Where does Bond go after Craig?

1410411413415416680

Comments

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Speaking as a big Nolan fan, I'm not sure why we "really really really" need him for the next Bond film, as if there's absolutely no one else who can handle the job.

    Absolutely there are other choices, some better some worse.

    I'm mostly talking about how the film will be percieved by the casual audience, the average Chris Stuckmann/John Campea watcher. If Bond is considered a 7/10 movie a lot of non-bond fans will say that they missed an opportunity and snubbing Nolan was a mistake. There will be the narrative that forms: "why didn't they just hire Nolan?"

    Why should Eon feel beholden to the general public or the media? It's their franchise and they can decide where they're going and who's going to take them there. I'm sure there are plenty of people who think Boyle not doing NTTD was a missed opportunity. No doubt when the next Bond is chosen there'll be people saying it should've been someone else.

    All I'm saying is that to the casual audience there is one very obvious person that stands who would do a good job on Bond 26, and if EON choose to go another way they're going to have to contend with those expectations.
  • edited November 2023 Posts: 4,137
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Speaking as a big Nolan fan, I'm not sure why we "really really really" need him for the next Bond film, as if there's absolutely no one else who can handle the job.

    Absolutely there are other choices, some better some worse.

    I'm mostly talking about how the film will be percieved by the casual audience, the average Chris Stuckmann/John Campea watcher. If Bond is considered a 7/10 movie a lot of non-bond fans will say that they missed an opportunity and snubbing Nolan was a mistake. There will be the narrative that forms: "why didn't they just hire Nolan?"

    Why should Eon feel beholden to the general public or the media? It's their franchise and they can decide where they're going and who's going to take them there. I'm sure there are plenty of people who think Boyle not doing NTTD was a missed opportunity. No doubt when the next Bond is chosen there'll be people saying it should've been someone else.

    All I'm saying is that to the casual audience there is one very obvious person that stands who would do a good job on Bond 26, and if EON choose to go another way they're going to have to contend with those expectations.

    If we’re talking about the average viewer, they really don’t think about these things that much, if at all. It’s comparable to Danny Boyle not directing Bond 25 or Guillermo del Torro not directing The Hobbit. It’s only the filmey fans who know, or care enough to have opinions on these things. Honestly, even with those examples opinions/discussions of the film superseded any disappointment over the previous director.

    In fact if anything those examples are more extreme in the sense that those directors were originally hired and we have a rough idea of what these movies could have looked like under their lead compared to what we got. Nolan’s not even attached to Bond at the moment. As it is it’s more akin to hypothetical discussions over what a John Landis directed TSWLM would have looked like, or indeed what a Nolan directed SP would have looked like. It’s completely hypothetical and not much discussed.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,787
    I'd liked to see a John Landis directed TSWLM, it would've been interesting.
  • edited November 2023 Posts: 1,076
    Just to put my two penneth in, I couldn't care less who directs a James Bond film. When I go to the pictures, the last thing on my mind is 'who directed this'.
    And, I don't know anything about Nolan other than he's talked about all the time on here, and he did some Batman films, (and Batman is massive on here too), and he a silly film called Tennet that I tried to watch a few weeks ago but turned it off because I hadn't got a Scooby what was going on.

    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.
  • Posts: 1,859
    peter wrote: »
    EoN, like other producers worth their salt, are like professional athletes: yes, they have to entertain their fans, but, to actually get the job done, they mostly drown out the noise from the stands and get on with it.

    Exactly.

    I've worked on several films and TV projects based on pre-existing properties which tried as hard as they could to appease fans while also bringing their own creative vision to the projects only to be criticized mercilessly by fans. It is a no win situation. The only thing that producers can do is put out quality projects.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,290
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Speaking as a big Nolan fan, I'm not sure why we "really really really" need him for the next Bond film, as if there's absolutely no one else who can handle the job.

    Absolutely there are other choices, some better some worse.

