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
Apart from the bit about Ferguson being great I think I agree.
Edgar Wright is still my first choice. EON would have to keep an eye on him and he couldn't throw in his usual references but he could still be great I think. Sadly it'll never happen.
Oh, you're a clever one, aren't you? Must be a real hit at preschool.
fool
/fo͞ol/
Noun
A person who acts unwisely or imprudently; a silly person: "what a fool I was to do this".
Verb
Trick or deceive (someone); dupe.
Adjective
Foolish or silly.
Synonyms
noun. simpleton - dolt - tomfool - ninny - nincompoop-@Suivez_ce_parachute
verb. cheat - deceive - dupe - bamboozle - hoodwink - kid
adjective. foolish - daft - goofy - fatuous - idiotic - asinine
My fear is that EoN MAY be trying such an approach with Mendes but the problem with that is, time. Nolan's batman film's came out in 2005, 2008 and 2012. That's a 3 and 4 year gap, something that's not ideal for the Bond series. With Craig being EoN's golden child and SF being released 4 years after QoS, it'll be a shame to not get the mileage we should be getting with Craig. With all due respect to Mendes, especially as he's been involved since 2009 or thereabouts, what the series needs is, a great director who can prioritise making a Bond film immediately for a 2014 release. If we get an autumn 2015 release, then "congrats" Bond goes up against Avatar 2.
I just worry we'll get more huge emotional moments if Mendes returns but the ending of SF suggests we are going back to a familiar place.
I really wouldn't mind 24 starting with a standalone PTS or make it seem that way and then later on it surprisingly ties in to the main plot. Have Bond go to M's office to be briefed and pop to Q branch for some banter and then off on a mission.
The rest of the film doesn't necessarily have to become a traditional entry it can play out like a Craig Bond but like SF see Bond having fun and not necessarily with him not at his best, maybe we'll see Bond more on top than we've seen in the previous 3, not a superman but moments of looking super suave and doing it with a rye trademark Craig smile. I don't imagine we are going to get GF or TB, it's going to be interesting seeing what tone these next 2 films take but I would like the big emotional moments dialled back please.
As for Mendes if he signs on and it comes out in 2015 so be it, I'm not going to have a hissy fit but something tells me some new blood would be nice, I'm not sure that lightening will necessarily strike twice.
It would have meant long stretches for the cast, too - led by Daniel Craig, Ralph Fiennes as the new M, Naomie Harris as Miss Moneypenny and Ben Whishaw playing Q.
That plan has been jettisoned, and Bond 24 and 25 will be stand-alone pictures.
At present, Logan’s thoughts for Bond 24 are in the form of two treatment papers outlining a rough idea of the plot. So, in theory, Mendes is on board, but wants to see the finished script before he fully commits.
Personally, I don't see why the two movies can't be linked and directed by two different people and shot separately rather than back-to-back.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2278914/Sam-Mendes-James-Bond-sights-Skyfalls-phenomenal-box-office-success.html
@bondsum I think the idea behind 24 and 25 being linked was to make something like CR-QoS, a direct continuation, and I think the style of the different directors was detrimental to the end result. I think stand alone pictures doesn't mean they are not connected at all, but that they are separate adventures, just like we had for most of the franchise. Thanks for posting the news!
Keep it coming Baz!
The series has lasted over 50 years because, for the most part, the movies have not been interconnected. I'm not saying that you cannot have an overarching villain like Quantum or SPECTRE, but I think all the films should be standalone pictures.
It will be interesting to see. SF is still primarily a P+W film, so taking that into account I expect a noticable shift in 24.
http://www.rexfeatures.com/search/?kw=sam+mendes&iso=GBR&lkw=&viah=Y&stk=N&sft=&search_action_desktop=
It may well be that the '75%' quote is from the man himself.
I'd rather see Bond 24 in Nov 2014 but if we have to wait we have to wait, although I was delighted with how Skyfall turned out I'm still a little cautious to what kind of film it will take Mendes to commit. The emotional weight of SF does not need repeated again and I think we'd all like to see something a bit more relaxed and fun without the kind of moments we had in Bond 23 and will Mendes want to make that kind of film?
:D
You know what, it likely does.
'Skyfall' was the title of the script draft Logan was working on back in April 2011, I guess it either just stuck or the team grew rather attached to it.
No, as far as i know the draft was titled "Silver Bullet" before it became Skyfall much later on.
There was also a stage where it was called "Once Upon A Spy", I think.
There's a big difference between a film that gets a massive box office and is trash and one that is a great film in its own right (TDKR). It may have taken a hit for its ambition and looser script and may not be the best of the Batman Trilogy, but TDKR is no lesser an immaculate film worthy of the praise and commercial success it has garnered.
Wade added the title SF - remember P&W wrote SF, Logan added dialogue and polish.
TDKR is good, but it is not even close to immaculate.