625 replies to this topic

[HildebrandRarity]

Wonderful!


Time for Morgan to show his quality.


Let the New Golden Age continue...



July/August will see a completed script. September will see Pre-Production. Cameras to roll next February. Bond 23 at the cinema next November.

What excitement!

The boredom of the past three months here is over!

How on EARTH do you get the conclusion that the script would be finished in two months time?!! How many feature scripts have you written whilst overseeing the production of a few others?

I meant a treatment. Quantum was being written into October and KEPT being fleshed out. So you think it's optimistic to see cameras roll next Feb?

[Zorin Industries]

Wonderful!


Time for Morgan to show his quality.


Let the New Golden Age continue...



July/August will see a completed script. September will see Pre-Production. Cameras to roll next February. Bond 23 at the cinema next November.

What excitement!

The boredom of the past three months here is over!

How on EARTH do you get the conclusion that the script would be finished in two months time?!! How many feature scripts have you written whilst overseeing the production of a few others?

So you think it's optimistic to see cameras roll next Feb?

I would suggest the cameras will be rolling next year. But no-one can say February. But having a script ready in two months is a notion plucked from nowhere. I think a few fans could be pleasantly surprised when a release date is finally confirmed, so watch this space...

[HildebrandRarity]

kindly re read.

The spine of my timeline is highly feasible.

Let's not be condescending towards eachother, ok?

[Zorin Industries]

No condescending here...

A script is very different from a treatment. I would suggest (from experience) that BOND 23 is already a few treatments down the line - especially as the likes of Peter Morgan may just have been asked to start off with something along those lines (and Morgan would probably have been "on board" for quite a while now).

Anyone's timeline is feasible, but does it tally with what the producers, studios, agents, distributors and MGM want. Right now I imagine MGM's "timeline" could be very different to everyone elses.

[HildebrandRarity]

ok, not 'treatment', not 'fully fleshed-out script'...how about a 'spine of a script' which allow for the 'cameras to roll next Feb.'?

Are we not allowed our optimism?

[Zorin Industries]

ok, not 'treatment', not 'fully fleshed-out script'...how about a 'spine of a script' which allow for the 'cameras to roll next Feb.'?

Are we not allowed our optimism?

"Optimism" could well see BOND 23 emerge within a very different timeline to what folk are expecting. That is nothing more than a hunch, so time will tell and I would hate to be wrong so will say no more...(!).

[DamnCoffee]

ok, not 'treatment', not 'fully fleshed-out script'...how about a 'spine of a script' which allow for the 'cameras to roll next Feb.'?

Are we not allowed our optimism?

I'd rather have a 'fully fleshed-out script', personally.

[HildebrandRarity]

ok, not 'treatment', not 'fully fleshed-out script'...how about a 'spine of a script' which allow for the 'cameras to roll next Feb.'?

Are we not allowed our optimism?

"Optimism" could well see BOND 23 emerge within a very different timeline to what folk are expecting. That is nothing more than a hunch, so time will tell and I would hate to be wrong so will say no more...(!).

...but Haggis worked till October! The cameras rolled in Feb.

We have LOTS of time!

BOND 23 NEXT NOVEMBER!!!

[danslittlefinger]

Almost every news outlet in Britain has an aritcle on this now. What other film franchise makes the news just because it hires a new writer? It makes me proud to be British when i see how important Bond is to Britain.

While that is nice Not a single one is willing to guess at the films title Really? I mean Surely the sun or one of those mags has an "insider"


yeah i know in 3 weeks i'll be up to my neck in title and cast and director rumours.

Why? There could well not be another announcement for a year. Sorry.

Well I'm sure but a few people are afraid of catching leprosy from even reading excerpts from The Sun.
Personally I'm not. I'm immune.

[HildebrandRarity]

ok, not 'treatment', not 'fully fleshed-out script'...how about a 'spine of a script' which allow for the 'cameras to roll next Feb.'?

Are we not allowed our optimism?

I'd rather have a 'fully fleshed-out script', personally.

I meant 'spine of a script' by this July/August!!!

