It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
"It’s true — I’ve been in discussions with (producer) Barbara Broccoli and (actor) Daniel Craig. It’s a magnificent project; I would love to do a James Bond, but I don’t know how it would fit with my current projects. We’ll have to see.”
http://montrealgazette.com/feature/denis-villeneuve-on-the-cutting-edge
Read with pleasure!!!!!!
If he is in "talks," it would seem to me that he's on board. Why even say he's "in talks" if there is any possibility he'd not do it or back out?
But it's not a matter of opinion.
Whether Villeneuve is in or not has nothing to do with opinions we have of him but of the information we receive.
In that case, a change of actor can't come quick enough.
Now whether he is actually in or out, that's the one that isn't a matter of opinion. We're not discussing facts here.
Given the uninspiring pool of candidates for his succession I can deal with Craig staying for Bond 25. Beside personal angle is a commonplace now in every franchise it's unlikely that a new Bond actor would change that trend.
GE (95)- personal
TWINE (99)- personal (for both M and then Bond)
DAD (02)- elements of personal (M doesn't trust Bond)
The personal angle's not new in this franchise; it's been going on for a very long time. It's just unfortunate that SP became the grandaddy of them all.
However, I think this has more to do with a troubled production than it does about the direction of the franchise.
Will Craig's last have elements of the personal-- absolutely. But I find it very hard to believe it'll come down like the sledgehammer known as SP.
Whether it's Villeneuve or Demange, or someone else, they're smart creative people. No one, from Babs, to DC, to whomever the director is, wants to make SP 2.0.
If there's a blueprint to this era's success, they will look at CR and SF. They will not look at SP, outside of story threads (Bond vs Blofeld in some capacity), for inspiration.
Conversely, a sure thing can fail or be critically panned.
It's all a matter of execution. Villeneuve is proving that he can execute with precision, which is why he is a high demand director. Cleopatra is a project that could truly benefit from a person with his skills.
They will look to SF. That is their benchmark. It's a question of $ and cents, with Craig back.
No action sequences in SP? Did either of you see the film?
If you view any of the Korean film trailers which DaltonCraig007 posts in the 'Coming Soon' thread, you'll see what a real action director can deliver in terms of tension and thrills.
You forgot TND (Paris Carver) however poorly handled that was. Otherwise I agree with you.
Agreed. I'm not a huge fan of action itself, it's the buildup that makes it exciting.
He has said in the interviews for promoting BR 2049 that it was the script that got him there and if it hadn't been compelling enough or justifiable enough to warrant a return to the story he wouldn't have signed on.
There is no chance that he would have joined Bond on the strength of the SP script and the stage it was at when they started filming it.
I think if he does take it on it will mean that P&W outline will have been passed onto someone who has fashioned it into something that he can bring something new to the table and not just a continuation of what came before.
It seems looking at the raves that BR 2049 and they are pretty extraordinary, reviews are saying it's either equal or surpasses Ridley's original.
It could be said and it has in this thread already that DV signing on would be a rather unexciting progression from BR 2049 to do this but if he does I imagine he'll go all in and not slum it one bit, he has one of the most impressive track records of any director since the devastating Incendies, I doubt he'd sign on with EON for the pay check and easy time of it.
The thing is Bond films are some of the most expensive and huge productions out there, they cost more than comic book films and they are a huge undertaking. I'd say after delivering BR 2049 DV is in a better place to take on Bond 25 than any director who has worked on the DC era.
I'm not bargaining on it but it looks more likely now after hearing what he said. I'd love it because he's one of the most exciting directors around and I think he would sate those people out there wanting action in a Bond film, he seems very preocupied with it and that Border crossing sequence in Sicario shows he can build suspense, if he team with Deakins again then I'll be very excited for the results.
Also I seriously hope Bond doesn't return to generic action directors and makes just action fueled entries, there are plenty of those in the series. Drama and action can go hand in hand and DV I think could deliver unlike any of his predecessors have done in the DC era so far.
I seriously can't wait for next Saturdays IMAX screening of BR 2049.
Of course, that's exactly what we need for Bond. If BR does turn out to be a masterpiece but DV does not direct, it really does add pressure on whoever does get the job as many fans will be imagining the Bond movie that DV would have directed and, in a few years, it will be another part of the "missed opportunies" thread.
I really do hope they can make a deal as Bond, at this stage, really does need a great director who can do something special rather than a journeyman. People with DV's talent and experience don't grow on trees.
I think he's married.
The idea of DV is exciting; the thought the producers could ever go back to SM should now be buried. Even if they lose out on DV, it's obvious they are looking for something a little more exciting than came last time.
Unfortunately I think SM really only had one Bond film in him. Returning to the well was a mistake.
I agree. In retrospect it seems Sam shot his bolt with SF and it was probably unwise to hope that lightning would strike twice.
On the other hand, EON have about 1 billion reasons to disagree with us. . .