If the lack of a title is a marketing strategy then it is a strange one for Bond. They have had a title almost every time. It doesn't make much sense for them to hold it back given they never have
I wonder if the lack of the title has something to do with no mention of the villains name. We know the character name of almost everyone, except Rami Maleks villain. I sit here and wonder which we'll find out first, title of the movie or name of the villain. Unless the villains name is the or part of the movie title.
If we are to take Wilson at his word (which is already a lie that they never have a title ready, since all the end credits of the first 16 films had the title for the next film listed), it's they don't have a title decided, not that they are keeping it secret.
If it was Shatterhand it would just make Barbara look dumb like when Chris Wolf denied he was Blofeld (all though with any other villain it would be less obvious and there'd be less incentive to keep it hidden). Brokenclaw and Colonel Sun all seem unlikely given Rami Malek. He could make a cool Scorpius if they went the cult leader route. I'm sure they could come up with a few good original villain names as well.
I don't know if I dreamed it or if I heard it in the community, but what if the title was simply "007"? I guess it's possible if that's really what the film's about. It would make it hard to refer to the film. You would have to specify "007 in 007" or they'd think you meant the entire franchise. Dumber things have happened.
- - -
Most of the short story titles from Octopussy & the Living Daylights are horrendous and unusable because they were written for magazines. If Fleming had lived to see them published in a collection he would've come up with better names like he did with the For Your Eyes Only collection. "Property and Lady" and "Octopussy" were written specifically for Playboy magazine, so the titles are written for that. "007 in New York" was for some travel magazine which is probably why it has a recipe for scrambled eggs.
Living Daylights is a good title because Fleming rewrote the title after he published it in magazine. Before that it was published as something lackluster like 'Trigger finger'. Decent but not a Fleming-good title. Risico and Hildebrand Rarity are also good titles.
- - -
I bring this up because 'Risico' is the way either Kristatos or Columbo says "Risk" in his greek accent. Therefore if it were used as a title for a film, it would HAVE be used either as the name of a villain or a weapon. If they thought the name was too Greek for Malek, they could call him and the film simply "Risk", or even "Mr. Risk" to sort of mirror Dr. No. All these variants on Risico could be a reason why they haven't decided on a name yet.
I don't feel good about using Hildebrand Rarity this early after that pointless reference that made it the new UNIVERSAL EXPORTS. Just a fake company or something, what would be the point? Unless it had nothing to do with the safe house or the company, but that seems like a big red herring.
that's something I've been wondering: did Fleming choose to retitle it as the Living Daylights, or was the story still known as Berlin Escape when he passed away?
I don't know if I dreamed it or if I heard it in the community, but that the title was to be "007". I guess it's possible if that's really what the film's about. It would make it hard to refer to the film. You would have to specify "007 in 007" or they'd think you meant the entire franchise.
its definitely an unpopular rumour that's been circulating here. Following a supposed series trend to name a later installment after the character, following previous installments with proper titles.
The only actual example I can think of is 1968's Inspector Clouseau, which starred Alan Arkin instead of Peter Sellers, and was not directed by Blake Edwards and did not feature music by Henry Mancini. Very bad precedent, since it insists it is still a film about the character the audience loves even though none of the original creators are even involved.
Save that desperate move for Bond26, after Craig quits and the Brocollis sell the franchise.
the title 007could make a bit of sense, plotwise though, if Bond25 really is about a retired CraigBond meeting the new agent who has been assigned his old employee number.
Maybe they should call it The CodeName Theory? cmon you guys all love that old CodeName Theory right?
Wow! It was so out there I thought I'd dreamed it.
Another example is Jason Bourne, the 5th bourne movie, and Stephen King's Dark Tower Series. Book 7 is called The Dark Tower. Bond is a much bigger deal because of how many installments it has.
I actually liked Inspector Clousea and thought Alan Arkin was a pretty good Clousea, the only one besides Sellers who was any good. Blake Edwards was supposed to help the guy that made it make the 3rd movie, but the guy got tired of waiting on him. Shot in the Dark came out 3 months after Pink Panther, but after that Edwards took 11 years to make another one. I guess it got called Pink Panther returns because the cartoon became more popular than Clouseau. That's his own fault though, sense Clouseau would've been in the public consciousness if he had made more films. It's actually funny, because the original Pink Panther, the protagonist was David Niven's thief character and the entire franchise was to be about his exploits, but Inspector Clouseau ended up being more popular and so Sellers hijacked Niven's franchise. Peter Sellers last Pink Panther film before he died was to be his last anyway. In it he was supposed to fall in love with a thief and betray his love for the law for a life of crime, so that the franchise would have come full circle.
