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
And DoP of DUNE and probably DUNE 2.
interesting... Nolan would be great
Brad Bird
Morten Tyldum
Russo Brothers
It's possible that they already know who the director of Bond 26 will be (Nolan) and there won't be any search.
It would be pretty funny, but not totally unreasonable if they went back to him.
"You didn't want to kill him the last time, so we did it without you. As we don't want to kill him this time, why don't we give it another shot?"
Fukunaga has two projects in the pipeline, the mini-series MASTERS OF THE AIR and the NAPOLEON project (originally a Stanley Kubrick project). If he is avaialable, and has some interesting ideas, they should offer him B26. Or Martin Campbell, if he feels, he has another Bond movie in him. And I still would like to see Danny Boyle to have a go at Bond. But we will have to wait and see, what EON's plans are.
I'd like something dark, elegant, suspenseful, cerebral and twisty, Nolan hits all those cylinders. Although I thought his Batmans were cheesy af, I do love Memento, Interstellar, Inception and Tenet.
I did like the ruthlessness with which Guy Ritchie portrayed Jason Statham's character, in Wrath of Man, (I'd like the next Bond to be similarly R rated) and he did do an amazing job with the Sherlock blockbusters.
Honestly I think the writers for the next iteration are of higher concern than the Director, and I really hope Craig's later films won't set the tone for the upcoming one.
Other candidates might (or might not) be:
Thomas Alfredsson
Philipp Noyce
Fede Alvarez
Alfonso Cuaron
Edgar Wright
Steve McQueen
Joe Wright
John Madden
Matthew Vaughan
+1 I agree. I really enjoyed NTTD but do feel that Cary was hindered by having to tie up elements from Craig’s previous films , as well as having a preordained conclusion, ending with Bond’s death. I would really like to see what he could do with a blank canvas.
From what I gathered, it was more that they liked a couple of the ideas in the treatment like the villain being from M's past and her dying at the end, but rejected most of it and then Purvis & Wade wrote another script that has Bond presumed dead at the beginning and M dying at the end and then Logan went over all of that and worked it into the final form. I think that's pretty standard for Hollywood scriptwriting. It's not wholly different, but the way they seem to have went about NTTD was still something else. "This is the start point and that has to be the end point, make it work" is different than "Here are some old treatments and a script with a couple of ideas we like, what do you think?"
Also, I always find it quite funny that Mendes and Purvis & Wade are so adamant that they took only one or two ideas from Morgan and then you watch the film and it's an allegory-laden drama about mothers and sons, ageing and death, Britain's place in the world and the End of Empire. You absolutely cannot tell me all that stuff didn't come from Morgan, who has been writing about this stuff for a very long time. The thing about SF is that it has an amazing story and great little moments of dialogue but a streaky plot and all the filmmakers talk about is what they did with the plot and the story seems to have kind of fallen into place from an old treatment, which is wild.
What are your thoughts on writer-directors? If I'm not mistaken, Fukunaga was the first director to also get a writing credit on a Bond film and many of the mor auteur-ish directors that get thrown around here do that for most of their projects. Do you think that should (or has to) continue?
Ah, right, now I see. That makes a lot of sense, actually - thanks for the clarification here, IG. And yes, it seems that at the very least, Logan/P & W ran with a lot of Morgan's themes for SF.
Apparently, Paul Haggis was offered the chance to direct QOS but passed on it as he was also writing the script, otherwise he'd've been the series' first writer-director. That would've been interesting but I love QOS as it is, so I don't really see it as a missed opportunity. But didn't directors such as Forster and Mendes come on board specifically because of Craig? I wonder if the auter-ish and prestige figures will hang back a bit now and wait to see where EON take the series?
Why? He's a mediocre director, at best. After Forster, Mendes, and CJF, Babs will likely only go with A-list talent in the chair. Marty isn't even C-list...and he's almost 80 years old.
With that in mind, if they're only going to seek A-list talent for the director's chair going forward, then it's a shame really. There are plenty of directors out there now (and there have been throughout the last three decades) who would do a good job of it. Ruling someone out because they're not A-list is cutting off your nose to spite your face, as far as I'm concerned.
Campbell's not coming back, though. He's done a few solid action vehicles since CR but I highly doubt he's all that interested in breaking in yet another new Bond era. The pressure experienced on the set of CR will be amplified by the success of Craig's run for the first film of the next guy, and that might be unappealing to Campbell considering his age.
Sure, they should not rule anyone out just because they aren't A-list directors, but A-list directors should have priority.