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
Because TV, "top end" or otherwise, still isn't filmmaking. It's a completely different practice.
Not to say you can't have success at both, but to assume someone will be successful at one because they are successful at the other is quite a big presumption.
This. Especially if we're speaking about a directorial debut...
You're right. It's far harder in a huge number of respects.
Wrong. Where do u get your insight from? High budget TV, today, is run like a feature film, more so than many feature films. I have many friends who write and direct or produce or line-produce top end TV, and it is not a soap opera any more. Just look at the quality of the shows. 2018. Wake up.
Yann Demange has committed to another project. No production dates yet. He is becoming quite popular
I know one male director who can't pull of a decent car chase.
I'm not saying someone like Clarkson couldn't deliver a good Bond movie. No one can know, in fact. I'm saying that the idea of a Bond movie IN 2018 made by someone who never made a feature film in her life it's a long shot. If you look at the best blockbuster ever made (especially in this era of over saturated blockbuster franchises) they always have a strong director with a clear, strong and personal vision behind it.
I just think assuming as a fact that any TV director could deliver a great movie of this size just because in 2018 TV is no more just soap opera crap it's also wrong.
Yes, there are people like Peter Jackson who directed TLotR after some small horror b-movies, but it was a dream project for him, something he worked on for a decade. This scenario here is very different, with pre-production and script polishing goin on without even a director 3/4 months from principal photography.
Marc Forster?
You made your comment when there where just me and Panchito posting "against" Clarkson etc etc. You said trolls. BTW, fine. :)
Nobody is assuming that it's going to be great. The issue here is that some people have already assumed that it won't be. Of course it could turn out to be rubbish. Anything could happen. Spectre had an Oscar-winning director coming back from the most successful Bond film in 40 years, and look how that turned out.
Throwing out things like "TV directors wouldn't be able to handle the schedule" just makes you look ignorant. I mean that in the nicest way possible considering how this thread has riled me today.
Mods: apologies for the language slips earlier. Though, to my credit, the first drafts were far cussier.
I know plenty including myself that find the QOS PTS thrilling, yes the editing is a little frenetic but compare that to Mendes directing 2 very expensive sports car casually drive around Rome with little next to no suspense.
Does this mean he is out of the running?
It's not rushing yet.
I don't think it removes him. Seems to me it confirms that he truly is an up and comer. Makes me want him as director even more.
Equally bad in my book, for different reasons indeed.
I'd be interested to know where @matt_u is qualified to question the @ColonelSun but then why again should I bother we are living in a time where utter novices can talk down people of experience.
Also I apply this to things happening other than just a Bond internet forum.
If @matt_u is part of the industry I of course apologise.
Kathryn Bigelow and Patty Jenkins to name two.
Well, to me Spectre turned out great. But we're not talking about tastes right?
And I never talked just about "schedule issues", come on. Read again my comments. If you think directing something like Collateral in London presents the same issues that directing a globetrotting 200 million dollars movie (debut) with hundreds and hundreds of employees working with more experienced people than you, plus all the pressure that a Bond movie carries on the shoulder of a director, well fine. To me, this assumption sounds also a little naive.
The best thing we can do is waiting for an announcement. Ah, and I never assumed B25 it's not goin to be great.
We're talking about possibilities here. As I said before I'm no producer but you don't need to work in the industry to understand that assuming as a fact that any TV director could deliver a great movie of this size just because in 2018 TV is no more just soap opera crap it's a really long shot.
Clutching at straws, I think is the term.
You are another one, I'm sorry you aren't in the industry just a keyboard warrior with a smart tongue.
BB is incompetent? How on earth could that be true? And, as I have already tried to explain, going in a new direction for a new director is not downgrading. A top level TV director knows how to step into an advanced production. Can u comprehend that?