"We can also reveal that for most of the script Boyle was developing, Bond was incarcerated by the villain."
Isn't that what happens in Goldfinger? From about 50 minutes into the film when he's captured at the gold smelting plant, until the end of the film at Fort Knox, he's a captive of Goldfinger.
On a somewhat upbeat note, I think we should all breathe a sigh of relief that the Boyle/Hodge Bond film is not being made. It sounds worse and worse with each new piece of information that comes to light.
Been thinking the same thing myself. Just a gut feeling (and to be completely honest, I was a big Boyle supporter) I doubt that Boyle just left over a difference in casting. In hindsight, just because he did a nice job with the Olympic mini film doesn't mean when he actually got his hands on Bond he wouldn't screw it up. I get the feeling that Boyle never was really "all in" on Bond 25, thought he could do basically want he wanted and then when he couldn't, had an excuse to walk away while at the same time, EON didn't have to suck it up and live with what they were very uncomfortable with despite the mess they would be left to clean up.
Just a bit of my own hopeful perspective based upon what's been put out there re this latest delay to counter some of the apathy, hand wringing and general air of doom and gloom out there (and we have all earned our right in spades to have these feelings):
This is my theory/guess: EON and Fukunaga (and P&W and whomever else) were trying to craft an intelligent spy thriller with plenty of action and adventure out of what they inherited from Boyle/Hodge and P&W. They weren't completely satisfied with what they came up with and all along had been looking to involve Scott Burns who was not available at the time. Despite the big $$$$ SPECTRE made, for Craig's last film and the sake of the series future they did not want to forge ahead with a script that was subpar so they debated/agonized over whether they should delay further and take the PR hit. When Fast and the Furious pulled out of the Easter date (which EON may have preferred to begin with) it was the perfect opportunity to buy needed extra time to get Burns on board and clean up the script and also have a better release date that comes with the added prestige of being a holiday release and the first tent pole film of the season.
"We can also reveal that for most of the script Boyle was developing, Bond was incarcerated by the villain."
Isn't that what happens in Goldfinger? From about 50 minutes into the film when he's captured at the gold smelting plant, until the end of the film at Fort Knox, he's a captive of Goldfinger.
Bond has been captured by the bad guy in almost every Bond film. I hope this wasn't Boyle's big idea.
Now with the new rumors coming in of Scott. Z Burns coming in to overhaul the script. Not just polish, but actually overhaul, in combination with the second delay, i'm getting concerned a real mess is going on behind the scenes at EON....
"We can also reveal that for most of the script Boyle was developing, Bond was incarcerated by the villain."
Isn't that what happens in Goldfinger? From about 50 minutes into the film when he's captured at the gold smelting plant, until the end of the film at Fort Knox, he's a captive of Goldfinger.
Bond has been captured by the bad guy in almost every Bond film. I hope this wasn't Boyle's big idea.
True. But, rarely has been Bond been a captive for 2/3 of the movie, which is what happens in Goldfinger.
"We can also reveal that for most of the script Boyle was developing, Bond was incarcerated by the villain."
Isn't that what happens in Goldfinger? From about 50 minutes into the film when he's captured at the gold smelting plant, until the end of the film at Fort Knox, he's a captive of Goldfinger.
Bond has been captured by the bad guy in almost every Bond film. I hope this wasn't Boyle's big idea.
True. But, rarely has been Bond been a captive for 2/3 of the movie, which is what happens in Goldfinger.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying it's a tired, worn out plot device. When Silva allowed himself to be captured in Skyfall it kind of turned this trope on its head.
Bond has been captured by the bad guy in almost every Bond film. I hope this wasn't Boyle's big idea.
True. But, rarely has been Bond been a captive for 2/3 of the movie, which is what happens in Goldfinger.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying it's a tired, worn out plot device. When Silva allowed himself to be captured in Skyfall it kind of turned this trope on its head.
I liked that it was a nice inversion.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
True. But, rarely has been Bond been a captive for 2/3 of the movie, which is what happens in Goldfinger.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying it's a tired, worn out plot device. When Silva allowed himself to be captured in Skyfall it kind of turned this trope on its head.
