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
Yes, but no time soon. If EON want it and Daniel wants it, they could keep going for another 2 I think. Don't forget that all this talk of quitting comes strictly from the press, and their deliberate misrepresentation of Daniels quotes. The slashing wrists comment fit nicely into their ' who will play Bond next' narrative. They deliberately left out the context in which it was said to bulster the 'black Bond' click bait articles.
IMO, the public at large is more than happy for Craig to continue playing Bond as long as he is happy to.
This is the key point. Some here want him. Some here want him gone. EON want him. I think the new studio may actually be indifferent (if they have someone else in mind who they can run for longer due to age). His big proponent at Sony was Pascal and she's gone. I don't know about MGM's desires (they did not want Dalton and had a say in him leaving).
Ultimately it will be his decision. I just hope he doesn't fixate again on Mendes. He should make his decision independent of Mendes. Sam Mendes is not integral to James Bond.
It all depends only on one thing: the rate of success of SP.
If it doesn't make a billion and with the disasterous ratings and reviews, BB will not be allowed to continue this path.
In the end the profit is what counts, sadly.
Yes, but he is integral to THIS James Bond. They can't finish this story without him. If Mendes leaves, best to just recast and start from scratch with a new approach ie standalone films again.
The more I think about it, the more this scenario seems like the most likely, especially with Bond moving neighbourhood, as it were. I don't think a new studio would choose to take on the burden/baggage of the Craig era when they can just start over.
The press reviews are more positive than negative?
The good ones outweigh the bad ones.
But it's the not so small number of bad reviews that stand out and don't forget that QOS is considered a clunker in this era and SP has now dropped to that level.
I'm not saying that's justified, I'm completely puzzled by this!
http://collider.com/martin-campbell-interview-green-lantern/
Already discussed on this old topic http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/799/martin-campbell-on-doing-more-bond
a great script with any competent director is better than a poor script with an Oscar winning director IMHO, there are a few directors who could do a decent job but where is the script writer who is going to sit in front of a PC and produce a classic Bond?
Like the supporter of a football team hoping his team get beat so they can sack the manager. Mental comment!
for whatever worth wherever that is anything worth could beat me up(scotty)..; a classy bond with a stiff upper lip, pc in this case means stopped smoking but keeping the smoking while rolling the dices into the right corners of the globe, being a local wherever he goes tongue in cheek, speeding up his records-starting to like glen-Miller that is..!
Indeed.
Deankins proof with Jarhead and from what i have seen of footage from Sicario he can make QOS cinematopgraphy. Also with Dennis Gassner/production designer in mind. I think Denis Villeneuve is QOS style directer, of course it is risk movie even more dificult then QOS mabey. After that interview about this movie, 2 weaks later the directer confirm he like to direct a Bond movie. Denis Villeneuve is more France Canada directer, whyle Roger Spottiswoode from Tomorrow Never Dies whas English/Canada directer. But Marc Forster whas also not English and work with a lot of English actors/make English movies.
I prefer there filming on film, so that be a bit of problem Deankins prefer digital. But mabey that problem can fixed if there not use to much CGI. Mabey also there should some test screenings on big screen before final cut.
In interview with them Deanskins admit something in making Sicario i think he mabey also should have in mind making Skyfall but did not. I hope he keep his own words in mind if he return to Bond.
http://variety.com/2015/film/features/deakins-villeneuve-embrace-harsh-cruel-nature-in-sicario-1201593474/
Problem with digital or with BD or HD TV it sometimes can look too good.
I expect like Spectre cinematopgraphy more because there filming more on film and real locations. But biggest problem is that i am afraid i not going to like story.
Sicario R-rated / 16+ for violence in meaning of action/blood/drugs and alcohol abuse. Whyle i think Bond 25 also should be rated R/16+ but because of violence of fair and drugs and alcohol abuse.