[Judo chop]

I think P&W get more than their fair share of lambasting around here, but having said that, I think P&W writing on its own leaves a lot to be desired. Haggis’ strength as a writer was a fine compliment to P&W’s weaknesses. I’d have only been sad to see Haggis go if he wasn’t being replaced, and replaced with someone who writes with equal intelligence. Or better yet, someone who writes with equal intelligence, a lighter sense of wit, and one who is less tempted with the desire to knock us out with heavy, empty, trailer dialogue.

Don’t know much about this Morgan guy, but his track record gives me confidence that he’s at least a strong potential.

[DamnCoffee]

...but Haggis worked till October! The cameras rolled in Feb.

We have LOTS of time!

BOND 23 NEXT NOVEMBER!!!

That was only because of the writers strike. You know, if he missed the deadline OR the writers strike didn't happen, we probably would've had Quantum of Solace in May 2009.

The writers strike ed up the quality of Quantum of Solace big time, imo. I think they'd want a fully developed script before they start even considering rolling the cameras.

[Simon]

Personally, I would like to see if they could make a 'Bond film' without a Bond girl and / or M.

The risks they took with LTK all those years ago seem mild by todays' successful standards. So, see what else can be thrown out.

I am not saying it could work, as all the Bondian supports or crutches were believed to have 'made' the film (series), but there are still Bond film elements that could be risked and turned upside down still further.

[Zorin Industries]

ok, not 'treatment', not 'fully fleshed-out script'...how about a 'spine of a script' which allow for the 'cameras to roll next Feb.'?

Are we not allowed our optimism?

"Optimism" could well see BOND 23 emerge within a very different timeline to what folk are expecting. That is nothing more than a hunch, so time will tell and I would hate to be wrong so will say no more...(!).

...but Haggis worked till October! The cameras rolled in Feb.

Don't get too concerned about dates and previous announcements.

With regards to SOLACE, the cameras rolled earlier than the February of 2008. The Palio scenes were shot in the Summer of 2007 (way before any notion of "October") and something as complex and massive as a Bond shoot will kick off with different departments (not always the main unit) at any time.

Also, it's worth remembering that getting official statements about a film only concerns the dates those announcements are made - not what they are about. For instance, we get official word that Peter Morgan is joining the writing team in June 2009. His involvement with Purvis and Wade could easily have started, in some creative shape or form, months ago.

[HildebrandRarity]

Yes. Therefore it's not beyond the realms of possibility that principal photography will begin in Feb, '10, right?

So, that "how on EARTH" comment was really uncalled for.

We are staring down the barrel of a November, even Christmas, 2010 release. MGM would love that. Craig would love that. Morgan is quality and work is underway for that Nov '10 target to be hit.

I'm willing to bet the art department is working right now on things like ideas for sets, costumes, gadgets, etc...

Next thing is the naming of a director which I suspect is being worked on right now with an announcement sometime on the director nolater than late August/early September.

That is three months away...plenty of time to name a director.

Then, that director will have his ideas and work with Morgan into October to flesh out those ideas. By November we may get names for the supporting cast, possibly being announced in November, December and even as late as February (remember Eva Green?).

Plenty O'Time.

[Zorin Industries]

Yes. Therefore it's not beyond the realms of possibility that principal photography will begin in Feb, '10, right?

So, that "how on EARTH" comment was really uncalled for.

No. War and famine are "uncalled for" - not comments about unmade James Bond films (and I say that with respect, HR).

I disagree with your optimism, but may share it in the end for different reasons.

[danslittlefinger]

Yes. Therefore it's not beyond the realms of possibility that principal photography will begin in Feb, '10, right?

So, that "how on EARTH" comment was really uncalled for.

We are staring down the barrel of a November 2010 release. MGM would love that. Craig would love that. Morgan is quality and work is underway for that Nov '10 target to be hit.

As I missed it the first time around and then reiterated the point (which was so eloqently pointed out to me), didn't P & W state "2011" as a release date?
Personally speaking, I think filming will start mid 2010 then a summer release but now I do believe the film will have less of a "summer" atmosphere (CR would have done well as a summer release) theme so back to Nov 2011.

[HildebrandRarity]

...but Haggis worked till October! The cameras rolled in Feb.

We have LOTS of time!

BOND 23 NEXT NOVEMBER!!!