I liked that it was a nice inversion.
Not really. Every movie was doing that twist then because of the dark Knight.
Star trek into darkness and avengers have the same twist.
“The scent and smoke and sweat of a casino are nauseating at three in the morning. "
-Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying it's a tired, worn out plot device. When Silva allowed himself to be captured in Skyfall it kind of turned this trope on its head.
I liked that it was a nice inversion.
Not really. Every movie was doing that twist then because of the dark Knight.
Star trek into darkness and avengers have the same twist.
Didn't say it was original, just that I liked it.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I understand that people are disheartened by the delay, but one thing puzzles me.
If we don't trust EON's management of the franchise, why should we think these same producers would have cast a universally agreed upon replacement for Craig, hired the perfect screenwriter and director (better than Fukunaga), and released a top-shelf movie by now? That's setting aside all the studio and distribution stuff that slowed down the process.
There is not another universe where EON behaves as a smoothly oiled machine.
I understand that people are disheartened by the delay, but one thing puzzles me.
If we don't trust EON's management of the franchise, why should we think these same producers would have cast a universally agreed upon replacement for Craig, hired the perfect screenwriter and director (better than Fukunaga), and released a top-shelf movie by now? That's setting aside all the studio and distribution stuff that slowed down the process.
There is not another universe where EON behaves as a smoothly oiled machine.
I think it's just the squandering of time and lack of focus that gets people. I take your point re alternative Universe where all progresses smoothly but surely nailing down a good quality script and keeping to a schedule should not be beyond them. Also if Spectre had been better thought of and the Craig era more consistent (one superb one poor, one good one disappointing ( see Rotten Tomatoes for the numbers but 80 ish, 50 ish 70 ish and late 50's from memory) people (fanboys, industry commentators and Muggles) would be better disposed to them. As it stands its starting to smell bad...
Good films can and have emerged from inauspicious starts and circumstances and I truly hope this is the case here. For my part a lot will depend on how DC looks when we see him at the Oscar's. If he looks like he's buckled down and got in shape It would augur well.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I've no problem with that if true...it's certainly a mark of delineation from Tom Cruise's MI films, where he's clearly going to ignore his real age as long as possible. I like the idea of a mature Bond, as long as he can still sell the physicality - which admittedly wasn't the case with a previous mature Bond {:)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I understand that people are disheartened by the delay, but one thing puzzles me.
If we don't trust EON's management of the franchise, why should we think these same producers would have cast a universally agreed upon replacement for Craig, hired the perfect screenwriter and director (better than Fukunaga), and released a top-shelf movie by now? That's setting aside all the studio and distribution stuff that slowed down the process.
There is not another universe where EON behaves as a smoothly oiled machine.
I think it's just the squandering of time and lack of focus that gets people. I take your point re alternative Universe where all progresses smoothly but surely nailing down a good quality script and keeping to a schedule should not be beyond them. Also if Spectre had been better thought of and the Craig era more consistent (one superb one poor, one good one disappointing ( see Rotten Tomatoes for the numbers but 80 ish, 50 ish 70 ish and late 50's from memory) people (fanboys, industry commentators and Muggles) would be better disposed to them. As it stands its starting to smell bad...
Good films can and have emerged from inauspicious starts and circumstances and I truly hope this is the case here. For my part a lot will depend on how DC looks when we see him at the Oscar's. If he looks like he's buckled down and got in shape It would augur well.
I think it's just the squandering of time and lack of focus that gets people.
Definitely.
And can someone explain this for me: I don't understand how BB and MGW were able to produce three films in a five year span (GE to TWINE), while we've had only two films in the last ten years. I know that MGM had financial troubles, but Eon resumed pre-production in January 2011. I also know they wanted to wait for Mendes to finish up his work in the West End put SP back a year, and I think finding a distributer for Bond 25 took a little longer than expected(?). Are they just resting on their laurels? Are Eon just bored of Bond? BB has made Film Stars Don't Die In Liverpool and prepped The Rhythm Section, which is something Cubby didn't bother with (excepting Call Me Bwana).
