› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…2728303233…2507

Comments

  • Tuck91Tuck91
    Posts: 1,680
    Campbells QOS would have been much better, the setbacks & lowpoints of QOS are easily counteracted by change of director IMO.

    I said in another thread that Mendes directing CR would have been a pretty interesting film.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited December 2015 Posts: 4,399
    .
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    HASEROT wrote: »
    BondBug wrote: »
    Personally, I think that there isn't a great deal of difference between many of these directors of big movies. If Sam Mendes had directed Quantum of Solace, based on the same script that Marc Forster had, nobody would be talking about Oscars and they would not have asked him back. If Guy Ritchie had directed the Skyfall script, he would be the man of the moment.

    i can agree with that... i've always felt Forster was more a victim of bad luck than anything... the only problem i had with his direction, was the frenetic handheld camera during the action... beyond that, i've always maintained that QOS was arguably the best looking Bond film from a Cinematography standpoint since OHMSS.
    Agreed. Aside from the editing, QoS is one of the most gorgeous looking entries of the series.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    After his good work on Uncle, I approve of Ritchie for Bond25, Shatterhand.
    Where does he sign?

    PS Don't kill Swann. She is not Tracy. And Ernst must live to threaten the world again.
    Kill Bunt if you want though.
  • BondBugBondBug
    Posts: 158
    HASEROT wrote: »
    BondBug wrote: »
    Personally, I think that there isn't a great deal of difference between many of these directors of big movies. If Sam Mendes had directed Quantum of Solace, based on the same script that Marc Forster had, nobody would be talking about Oscars and they would not have asked him back. If Guy Ritchie had directed the Skyfall script, he would be the man of the moment.

    i can agree with that... i've always felt Forster was more a victim of bad luck than anything... the only problem i had with his direction, was the frenetic handheld camera during the action... beyond that, i've always maintained that QOS was arguably the best looking Bond film from a Cinematography standpoint since OHMSS.

    Yes, it is hard to follow some of the car chase and it looks like M is shot, but it is a stunning looking movie, but unsatisfying in other ways.

  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,843
    timmer wrote: »
    After his good work on Uncle, I approve of Ritchie for Bond25, Shatterhand.
    Where does he sign?

    PS Don't kill Swann. She is not Tracy. And Ernst must live to threaten the world again.
    Kill Bunt if you want though.


    I don't want Shatterhand as the title for a variety of reasons


    1. Dr Gutham Von Shatterhand is an interesting enough name that it could be used on it's own.

    2. I am tired with S Names so no Shatterhand, no Salvo, No Solo, No Seafire, just no more S titles for a while heck I don't even want Valley of Shadows because of how sick with titles I am lol



  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Don't forget Skyfall, SPECTRE and Shoot to Kill.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Ritchie? Uh I need a lot more convincing. However, in another thread I expressed I wouldn't be opposed to Peter Jackson directing a Bond film. However, Alfonso Cuaron is my number 1 favourite at this moment in time to direct.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,713
    Alfonso Cuaron directed one of the most thrilling scenes I've seen inthe last 10 years: the escape of Clive Owen and the 2 women from the farm at early dawn in 'Children of Men'. I believe it's a single-shot sequence and is absolutely nerve-racking.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited December 2015 Posts: 2,138
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Ireland would be a lovely location for a Bond film, you could do so much with it.

    Exactly, the boat scenes from FRWL are filmed on the west of Scotland at Loch Gillopshead. You could never tell.
    DrShatterhand wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Guy Ritchie? Seriously? No.
    I'm with you.

    +1

    I wouldn't want Ritchie's gimmicky visuals and leaden screenwriting 'skills' anywhere near Bond thank you very much.

    We have already had his ex wife crud all over DAD with her awful theme song and demand to be in the flm, what's next Rocco as odd job?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited December 2015 Posts: 9,117
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Ritchie? Uh I need a lot more convincing. However, in another thread I expressed I wouldn't be opposed to Peter Jackson directing a Bond film. However, Alfonso Cuaron is my number 1 favourite at this moment in time to direct.
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    Alfonso Cuaron directed one of the most thrilling scenes I've seen inthe last 10 years: the escape of Clive Owen and the 2 women from the farm at early dawn in 'Children of Men'. I believe it's a single-shot sequence and is absolutely nerve-racking.

    Cuaron would be the dream ticket. Children of Men is a very good film and shows he can blend action and character. And the two big single shot sequences with guns going off and stunts all over the place make a mockery of Sam's much vaunted 'bloke walks through a hotel and along the edge of a roof while some extras dance in the background' shot.

    And it seems like he may be a bit of a fan if we think about his voice over work on QOS. Unless maybe he's just Forster's mate and did it for a laugh.

    Nonetheless here's a guy who has shown he can deliver spectacular action and mix it well with drama. Mendes does ok with the drama (if the script is up to it) but the action in both his films has been pretty lacklustre.

    Cuaron definitely top of my list although I would settle for Hooper. Mendes maybe third. Think the Vaughn ship has sailed and given how disappointing Kingsman was that's maybe a good thing. Would be happy enough with Joe Wright though.

    I'm still can't make up my mind about Nolan.


  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited December 2015 Posts: 6,276
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Ritchie? Uh I need a lot more convincing. However, in another thread I expressed I wouldn't be opposed to Peter Jackson directing a Bond film. However, Alfonso Cuaron is my number 1 favourite at this moment in time to direct.
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    Alfonso Cuaron directed one of the most thrilling scenes I've seen inthe last 10 years: the escape of Clive Owen and the 2 women from the farm at early dawn in 'Children of Men'. I believe it's a single-shot sequence and is absolutely nerve-racking.