The writers strike ed up the quality of Quantum of Solace big time, imo.

LOL.

We all have an opinion. You have yours. I think Quantum was one of the best by a large margin, if not the best by a narrow margin.

But this is about the writing team up and running. The first CONCRETE news about Bond 23. The idea that the time line does not rule out a late 2010 release.

I suspect MGM has a big hand in pushing things here. They need Bond to be back in business for them sooner then later. By all accounts, quality and freshness won't suffer given this announcement.

[DamnCoffee]

...but Haggis worked till October! The cameras rolled in Feb.

We have LOTS of time!

BOND 23 NEXT NOVEMBER!!!

The writers strike ed up the quality of Quantum of Solace big time, imo.

LOL.

We all have an opinion. You have yours. I think Quantum was one of the best by a large margin, if not the best by a narrow margin.

But this is about the writing team up and running. The first CONCRETE news about Bond 23. The idea that the time line does not rule out a late 2010 release.

I suspect MGM has a big hand in pushing things here. They need Bond to be back in business for them sooner then later. By all accounts, quality and freshness won't suffer given this announcement.

Would you kindly stop LOL'ing every single person who disagrees with you? It's rather rude.

Yes, Quantum was good, but it would've been a lot better if the script was fleshed out more.

[I never miss]

I would love B23 to be released at the tail end of 2010, but I am in the camp that feels it's unlikely. I put this down to MGW's infamous 'I want to take a break' comment, and I'd love to be proved wrong.

I think we'll have to hear pretty soon if we're going to see the next release in 2010. If we don't have a director in place in the next 3 months then I think it's HIGHLY unlikely we'll see Bond 23 before Summer 2011.

As a sidenote, the whole longer break=quality argument really gets on my nerves. SC's first 4 movies were made at yearly intervals (yes, I know the industry was different then, but still) and many great Bond movies have been made at 2 year intervals. Yes, TSWLM benefitted from a 2 1/2 year gap, but DAD certainly didn't benefit from a 3 year gap. It all comes down to the script, and how inspired the ideas are.

[Zorin Industries]

...but Haggis worked till October! The cameras rolled in Feb.

We have LOTS of time!

BOND 23 NEXT NOVEMBER!!!

The writers strike ed up the quality of Quantum of Solace big time, imo.

LOL.

We all have an opinion. You have yours. I think Quantum was one of the best by a large margin, if not the best by a narrow margin.

But this is about the writing team up and running. The first CONCRETE news about Bond 23. The idea that the time line does not rule out a late 2010 release.

I suspect MGM has a big hand in pushing things here. They need Bond to be back in business for them sooner then later. By all accounts, quality and freshness won't suffer given this announcement.

Would you kindly stop LOL'ing every single person who disagrees with you? It's rather rude.

Yes, Quantum was good, but it would've been a lot better if the script was fleshed out more.

But a lot of people have no problem with the script for SOLACE - or rather the finished film as very people read the script at any point other than the people who had to ("online versions" do not count as they are usually 99% bollocks). I personally think the less is more approach worked brilliantly in SOLACE. After half a century of creativity and 22 films, do Eon Productions really need to spell out every detail and repeat and repeat every tired facet of every other Bond film? Popular does not always have to imply populist.

I would love B23 to be released at the tail end of 2010, but I am in the camp that feels it's unlikely. I put this down to MGW's infamous 'I want to take a break' comment, and I'd love to be proved wrong.

I think we'll have to hear pretty soon if we're going to see the next release in 2010. If we don't have a director in place in the next 3 months then I think it's HIGHLY unlikely we'll see Bond 23 before Summer 2011.

With all respect, that is fan-boy piffle / speculation.

For all anyone knows, BOND 23 already has its director/s. As I have been at pains to suggest before, "announcements" are nothing more than confirmation. They certainly do not punctuate a timeline of creative decisions, production planning and some sort of blueprint that dictates "Thou Must Have A Bond Film In Exactly 8 Months As The Director Has Now Been Chosen And We Heard That Martin Campbell Was to Direct Casino Royale Exactly 8 months to the hour before the film came out so that must be what will happen with the next film....".

And as I have said before also, always take with a pinch of salt what any film producer tells you when he or she wants to keep things under wraps and rightly so. So far a "break" is hardly what the Eon producers are taking right now.

