poor adaptation of Fleming's novel), is of a particularly high quality.  



#97 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 20 July 2014 - 02:27 PM

True.  I do not know what strengths P&W do bring to the table (except endearing themselves to EON, obviously).  

 

But I wanted to point out that all the vitriol against them is always based on the final film.  And scriptwriters really do have zero influence on that.  To see what is done to one´s script is disheartening, most of the time.



#98 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 02:42 PM

I think this time around we might get a decent idea as to what Purvis and Wade bring to the table.  If we're back to a film plagued with Bond/M trust issues, I think we can safely say that they're the ones behind it, since they're being brought on board with the specific instructions to work on that element of Logan's screenplay (among other things, of course).  If we're back to hearing things like "sometimes we're so focused on our enemies we forget to watch our friends" or "I thought I could trust you" or things like that, then I think that it's a reasonable conclusion to say that they're coming from P&W.  



#99 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 20 July 2014 - 03:05 PM

On the other hand, this might be due to EON´s influence...


Edited by SecretAgentFan, 20 July 2014 - 03:05 PM.


#100 AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän

AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 493 posts
  • Location:Oulu, Finland

Posted 20 July 2014 - 03:43 PM

When working alone P&W are rather poor, but when paired with someone like Haggis or Logan they do deliver the goods. Thus I am not worried. I wonder how much Michael Wilson has input on stories nowadays...



#101 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 20 July 2014 - 04:38 PM

Aaaaarrrrrrrrrggggghhhhhhhh!

 

I´m so sorry, Neil, Robert - nobody will listen to me.


Edited by SecretAgentFan, 20 July 2014 - 04:39 PM.


#102 rubixcub

rubixcub

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 752 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 20 July 2014 - 05:33 PM

 

 IMO there was a difference in style & dialogue that crept in the same time P&W did -- TWINE being a soap opera and DAD being too much cheese in the humor -- and even in the Craig era, I feel like I can spot P&W dialogue by it's stiffness and the fact it doesn't sound like the way people actually talk, "take your ego out of the equation", for example, or the over-severity with which they invested M ("one more word and I'll have you killed").

 

It's a different time now, and tastes have changed.  I don't really think their style ever completely worked, and I don't think it'll work now.  There is a lot of smart humor in a lot of today's entertainment, and plenty of writing talent out there who could help move Bond forward.  (I personally wouldn't mind the likes of "Sherlock" show-runner Mark Gatiss taking a pass at the dialogue.)  I almost get the sense that P&W are being brought in because the powers that be are in a bind and under a time crunch, and P&W are the safest, or at least the most familiar, port in the storm.

 

Dave

 

So you "feel like you can spot P&W dialogue"?  

 

Newsflash: you can´t.  You´re just succumbing to a general perspective that keeps on being sustained on a message board without any evidence.  Or did you read the first draft of their scripts?  Those which did not already get peppered with "suggestions" by producers, studio executives, directors, actors and all their spouses, children etc.?

 

 

Certain lines of dialogue in the P&W era have a common sound, is all, different from films before them.  This would indicate that said dialogue most likely came from P&W.  Also, isn't it generally known that Bond/M scenes were usually left to them?  All I'm saying is you pick up on certain things that have a tonal or syntactic similarity, and owing to the introduction of similar-sounding dialogue introduced in their earlier efforts, I have attributed same to them.

 

Dave



#103 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 21 July 2014 - 07:00 AM

Similar sounding dialogue, a common sound - that is, excuse me, absurd.  People here look for scapegoats for everything they don´t like and for heroes for everything they do like.  When in reality filmmaking is a team effort, and the end result consists of a wild mix of input.

 

Keep in mind that Barbara Broccoli was and is a decisive factor since GOLDENEYE.  She shaped the following films to a high degree.  I don´t want to put the blame on her at all, mind you, but certain repeated elements (M´s role in particular) will be part of this change of management.



