Sam Mendes to direct Bond 24?

13638404142

Comments

  • edited June 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Creasy47 wrote:
    The action is average verging on poor, the plot is mediocre at best, the villain is weak, the henchman a joke, the titles, song, direction and editing are all awful. Theres only really Craigs performance, Olga, the scenes with Mathis, some of the scenes with M and the photography that are worthy of note. And none of those could be claimed anywhere near the greatest in the series, or even the greatest in the Craig era.

    You must have missed the Bond vs. Slate fight.

    I could barely follow that one, and it was lifted right out of the first Bourne movie in style. Same with the rope fight, obviously more original but the editing was just awful.

    I didn't mind the boat fight as much as others and could follow that, but the best action in QOS happens at the Bregenz Opera House and at the Perla de Las Dunas. These to me are strong reasons why the action in QOS rises from poor to average.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    the best action in QOS happens at the Bregenz Opera House and at the Perla de Las Dunas. These to me are strong reasons why the action in QOS rises from poor to average.

    If these are your only reasons to elevate it then I strongly suggest you reconsider.

    What action is at the Opera? Bond shoots a few blokes in slow mo. Its hardly the ski jump or the fight on the back of the Hercules is it? Its a nice dramatic scene with a few soupcons of action but its not exactly groundbreaking.

    Ditto the finale. Bond shoots people and shit blows up. Wow - thats something fresh and orginal.

    If thats the best that QOS offers then surely average is far too kind?
  • Posts: 5,767
    Ditto the finale. Bond shoots people and shit blows up. Wow - thats something fresh and orginal.
    Which of course exactly describes SF as well.

  • I think the opera house is more groundbreaking than you do. There's a lot of great things to love about the scene, the spying, the music lend to that. The fights are short and brutal just like in real life, and I felt these shorter bursts of action fit the movie better than a lengthier piece such as the train fight, which was longer and more dramatic and fit SF's storyline much better. Greene and Elvis weren't tough guys, Patrice was and they needed more to establish that, and I thoroughly enjoyed many of SF's action pieces.

    The Perla fight fit the revenge motif perfectly. It's not always all about the actual scene as there are, as you admit, lots of average action pieces. But it would be nice to see them cut loose with something big to wow the audiences. Wasn't it you Wiz, who posted something about having a battle with jet packs? I'd love to see something like that, but it's hard for me to tell if EON still finds the wild action of the Connery and Moore eras viable nowadays.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Wasn't it you Wiz, who posted something about having a battle with jet packs?

    Hmmm...future movie plot point... -saved- ;)
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited June 2013 Posts: 9,117
    boldfinger wrote:
    Ditto the finale. Bond shoots people and shit blows up. Wow - thats something fresh and orginal.
    Which of course exactly describes SF as well.

    Yes it does. And your point is? We are criticising QOS here? How are the shortcomings in SF's action scenes a defence, or even relevant?
    Wasn't it you Wiz, who posted something about having a battle with jet packs?

    No I can assure you it most certainly was not.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 3,494
    My bad Wiz. Because you lengthily discussed the lack of honest stunt work in the QOS sinkhole scene, I guess I thought it was you who put up a clip of something of that nature that could be done. I remember it had a stuntman flying on a jet pack and there was conjecture on how this kind of work could be used to enhance the action of a future Bond installment. I think that could be a great idea, Bond using one to access QUANTUM HQ or fighting some QUANTUM henchmen that way.

    @Risico- maybe that's because many of us prefer Skyfall to QOS?
  • Posts: 9,847
    ok so we have Skyfall and people are still complaining about Quantum of Solace sigh
  • hullcityfanhullcityfan Banned
    edited June 2013 Posts: 496
    This a shame this! Lets get me to do it get me to direct or a pro. But if you get me then I have no idea what I'm doing and it'll be better than Skyfall but if you get a pro like Marc Foster then it'll fail, lets bring back Martin Campbell!