The only actual example I can think of is 1968's Inspector Clouseau, which starred Alan Arkin instead of Peter Sellers, and was not directed by Blake Edwards and did not feature music by Henry Mancini. Very bad precedent, since it insists it is still a film about the character the audience loves even though none of the original creators are even involved.
The recent examples of this trend have been films like Rocky Balboa, 2008's Rambo, Logan and Jason Bourne. There were plans to make a sixth Die Hard film called McClane, but it's looking like it may not be made. I think that titling the fourth Fast and the Furious film Fast & Furious also fits this trend of naming a later film in the series after the name of the series.
All these examples are uniquely stupid for there own reasons ) , Because the first 5 Rockies were already called Rocky, so they just added his last name. Rambo is even dumber. It went First Blood, Rambo: First Blood Part II, Rambo III, Rambo. So there are 2 Rambo's, a Rambo 3 and no Rambo 2. Logan is at least based on the comic "Old Man Logan"
I do notice two striking similarity between all of them (except Logan) , and that is either to market a franchise that has been dormant for two decades (thereby not tacking on a number so that you may attract a new audience that hadn't seen the others) and/or the drive for a studio to shoot a product out of its ass as fast as possible.
I actually liked Inspector Clouseau and thought Alan Arkin was a pretty good Clousea, the only one besides Sellers who was any good.
its been a long time since I saw it, so have no opinion. I do like Alan Arkin in general, very funny man. His other comedy roles are more character based , not so slapstick. I think of him above all as Yossarian in Catch22.
it is even sillier they named the 1970s sequels after a character who was no longer in the films though. Inspector Clouseau is more defensible than that. But there's precedent for that too: The Thin Man!
...In a way, Lea Seydoux and Naomi Harris have sort of confirmed this by saying that the script is constantly changing and that none of the cast are likely to see a complete script....
one zany suggestion:
maybe the actors are only being given the portions of the script relevant to the scenes they will be in?
there are filmmakers who work this way:
Larry David only gives exactly the minimal plot description needed to his actors, he wants them to improvise through their shock at the weird situations they will be thrown into. The actress who plays his wife in particular is excluded from the scripts until the cameras are rolling, just to get those genuine reaction shots.
Same with David Lynch: if you watch the bonus footage in Twin Peaks the Return, you can see him taking his actors aside and whispering in their ears "now this other character is going to respond to your line with something a little weird, and then I want you to go into hysterics like you're having a seizure. But I can't tell you what it is that the other character is going to say"
Course those approaches are a little to arty for a James Bond film, I'm sure.
But realistically, given the security issues following SPECTRE, a very good idea would be to not give any of the supporting actors the script for scenes they are not in. Especially when we can see that they are getting hounded by the press and the online community to please spoil the plot.
...In a way, Lea Seydoux and Naomi Harris have sort of confirmed this by saying that the script is constantly changing and that none of the cast are likely to see a complete script....
one zany suggestion:
maybe the actors are only being given the portions of the script relevant to the scenes they will be in?
there are filmmakers who work this way:
Larry David only gives exactly the minimal plot description needed to his actors, he wants them to improvise through their shock at the weird situations they will be thrown into. The actress who plays his wife in particular is excluded from the scripts until the cameras are rolling, just to get those genuine reaction shots.
Same with David Lynch: if you watch the bonus footage in Twin Peaks the Return, you can see him taking his actors aside and whispering in their ears "now this other character is going to respond to your line with something a little weird, and then I want you to go into hysterics like you're having a seizure. But I can't tell you what it is that the other character is going to say"
Course those approaches are a little to arty for a James Bond film, I'm sure.
But realistically, given the security issues following SPECTRE, a very good idea would be to not give any of the supporting actors the script for scenes they are not in. Especially when we can see that they are getting hounded by the press and the online community to please spoil the plot.
“Ok Daniel.. I can’t tell you what he’s going to say.. .but after he says it hit him with that iron bar”
I can't believe people are even discussing "007" Or "James Bond" as a title. There is zero benefit of calling it that, and a million reasons not to. It's an extremely stupid idea and should never be suggested again.
The only actual example I can think of is 1968's Inspector Clouseau, which starred Alan Arkin instead of Peter Sellers, and was not directed by Blake Edwards and did not feature music by Henry Mancini. Very bad precedent, since it insists it is still a film about the character the audience loves even though none of the original creators are even involved.
