120 replies to this topic

[killkenny kid]

Santa, you bring a smile to my face.

[Germanlady]

You can vote for the film

http://uk.movies.yah...ig-in-2008.html

[Santa]

Santa, you bring a smile to my face.

Oh good. I think.

[Judo chop]

The timing thing does seem a little odd but I imagine it's down to one of two things: under instruction from Mickey and Babs, probably as a response to comments that CR was on the long side, or more likely because he's anal. I say that because it's the kind of thing I could see myself doing were I him, and I'm particularly anal.

There were 64 words in that paragraph.

So I edited it to equal a nice, even 60. Just the way I like it.

[Vauxhall]

Just checking out all this news for the first time. I think the best thing is the confirmation of Jeffrey Wright to return. In regards to the running time, I think that to ensure it's exactly 120 minutes just for the sake of doing so is a bit bizarre. They should see what they film, how well it all turns out before tinkering with it in my opinion, but I'm sure Forster has his reasons.

[The Dove]

Ahh and so it begins.. Great to hear that Jeffrey Wright is coming back as Felix.. hopefully he'll have a much bigger role this time. As for the running time of the film that Forester is aiming to be exactly 120 minutes, I'm not at all worried about that at the moment..Its still WAY too early in the production for that! LOL

[DLibrasnow]

So the Bond Girl hasn't been cast yet? Wonder if that means no Gemma Arterton after all...or maybe she's a secondary Bond Girl?

I think it was always assumed she was going to be a secondary Bond girl since the main Bond girl is supposed to be a Latina.

Besides, Arterton was confirmed by a source at EON.

[Vauxhall]

I seem to remember a story a while back indicating there would be four Bond girls in BOND 22. So we may have the Latina actress, Gemma Arterton and still have scope for two more.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

Someone's matched Dave's record... Jeffrey Wright. Will he beat him by playing Felix three times?

[DamnCoffee]

Someone's matched Dave's record... Jeffrey Wright. Will he beat him by playing Felix three times?

Lets hope so...

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

I'll always miss Dave anyway, but Jeff's not bad.
By the way... isn't there any pics of the scene that's being filmed today?

[DamnCoffee]

Nope, not at the moment mate, but expect some in the coming weeks, if not tomorrow.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

Looking very forward to it. At least to a press release to print it and archive it on my Bond scrapbook

[jimbo bond 007]

The first day of filming and no spies on the set with cameras, what is this world coming to?!

Please EON or someone release a picture from the Bond 22 set before I die of excitement.

Lets hope that some of the papers here in the UK try and get some sneak pics before the week is out.

[MarcAngeDraco]

Not sure that the two hour comment wasn't a little tongue-in-cheek...

[tdalton]

The fact that they're already setting an exact length for the film is a troubling thing to hear. If there is a lot of great material shot for the film (which I seriously doubt there will be), then some of it will end up being cut and the film will suffer because of it. If there's not a lot of great material shot for the film (which I think is more likely), then there may be more filler added in to make the film meet its 2 hour mark. I think that the director should take the footage into the post production and make the best film that he can, and whether that's 90 minutes or a 3 hour epic of a film should be decided by the story and what needs to be shown on screen and not by a self-imposed mandate to make the film shorter than CR.

[DamnCoffee]

I Forster is judging the length of the movie by the script. I dont know if this is true but my Media Studies teacher told me that 1 page in a script is supposed to equal 1 minute. So maybe there is 120 pages.

[Judo chop]

I Forster means is judging the length of the movie by the script. I dont know if this is true but my Media Studies teacher told me that 1 page in a script is supposed to equal 1 minute. So maybe there is 120 pages.

Oh great. And Haggis was on what? Page SEVEN when he went on strike? This film is already off to a bad start.

[Harmsway]

The fact that they're already setting an exact length for the film is a troubling thing to hear. If there is a lot of great material shot for the film (which I seriously doubt there will be), then some of it will end up being cut and the film will suffer because of it. If there's not a lot of great material shot for the film (which I think is more likely), then there may be more filler added in to make the film meet its 2 hour mark. I think that the director should take the footage into the post production and make the best film that he can, and whether that's 90 minutes or a 3 hour epic of a film should be decided by the story and what needs to be shown on screen and not by a self-imposed mandate to make the film shorter than CR.