It's very frustrating for us fans. There's also a new generation who will not be used to Bond. I think consistency is important to maintaining any series. For many millions of people around the world, going to see a new Bond film every two years was a tradition. Bond was permanently popular and the series had considerable momentum, particularly in the Moore and Brosnan eras. I know the Craig era has been incredibly successful, but the series is basically dormant. To the public, this lion is very much asleep. Before GE, there was much concern that the six year hiatus had spelled the end for the series, yet a similar four year gap is now considered to be business as usual.
This gap is going to be the same as the length between the releases of YOLT and DAF. To many people back then who didn’t accept Lazenby as Bond, it’s probably a similar feeling.
There was a nice installment of The Bond Experience podcast on YouTube today where David Zaritsky sums up and comments on and reacts to the latest Bond 25 delay. IMO, it's worth watching.
Yes, it was a good approach to the whole situation (the whole enchilada, perhaps? )
Thanks for a bit of reason in this storm of angst, disappointment, and aggravation.
Whatever happened to "Keep calm and carry on"?
Be that as it may, it is understandable that many fans get annoyed when they have to keep waiting years between films. It's really no way to run a franchise. We have had only two films in one decade. That's never happened before.
I appreciate the sentiment behind the “keep calm, everything is fine” outlook, but it runs counter to all of the facts. That’s why many of us have, quite reasonably I think, lost faith. Any excitement that I experience for Bond 25 will need to be earned.
I appreciate the sentiment behind the “keep calm, everything is fine” outlook, but it runs counter to all of the facts. That’s why many of us have, quite reasonably I think, lost faith. Any excitement that I experience for Bond 25 will need to be earned.
Despite the behind the scenes issues I am always happy to receive a Bond film.
I can totally agree with the above. Since SP, everything we got is a whacky release date and very few casting decisions. Would be nice if the producers would actually interact with the fans, i.e. Bond will be wearing Omega, driving (Aston), let it be a video game or even non-Bond related stuff like never before seen footage (of which there is plenty).
What I personally that you get everything in a short period of time and invetween (increasing) you‘re left absolutely cold, as if there was no Bond.
There could be done so much more and if it would only be sporadic releases of cut scenes via social media...
Absolutely...I guess the spirit of my video was to state that we have choices on how we spend our time and focus after this news....and spending it on the fun we create ourselves seems to be a good plan of action....
I appreciate the sentiment behind the “keep calm, everything is fine” outlook, but it runs counter to all of the facts. That’s why many of us have, quite reasonably I think, lost faith. Any excitement that I experience for Bond 25 will need to be earned.
Comments
Been thinking the same thing myself. Just a gut feeling (and to be completely honest, I was a big Boyle supporter) I doubt that Boyle just left over a difference in casting. In hindsight, just because he did a nice job with the Olympic mini film doesn't mean when he actually got his hands on Bond he wouldn't screw it up. I get the feeling that Boyle never was really "all in" on Bond 25, thought he could do basically want he wanted and then when he couldn't, had an excuse to walk away while at the same time, EON didn't have to suck it up and live with what they were very uncomfortable with despite the mess they would be left to clean up.
Just a bit of my own hopeful perspective based upon what's been put out there re this latest delay to counter some of the apathy, hand wringing and general air of doom and gloom out there (and we have all earned our right in spades to have these feelings):
This is my theory/guess: EON and Fukunaga (and P&W and whomever else) were trying to craft an intelligent spy thriller with plenty of action and adventure out of what they inherited from Boyle/Hodge and P&W. They weren't completely satisfied with what they came up with and all along had been looking to involve Scott Burns who was not available at the time. Despite the big $$$$ SPECTRE made, for Craig's last film and the sake of the series future they did not want to forge ahead with a script that was subpar so they debated/agonized over whether they should delay further and take the PR hit. When Fast and the Furious pulled out of the Easter date (which EON may have preferred to begin with) it was the perfect opportunity to buy needed extra time to get Burns on board and clean up the script and also have a better release date that comes with the added prestige of being a holiday release and the first tent pole film of the season.
