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
Having said that, the franchise is now in a very complicated position because there are endless directions EoN could go but it’s gonna be a real challenge to top Craig’s appeal and success. What’s the most obvious way to go bigger with a fresh new start skyrocketing the hype far beyond Bond’s fans? Hiring Nolan.
I don't really see a problem with Nolan as a director although there are plenty of good directors...like why not rehire Mendez? What I see as a problem is all of the talk of trilogies and sequels. If they hire Nolan for say 3 to 5 films, he doesn't necessarily have to do them as sequels to one another, he could do 3 to 5 stand alone films no problem. Besides, the directors are not always the writers. I do doubt highly that hiring Nolan would "skyrocket the hype, they said the same thing with the DC films and they fizzled out for several reasons starting with bad direction and writing.
With DC he was just an executive producer for Snyder films after his Batman trilogy.
Nolan is a brand and one of the two most powerful directors in the world. If they announce him as the new Bond director it’s gonna be totally huge.
They said the same thing with JJ Abrams, and while his name and hype brought a lot of attention to Star Trek and Star Wars, they turned out to be buckets of terds mixed with an over-inflated number of special effects to hide poor story telling...I do have a lot more faith in Nolan, I did like the Batman series he did, I'm just no fan of sequels in a franchise that is supposed to represent "the next adventure" versus a "3 and out" strategy
Plus, I never referenced Nolan being hired to do a series of film.
The point is that Nolan is such a famous and acclaimed director that the notion of hiring him for B26 would drag a massive amount of expectations and hype. More than any other director of the planet. On paper, it's the easiest way to kickstart something new and big after Craig.
I'm not disagreeing with you...I'm simply saying that fame doesn't denote further success. Nolan did amazing with Batman, doesn't mean he will succeed with that model applied to Bond...I hope it does, but for me seeing is believing. Further, bringing in the big guns and then not producing will be the quickest way to put fans off...as quickly as you brought them in with the name...I think as long as the studio hires some strong writers that work well with whichever director they go with then it should mean success.
Agreed
Just LOL...strong no, fully grown this guy wouldn't resemble James Bond
Obviously. But combining the most powerful blockbuster director of the world and Bond would be unprecedented.
your commentary makes me wonder why Eon just didn't ante-up and bring on Michael Bay in earlier films, honestly I thought the Brosnan movies were directed just fine with "the most powerful blockbuster director of the world" but I suppose Bay could have really really improved them :)
The way he talks about Bond in interviews he basically admits to using up much of his Bondian inspiration, ideas and nostalgia in his recent movies like Inception and Tenet, and after the grinding experience of forcing himself to do three Batman movies, I would be very surprised if he ever got himself into that arrangement ever again.
Based on interviews, I think Nolan thinks he has perhaps one solid Bond plot in him with a practical shortlist of actors already in mind probably, and the timing is right for him to make that movie. And I do think it'd be a shame to not have it work out as I don't see him signing on if he doesn't get Bond 26.
That being said, I'm not exactly demanding a Nolan Bond film. I just think he can be smart, and he clearly cares about Bond on some level in a passionate way, and that could be useful for the franchise if it wants to be careful for the next one.
I would personally rather see how the younger Wilson producers get involved in fronting Bond 26, and I would prefer a strong Broccoli-Wilson creative vision supplemented by a solid working action director and well-cast "unknown" Bond trying to meet that vision.
Side note: it's honestly surprisingly sloppy of Vanity Fair to lazily throw in Holland, Cavill and Regé-Jean Page. I'm sure that outlet has some actual sources that could get an idea of what any "early" conversations were actually about at the moment.
Perhaps he was too “American” for EoN. He’s definitely a master crafting action sequences tho.
Can't disagree! If we are lucky he'll return Bond to who Bond is supposed to be if he gets the job.
And yet I've not seen him do anything that hits the Bond feel, for my money. They're cold, hard machine-like affairs, his films.
Not to mention that Nolan's films are unbearably pretentious! The only one that is rewatchable is Inception, and that is largely because of the acting skills of DiCaprio and Cotillard. They brought a warmth to the film that *all* of his other films lack.
Personally I don't really find his films that pretentious. My favourite of his is Interstellar; the most fascinating materialization of his "time" themes.
