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
Having said that, if the consensus is that there should be another new thread, then so be it, but I ask that this thread 'not' be locked.
1000 pages ago.
That's my opinion of SP. In fact I find it surprising it was released at all (in it's final form). After this experience I'm bracing myself for Bond 25 to be just as bad.
Ah, how times have changed.
Oh wait.
Oh wait.
;)
The pre-production of 25 has certainly been messy, and taken on a life of its own. I'm sure it won't be as bad as Spectre, though.
Fukunaga is a wunderkind, who frequently writes his own scripts, and has an excellent visual style. Mendes was an overrated bloke, who had a decent record and reputation, only because he picked scripts to direct very carefully. I'm hopeful Cary can breathe a bit of life back in to Bond after the dreariness of the last three.
Agreed. It can get toxic in this thread sometimes, but it’s generally good fun, much like the forum as a whole.
You're right - it'll be worse. :(
What makes you think that? @Mendes4Lyfe
I don't think any Bond movies production has been smooth for many years. In fact they've never been smooth affairs right from the beginning.
Look how problematic QOS was. So far Bond 25 hasn't been so bad. Ok we lost Boyle as director. But that was resolved quickly.
Nonsense. American Beauty, Road to Perdition and Revolutionary Road are all masterfully directed films, not to mention that Fukunaga has only directed one thing that rivals these three films: True Detective.
I disagree, it is bad. And QoS suffered as a result of its troubled production, so isn't it reasonable to assume that B25 will also. My main concern is the script has gone through so many iterations, it's hard to see how they have a clear idea of what this film will be. SP had the same problem as was revealed in the leaks, that behind the scenes they were not at all confident with what they had. I think once thinks are set in motion they kind of have to roll with it. I think the mistakes in decisions have already taken place, and now it's only a matter of coming to fruition. I think bringing back Craig was a mistake to begin with, but ignoring that, Cary Fukunaga simply doesn't have any experience with this kind of think, and it doesn't seem like he has been working towards this in his career. Indeed, it's rather random that he is the man chosen to bring us the next Bond adventure after half a decade without one. Mendes was also not used to a series of this kind, but that was a slightly different situation, as Criags Bond still had much unexplored about it. What he was doing wasn't meant to resolve the Craig era, to conclude it in a satisfactory manner. Mendes as a choice felt bold, whereas Fukunaga feels desperate. Likes he was the only one who could commit on short notice, and met with Craig's approval.
But I think in a broader sense, they just painted themselves into a corner with SP, and it was a natural place to leave it and have a rethink.
I wouldn't agree @PanchitoPistoles . Great stories, but I didn't see any masterful direction in any of them. Most of the credit for their quality goes to the plot and stories. Of course the director has input in the way the story is framed, but Mendes has never developed a great story himself.
On the subject of Fukunaga not directing anything near that level, film wise, you should check out Beasts Of No Nation. Not a pleasant film, but an excellent one.
The Bond films have never really used A-list or well known directors. Few of them had massive success before they were used by EON. Mendes was probably the first well known director before he made his Bond films. One of the reason I'm optimistic about Christopher Nolan being called in for directorial duties in the future.
It's a James Bond film, not a Christopher Nolan film with James Bond.
Despite the rush to replace Boyle, I think EON would've had extensive talks with Cary Fukunaga before he signed on as too the direction and what he can bring to the table.
Never a bad thing to be cautious, with the film industry on the whole. Things cant change rapidly. Hopefully we can get some plain sailing for a while though.
Wont be too long before the news starts coming more frequently when production begins.
This is not the place to talk about why I appreciate SP or why you hate it, but the movie is the fourth highest grossing Bond (adjusting inflation) out of 24. So you shouldn't be surprised at all and it's pretty clear that most of the world doesn't share your opinion...