#104 RMc2

RMc2

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 21 July 2014 - 12:07 PM

Similar sounding dialogue, a common sound - that is, excuse me, absurd.  

 

It can be surprisingly easy to identify certain screenwriters' dialogue additions to any given film, and sometimes even entire scenes or themes can be spotted by a fan who knows the writers' films. This is especially true of distinctive writers like Tarantino or Robert Bolt. So be careful before you generalise, SAF ;)

 

However, I can't say I could ever do this for P&W because they've worked almost exclusively on Bond films and their scripts have been altered and reworked by other writers, credited and uncredited, as well as Broccoli, Craig and different directors. So I agree with you in this case.

 

In defence of P&W, I really urge people to listen to the podcast interview they did with Empire magazine (I'll try to find the link and post it here) about SkyFall. If you take their word for it, virtually the entire of SF's story is actually their work and several of the things I hate most about the film were Mendes' ideas. If my interpretation of the development timeline is correct, when Craig described the SF script as "really, really good" he was referring to the draft before Logan came aboard. Personally I don't think SF lives up to that hype, but we may be wrong to blame P&W.

 

Food for thought, at least.


Edited by RMc, 21 July 2014 - 12:08 PM.


#105 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 21 July 2014 - 02:24 PM

Good points - and I was probably venting a bit (a bit?) when I generalized.  (Although I do think that Tarantino´s dialogue might only be recognizable because it is so talky; and it can easily be imitated without anyone able to tell the difference.)



#106 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 21 July 2014 - 11:25 PM

Yes, though there are number of other idiosyncratic and far more talent writers than Tarantino. Harold Pinter being one.



#107 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 22 July 2014 - 06:06 AM

I agree with SecretAgent about it being a team effort.



#108 dtuba

dtuba

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 573 posts
  • Location:Tacoma, WA, USA

Posted 22 July 2014 - 09:19 PM

 

Similar sounding dialogue, a common sound - that is, excuse me, absurd.  

 

It can be surprisingly easy to identify certain screenwriters' dialogue additions to any given film, and sometimes even entire scenes or themes can be spotted by a fan who knows the writers' films. This is especially true of distinctive writers like Tarantino or Robert Bolt. So be careful before you generalise, SAF ;)

 

 

Joss Whedon, Aaron Sorkin, David Mamet.



#109 S K Y F A L L

S K Y F A L L

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6889 posts
  • Location:CANADA

Posted 23 July 2014 - 04:51 AM

I just hope this doesn't delay Johnny English 3...

I was optimistic about a fresh start with new writers perhaps this will be alright with them polishing it rather then crafting it...

It would be great if we could find out who wrote what lines,
"Yo' mama. And she told me to tell you she's really disappointed in you."



#110 Matt_13

Matt_13

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5969 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 23 July 2014 - 08:40 AM

I think that was Halle Berry's idea, and the director supported it, though the original line ("Your mother") really isn't much better.

#111 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

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

Posted 23 July 2014 - 11:27 AM

For me, it's that first conversation that Bond and Jinx have in Cuba. Every single thing about it makes me cringe with embarrassment.

Anyone who had anything to do with it should be utterly ashamed.  



#112 Mr_Wint

Mr_Wint

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2406 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 23 July 2014 - 12:18 PM

This is worse:
Jinx: NSA. Hello! We are on the same side.
Bond: Does not mean we are after the same thing!
Jinx: Sure it does. World peace, unconditional love, and our little friend with the expensive acne.

#113 Matt_13

Matt_13

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5969 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 23 July 2014 - 12:36 PM

I think pretty much anything to do with Jinx can be considered a misfire.

#114 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 25 July 2014 - 07:29 AM

John Logan reportedly said during Comic-Con that the script for BOND 24 is finished.  (Maybe he means: his work on the script?)

 

http://www.deadline....in/#more-786927



#115 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 25 July 2014 - 11:44 AM

John Logan reportedly said during Comic-Con that the script for BOND 24 is finished.  (Maybe he means: his work on the script?)