Have to say, this nails my feelings about Nolan's films. They are cold - in the imagery and cinematography, but also there always seems to be a certain distance between the story and the viewer. Having said that, Nolan's a 'prestige' director as well as a commercially successful one and he actively wants to do it - it'd be a bit of an oversight if EON didn't at least explore the possibilities.
Interstellar is my favorite of his as well. Between the music, the performances, the cinematography, and the themes, it is I think his crowning achievement.
I get where others are coming from by calling his aesthetic "cold" and "machinelike." This is similar to how I feel about some of Nolan's other films. Around the time of Batman Begins (perhaps his most Bond-like film), I would have considered Nolan a very promising director for Bond, but his aesthetic has grown darker and colder since then and that extreme is really the opposite of the more colorful, more outlandish, more bon vivant world inhabited by Bond, both literary and cinematic. With both the extreme No Time to Die swung toward and the extreme Nolan has swung toward with Tenet, now more than ever the time is wrong for a Nolan-helmed Bond. I know On Her Majesty's Secret Service is one of Nolan's favorite films. It's also one of Soderbergh's. I don't think that necessarily makes either one the right choice to helm a Bond film.
Interstellar and his Batman trilogy are more emotional, to be fair, than both QOS and SP, without mentioning most of the Bond films that came before.
I don’t want to sound like a “Nolan must make a Bond film” supporter because I’m not tho.
I definitely can see Tenet being seen as cold and machinelike, perhaps this sentiment for Nolan is coming off the fact that this was his most recent film?
The time has been brewing since SF, if not CR (actually) that Nolan would take the director's helm. His and Paul Greengrass' inspiration has been present throughout Craig's five movies.
When less care was given and people settled for films like TWINE which often came off cartoonish towards the last half of the movies including DAD and even TND.....each film had a different director and it was always "next, please"....so much potential was lost. There is an aura or air of silliness throughout much of TND, TWINE, and DAD in their last half. After DAD, if it wasn't for the good reviews CR was getting, I wouldn't have gone to the theatre to see it. And when I met Purvis and Wade at a Q&A a year after QoS came out, I got an apology from them for DAD, which was likely the director's fault. They knew QoS would age better with time and each viewing.
And if it wasn't for DC's involvement and care for the character in the process unlike PB who would take the paycheck and take a back seat while telling the media that the scripts sucked (which they did)....nobody won and he ended on bad terms with the producers. Notice PB never attended any of the premiers and would seldomly admit to watching the DC movies, it's because he wasn't invited to them. PB only looked the part but really it's about how one handles the part. Let's look at how each one handl
Dalton read all the books and his movies have aged better than PB's, GL's movie had a director who worked on the series long before OHMSS and his esthetic is timeless. The reason we never got a real true wholesome sequel to OHMSS (FYEO's ended silly) is not so much because GL decided against returning but that the director did not come back for the sequel.
The better movies of RM involved the more committed directors as opposed to the crash-em bash-em money-grabbing type. And his tenure was filled with hit-or-misses. And then there's SC, whose last three films were just too formulaic with wasted potential. His mere presence could not save those films with critics. When DC made sure that each film further developed the series and made each film more character-driven, it made watching each movie worthwhile.
These days, audiences' ratings are available a lot faster and the producers can't risk producing any more thoughtlessly made Bond movies. This is why John Woo doesn't quite have as much of a rising career anymore.
Gosh I'm not sure really. I know Interstellar was about family love primarily, and yet I wouldn't call it a warm film. QoS and SP weren't really dealing with those themes, and yet honestly I find them warmer.
I'd agree that Interstellar is probably his best though. I don't really want to watch it again however.
I've watched it a few times. It probably sounds really cheesy, but I love Hathaway's defense of love being a force that transcends time and space, drawing one person to another across the cosmos.
The reason being that QoS and SP were warmer is because they were much more direct in their storytelling as opposed to requiring a huge imagination as in Interstellar. Interstellar is one of the polarizing films by Nolan yet one of his best. Anne Hathaway's casting would not have been everyone's first choice for such a role however her character's message is what counts most. It wouldn't be too far-fetched if the Bond series made a move towards overall underlying messages in their subsequent films because NTTD was about family, whether it was 007's family from work or his biological one.
When Bond says that he doesn't regret whatever came before him and Madeleine....it's deep because the story has developed since CR. The irony is that the man who was responsible for Vesper's death is also the man who led Bond to his daughter.