[Safari Suit]

I think P&W get more than their fair share of lambasting around here, but having said that, I think P&W writing on its own leaves a lot to be desired. Haggis’ strength as a writer was a fine compliment to P&W’s weaknesses.

How do you know that P&W's work as writers leaves a lot to be desired? From TWINE and DAD I presume, and fair enough. But that does not mean that it was Haggis that saved CR and QOS from being stuck in the same mire. It is entirely possible that P&W work on the later films was simply in a different class to their work on the earlier films. After all the essays I wrote in high school were not the same standard as those I wrote in first school, nor even were all the essays I wrote in high school of the same quality. People grow as writers, and writers are also generally pretty inconsistent.

[I never miss]

What do any of us really know about the exact state of Bond 23 at the moment? Surely idle speculation is part of the fun...

Edited by I never miss, 15 June 2009 - 04:03 PM.

[Zorin Industries]

What do any of us really know about the exact state of Bond 23 at the moment? Surely idle speculation is part of the fun...

Absolutely.

But let's be careful not to always get "Bond wrong".

[Jackanaples]

I hope they change the characters though, make them new.
Q shouldn't be like Desmond's character or Cleese's for that. Make him completely new. Like an Old Army General who misses work in the field and now makes the gadgets and gizmos for the younger men to use and is resentfull to you for it.
I'm thinking Tom Wilkinson


As for Moneypenny, I think it could work having her a Fields character. Make her a minor Bond girl, have her in an actual role. Make her important to the plot in some way.
I'm thinking Freema Agyeman or Keeley Hawes

While I don't think either Q or Moneypenny need ever return, I do have some thoughts should they do so.

First, I disagree with the idea of Q (or Major Boothroyd) being "like an Old Army General who misses work in the field and now makes the gadgets and gizmos for the younger men to use and is resentful to you for it." Not only is this too much like Desmond Llewellyn's take on the character, but I feel it's also out of step with the times.

Technology and innovation in the 21st century is more often than not, a young man's (or woman's) game. So perhaps a young man who sees his work at MI6 as really creative and stimulating. If he equips Bond with something for the field, he's no interested in seeing it come back as he's moved on to other projects --but he might show curiosity to a villain's reaction to it, i.e. "What was his reaction when you killed him with something as innocuous as a pen? What was the look on his face like?"

Keep in mind I'm not suggesting they do this. I like things as they are. Craig's Bond seems extremely resourceful and that never gets boring.

As for Moneypenny, well, I think bringing her back is also a wrong idea, though Craig could be great in those scenes. They should bring back Sylvia Trench instead, and follow Terence Young's plan for the character to its fruition this time.

Edited by Jackanaples, 15 June 2009 - 04:20 PM.

[Judo chop]

I think P&W get more than their fair share of lambasting around here, but having said that, I think P&W writing on its own leaves a lot to be desired. Haggis’ strength as a writer was a fine compliment to P&W’s weaknesses.

How do you know that P&W's work as writers leaves a lot to be desired? From TWINE and DAD I presume, and fair enough. But that does not mean that it was Haggis that saved CR and QOS from being stuck in the same mire. It is entirely possible that P&W work on the later films was simply in a different class to their work on the earlier films. After all the essays I wrote in high school were not the same standard as those I wrote in first school, nor even were all the essays I wrote in high school of the same quality. People grow as writers, and writers are also generally pretty inconsistent.

After watching a film (or in this case, a small series of films), can we surmise anything about the quality of the writers by way of the quality of the writing? If not, I wonder why studios bother crediting writers on their films at all?

I recognize that none of what I said is certain (ie. I definitely don't 'KNOW'), but I do believe it’s a safer bet than total conjecture. When P&W were the primary penners, dialogue looked one way. When Haggis entered the scene, dialogue looked another way. And not only that, but the way things looked with Haggis on board also look quite a bit like other writing Haggis has been 100% credited with. I think “Haggishness” is a fairly (relatively) definable quality.

As for P&W on their own... at their hands I’ve seen a couple good villain ideas, and so I conclude they know how to write a good villain. I think if they knew Bondian wit, or how to peel a layer without stinking up the place, we’d have seen it after two films.