    I'm mostly talking about how the film will be percieved by the casual audience, the average Chris Stuckmann/John Campea watcher. If Bond is considered a 7/10 movie a lot of non-bond fans will say that they missed an opportunity and snubbing Nolan was a mistake. There will be the narrative that forms: "why didn't they just hire Nolan?"

    Why should Eon feel beholden to the general public or the media? It's their franchise and they can decide where they're going and who's going to take them there. I'm sure there are plenty of people who think Boyle not doing NTTD was a missed opportunity. No doubt when the next Bond is chosen there'll be people saying it should've been someone else.

    All I'm saying is that to the casual audience there is one very obvious person that stands who would do a good job on Bond 26, and if EON choose to go another way they're going to have to contend with those expectations.

    Yes, and I hope she gets a chance.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.

    Agreed. :-&
  • DarthDimi wrote: »
    Speaking as a big Nolan fan, I'm not sure why we "really really really" need him for the next Bond film, as if there's absolutely no one else who can handle the job.

    Because MI flopped. That's why.

    Bingo. We are living in a time when even a really well made, big spy movie that received excellent reviews can flop. Nolan on the other hand pretty much guarantees box office success.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited November 2023 Posts: 8,395
    Criticise nolan as much as you like, the dark knight films + inception were peak blockbuster cinema in the 21st century, I think many casual film fans miss those days.
  • Posts: 4,137
    If that’s true then Tenet would have been more successful, even with Covid.

    MI not doing well was based on a few things. The studios didn’t predict the extent to which ‘Barbenheimer’ would take off and their film got sidelined. Add to that MI is a series with a relatively soft fanbase compared to Bond (financially it’s never made as much money as Bond, and I don’t think it has that same dedicated fanbase, most of whom are older and more specific demographic wise to Bond), and because it was a two parter a big chunk of people simply decided it wasn’t worth going to the cinemas/decided to catch them at home later on, you have an underwhelming film. If a Bond film had been released in MI’s place it would have done better.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited November 2023 Posts: 3,152
    Few people care who directs a film / Nolan pretty much guarantees box office success. Can both of those things be true? Directors do have their fans, who'll go to see anything they make, but I suspect they're far outnumbered by those who don't take much notice of who was at the helm.
    In reference to Bond, Nolan himself said that he wants complete control of the whole package or he'll be happy just to see the film in the cinema. That suggests that he's not willing to revert to the position he was in back in the '00s, when he made those Batman films. Can't blame him for that - who wants to give up what they've achieved and drop back two decades? Then again, would he be willing to make the sacrifice if it's his one chance to direct a Bond film? Hmm. Dunno.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Venutius wrote: »
    Few people care who directs a film / Nolan pretty much guarantees box office success. Can both of those things be true? Directors do have their fans, who'll go to see anything they make, but I suspect they're far outnumbered by those who don't take much notice of who was at the helm.
    In reference to Bond, Nolan himself said that he wants complete control of the whole package or he'll be happy just to see the film in the cinema. That suggests that he's not willing to revert to the position he was in back in the '00s, when he made those Batman films. Can't blame him for that - who wants to give up what they've achieved and drop back two decades? Then again, would he be willing to make the sacrifice if it's his one chance to direct a Bond film? Hmm. Dunno.

    He also said that working on Bond involves "a particular set of constraints".
  • Posts: 1,859
    Venutius wrote: »
    Few people care who directs a film / Nolan pretty much guarantees box office success. Can both of those things be true? Directors do have their fans, who'll go to see anything they make, but I suspect they're far outnumbered by those who don't take much notice of who was at the helm.
    In reference to Bond, Nolan himself said that he wants complete control of the whole package or he'll be happy just to see the film in the cinema. That suggests that he's not willing to revert to the position he was in back in the '00s, when he made those Batman films. Can't blame him for that - who wants to give up what they've achieved and drop back two decades? Then again, would he be willing to make the sacrifice if it's his one chance to direct a Bond film? Hmm. Dunno.