The recent examples of this trend have been films like Rocky Balboa, 2008's Rambo, Logan and Jason Bourne. There were plans to make a sixth Die Hard film called McClane, but it's looking like it may not be made. I think that titling the fourth Fast and the Furious film Fast & Furious also fits this trend of naming a later film in the series after the name of the series.
Plus we've got 'John Rambo' coming up very soon, haven't we?
I don't think it should flat out say: "I'm Q and I'm gay", but I do think they gave a few hints in SF and SP. I'm perfectly fine with it, I do think Whishaw is doing a great job. SP is my least favourite Bond film, but the Q scenes are a joy to watch.
Don't confuse me with the other DutchBondFan, but be sure to follow his YouTube account. You can read my articles on James Bond Nederland: www.jamesbond.nl/author/gosse/
It wouldn't surprise me if Craig was actually injured. Hopefully, if true, it's not serious. It might be difficult, but they might be able to shoot some other scenes that don't involve Craig while he recovers. However I must say the rest of the story was the biggest pile of steaming bulls..t and negative spin I have yet to read regarding Bond 25. Gotta love the tabs.
Hopefully not much of the filming has been cancelled. It will probably resume in a couple weeks, or they will find a way to film other things or film around the injury. Daniel Craig gets injured on every Bond film.
The Sun states that filming for this coming weekend at Pinewood is what was cancelled, but on the other hand we know from his Instagram that Jeffrey Wright was there today...
Well he was out and about in NYC yesterday and they have wrapped filming in Jamaica according to Cary. Sounds like it is bull or has been very exaggerated.
Will be interesting to see eventually if he was even in a suit in Jamaica
Hopefully not much of the filming has been cancelled. It will probably resume in a couple weeks, or they will find a way to film other things or film around the injury. Daniel Craig gets injured on every Bond film.
We just don't want this to get to Rhythm Section territory. That was 7 months for a wrist and caused crew to go find other work...
Well he was out and about in NYC yesterday and they have wrapped filming in Jamaica according to Cary. Sounds like it is bull or has been very exaggerated.
I would actually argue that lends credence to the story since it said he flew to NY to have it checked out...
Maybe, but he does live in NYC...... (as well as his wife)
Well sure but if we know filming ended in Jamaica on Friday (Fukunaga IG) and cast were at Pinewood Monday (Jeffrey Wright IG) what are the chances he stopped off home for a bit?
Comments
If we are to take Wilson at his word (which is already a lie that they never have a title ready, since all the end credits of the first 16 films had the title for the next film listed), it's they don't have a title decided, not that they are keeping it secret.
If it was Shatterhand it would just make Barbara look dumb like when Chris Wolf denied he was Blofeld (all though with any other villain it would be less obvious and there'd be less incentive to keep it hidden). Brokenclaw and Colonel Sun all seem unlikely given Rami Malek. He could make a cool Scorpius if they went the cult leader route. I'm sure they could come up with a few good original villain names as well.
I don't know if I dreamed it or if I heard it in the community, but what if the title was simply "007"? I guess it's possible if that's really what the film's about. It would make it hard to refer to the film. You would have to specify "007 in 007" or they'd think you meant the entire franchise. Dumber things have happened.
- - -
Most of the short story titles from Octopussy & the Living Daylights are horrendous and unusable because they were written for magazines. If Fleming had lived to see them published in a collection he would've come up with better names like he did with the For Your Eyes Only collection. "Property and Lady" and "Octopussy" were written specifically for Playboy magazine, so the titles are written for that. "007 in New York" was for some travel magazine which is probably why it has a recipe for scrambled eggs.
Living Daylights is a good title because Fleming rewrote the title after he published it in magazine. Before that it was published as something lackluster like 'Trigger finger'. Decent but not a Fleming-good title. Risico and Hildebrand Rarity are also good titles.
- - -
I bring this up because 'Risico' is the way either Kristatos or Columbo says "Risk" in his greek accent. Therefore if it were used as a title for a film, it would HAVE be used either as the name of a villain or a weapon. If they thought the name was too Greek for Malek, they could call him and the film simply "Risk", or even "Mr. Risk" to sort of mirror Dr. No. All these variants on Risico could be a reason why they haven't decided on a name yet.
I don't feel good about using Hildebrand Rarity this early after that pointless reference that made it the new UNIVERSAL EXPORTS. Just a fake company or something, what would be the point? Unless it had nothing to do with the safe house or the company, but that seems like a big red herring.
did Fleming choose to retitle it as the Living Daylights, or was the story still known as Berlin Escape when he passed away?
