Call sheet spoilers

[Mazer Rackham]

Anyone know how much longer the shoot is scheduled to last?

I've read it's supposed to go until sometime in May.

That's what whatsherface said. They were supposed to be ending in April, May is an easy enough stretch it's not like Craig has anywhere to be. The original thought was the sequel to TGWTDT would be filming soon after SF, Fincher was very big on how EON was sharing Criag on a tight scheduled.
Fincher has already gone of the reservation, he doesn't care for the other two books right now he is more interested making any movie but the sequels, so it will take time for whoever to gets the sequels to get up to speed although Sony may lose their Salander if they can't get it going soon. That is IF they want to get it going at all, TGWTDT is Sony's Gone in 60 Seconds, it will not make money, it will not win prestige, what they do know now is how much money to pump into the sequels, how much adverting to give them, and when not to release them. Maybe home video sales will be the real story.

Far as Bond goes they may be doing reshoots as late as summer but that is normal, SF is going to be a test of keeping a Bond actor on perhaps too long, maybe not we'll see. Craig was ready to walk away with the thought it was too long a hiatus, but he got to call most of the important shots like story and director I don't know how any actor could resist that kind of control.

[Mazer Rackham]

More to the point, Craig/Bond has never met Tracy and never been married to her. It's actually possible that Brosnan/Bond never did either. Michael G. Wilson said in 1995 at the New York fan convention, that he didn't review the Bond movies as one big series, but a "series of series" of films. That statement ignores how Moore/Bond and Dalton/Bond had been married (Moore/Bond specifically married to Tracy, established firmly with the pre-titles of You Only Live Twice). But there you go.

It was always a wink and a nod about the history, they did a hell of job with OHMSS demonstrating in the opening credits it was supposed to be the same Bond, or shared Bond experience. Of course DAD took it a little too far in the anniversary extravaganza. I think the idea was not to concentrate too much on the timeline but to have the lose idea for the audience that it was the same character.

[The Old Fakir]

I don't find Daniel Craig convincing as a young Bond before Connery.

[Dr. No]

I am sorry that scene was filmed. Hope they cut it.

[Dr. No]

I don't find Daniel Craig convincing as a young Bond before Connery.

I thought when they first announced the reboot they would eventually work it in to the old movies after seeing CR it was apparent this was not the plan.

[Alessandra]

Some of the spoilers (the ones listed 1-6) were from a Web site that quoted from the call sheets but did not reproduce them.

The James Bond Brasil fan site had images reproducing six pages. It was up for a day or two before the site was forced to take them down. Also images of a page or two surfaced on the MI6 message board (but may have been taken down).

The thing about Bond telling M about his childhood is from the call sheet. It's a one-line description of the scene being filmed.

Ok Naps.. is this you??? (you'd know me if this is you LOL)

And HOLY mother of God. THat line then is TRUE and from the call sheet. He tells M about his childhood?? WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING! Wait, why am I even saying this? Go look at the leaked set photos with Bardem that I just posted in BJ's thread gentlemen... just go. Then and

[FormerBondFan]

I always thought Bond's past should be left a mystery though his family history was mentioned briefly in GE.

[Omega]

\

Some of the spoilers (the ones listed 1-6) were from a Web site that quoted from the call sheets but did not reproduce them.

The James Bond Brasil fan site had images reproducing six pages. It was up for a day or two before the site was forced to take them down. Also images of a page or two surfaced on the MI6 message board (but may have been taken down).

The thing about Bond telling M about his childhood is from the call sheet. It's a one-line description of the scene being filmed.

Yep I copied the info form a movie forum, the other call sheets on ebay went for big bucks.

[Napoleon Solo]

Some of the spoilers (the ones listed 1-6) were from a Web site that quoted from the call sheets but did not reproduce them.

The James Bond Brasil fan site had images reproducing six pages. It was up for a day or two before the site was forced to take them down. Also images of a page or two surfaced on the MI6 message board (but may have been taken down).

The thing about Bond telling M about his childhood is from the call sheet. It's a one-line description of the scene being filmed.

Ok Naps.. is this you??? (you'd know me if this is you LOL)

And HOLY mother of God. THat line then is TRUE and from the call sheet. He tells M about his childhood?? WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING! Wait, why am I even saying this? Go look at the leaked set photos with Bardem that I just posted in BJ's thread gentlemen... just go. Then and

(IF YOU'RE OFFENDED BY SPOILERS STOP READING NOW)

As I recall from the call sheet before it was taken down, in one scene M is in the DB5 out in Scotland, wakes up and no Bond is around. Then, there's the scene where Bond tells M about his childhood.

Also, re: the Bardem photos from Sunday March 11...any possibility he's wearing a blonde wig? It looks like it *might* be a wig.

[katied]

Bardem in a blonde wig... .

[JackWade CIA]

Bardem in a blonde wig... .

Maybe it is a disguise for the moment. A baddie seeking past using a cops uniform and a wig. If he looks like this the whole movie yes a major mistake has occurred.

[katied]

Yeah..I'm inclined to think it's a disguise..but if it really is for the whole movie...

[Thunderpussy]

more filming stuff

a few spoilers, but some photos of Bond's home etc.

[Kristatos]

more filming stuff

a few spoilers, but some photos of Bond's home etc.

Wait, Bond now has a "family seat"? Doesn't that kind of contradict all that stuff in CR about how he had to try twice as hard to impress people at Cambridge due to being so common etc etc?

[Goldeneye]

more filming stuff

a few spoilers, but some photos of Bond's home etc.

Wait, Bond now has a "family seat"? Doesn't that kind of contradict all that stuff in CR about how he had to try twice as hard to impress people at Cambridge due to being so common etc etc?

