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
CR is a towering Bond film, but the arc blew its load too early. So did the character, in terms of meeting the girl who would shape his soul.
DC was young and reasonably fresh faced when CR rolled out. There was so much rich material too explore if they wanted to do a proper arc.
In a way, CR was too greedy, took too much meat. And why the hell was Mendes hell-bent on a retirement film after Bond had only just conquered his youthful humanity in QoS?
This is how it should have gone down:
Film 1: Rising to 00 status. Comes up against a foe who "makes him earn it". An exploration of what it might have been like as a younger agent.
Film 2: MI6 is under attack by a former agent. M is killed and Bond loses his only real friend.
Film 3: The Casino Royale / Vesper saga. Bond questions his devotion to the cause.
Film 4: The QoS revenge bullet. Bond in his prime but teetering between duty and oblivion.
Film 5: An ageing Bond comes up against a seemingly unstoppable young terrorist by the name of Ernst Blofeld.
This is easy in hindsight, but would've sorted DC out over a nice, five-film arc.
Instead, the producers and writers are in a very tricky position for B25. A shame, because DC is an excellent Bond and this era seems like a golden opportunity wasted.
Insomnia wasn´t written by Nolan, so it´s rather not indicative of what Nolan might do, in terms of vision, with a Bond film. Except for the lighting.
--
That's a good point, and I've always wondered if it might have been best for him to just have made the one 'reset' film to take EON out of the funk hole they had dug for themselves in the 90's. He would have been eulogized as the best of the best if that had happened. Like his predecessor he peaked with his first one, which is sad.
It feels like a Pierce Brosnan-era choice. A safe journeyman director who won’t rock the applecart too much.
I presume that McGuigan made a strong impression on Barbara and she evidently considers him to be someone she can work with. I also suspect he’s someone she will be able to manage – where Mendes was hired to bring his own independent voice.
I actually don’t mind a journeyman finishing off Craig’s era. If a Chris-Nolan-or-Edgar-Wright-type came on, they would want to do “their” Bond film. With McGuigan what you get is a safe pair of hands who will close the Craig films off effectively. He won’t mind picking up the threads left by Mendes and seeing Craig over the finishing line.
We might not get an overly polished and technically accomplished film (wave goodbye to the beautiful cinematography of the Mendes reign) but we’ll get an adept film that closes the Craig movies off.
I see a lot of comparisons between McGuigan and Martin Campbell. I just hope they bring on a great writer. That is the real question here – as McGuigan will just shoot the script he’s given.
Who can polish P&W’s draft? Some suggestions:
• Jez Butterworth (He’s a renowned playwright who hasn’t been given a proper chance to write Bond – opposed to just polish the final drafts)
• Paul Haggis (the writer’s strike ruined QOS but I know for a fact that he was the one who made the CR script sparkle)
• Steven Knight
• David Hare
• Tom Stoppard (Apparently he was involved very early on in the QOS development before Forster came onboard)
• John Logan (SF was brilliant but SP was a mess – is he redeemable?)
• Alex Garland (More of a possibility as a director)
• Jonathan Nolan
• Chris Terrio (His literate BvS script was hated by fans – personally, I think it holds a lot of merit, albeit a little too high-brow and misguided for the material)
The last act of CR is spiritually the first act of QoS. That's where all the confusion starts, which is carried over into the sequel. Imagine if that house sinking sequence had been the QoS PTS, a bit like the India opening of Bourne 2. Come to think of it, Supremacy and QoS kinda have the exact same ending anyway. They weren't just copying Bourne aesthetically, but also in structure.
Babs won't have made this call without Craig's blessing (assuming he's back). Would Craig work with someone like McGuigan after Mendes? Has he worked with him before?
That's probably why they didn't do it that way, because it would have sent off alarm bells re: Bourne. I certainly noticed it regardless. QoS is very similar to The Bourne Supremacy, which was a benchmark film in the genre (as much so as the first), and not only because of shaky cam but because it put the viewer in the mind of the protagonist and had limited exposition. The viewer had to figure out what Bourne was up to as the film progressed. The visceral immediacy of the whole thing was something quite new at the time.