    Cuaron would be the dream ticket. Children of Men is a very good film and shows he can blend action and character. And the two big single shot sequences with guns going off and stunts all over the place make a mockery of Sam's much vaunted 'bloke walks through a hotel and along the edge of a roof while some extras dance in the background' shot.

    And it seems like he may be a bit of a fan if we think about his voice over work on QOS. Unless maybe he's just Forster's mate and did it for a laugh.

    Nonetheless here's a guy who has shown he can deliver spectacular action and mix it well with drama. Mendes does ok with the drama (if the script is up to it) but the action in both his films has been pretty lacklustre.

    Cuaron definitely top of my list although I would settle for Hooper. Mendes maybe third. Think the Vaughn ship has sailed and given how disappointing Kingsman was that's maybe a good thing. Would be happy enough with Joe Wright though.

    I'm still can't make up my mind about Nolan.


    I really agree with these choices. But wasn't Vaughn already rejected by Eon for CR? It seems like they wouldn't likely go back to him.

    Nolan, I fear, would be a Mendes retread. Nolan is good at big dramatic moments (if too expository for my tastes) but he can't consistently direct action either. His homage to OHMSS in Inception is more atmospheric than exciting.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Guy Ritchie? Seriously? No.
    I'm with you.

    Add me to this list chaps.

    Agreed. No thank you.
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    Cuaron could be good.

    Peter Jackson maybe if he's a Fleming fan.

    Paul Greengrass could strip it back (again).

    What was Danny Boyle's status?

    Ditto David Yates?

    I kind of want George Miller to do it, honestly. JB needs an adrenaline enema after the last two. I want the talent of the artistic director, BUT not at the expense of action again. It has to have both.

    I would vote no on Nolan, Mendes, Ritchie, Spielberg.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,407
    Cuaron would be my choice too! And if he had Emmanuel Lubezki as DoP, that would be the icing on the cake!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    DoctorNo wrote: »
    Cuaron could be good.

    Peter Jackson maybe if he's a Fleming fan.

    Paul Greengrass could strip it back (again).

    What was Danny Boyle's status?

    Ditto David Yates?

    I kind of want George Miller to do it, honestly. JB needs an adrenaline enema after the last two. I want the talent of the artistic director, BUT not at the expense of action again. It has to have both.

    I would vote no on Nolan, Mendes, Ritchie, Spielberg.

    I worry a Jackson would want to bring in a load of CGI.

    Greengrass can get fucked. I like the Bourne films but you can't slate Bond like he did and get the gig.

    Danny Boyle would be pretty good I reckon. In fact I think I have joint top of my list now along with Cuaron. Actually slightly ahead as he's English.
  • dinovelvetdinovelvet
    Posts: 709
    Boyle has clearly said he has no desire to make a Bond movie; his Olympics short was a one off.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I'll be glad if he doesn't.
  • fjdinardofjdinardo
    Posts: 1,970
    Ron Jeremy could direct a Bond film if it means Craig comes back
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Who's Ron Jeremy?

    EDIT - ok, now I get it. ;)
  • PDJamesBondPDJamesBond
    Posts: 669
    If there were an official statement from EON saying that Daniel Craig was returning and Martin Campbell was directing, I think I might actually sob with happiness.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,462
    PDJamesBond wrote: »
    If there were an official statement from EON saying that Daniel Craig was returning and Martin Campbell was directing, I think I might actually sob with happiness.

    That would be best-case scenario for me.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    edited December 2015 Posts: 1,755
    PDJamesBond wrote: »
    If there were an official statement from EON saying that Daniel Craig was returning and Martin Campbell was directing, I think I might actually sob with happiness.

    To finish what he started with Casino Royale. This would be beyond lovely. Oh to dream...

  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    If only. Yeah, a dream come true.
  • smittysmitty
    Posts: 725
    I think George Miller could make a great Bond film. He has done an incredibly wide variety of stuff, and he has written a lot of his films too. Bond badly needs a director for 25 that knows what a good script requires. He may be around 70 but MM was a killer to direct so he must still have plenty of stamina.


  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    Cloud007 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »

    One of the bits I loved in Uncle was the Royal Navy commando assault towards the end. I'd love something like that in a Bond movie. Bond arriving by night in a WW2 style hit and run commando raid - blacked up, beret, light machine gun. Lots of 'Commander Bond'. It would be Bond escaping all the angst, reconnecting with his military past and just getting stuck in. Brilliant.

    I agree with you. I think a lot of that cooperation between Bond and the military has really been lost since a while ago. Maybe the thought of needing the help of others may look "un-cool" to some audiences?. I think that it's a wonderful thing to see him working at the same level as some elite units. The combined assault in "The Spy Who Loved Me" is a great example of this.

    Couldn't agree more. The Bond films need to get back to the OPERATIONAL side of things, as opposed to the relational.
    And the military/naval connection has been lost since the start of the Craig era.. the 'M' in MI6 does stand for military, after all.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    So they could make him Commander in the next and do said operational side
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    It would be cool for him to be referred to as 'Commander Bond' just to keep that background there - I think the only reference to Bond's naval background in the DC era is Bond's title of Commander in M's obituary.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    In the video game Blood Stone, an original Craig Bond story, Bond is referred to as 'Commander Bond' by his Taiwanese counterpart.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    The prospect of another Martin Campbell entry really doesn't excite me at all.

    massively overrated IMO.

Sign In or Register to comment.