Spoiler

Almost didn’t go back to Hankley today, but I’m glad we did, as I had an interesting chat with one of the crew who told me some plot stuff. Apparently the lodge is Bond’s Scottish family home. So not a monastery at all, rather an ancestral seat. According to him, the chapel is going to have the gravestones of Bond’s grandmother and other family members, and that’s where Bond takes refuge after the lodge gets blown up.

We got talking because I was surprised to realise that the big hole in the wall that I discussed here, had completely vanished. I wondered what the point was of building a big hole and then filling it in, so I asked them. As it turns out, my daughter’s suggestion was right – they’ve covered up the hole.

where'd that hole go?

So… they’ve built a big hole into the wall, then they’ve built a second, normal looking wall over the top. They’ve even put in window frames made of balsa, the ultra-light wood that model aeroplanes are made of. The point of this extra special fakery is so that they can blow up the second wall and be left with the original hole-in-the-wall. Clever stuff.

The hole-in-the-wall is on the far right of photo here – to the right of the big doorway. Watch that space, folks.

So then apparently Bond is going to come hurtling through the gates on the ridge in his aston martin, hotly pursued by someone with unfriendly designs on him. My very forthcoming source today seemed to think that Daniel Craig would actually be there for some of the filming, but I’m a bit doubtful, tbh.

Anyhow, the plot dictates that the homecoming son takes refuge in the grand family seat, which then gets blown to bits by baddies in a helicopter and simultaneously stormed by armed baddies on the ground (who’ve poured out of said helicopter), whereupon Bond flees to the chapel, presumably seeking the protection of his forefathers (and mothers).

a load of hot air...

My source tells me that the lodge is a replica of an actual lodge in Scotland, where they’ve already been filming, but can’t blow it up for the obvious reason that this would rather annoy the owners. So I’m guessing that any heartstring-tugging shots of Daniel reverently touching the gravestone of his granny before doing forward rolls into a bush and throttling the baddies with their own braces, have already been filmed. You never know though, I suppose. They’ve still not finished the roof, and apparently it’ll now be left as it is, since they can cover the bald bit with cgi. It’s the front that you see above that’s the important angle, apparently. Here are some nice hot air balloons floating over the undone bit of the lodge – I wonder if Surrey air balloon revenue has increased in relation to the skyfall filming. All three emergency services were certainly in evidence yesterday, and I assume the film-makers generously compensate the M.O.D. and all the services. Today I was chatting with a Surrey police officer, and he told me that lots of safety cover is provided (at a price) to ensure that the whole explosives issue is safe and covered from a fire perspective. He also told me that the film set had to apply for a licence to blow stuff up, and that the licence is valid for the next few weeks. On the basis of all that I’ve been told today, it seems that filming starts on Tuesday, that there’ll be day and night shoots over the next couple of weeks, and that there’ll be some gratifying low-light explosions occurring. I’ve been a bit concerned about the fire risk inherent in blowing up stuff on heathland – one of the most flammable protected habitats you can find. I’m reassured by finding these big inflatable water bowsers, accompanied by huge reels of hose, which will presumably be on standby on the explosive night.

fake lichen dots on pretend rock

We wandered a long meandering way around Hankley today, only coming near all the film business towards the end of the walk. We ended up on the ridge overlooking the site though, and came across ‘the gatehouse’.

tumbledown wall looks so real!

What really struck me is that the fakery looks just so damned realistic. They’ve pretty much finished the gatehouse now, and it’s fabulous; the edges of the walls are just so convincingly tumbledown and colonised with mosses and lichens. It’s only when you look very closely at the lichen that you realise that it’s just sparsely scattered yellow dots on plaster. It really does the job on first glance though. If the filming’s going to occur mainly at dusk or night, though, then you wonder whether all this detail is worth it considering the fact that most of it is unlikely to be seen. I’m drawn in by all this make believe now though, and I’m feeling rather excited at the thought of seeing some filming.
Tags: "skyfall plot", film location, heath, heathland, helicopter, James Bond, photographs, Skyfall

[Thunderpussy]

Kristatos wrote;
[offtopic]Wait, Bond now has a "family seat"? Doesn't that kind of contradict all that stuff in CR about how he had to try twice as hard to impress people at Cambridge due to being so common etc etc?[/offtopic]

I was thinking that too, I think that the Producers simply don't know what they're doing.
They now have a aged/haggard Bond, from a poor background ( only got to a good school through charity )
now has a luxury Pad in the Highlands. Complete with Family Crypt.
I know D Craig looks like a character from the Adams Family, and now his Bond lives like one as well.

[Napoleon Solo]

For those who read the filming details above....does that sound similar to the 2005 Batman movie? If you read it and saw the movie you'll know what I mean.

[Kristatos]

I was thinking that too, I think that the Producers simply don't know what they're doing.
They now have a aged/haggard Bond, from a poor background ( only got to a good school through charity )

Well, that at least is consistent with the stuff in his obituary, where as an orphan, Bond was reliant on his family connections to get him through his education. No mention of others looking down on him for it, though, despite the fact that class was much more of an issue in Fleming's day than it would have been by the time BoBo went to college. According to the official 007 website, BoBo was born in 1968, the same year as Daniel Craig and a year after me. This means that he would have been at uni some time in the mid-to-late 1980s. Were people still as class-obsessed by then, even at Oxbridge?

[katied]

*sigh* Continuity:They can't haz it.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

Craig looks like s**t in this film from the photos seen. His hair is like a skinhead, and for part of the film he dons a grey stubble beard.

Maybe Craig should have worn Bardem's blond wig?