Best post of the month. Thank you for that, @peter.
The sinking house was an idea of Paul Haggis because the P&W third act was seen to be too weak - it was always intended to be at the end of CR.
Agreed it has got something to it. It's currently running quite often on our major radio stations and I also find it quite addictive.
Not really.
I'm not necessarily on board with that, but at this point I'm not sure EON should be against seeing anyone's ideas. To be honest, rather than hiring just a few guys to hammer something out, I think it'd be interesting if they went the TSWLM route and just had something like a dozen writers come in and give it their best shot.
Had no idea Stoppard was involved with QOS early on. I'd be all for seeing what he had to contribute.
If they really want to "get the band back together" for this last outing with Campbell and Craig, they ought to bring back Haggis as well.
Well, hell, then. That settles it. Why worry about getting the right director when it apparently doesn't matter...because all of the vision and creative work (except the lighting) comes solely from the script. Heck, any of us could direct a Bond film, since the script is all we need.
I think you might want to reconsider that comment, @boldfinger.
Can't see it, two quite different films.
You're so right.
I know this looks very much like blowing my own horn (probably because that's what it is), but I'm still convinced that this idea from my very first post on this forum still is the most sensible one to erase this eyesore from the franchises shield, so in all my vanity I'm boldly going to repost it.
I know it hasn't set the world (i.e. this forum) on fire but you might find it's worth a second look. If you don't, excuse me for stealing your time.
So here we go:
I assume it is safe to say that just about everybody hates/dislikes the Oberhauser/Blofeld angle. And even those that are too young and too casual fans to recognize the rape of Flemings work consider the new Blofeld incarnation completely laughable.
And face it - it's in the world. There's no way they just can't ignore it from now on. There always will be people making fun out of it no matter how much they try to erase the memory of this terrible, terrible mistake.
So why not just make Oberhauser a busybody? Someone who worked rather high-level for Spectre, but just pretended to be the big boss himself.
With a little fantasy all of this could be achieved in just a few minutes of the PTS.
Just imagine the gunbarrel, followed by a group of people breaking in Blofeld's jail ( causing of course some bloodshed on the way), entering his cell and placing - in complete silence - a video screen in front of the very terrified looking "Blofeld" (if they wanted to save them money for Waltz they could also keep his face in the shadow and just let his body language and widened-in-terror eyes do the talking).
Then a voice out of the screen:
"Hello, Franz. You know, I should be grateful to you for making my name a complete joke all over the intelligence community, just because you were so keen to impress your Mr. Bond, you neurotic little frat. But actually I'm not. I'm afraid not at all. Somehow I feel really sorry. I always found your relentlessly information seeking mind of great use, but you certainly have overplayed your hand, costing Spectre in effect all the knowledge to be gained out of the nine eyes project. For that alone you deserve the utmost punishment so at least try to face your fate with some dignity, even though I doubt it."
We now see the men in the cell doing something disgusting to Oberhauser. (I'd imagine something along the lines of an octopus pressed on his face who somehow suffocates him, but could almost live with any kind of killing.)
Then the camera focuses on the screen and we see a man up to his throat, stroking a cat he holds in his hands.
After he seems to have delectated him sufficiently on the site of the dying Oberhauser we hear his voice again:
"So and now we have to teach MI6 and Mr. Bond that the name of Ernst Stavros Blofeld is to be taken seriously."
Or alternatively, almost best of all, this also could lend to an introduction line for the new Bond. Blofeld last line could be something along the lines of "and now to this Mr. Bond. I really look forward meeting him."
Titles, followed by whoever walking in M's office.
Fact implies that it's been confirmed, which it hasn't.
What's wrong with that? Things are up in the air at the moment, admittedly.
Haha imagine if this big idea he's saving was literally just that. Shot for shot remake of OHMSS with a slightly different title.