    He also said that working on Bond involves "a particular set of constraints".

    So did Batman.
  • Posts: 4,137
    Short of Nolan having become insufferably arrogant, power hungry, or a bit pottey, he knows he won’t get complete artistic no strings attached freedom. I don’t believe he is any of those things. He’s just a director who has enjoyed a lot of creative freedom later in his career and wants to maintain that. It’s up to EON whether they want to work with him or not.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,583
    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.

    Agreed. :-&

    He directed the film that was written for him. Wanna blame someone if you didn't like NTTD, don't blame CJF for it. Blame the writers and Barb.
  • He also said that working on Bond involves "a particular set of constraints".
    Exactly. Nolan does want complete creative freedom but would not use that complete freedom to do something completely unhinged with Bond. His sensibilities align with the Bond franchise. This would not turn into a Danny Boyle situation 2.0.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited November 2023 Posts: 8,395
    He also said that working on Bond involves "a particular set of constraints".
    Exactly. Nolan does want complete creative freedom but would not use that complete freedom to do something completely unhinged with Bond. His sensibilities align with the Bond franchise. This would not turn into a Danny Boyle situation 2.0.

    I tend to agree, as far as I'm aware Nolan delivered 3 premium standard franchise films in the course of 7 years with very little friction between him and Warner. He's closer to a Peter Jackson than a Danny Boyle type.
    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.

    Agreed. :-&

    He directed the film that was written for him. Wanna blame someone if you didn't like NTTD, don't blame CJF for it. Blame the writers and Barb.

    Blame everyone involved honestly.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,785
    He also said that working on Bond involves "a particular set of constraints".
    Exactly. Nolan does want complete creative freedom but would not use that complete freedom to do something completely unhinged with Bond. His sensibilities align with the Bond franchise. This would not turn into a Danny Boyle situation 2.0.

    I tend to agree, as far as I'm aware Nolan delivered 3 premium standard franchise films in the course of 7 years with very little friction between him and Warner. He's closer to a Peter Jackson than a Danny Boyle type.
    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.

    Agreed. :-&

    He directed the film that was written for him. Wanna blame someone if you didn't like NTTD, don't blame CJF for it. Blame the writers and Barb.

    Blame everyone involved honestly.

    The producers are responsible for the content of the film. Especially the case for Bond films.

  • Posts: 1,336
    007HallY wrote: »
    If that’s true then Tenet would have been more successful, even with Covid.

    MI not doing well was based on a few things. The studios didn’t predict the extent to which ‘Barbenheimer’ would take off and their film got sidelined. Add to that MI is a series with a relatively soft fanbase compared to Bond (financially it’s never made as much money as Bond, and I don’t think it has that same dedicated fanbase, most of whom are older and more specific demographic wise to Bond), and because it was a two parter a big chunk of people simply decided it wasn’t worth going to the cinemas/decided to catch them at home later on, you have an underwhelming film. If a Bond film had been released in MI’s place it would have done better.

    Tom Cruise is a star. The new Bond, well...I don't think so.

    The risk is real. Bond's fanbase is too old now.
  • Posts: 4,137
    007HallY wrote: »
    If that’s true then Tenet would have been more successful, even with Covid.

    MI not doing well was based on a few things. The studios didn’t predict the extent to which ‘Barbenheimer’ would take off and their film got sidelined. Add to that MI is a series with a relatively soft fanbase compared to Bond (financially it’s never made as much money as Bond, and I don’t think it has that same dedicated fanbase, most of whom are older and more specific demographic wise to Bond), and because it was a two parter a big chunk of people simply decided it wasn’t worth going to the cinemas/decided to catch them at home later on, you have an underwhelming film. If a Bond film had been released in MI’s place it would have done better.

    Tom Cruise is a star. The new Bond, well...I don't think so.

    The risk is real. Bond's fanbase is too old now.