 

http://www.deadline....in/#more-786927

 

i would imagine that he's talking about his involvement.  Since they've delayed the start of production by two months for P&W to have more time to work on fixing the script, I would suspect that it'll be a while before the script is completely finished.



#116 ACE

ACE

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4543 posts

Posted 25 July 2014 - 12:15 PM

P&W are amongst the most prolific British screenwriting duos about. Remember, most screenwriters work doesn't actually get produced. They have some interesting work under their belt including the Barbarella remake, a Le Carre adaptation and their own material including a Corsican Mafia movie. These BAFTA-nominated screenwriters' work is obviously of a standard that film-makers such as Robert Rodriguez, Nicolas Winding Refn, Chan Wook Park, Bille August, Stephen Frears and Stephen Daldry work with them.
http://www.casarotto...ets/x/50566.pdf

Totally agree with SecretAgentFan about it being really impossible to separate who wrote what in the screenplay. One would a draft by draft comparison. Of course there are some writers who have marquee value where you can tell their input. However, most studio franchise vehicles get rewritten by a host of credited and uncredited writers. 

 

I also agree with RMc's reference to Empire Skyfall podcast which points the finger of illogically in the story to Mr Mendes.

 

Anyway, as Richard Maibaum once said, "Bond films aren't written or directed, they're produced."



#117 RMc2

RMc2

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 25 July 2014 - 12:56 PM

Good points - and I was probably venting a bit (a bit?) when I generalized.  (Although I do think that Tarantino´s dialogue might only be recognizable because it is so talky; and it can easily be imitated without anyone able to tell the difference.)

 

I'd agree - not a huge fan of Tarantino's writing. Or at least, the acclaim his writing receives.

 

Account number: 57548722 

 

 

Similar sounding dialogue, a common sound - that is, excuse me, absurd.  

 

It can be surprisingly easy to identify certain screenwriters' dialogue additions to any given film, and sometimes even entire scenes or themes can be spotted by a fan who knows the writers' films. This is especially true of distinctive writers like Tarantino or Robert Bolt. So be careful before you generalise, SAF ;)

 

 

Joss Whedon, Aaron Sorkin, David Mamet.

 

 

:) The more I think about it and SAF's comments, the rarer it is that screenwriters seem to make it big enough to be the 'voice' of their films...

 

 

John Logan reportedly said during Comic-Con that the script for BOND 24 is finished.  (Maybe he means: his work on the script?)

 

http://www.deadline....in/#more-786927

 

i would imagine that he's talking about his involvement.  Since they've delayed the start of production by two months for P&W to have more time to work on fixing the script, I would suspect that it'll be a while before the script is completely finished.

 

 

Unless the script really is now finished, and the changes required more time to scout locations and conceive new set-pieces?



#118 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 25 July 2014 - 07:09 PM

Tarantino could never direct a Bond film, because he's a name director. its like the producers want it to be known as a BOND FILM not as a TARANTINO FILM. Because he's already gained his fame........itll always be some relative unknown or someone theyve worked with but thats the secret to success. 



#119 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

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

Posted 01 August 2014 - 09:27 AM

An up date from Baz.

 

A script has been delivered that everyone is now happy with.

The production has received the green light for a late November / early December start of filming. 

 

http://www.mailonsun...her-script.html

 

Sources told me yesterday that Purvis and Wade have delivered their work to producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson — and the green light has been given for filming to start in late November / early December. 

 

‘Everyone’s excited, and all systems are pumping away at full speed,’ my 007 informant told me, adding that Purvis and Wade’s script is ‘substantially different’ from Logan’s.

 

‘There was an awful lot of work to do. It was a big job. The impression given was that Purvis and Wade were hired to add jokes — but it was a bigger deal than that,’ an executive at one of the studios associated with the Bond films explained.

 



#120 Matt_13

Matt_13

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5969 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 August 2014 - 11:50 AM

That last bit is interesting...