So Peter Weir or Denis Villeneuve for Bond 25 with on this moment i prefer earlier Van Hoytema then Deankins return. Warner need MGM to make the hobbit and now MGM need Warner to make Bond. But if MGM said Bond 25 in 2017, Warner mabey don't problem of it (See 1,5 and 2 years time difrence between some of Potter movies), but mabey whant something in return. Also a big part of last two movies already be Warner style wit Fienes and a lot of Potter crew members. If i must choose for 2 years wait and getting Nolan/Hans Zimmer or 3 years wait and get Sam Mendes/Thomas Newman i choose for this last option. if Warner demend something and stick with Mendes, hope it be Alexander Desplat too as composer.
My earlier comment was in reference to the way they have been interpreted on screen by Mendes. How they have been realized. The reviews on these two, for the most part, have not been glowing. Difficult to say more without spoiling it.
At your service.
Anyone but P&W would be fine with me...
The thing about Mendes unlike Gilbert & Glen he's unlikely as proved by SP to make the same film twice. If they can flesh out something different and he's excited then I think he'll be back, I don't think if he doesn't that Craig is definitely leaving though.
I think if they could find another director that would excite Craig he'd sign on but I think DC would definitely come back if Sam was on board, whether that is for just one more or not.
Seriously if a journeyman hack like John Glen can direct 5 Bond's in a row? Then Mendes should be a no brainer for a third unless of course like quite few you've had enough of him. I get the idea some would like him to go just so Newman isn't scoring the next one.
I don't hate P&W like some, I know again the script isn't Chinatown ( it's never likely to be) but it seems with Butterworth they saved it from being something much worse that was originally intended if Logan had had is way with it.
Thought Gattis is someone I wouldn't be disappointed with, they've tried to get rid of P&W the last time. I think this was more down to they needed a quick fix and for all their faults they know their Bond, but some fresh talent wouldn't be a bad idea.
I also really miss that light playfulness on the female side which characterized FRWL & TB in particular, but also TSWLM/MR. Perhaps GE got closest in the recent past. Not too serious in terms of relationships, but a spunky light cheekiness without going OTT.
It's very unlikely given the focus on box office these days, but I'd really like that personally.
I naively thought SP would be SF2 and it absolutely isn't, and as you say the leap isn't jarring, it's different but also feels like a natural progression. I'm now intrigued to see what he can do with a third. For all its humour SP has a haunted quality too it, I'd love the next to be even more bizarre.
Couldn't have put it better myself, It's not like they've made a Moore films here, they are still exploring things that feel natural in the Craig world it's just he's the Bond many of us have been waiting for without the baggage. I don't think the Craig era is ever going to be free of the dark side of the character but for Bond to be as ruthless and carefree there is always going to have to be that quality,
Bizarre is definitely something they can build on, like you say it does have a haunted quality to it. I can't quite get those who said Waltz was phoning it in. Yes you could see a touch of Hans Landa, especially in the bit where he laughs and say's "I've really put you through it haven't I" in the London climax. Though I think they've been very fortunate to secure him in that role.
Why the producers and Mendes returned to P&W I will never know or understand.
Mendes as director is not just an artist but a manager as well. He has to direct his vision. No excuse for the lack of plot or character development from a director as Mendes talent. The excuse or reason is they ran out if time and had to proceed ...and yes I believe they made a great fun film but not the film they could had made or should have made.
I'm ok with Mendes again but not the writers ...but to be honest if B25 is taken a predictable route story wise then I'm not sure if I want Mendes back.
Having said all that I really do like Mendes even though I haven't seen SP.
It's odd how many casual fans blame director Sam Mendes or even actor Daniel Craig for the lackluster screenwriting talents of P&W. The same thing happened after Skyfall.
Frankly, whoever directs the next Bond film is of secondary importance. The primary issue should be finding better screenwriters or, at least, finding anyone other than P&W (or Logan) to hammer out the next film's script.
My ultimate Bond 25 nightmare is this headline: "Purvis & Wade hired by Eon to write or re-write Bond 25." Eon could hire Quentin Tarantino, Steven Spielberg or Chris Nolan to direct the next film, but the screenwriting by P&W still would be "not quite right" and drag the film down.