[Safari Suit]

When P&W were the primary penners, dialogue looked one way. When Haggis entered the scene, dialogue looked another way. And not only that, but the way things looked with Haggis on board also look quite a bit like other writing Haggis has been 100% credited with. I think “Haggishness” is a fairly (relatively) definable quality.

I suppose this is all entirely plausible, perhaps even likely, but P/W were hired to produce an entirely different work from TWINE/DAD for CR, so it's entirely possible they were responsible themselves for a paradigm shift in the style of writing and dialogue. And of course, as I said earlier, writers change and their work also varies. For me personally, the only similarities I can see between Crash and Haggis' Bond films are bad ones, but that's just me, and it doesn't necessarily mean anything about his work on CR/QOS.

[Quantumofsolace007]

Personnaly I am willing to put money down we will have the release date and possibly Director before Halloween (I'm gonna also say if we get it before September I also wouldn't be suprised)

in the mean time we'll enjoy the highly inacurate but ultimatly amusing bs from the Sun those likes (Sun reports bond 23 is risico I'm wondering how many people will belive it and be shocked if bond 23 is The Property of a lady)


Title we'll get next year that is a given if we get it earlier then 2010 I will be Shocked.


this is my 2 cents.

as for relase date i'm not touching that one with a 12 foot pole everything indicates a late 2010 early 2011 release yet some in the know and others not in the know keep screaming November 2011 at the top of their lungs. I wonder if they Know this for a fact or they afraid Bond can't compete against the boys of summer. If MGM and Eon belive Bond can comepte against Marvel and DC I will agree and have the utmost faith. Spring is largely untocuhed as i pointed out and could work better for 007 then fall (plus a spring 2011 release doesn't rule out a fall 2012 release for bond 24 and if both are quality films i think everyone would like back to back bond)

I will say this Daniel Craig is a poular bond and the route the franchise is going it could POSSIBLY do well in the summer.

Eon says May 2011 I'll be happy and support their decision.

[Judo chop]

I suppose this is all entirely plausible, perhaps even likely, but P/W were hired to produce an entirely different work from TWINE/DAD for CR, so it's entirely possible they were responsible themselves for a paradigm shift in the style of writing and dialogue.

It is possible. And I’d like to know it was true. It would only bode good things for B23 if it was. I just don’t think this is the best guess we can make. In this line of thinking, we could suppose that Michael Bay might produce a great character drama piece once he’d decided to ‘give it a go’ in another genre.

Es possible, pero…

And of course, as I said earlier, writers change and their work also varies. For me personally, the only similarities I can see between Crash and Haggis' Bond films are bad ones, but that's just me, and it doesn't necessarily mean anything about his work on CR/QOS.

I think some good/some bad. Actually, I think it’s a more accurate statement that Haggis can be his own worst enemy. To me, he’s a guy with a great talent from which stems many good ideas, but he’s also a guy missing a certain filter, and that allows his good ideas to sometimes run amok, and I think CRASH is the epitome of this condition. (Incidentally, in addition to CRASH, I was also considering his directorial work VALLEY OF ELAH, and his writing in MILLION DOLLAR BABY, FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS, and LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA, which display varying proportions and degrees of skill contained and skill run amok.)

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

On the subject of P&W and the DAD script and the change of ending here is an extract from Empire Magazine December 2002. Make of it what you will.

"Yet the biggest change of all was initiated by Tamahori. At the 11th hour. "We went into production in January, and then sometime in February I realised the ending was not gonna work. A lot of Bond movies have great openings, a great middle - the tank in GoldenEye - but you could never say that the ending was that fabulous. Always a facility blowing up. So I said, 'It's the 20th movie. Do we really want another ground based facility blowing up? If feels so lame.'"
The solution lay in the opposite of ground-based. "I said, 'Let's get the biggest plane in the world, blow that up and have that falling around them,'" continues Tamahori. "That started a whole script revision. Of course the ramifications were enormous because we had already done a lot of set construction and spent a lot of money. But the guys wrote and rewrote, and they've come up with one of the most inspired codas to a Bond movie ever."

Edited by sthgilyadgnivileht, 15 June 2009 - 09:55 PM.