    Mod edit: member addressed via PM.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    My bad Wiz. Because you lengthily discussed the lack of honest stunt work in the QOS sinkhole scene, I guess I thought it was you who put up a clip of something of that nature that could be done. I remember it had a stuntman flying on a jet pack and there was conjecture on how this kind of work could be used to enhance the action of a future Bond installment. I think that could be a great idea, Bond using one to access QUANTUM HQ or fighting some QUANTUM henchmen that way.

    I put up a clip of some proper stuntmen doing a real freefall scene.

    To be honest I dont know why but even though it is actually a real invention I've never really liked the jetpack in TB as it seems a bit too ridiculously OTT and I would hate to see it return.
  • Posts: 612
    If Mendes is onboard for Bond 24, consider me pleased.

    (Sorry for putting things on-topic)
  • Posts: 9,847
    on topic last week there were tons of rumors I hope the same will be said for this week.
  • Posts: 5,767
    boldfinger wrote:
    Ditto the finale. Bond shoots people and shit blows up. Wow - thats something fresh and orginal.
    Which of course exactly describes SF as well.

    Yes it does. And your point is? We are criticising QOS here? How are the shortcomings in SF's action scenes a defence, or even relevant?
    My point is that QOS is criticised here for something common to other films too. The discussion is about Mendes and possible future Bond films, not QOS. Otherwise please forgive me if I misinterpreted the thread title.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    boldfinger wrote:
    boldfinger wrote:
    Ditto the finale. Bond shoots people and shit blows up. Wow - thats something fresh and orginal.
    Which of course exactly describes SF as well.

    Yes it does. And your point is? We are criticising QOS here? How are the shortcomings in SF's action scenes a defence, or even relevant?
    My point is that QOS is criticised here for something common to other films too. The discussion is about Mendes and possible future Bond films, not QOS. Otherwise please forgive me if I misinterpreted the thread title.

    Well you are quite correct over the topic of the thread if not your other conclusions but as we are back on topic I'll leave it at that.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Risico007 wrote:
    on topic last week there were tons of rumors I hope the same will be said for this week.

    I would prefer facts over rumors.
  • Posts: 60
    Has it been confirmed that Bond 24 is looking at a 2015 release instead of 2014?
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    As far as we know it's all media speculation including Mendes coming back, not until EON confirms it is it gospel, that being said I think bits and pieces are probably genuine.

    EON will confirm when they are good and ready, meaning when every other news site has reported it as official will they release the truth, the lost art of keeping a secret.
  • Shardlake wrote:
    As far as we know it's all media speculation including Mendes coming back, not until EON confirms it is it gospel, that being said I think bits and pieces are probably genuine.

    EON will confirm when they are good and ready, meaning when every other news site has reported it as official will they release the truth, the lost art of keeping a secret.

    It's more than just speculation - the news has come from several reliable sources.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    It does seem likely, more than a wild rumor now - and I do hope it's true.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I'm actually thinking that Mendes isn't actually coming back
  • Posts: 9,847
    doubleoego wrote:
    I'm actually thinking that Mendes isn't actually coming back

    Why if I may ask?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I think the prods do want a 2014 release and I'm not convinced Mendes can make such a deadline.
  • doubleoego wrote:
    I think the prods do want a 2014 release and I'm not convinced Mendes can make such a deadline.

    They can if they start production by the end of this summer.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    And we all know that's not going to happen. Craig himself is busy until next January. The earliest production could start and that's if we're lucky is February/March 2014.
  • doubleoego wrote:
    I think the prods do want a 2014 release and I'm not convinced Mendes can make such a deadline.

