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
Alexander Witt - he's been the 2nd Unit Director on the Bond films CR, SF, and SP - as well as 2nd Unit Director on numerous films like: X-Men First Class, Fast Five, The Town, American Gangster, The Italian Job, Black Hawk Down and etc.... so he at least knows how to stage and shoot action... he may not be the flashy or sexy pick - but if one is making a list of possible in house candidates who could one day helm a Bond film, then i gotta believe his name to be on that list.
I'd be happy to promote from in house. Witt also has a decent resume. Trouble is, he's on directorial duties till at least 2018.
The third quarter ended on Friday. Probably either late in October or early in November.
Forster, 2008
“Then we started shooting and the only problems I had with the script we were shooting in April, May and June so as soon as the strike was over we did another polish with someone and it worked out with all this stuff coming up. So I was pretty happy with all the work we’d done in January and February so [there won’t be any need for reshoots].” (emphasis added)
Nevertheless, Forster did hire another writer, newcomer Joshua Zetumer, to polish Haggis’ draft. “He’s a very young writer and he only wrote two or three scripts. And I read a script of his that I was very fond of and Barbara and Michael liked it,” the director explained. “There were a couple of polishes and changes that I wanted to do and I felt that he was very well suited and I thought that he would be good for it and that’s why I hired him.”
https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/a-james-bond-set-visit-and-seven-exclusive-quantum-of-solace-images/
So let's say Forster and Craig were doing their thing early during the shoot. The whole "Forster and Craig really wrote Quantum" narrative makes it sound as if it were that way the whole movie. Clearly that wasn't so but the whole "there was no script" is exaggerated.
On screen, I'm fine with him. Some of the accompanying comments during publicity become repetitive after a while. Also, sometimes he says things (like his 2011 comment how the Fleming titles don't mean anything) that don't hold up to scrutiny.
Personally I find that DC makes an effort to be genuine and honest. It's refreshing, rather than see a puppet, with a fake smile, spewing the same script the PR people order them to spew.
In the end, out of the hundreds (thousands?) of interviews since DC's been in the limelight, are we to go after the three or four mis-quotes/mis-readings and keep raking him over the coals?
Or should we accept the man as a fine actor, tries his best during the press junkets (and remember, this is the same press that were giving voice to all the imbeciles who wanted DC fired once he was cast); he may say things you may not agree with, but I bet if anyone here did as many interviews as DC (and others do), we would read some of our words being twisted, or not put in proper context.
The press is there to sell papers, so if the actor who plays Bond says he'd like to slash his wrists than do another, then lets not be responsible as the author of that article; let's not say something like, "obviously coming off of a marathon, nine-month shoot, the actor was clearly joking when he told me he'd rather slash his wrists"...; no, lets not have journalistic integrity and put DC's words in context. Instead, I can turn his words into headlines, I'll get hits on the internet, I'm breaking a story: Bond Actor Would Rather Slash Wrists Than Do Another!
Like I said, don't believe all the headlines.
Some of you (or should I say one) is at least as passionate if not obsessed with Craig and any criticism seems forbidden.
Anyway, I rather have 10 @Mendes4Lyfe anytime of the day who are positive about something than one of those always negative, criticising, nitpicking grump.
And just for the record, since re-watching an episode of Being Human and the pilot to Poldark earlier today, Aidan Turner is now my No 1 too for the next Bond. Sorry Dan Stevens...
Mirroring Sean Connery here. Perfect.
Well said.
Just to clarify, Dan said the titles for the Bond films can often make no sense in context of the movie, which he is right about in some cases. He wasn't referring to the literature of Fleming.
In that photo he reminds me of the Bond as seen on the very early pulpish Fleming novel covers. Dick Orne's Bond in particular more so than Connery.
I do think, though, even at 33 he still looks a bit young for 007. That said, it could give Dan time for at least one possibly two more outings-then Turner would probably look the right age.
Even if we've seen the final Daniel Craig Bond film, having warmed recently to the idea of Fassbender, or Tom Hardy, I'd put Turner alongside those two. There are certainly far worse names. I'd say pretty much 95% of the actors mentioned as possible replacements for Craig are as Bondian as Screech from Saved By The Bell.
Great post.
Still rooting for the following in this order: 1) for Craig to go out on a high note; 2) for somebody completely off everyone's radar who turns out to just completely own the character like Craig did; 3) for Michael Fassbender.
Ha ha ha ha ha. Brilliant.
He's a ringer for Giggsy after he has just heard his missus's key in the door while he's upstairs smashing some page 3 tart.
Rather than just wandering aimlessly from film to film, I would like to see a team brought in that maps a 5 film arc, that could include stand alone stories, for the next 007. Turner is the perfect age for this.