The only actual example I can think of is 1968's Inspector Clouseau, which starred Alan Arkin instead of Peter Sellers, and was not directed by Blake Edwards and did not feature music by Henry Mancini. Very bad precedent, since it insists it is still a film about the character the audience loves even though none of the original creators are even involved.
Save that desperate move for Bond26, after Craig quits and the Brocollis sell the franchise.
the title 007 could make a bit of sense, plotwise though, if Bond25 really is about a retired CraigBond meeting the new agent who has been assigned his old employee number.
Maybe they should call it The CodeName Theory? cmon you guys all love that old CodeName Theory right?
Another example is Jason Bourne, the 5th bourne movie, and Stephen King's Dark Tower Series. Book 7 is called The Dark Tower. Bond is a much bigger deal because of how many installments it has.
I actually liked Inspector Clousea and thought Alan Arkin was a pretty good Clousea, the only one besides Sellers who was any good. Blake Edwards was supposed to help the guy that made it make the 3rd movie, but the guy got tired of waiting on him. Shot in the Dark came out 3 months after Pink Panther, but after that Edwards took 11 years to make another one. I guess it got called Pink Panther returns because the cartoon became more popular than Clouseau. That's his own fault though, sense Clouseau would've been in the public consciousness if he had made more films. It's actually funny, because the original Pink Panther, the protagonist was David Niven's thief character and the entire franchise was to be about his exploits, but Inspector Clouseau ended up being more popular and so Sellers hijacked Niven's franchise. Peter Sellers last Pink Panther film before he died was to be his last anyway. In it he was supposed to fall in love with a thief and betray his love for the law for a life of crime, so that the franchise would have come full circle.
The recent examples of this trend have been films like Rocky Balboa, 2008's Rambo, Logan and Jason Bourne. There were plans to make a sixth Die Hard film called McClane, but it's looking like it may not be made. I think that titling the fourth Fast and the Furious film Fast & Furious also fits this trend of naming a later film in the series after the name of the series.
it is even sillier they named the 1970s sequels after a character who was no longer in the films though. Inspector Clouseau is more defensible than that. But there's precedent for that too: The Thin Man!
maybe the actors are only being given the portions of the script relevant to the scenes they will be in?
there are filmmakers who work this way:
Larry David only gives exactly the minimal plot description needed to his actors, he wants them to improvise through their shock at the weird situations they will be thrown into. The actress who plays his wife in particular is excluded from the scripts until the cameras are rolling, just to get those genuine reaction shots.
Same with David Lynch: if you watch the bonus footage in Twin Peaks the Return, you can see him taking his actors aside and whispering in their ears "now this other character is going to respond to your line with something a little weird, and then I want you to go into hysterics like you're having a seizure. But I can't tell you what it is that the other character is going to say"
Course those approaches are a little to arty for a James Bond film, I'm sure.
But realistically, given the security issues following SPECTRE, a very good idea would be to not give any of the supporting actors the script for scenes they are not in. Especially when we can see that they are getting hounded by the press and the online community to please spoil the plot.
“Ok Daniel.. I can’t tell you what he’s going to say.. .but after he says it hit him with that iron bar”
. Risico.
Gun In My Hand
Never Dream of Dying
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
Plus we've got 'John Rambo' coming up very soon, haven't we?
The fim‘s called „Rambo: Last Blood“, so not sure if that counts.
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
The unrated blu of 2008's RAMBO carries JOHN RAMBO as its title on the film print.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/9067706/james-bond-filming-cancelled-daniel-craig-ankle/amp/
It wouldn't surprise me if Craig was actually injured. Hopefully, if true, it's not serious. It might be difficult, but they might be able to shoot some other scenes that don't involve Craig while he recovers. However I must say the rest of the story was the biggest pile of steaming bulls..t and negative spin I have yet to read regarding Bond 25. Gotta love the tabs.
Hopefully not much of the filming has been cancelled. It will probably resume in a couple weeks, or they will find a way to film other things or film around the injury. Daniel Craig gets injured on every Bond film.
Even that wouldn't be a good headline - we don't know the length of delay yet...
Will be interesting to see eventually if he was even in a suit in Jamaica
We just don't want this to get to Rhythm Section territory. That was 7 months for a wrist and caused crew to go find other work...
I would actually argue that lends credence to the story since it said he flew to NY to have it checked out...
Well sure but if we know filming ended in Jamaica on Friday (Fukunaga IG) and cast were at Pinewood Monday (Jeffrey Wright IG) what are the chances he stopped off home for a bit?