Bond has been captured by the bad guy in almost every Bond film. I hope this wasn't Boyle's big idea.
YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
True. But, rarely has been Bond been a captive for 2/3 of the movie, which is what happens in Goldfinger.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying it's a tired, worn out plot device. When Silva allowed himself to be captured in Skyfall it kind of turned this trope on its head.
I liked that it was a nice inversion.
Star trek into darkness and avengers have the same twist.
-Casino Royale, Ian Fleming
Didn't say it was original, just that I liked it.
If we don't trust EON's management of the franchise, why should we think these same producers would have cast a universally agreed upon replacement for Craig, hired the perfect screenwriter and director (better than Fukunaga), and released a top-shelf movie by now? That's setting aside all the studio and distribution stuff that slowed down the process.
There is not another universe where EON behaves as a smoothly oiled machine.
I think it's just the squandering of time and lack of focus that gets people. I take your point re alternative Universe where all progresses smoothly but surely nailing down a good quality script and keeping to a schedule should not be beyond them. Also if Spectre had been better thought of and the Craig era more consistent (one superb one poor, one good one disappointing ( see Rotten Tomatoes for the numbers but 80 ish, 50 ish 70 ish and late 50's from memory) people (fanboys, industry commentators and Muggles) would be better disposed to them. As it stands its starting to smell bad...
Good films can and have emerged from inauspicious starts and circumstances and I truly hope this is the case here. For my part a lot will depend on how DC looks when we see him at the Oscar's. If he looks like he's buckled down and got in shape It would augur well.
"Craig has pledged to give the spy a 'world-weary and mature' look for the film" with grey hair and all.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6712817/We-DONT-expect-dye-Mr-Bond-Daniel-Craig-insists-not-hide-grey-hair.html
I've no problem with that if true...it's certainly a mark of delineation from Tom Cruise's MI films, where he's clearly going to ignore his real age as long as possible. I like the idea of a mature Bond, as long as he can still sell the physicality - which admittedly wasn't the case with a previous mature Bond {:)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Craig's Bond films on Rotten Tomatoes
CR 94%
QOS 65%
SF 92%
SP 64%
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/franchise/james_bond_007/
Definitely.
And can someone explain this for me: I don't understand how BB and MGW were able to produce three films in a five year span (GE to TWINE), while we've had only two films in the last ten years. I know that MGM had financial troubles, but Eon resumed pre-production in January 2011. I also know they wanted to wait for Mendes to finish up his work in the West End put SP back a year, and I think finding a distributer for Bond 25 took a little longer than expected(?). Are they just resting on their laurels? Are Eon just bored of Bond? BB has made Film Stars Don't Die In Liverpool and prepped The Rhythm Section, which is something Cubby didn't bother with (excepting Call Me Bwana).
It's very frustrating for us fans. There's also a new generation who will not be used to Bond. I think consistency is important to maintaining any series. For many millions of people around the world, going to see a new Bond film every two years was a tradition. Bond was permanently popular and the series had considerable momentum, particularly in the Moore and Brosnan eras. I know the Craig era has been incredibly successful, but the series is basically dormant. To the public, this lion is very much asleep. Before GE, there was much concern that the six year hiatus had spelled the end for the series, yet a similar four year gap is now considered to be business as usual.
I agree, they should plan for 2-3 years, as you said for consistency.
Wow, that’s something I’ve never considered before
Thanks for a bit of reason in this storm of angst, disappointment, and aggravation.
Whatever happened to "Keep calm and carry on"?
Be that as it may, it is understandable that many fans get annoyed when they have to keep waiting years between films. It's really no way to run a franchise. We have had only two films in one decade. That's never happened before.
Despite the behind the scenes issues I am always happy to receive a Bond film.
What I personally that you get everything in a short period of time and invetween (increasing) you‘re left absolutely cold, as if there was no Bond.
There could be done so much more and if it would only be sporadic releases of cut scenes via social media...
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
It got real old...