    Like I said, the fanbase of MI is likely older than Bond’s. And far less inclined to go to the cinema to watch these films. Doesn’t matter how famous Tom Cruise is (honestly, some people including me simply find him smug or creepy even if they like his films), that fanbase wasn’t and isn’t ever going to be strong enough to pull it through significant competition.

    There are some young people who hate Bond (always been the case) but its viewership is pretty wide on the whole. A good chunk of people will go and see Bond 26 because it’s ‘the new Bond film’, and honestly a new actor/fresh direction always brings younger viewers.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited November 2023 Posts: 9,509
    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.

    Agreed. :-&

    He directed the film that was written for him. Wanna blame someone if you didn't like NTTD, don't blame CJF for it. Blame the writers and Barb.

    @Last_Rat_Standing ... Cary was one of the screenwriters.... In fact he executed a page one rewrite based off of the original P & W script.... Then I believe Scott Burns next came on board for a two week polish on the action sequences, then PWB was the next writer hired, I believe, with Fukunaga overseeing and polishing as they went along.

    And "Barb" had the writers and major players of the production read YOLT... And why would you just blame "Barb"? There's MGW, Gregg Wilson, ALL of their producing partners including in distribution....when a script is commissioned it has to be greenlit by an entire army of people (producers/financiers for obvious reasons (they're sinking a quarter of a billion dollars into one project), distributors because they have to sell the product to worldwide territories).

    So, if you want to heap blame there's a whole slew of people besides "Barb"...

    Personally, I love the flick; love it more since my first viewing...I should be blamed too, I suppose? After all I'm buying into this dreck!
  • edited November 2023 Posts: 561
    007HallY wrote: »
    If that’s true then Tenet would have been more successful, even with Covid.

    MI not doing well was based on a few things. The studios didn’t predict the extent to which ‘Barbenheimer’ would take off and their film got sidelined. Add to that MI is a series with a relatively soft fanbase compared to Bond (financially it’s never made as much money as Bond, and I don’t think it has that same dedicated fanbase, most of whom are older and more specific demographic wise to Bond), and because it was a two parter a big chunk of people simply decided it wasn’t worth going to the cinemas/decided to catch them at home later on, you have an underwhelming film. If a Bond film had been released in MI’s place it would have done better.

    "Tenet" pulling as much as it did during the peak of COVID shutdowns in Summer 2020 is an actual miracle, and is a testament to the brand power of Nolan.

    I'm Nolan agnostic for B26 but there is no world where "Tenet" should be viewed as a drag on his career as a commercial hit maker.
    peter wrote: »
    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.

    Agreed. :-&

    He directed the film that was written for him. Wanna blame someone if you didn't like NTTD, don't blame CJF for it. Blame the writers and Barb.

    @Last_Rat_Standing ... Cary was one of the screenwriters.... In fact he executed a page one rewrite based off of the original P & W script.... Then I believe Scott Burns next came on board for a two week polish on the action sequences, then PWB was the next writer hired, I believe, with Fukunaga overseeing and polishing as they went along.

    And "Barb" had the writers and major players of the production read YOLT... And why would you just blame "Barb"? There's MGW, Gregg Wilson, ALL of their producing partners including in distribution....when a script is commissioned it has to be greenlit by an entire army of people (producers/financiers for obvious reasons (they're sinking a quarter of a billion dollars into one project), distributors because they have to sell the product to worldwide territories).

    So, if you want to heap blame there's a whole slew of people besides "Barb"...

    Personally, I love the flick; love it more since my first viewing...I should be blamed too, I suppose? After all I'm buying into this dreck!



    Agreed — as usual people online want an image to get mad at, and not the actual reality of a $300MM project. There is no fall guy.
  • edited November 2023 Posts: 4,137
    BMB007 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    If that’s true then Tenet would have been more successful, even with Covid.

