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
I've always thought it's GoldenEye that looks like a TV movie. Casino Royale looks better in my opinion.
It's very obvious but I just hope whatever it is Amazon do, it still feels like Bond
@Jordo007 Gregg Wilson was open to changing Bond radically. I believe Barbara was against that and sidelined him because of it.
For me GE's the better film in terms of cinematography. It's got a bit more atmosphere to it and I'd say it's the first time the Bond franchise really leaned into visual darkness and got a bit more ambitious in terms of its visuals (it's not always a pretty film in this sense, but it's by design and it feels right). It's wonderfully cinematic - the lighting especially - and is noticeably more stylish than the 80s entries for me.
They actually put a lot of thought into it. For anyone interested in cinematography here's an article I found interesting about their approach - https://theasc.com/articles/goldeneye-reintroducing-bond-james-bond
CR is very good too, and similarly not always meant to look 'pretty'. But GE ranks up there with SF and NTTD's cinematography for me. I hope they find cinematographers who put a similar level of care and attention to detail into their work going forward.
As I noted. The film is good despite Campbell, not because of him.
His visual language is so notable, I guess, that his name is right up there with Fincher, Nolan, Soderberg, Spielberg, Mendes, Inarittu, Tarantino, Cuaron...
Campbell is, at best, a workman-like director. His resume certainly suggests it.
Good lighting but look at this. Pure TV.
I always think the term 'workman-like director' is a simplification, especially for someone like Campbell. The truth is he's a major reason why CR and GE are the way they are creatively, and both films share stylistic similarities which point to a consistency in vision (if consistency of vision is fundamentally even a trait of auteurs). The truth is every director has a significant impact on the finished film. Bad directors can ruin a great script (I've seen that personally even with shorts). He's the one who brought on Phil Meheux for cinematography, Haggis on to do rewrites of CR. So the script or look of the film certainly wouldn't be the same without him and his collaborators.
Not saying he's in the same league as a Spielberg or Cuaron (or even Mendes), but very few directors are.
Nah, to me that gets the right sense of a rather gloomy Russia. Actually the shot of Natalya in the intercut is wonderfully cinematic with the close up, long lens, and shallow focus (and focus pull).
I sort of get what you mean in one way. The camera movements are rather subtle (but I think that's more an indication of cinematography we see nowadays/how cinematographers make it more 'noticeable' which isn't always good and is a stylistic approach). But otherwise no, I'm not seeing TV movie. Especially when you compare it to certain scenes in LTK which look a wee bit flat. I don't get that sense with this scene.
I can't imagine there's anything off limits; I think MGM even own NSNA now don't they, so they can probably cover the screen in little red 007s if they want! :)
I haven't heard how it's phrased in this podcast but it may be to do with the Terry Madden situation perhaps?
A director is (much) more than just the visuals: he interprets a script and decides how it plays out on the screen. To me GE is a very confident reinvention of Bond, he knows exactly which scenes to play seriously and which he can play for laughs. A lesser director wouldn't have had the confidence to make the tank chase funny, I'd say- and he manages it in a way which doesn't undermine the film, like a hover gondola might do.
I don't think that they bought it just to sit on their hands.
At the very least, I expect the next one comes out no later than 2027 now. November 2026 is definitely on the table.
It appears they have nothing so far - no script/story, director, no release dates, and certainly no actors. I know some will speculate here that Amazon have done work and will announce something soon, but it appears nothing official has been done yet and they're still in the process of working out how Bond will be run. Ultimately though there's not enough information at the current time. We do, however, know EON made progress in looking at collaborators/creatives, but we don't know if Amazon will go down this route or start afresh.
It's tricky to say one way or the other, but these movies take time. I'm not sure I'd hold out for 2026, but ultimately it comes down to a number of factor which we don't know about currently. It's worth saying too that if they were looking at a later 2027 release (October) it'd go head to head with The Batman Part 2. Not sure if it's something they'd want to avoid or not, or don't care about, but it might impact the schedule if they got things going in the shorter term. Maybe a Summer release if they could make it? Who knows.
Even with that there's a whole timeline before official announcements going back years, including a scrapped initial release date - https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/cr_timeline?t=bond21&s=bond21&id=1718
It seems like it's early days still. But I don't know.
Wow, color me surprised, we can find common ground on something after all. Wholeheartedly agree.
Agreed. It's just wishful thinking on my part.
Campbells getting a phone call.
Honestly, since I already assumed Amazon would play things as safe as possible to begin with, this would make sense. And I’m not against it, to be clear. GE and CR are both top-shelf Bond films to me that I love revisiting all the time. That’s no guarantee Campbell will complete a hat-trick of greatness, of course, but I wouldn’t mind seeing a proven veteran like him get one last go at it.
Just having "from the director of Goldeneye and Casino Royale" on the poster/trailers would be enough to assuage A LOT of anxiety about the transition.
That's true. Amazon could call him, you know.
I do wonder if people who worked closely with EON will reject working with Amazon in a show of solidarity, at least initially. I certainly hope not.
That's a plausible reason.
OMG, I was just going to write that. Whoever makes the next film needs to capture the soul of Bond. I have no idea who the right person to do that is.
Gregg didn't say anything that Barbara hadn't basically already said, about being open to change Bond. I think the reason is something else.
That’s ageist. If he’s up for it, he’s up for it.