Anybody panicking about this is wasting their breath. Forster's not the kind of guy who would compromise a film just to keep a running time, and this comment is probably made in half-jest anyway. What he's probably indicating, more than anything, is that the script was written with this 2-hour benchmark in mind. He probably laid that out in planning long before, ala "I want a tight, shorter Bond film." And that's fine.

Furthermore, I don't see anywhere the suggestion that Forster desperately wants it to be exactly 2 hrs, just that he really wants the film to be under that. That is a more than fair goal, given how overlong movies are these days.

[DamnCoffee]

Oh great. And Haggis was on what? Page SEVEN when he went on strike? This film is already off to a bad start.

Actually Haggis completed the draft before he went on strike.

[Fro]

The longest film Forster has made is 122 minutes, which is "The Kite Runner".

Nearly everthing he's made except "Stay" falls into that 110-120 minute range.

[Qwerty]

I seem to remember a story a while back indicating there would be four Bond girls in BOND 22. So we may have the Latina actress, Gemma Arterton and still have scope for two more.

That was one of the reports from The Daily Mail in mid-November: http://commanderbond.net/article/4650

[DaveBond21]

I just added to the article, that

in related news, director Marc Forster has stated in an interview with Swiss online magazine "20min.ch" that he intends a running time for the finished film of exactly 120 minutes - and not a minute longer.

.

I was thinking about the running time the other day. I like the idea of Bond 22 being around the 2 hour mark, I don't think it should be quite as long as CR.

[Qwerty]

So the Bond Girl hasn't been cast yet? Wonder if that means no Gemma Arterton after all...or maybe she's a secondary Bond Girl?

Was wondering about that as well since the Empire Online report was never really positive on if she was the main Bond girl or not.

[blueman]

Just read where Forster had confirmed Arterton...or thought I had, it's confusing.

[HH007]

The fact that they're already setting an exact length for the film is a troubling thing to hear. If there is a lot of great material shot for the film (which I seriously doubt there will be), then some of it will end up being cut and the film will suffer because of it. If there's not a lot of great material shot for the film (which I think is more likely), then there may be more filler added in to make the film meet its 2 hour mark. I think that the director should take the footage into the post production and make the best film that he can, and whether that's 90 minutes or a 3 hour epic of a film should be decided by the story and what needs to be shown on screen and not by a self-imposed mandate to make the film shorter than CR.

I think you're fretting a little too much, now. Really. Most films made they try to hit either a 90 minute or a two hour mark. As someone else said, Forster is not the kind of filmmaker who would damage his film just to make it a certain length.

[TaoMike]

As much as I enjoyed Wright as Leiter -- I confess to being a fan of both -- I was kind of hoping he might "sit this one out" and return in the third Craig film. My concern is that he's simply being chucked into the mix for the sake of "continuity", rather than a logical inclusion based on the plot. I hope he rates a larger part in this one -- and we get to see some Bond/Leiter bonding moments...

[HH007]

As much as I enjoyed Wright as Leiter -- I confess to being a fan of both -- I was kind of hoping he might "sit this one out" and return in the third Craig film. My concern is that he's simply being chucked into the mix for the sake of "continuity", rather than a logical inclusion based on the plot. I hope he rates a larger part in this one -- and we get to see some Bond/Leiter bonding moments...

I don't agree that he's just being thrown in for continuity. Remember his role in CR ended on something of a loose end. He was supposed to take Le Chiffre into custody... but then he just disappeared.

[tdalton]

As much as I enjoyed Wright as Leiter -- I confess to being a fan of both -- I was kind of hoping he might "sit this one out" and return in the third Craig film. My concern is that he's simply being chucked into the mix for the sake of "continuity", rather than a logical inclusion based on the plot. I hope he rates a larger part in this one -- and we get to see some Bond/Leiter bonding moments...

I don't agree that he's just being thrown in for continuity. Remember his role in CR ended on something of a loose end. He was supposed to take Le Chiffre into custody... but then he just disappeared.

I don't get that feeling either. I think that they're bringing Leiter back because they have a terrific actor in the part with Jeffrey Wright, and to not include an actor of that quality when you have the chance to wouldn't be the right way to go.

[DaveBond21]

I think Leiter will only be in Panama, in a similar size role to in Casino Royale. I like the character, but I don't necessarily want him in all the Craig Bond films.