    MI not doing well was based on a few things. The studios didn’t predict the extent to which ‘Barbenheimer’ would take off and their film got sidelined. Add to that MI is a series with a relatively soft fanbase compared to Bond (financially it’s never made as much money as Bond, and I don’t think it has that same dedicated fanbase, most of whom are older and more specific demographic wise to Bond), and because it was a two parter a big chunk of people simply decided it wasn’t worth going to the cinemas/decided to catch them at home later on, you have an underwhelming film. If a Bond film had been released in MI’s place it would have done better.

    "Tenet" pulling as much as it did during the peak of COVID shutdowns in Summer 2020 is an actual miracle, and is a testament to the brand power of Nolan.

    I'm Nolan agnostic for B26 but there is no world where "Tenet" should be viewed as a drag on his career as a commercial hit maker.

    I think if anything Covid covered for Tenet’s lack of success. It really was a baffling film for a lot of people in a way Nolan’s other films hadn’t been. No one really knew what it was about (certainly the whole spy/sci fi twist wasn’t apparent which might have gotten some people onboard), it didn’t have a major/recognisable actor in the lead role, it certainly didn’t have good word of mouth or rewatchability, and as I’ve said in the past a large portion of people don’t care about the director. I don’t think it would have been a hit even without Covid, nor do I think Nolan’s name helped.

    I mean, even in Nolan’s filmography Tenet’s a strange one. It really seemed like he was trying something different with it.
  • Remembering that NTTD had at least 5 screenwriters (Purvis, Wade, Fukunaga, Waller-Bridge and Burns) gave me a massive headache. Sure, that is one way to write the script, but I prefer the Chris Nolan method, which usually involves only one writer, maybe two.
  • Posts: 1,859
    007HallY wrote: »
    If that’s true then Tenet would have been more successful, even with Covid.

    MI not doing well was based on a few things. The studios didn’t predict the extent to which ‘Barbenheimer’ would take off and their film got sidelined. Add to that MI is a series with a relatively soft fanbase compared to Bond (financially it’s never made as much money as Bond, and I don’t think it has that same dedicated fanbase, most of whom are older and more specific demographic wise to Bond), and because it was a two parter a big chunk of people simply decided it wasn’t worth going to the cinemas/decided to catch them at home later on, you have an underwhelming film. If a Bond film had been released in MI’s place it would have done better.

    Tom Cruise is a star. The new Bond, well...I don't think so.

    The risk is real. Bond's fanbase is too old now.

    So, does EON make a Bond film for the older audience (who are not generally film goers) or strive for a new young base of fans?

    Also, the age of the producers does come into play regarding their own personal perspectives.

    Does a new Bond interpretation need a whole new perspective to bring in a new generation of fans?
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    edited November 2023 Posts: 4,583
    peter wrote: »
    Plus, the last guy was supposed to be a top-notch director and look what we got.

    Agreed. :-&

    He directed the film that was written for him. Wanna blame someone if you didn't like NTTD, don't blame CJF for it. Blame the writers and Barb.

    @Last_Rat_Standing ... Cary was one of the screenwriters.... In fact he executed a page one rewrite based off of the original P & W script.... Then I believe Scott Burns next came on board for a two week polish on the action sequences, then PWB was the next writer hired, I believe, with Fukunaga overseeing and polishing as they went along.

    And "Barb" had the writers and major players of the production read YOLT... And why would you just blame "Barb"? There's MGW, Gregg Wilson, ALL of their producing partners including in distribution....when a script is commissioned it has to be greenlit by an entire army of people (producers/financiers for obvious reasons (they're sinking a quarter of a billion dollars into one project), distributors because they have to sell the product to worldwide territories).

    So, if you want to heap blame there's a whole slew of people besides "Barb"...

    Personally, I love the flick; love it more since my first viewing...I should be blamed too, I suppose? After all I'm buying into this dreck!