Speaking about 25, which should be the focus of this thread, I'm wondering if EoN is still trying to get Rami Malek. The guy is one of the few frontrunners for winning a Golden Globe and an Oscar for his great work in Bohemian Rhapsody - which is a global phenomenon with a crazy 700+ million dollars gross - and he's clearly living a special moment. Everybody seems to love him and he's getting a lot of social media praise and attention. Fingers crossed because he's clearly extremely versatile and a younger villain could be something very interesting and fresh.
I don't think Boyle was such a big loss to begin with. Never thought he was fitting for Bond.
@Roadphill About American Beauty, I think the plot and dialogues were rather mediocre, student stuff really. It's the direction and the acting that lift it off the ground. Still an overrated movie imo, but I'd give some credit to Mendes for its qualities. I agree about Road to Perdition and Revolutionary Road though. Very strong source material.
Of course, I'm just stating my own opinion of a film I find terribly, terribly bad; and without any highlights to mention. On top of that, I agree with @Mendes4Lyfe that EON painted themselves into a corner with SP, and that Bond 25 would be the place to do some sort of reboot with a new, younger actor. I also fear that with the return of Léa Seydoux, they'll just delve more into the mess that SP created.
Of topic, but one point I want to make; even if a lot of people go and watch a movie at the cinema, that doesn't mean all of them leave the cinema feeling they got what they expected from a film.
A younger villain would be interesting. I think a Zuckerbergish Millennial billionaire would be something different.
--
Re: Fukunaga - he was available, had a history of being able to execute on someone else's vision quickly and successfully, praised the current actor, and seemed amenable to working within an existing framework (whereas others, like Layton, wanted to reimagine and probably go in another direction. They also publicly expressed their appreciation for earlier films which employed a different tonality, which was probably a faux pas when trying to land the gig, while Fukunaga has been careful not to bruise any egos). Let's not kid ourselves though - he wasn't the first choice and neither is the current release date. They had to do what they had to do to get a film out. That doesn't mean it can't be decent. They still have more than enough time to pull it all off successfully.
--
I think you're conflating a few things here. Box office is not a reflection of how people feel about a film, and this one had the benefit of following one of the most critically praised and commercially successful entries of the past 50 years, which inflated its out of the gate gross. If you check how it performed over multiple weeks in all markets, you will see a rapid tail off in box office, which does not reflect a film which is getting good word of mouth (unlike its predecessor, which actually increased weekly gross in some markets later in its run). Moreover, if one were to survey this site's fanbase or the general public, I'm reasonably sure you won't see this film being ranked 4 out of 24. More likely the opposite.
You being the repetitive sort, It's not easy to agree with you sometimes, @PanchitoPistoles, but on what Mendes is concerned, I agree. About Fukunaga, no, his one thing that rivals those films is not TD. Have you seen his Jane Eyre? Or Sin Nombre, or Beasts of no Nation? Direction wise, these were pretty brilliant films. Even Maniac had it's brilliancy, even on the writing department. They are good directors. The thing is, Sam Mendes could have botched Bond and still be on the hall of fame and do his thing for a long career. He was already golden when he entered the franchise. Fukunaga can't botch it. He can't afford it. Not now in this period of his career. If he's the guy who follows Mendes and replaced Boyle and fails, he's screwed. And that's very good news for Bond. He'll do his very best, I'm sure.
I do think this could have been a on off, but it's entirely in the spirit of the Craig era to have continuity, and in the long run, we'll probably appreciate it contained as it is. I too find myself saying that I'd love for a new Bond and new direction to take over immediately. That being said, that "great" Danny Boyle thing you keep repeating compulsively is utter nonsense. And how can you call Nolan and Boyle great? I, for one, do think Nolan earned that title. But the MTV videoclip director that is Boyle isn't in the same league, not even in Mendes league, as the latter is knowledgeable in theatre and the craft as most of us will never be. The best news about Bond 25 so far was that Boyle had left. I was over the moon when I read that. I dislike his films and directorial style. Many, many people do. But hey, I forgot to whom I was responding to for a while. Univex out. Cheers.