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
Micheal Bay films make money because they appeal to the lowest common denominator. I think he's aware of what he's doing with stuff like Transformers and Armageddon because he's shown that he is capable of making really fun action films (The Rock, Bad Boys, and I actually enjoyed Pain and Gain too) when he puts his mind to it. So I'm not even saying he isn't talented, but his films make money because of a whole different appeal.
I get the point about something being popular not necessarily meaning it's good but there's a difference between kids and CGI junkies turning out in droves to see the new Transformers regardless of it getting critically slated and people getting hyped for Dunkirk because of the critical buzz and very strong word of mouth. Things are popular for different reasons and in Nolan's case it's because of genuine quality. You at least have to admit that his films are really well crafted, shot and acted, even if you're not a fan of the tone or his style (e.g. CR is a middle of the pack Bond film for me, I really don't enjoy it that much but as a film it's undeniably very good).
I'd also say he's demonstrated more variety than you've given him credit for. He's done superhero origin story (Batman Begins), crime thriller (The Dark Knight, Memento), sci fi (Interstellar), big epic action/popcorn movie (The Dark Knight Rises, Inception), mind bending thrillers, and now he's tackling a war movie.
As I've said before, if he gets his hands on this franchise I believe he will take it to new heights. Mendes will soon be forgotten. My concern has always been where we go after he's done with it.
I agree that he won't repeat the Bat trilogy with Bond. I believe he will take it back to its core espionage roots and deliver a thriller for the ages. He's a creative genius. I sometimes wonder why he shows this franchise so much deference, because he's surpassed it with his films. It's probably because like the rest of us, the best early Bond films probably had a huge impact on him when he was young.
Yeah but his films are so dreary! He's such a bad director and not suited towards Bond. Even though he's one of the top filmmakers of the generation and every single film he makes gets raving reviews.
Personally we need another director like Tamahori who can give us another straight forward adventure!
I think, @Murdock, you could be surprised. Like you, I think the world of GE, still one of my very favourite Bond films. It has good lines, but there are some colder thriller aspects to that film too and Natalya's grief over her Severnaya colleagues never 'touched' me. Perhaps one of the key things that draw me to GE are the colder mood, the more carefully positioned jokes and the 'engineered' tension. From my POV, that's what Nolan is good at, as exemplified in films like Inception and The Prestige (but without the jokes then. ;-) )
I sincerely don't think that Nolan would cut a Bond film up to mess with it narratively, so as to deliberately create confusion, but he would give the film brains, no doubt about it. Perhaps that's what I'm drawn to most, in order to avoid another TWINE or DAD. But I will concede that I also want fun in my Bonds, much more than we've gotten in recent times. And I mean fun, the kind of escapist, colourful fun we haven't gotten since, say, the Nassau part of CR. I guess if Nolan were to do the next Bond film (or one of the next Bond films) I'll be interested to see how he delivers that.
Nolan is no dummy. He knows that when he does a Bond film, it can't just be a Nolan film. It can't be one of those very personal projects of his like Inception. I thought he rather kept himself under control with his Batman films, but we agree to disagree about those so I won't belabour the point. ;-)
Either way, @Murdock, I highly value your opinion and I see what you mean. And whatever the future of Bond brings, in the end I'm sure we're more or less looking for the same thing. ;-)
Greats points. I must admit, once I begin to unpack in my head what a Christopher Nolan Bond film would look like, the prospect does begin to excite me more and more. I certainly don't think he's c%ck it up, and EON would be falling over themselves to accommodate him. After the reception Dunkirk is getting, I can see things falling to play such that EON are at a loose end, and Nolan is freed up in his schedule. The fact that he has always can a deep passion for this franchise makes the possibility all the more likely.
I agree with this. The Bond influence is all over Inception and even his Batman films in a lot of ways. So I don't really understand the concerns about him making a Nolan movie rather than a Bond movie. He'd put his own stamp on it as all the directors should to an extent, but he's already shown in some of his previous work that he's a big fan. We definitely wouldn't end up with another Forster situation with Nolan, he's someone who would be genuinely excited to be doing a Bond movie.
I think EON would be stupid not to try and work something out. Cubby turned down Spielberg in his prime, Barbara and MGW shouldn't make the same mistake with Nolan. He makes great films, best blockbuster director working imo and I really can't see them getting anyone more talented. Plus they've already spent the best part of a decade aping him so why not go for the real thing when he's clearly up for it. It's a no brainer imo. If they were willing to spare no expense and give that much control to get Mendes, they should have no problems doing the same for Nolan.
I get your point about his films being a bit dark & deep. That could be more on account of his brother's writing than Nolan himself. I will be able to comment in a better fashion after viewing Dunkirk tomorrow (Jonathan didn't write that one). Nevertheless, he directs compelling films that resonate. Films that have deep characterizations and meaning. It doesn't mean he will be compelled to do that in a 'caretaker' role with Bond. For all we know he may want to do exactly the opposite, to differentiate himself from Mendes.
He is far from a bad director. Far from it.
Amen to that, @bondjames.
@bondjames Sometimes my sarcasm can be a bit hard to detect ;)
In GoldenEye you don't expect Natalya's colleagues to be gunned down like that. It's shocking and comes out of nowhere. But it doesn't linger there. The base explodes around here. She's trying to survive. Things don't get drawn out for long periods of time and it's not spoon fed to us. In Nolan's films, you can see tragedy coming a mile away. I just don't want that in Bond. I've never seen a Nolan film that wasn't dour or escapist. He's not a good fit for Bond.
I get your point though. I think that is the fear about Nolan. That it will be dark and dreary. It's a legitimate concern given some of his output, but I've always believed the man has the deepest respect for Bond and given his age he's probably influenced most by the earliest (60's and 70's) films. So I think he could really surprise us if he ever gets a shot at it.
At the end of the day, I couldn't see Barbara saying "no thanks" to Nolan. It will come down to whether he is interested or not.
EDIT: I just realized that would be the 60th anniversary. Perfect timing,
It sounds like he's given it quite a bit of thought over a substantial amount of time. He may have his vision of Bond plotted out and "pre-vized " in his minds eye; ramp up time might not be that long.
Based on his most recent quotes, he's very interested.
How credible is that?
You had me on side right up until the point you started talking about Goldeneye, at which point I was immediately reminded how immeasurable better a Nolan Bond film would be than pretty much anything else we've had from the series for the past 30 odd years.
Anything else your friend predicted that would give him merit?