    @peter
    I like NTTD and thought he directed the hell out of it. Now I had some issues with how some things played out. My initial comment was defending CJF in a way in which he shouldn't be the reason in which people didn't like NTTD.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited November 2023 Posts: 5,970
    [deleted]
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,646
    Lately I've come to take the diplomatic answer from BB and the "need complete control" comments from Nolan as two parties potentially trying publicly to already move on from something that obviously isn't going to work, especially considering they've clearly spoken to each other about Bond before.

    I also challenge this notion that Nolan still has ideas for "his" Bond movie, whatever twist or arc or setting fans have projected onto this potential Bond story, and here's maybe why:

    He already worked with Chris Corbould to give Batman his own "Q Branch" essentially with his own Morgan Freeman playing a "Q" type with plenty of cool, dynamic gadgets, better than Bond has in decades I'd say. Batman let him work with all of the British acting talent he could ever hope for, with Michael Caine, Christian Bale, Gary Oldham, and he was given much more free reign than he'd likely be afforded with Bond on the music and dark art style. He clearly had zero control over marketing Batman Begins, but that became more cohesive with the sequels. He probably scratched a significant portion of his Bond itch on three Batmans, and WB likely let him go much further than Eon would.

    Then with Inception, to me, it's clear that Marion Cotillard is his idea of a femme fatale, the type of woman that can truly get stuck... in a man's mind, and what that can do to him. It's also a spy thriller.. corporate espionage, but there are meetings in Morocco with foot chases in the street, shootouts, ski sequences, a villain lair, etc. The protagonist assembles a team of slick spy types. Maybe Nolan's Moneypenny would be, as M.'s assistant, something of a researcher and adviser for planning Bond's assaults/missions like Page's character in Inception designing the maze-like "sets in their mind" (just realized it's literal mindsets!).

    And to be honest, as much as I love Inception, it is cold, mostly sexless, and I do think the action style of CR and NTTD suits the screen Bond better than anything Nolan has shown me so far, and Tenet really had a lot of opportunity to prove me wrong and didn't.

    But as things sit, something seems off about a Nolan Bond project. Like when the prettiest girl at school doesn't necessarily take interest in the handsomest boy. And I think if he did do it, we're pretty far down his filmmaking Bond wishlist at this point. Maybe he seems less interested now because he's afraid if they ask, he'll have to admit he's blown his lot.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    You know, using TENET as an example of why Nolan shouldn’t be approached makes as much sense as using HOOK as an example of why Spielberg shouldn’t do a swashbuckling adventure.

    Every director gets a dud.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited November 2023 Posts: 1,646
    You know, using TENET as an example of why Nolan shouldn’t be approached makes as much sense as using HOOK as an example of why Spielberg shouldn’t do a swashbuckling adventure.

    Every director gets a dud.

    And we all make decisions we should expect an impact/reaction from.

    Tenet was an opportunity to do another cinematic sandbox, like Inception, where Nolan can truly fabricate unreal action scenes that defy an audience's notions and expectations (hallway fight in Inception works for this imo), and all he really accomplishes for Tenet is storming some weird music hall venue with no explanation and they literally just walk in/out of the door, then that scene of them scaling a building, a car chase where some cars go backward/undo a crash... like where is the same invention in the action that the story has been served?

    The biggest set piece is slowly rolling a jumbo jet halfway into a hangar ... it's not extravagant and fails the otherwise exceptional premise and world that Nolan often builds.

    In terms of creative action invention. For him to not be able recognize that a well-oiled Bond-veteran second unit would actually likely enhance any potential Bond story of his is a liability imo (and that's IF he can write-in a good action set piece setup in the script, or lets some of the Bond team in on the story development to ensure those big Bond moments happen). Tenet (which I like btw) just underserves itself, and I think as a whole against Batman, Inception, and Tenet, the common critique out there (not necessarily always from me in each case) is that the action is lacking, sometimes the women are underwritten, and he can't do "sexy" beyond sending an actor to a good tailor.
Sign In or Register to comment.