    They've been pretty consistent in saying that they don't want to rush things.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    A 2014 release isn't rushing things when you take into account the script has been worked on for about a year and that the prods have been on the hunt and looking to lock in a director since February.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 2,015
    I know talking about something else than the creative team bores many people (somee even flag !) but what's still puzzling me is that rumors abound that Bond 24 and Bond 25 are being worked upon to make things go fast. At the same time, I can't find any information that the deal with Sony goes beyond Bond 24 (I found though info about Sony Pix deal with MGM for 3 years, but that's not the core problem at all). The Hobbit Sony MGM deals will have ended at the time of Bond 24 also. So big money talks continue probably...

    Btw, Sir JM, I found a Variety paper which explains that MGM could not bring its own money to finance its part of Skyfall, that they had to create debt from "studio partners" (including Sony again ? - or MGM private stockholders who then asked for a lot of interests ?). Seems Sony is indeed the milk cow that did not get much and took all the risks, the ongoing war about Sony Entertainment may have a very important role in the near future for Bond !

    http://variety.com/2013/film/news/mgm-eyes-650-million-refinancing-deal-1118064283/
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 388
    doubleoego wrote:
    A 2014 release isn't rushing things when you take into account the script has been worked on for about a year and that the prods have been on the hunt and looking to lock in a director since February.

    In May last year, the president of Sony distribution announced that Bond 24 would have a late 2014 release date. Broccoli laughed and responded that "he was getting a little overexcited". In November, she told the Los Angeles Times, “Sometimes there are external pressures from a studio who want you to make it in a certain time frame or for their own benefit, and sometimes we’ve given into that but following what we hope will be a tremendous success with Skyfall, we have to try to keep the deadlines within our own time limits and not cave in to external pressures.”

    As for the script being in the works, I haven't heard that. Michael G Wilson told Den of Geek in October that no preparations had been made (at that time) for Bond 24. When asked when it would be released he answered, "if we’re rapid it’ll be two years, if we’re not it’ll be three." It was announced later that month that Logan had been re-hired.

    We can all hope that it comes out in 2014 but it's looking unlikely. All the signs point to 2015.
    Btw, Sir JM, I found a Variety paper which explains that MGM could not bring its own money to finance its part of Skyfall, that they had to create debt from "studio partners" (including Sony again ? - or MGM private stockholders who then asked for a lot of interests ?). Seems Sony is indeed the milk cow that did not get much and took all the risks, the ongoing war about Sony Entertainment may have a very important role in the near future for Bond !

    http://variety.com/2013/film/news/mgm-eyes-650-million-refinancing-deal-1118064283/

    Thanks @Suivez. That's interesting. Looks like MGM borrowed the money from Sony for their own part in the equity investment. I'm not too worried about Sony - they may have took the financial risks on SF but they earned a nice windfall from it. They will have certainly weighed the risks before investing and it's paid off for them.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 2,015
    As for the script being in the works, I haven't heard that.

    It was reported the director of Headhunters said EON met him and offered him to read Bond 24's script. It's a direct quote from a Norwegian interview with him.
    I'm not too worried about Sony - they may have took the financial risks on SF but they earned a nice windfall from it. They will have certainly weighed the risks before investing and it's paid off for them.

    But now one of their biggest shareholder publicly disagree and explains Sony Entertainment doesn't get enough money (lowest margins of the sector).
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 388
    As for the script being in the works, I haven't heard that.

    It was reported the director of Headhunters said EON met him and offered him to read Bond 24's script. It's a direct quote from a Norwegian interview with him.

    Yes, sorry, I meant that I hadn't heard it had been in the works "for about a year" as @doubleoego reported.
    I'm not too worried about Sony - they may have took the financial risks on SF but they earned a nice windfall from it. They will have certainly weighed the risks before investing and it's paid off for them.

    But now one of their biggest shareholder publicly disagree and explains Sony Entertainment doesn't get enough money (lowest margins of the sector).

    Yes, your information about that has been very interesting but I'm not hugely worried that it would delay production like the MGM bankruptcy did. Partly because Sony have no hold on the rights to Bond as MGM do. Although I would like to know more about Sony's deal with MGM.
Sign In or Register to comment.