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
Well, some of Nolan's decisions might not be what they want or think effective. If he's given power over casting, say, and he puts forward a less effective actor for the role than EON could pick, then that's a pretty fundamental disagreement in which normally the director would have to accept the producer's choice. Hell, if Nolan's pick gets the role then you can't really take that back (the producers want an actor who will be in the role for a period of time and not just one film).
Nolan's not a perfect filmmaker. I'd argue he's made some pretty bad creative decisions on some of his films, particularly his later ones. I don't see why out of all the directors they could pick why they'd give him that unprecedented level of creative power.
But if you dig around, or chat with those who are deep in the industry, they’ll tell you that was minor compared to the creative differences they were having with their artist.
Say what you will about WBs (and I’m sure most of it is true), but what’s unmistakable: when they find a talent like Eastwood, Affleck or Nolan, they do everything in their power to make these creatives happy. Nolan wanted more than they were offering and they cut him loose.
(I believe new heads at WBs are trying to get him back, and if I’m not mistaken, he did post on Oppenheimer back on their lot, so good luck to those guys)…
From 2021:
"Sources say that Nolan and his camp are talking to Sony and Universal, with conversations also taking place with Warners and Paramount."
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/sony-universal-studios-vying-for-new-christopher-nolan-movie-1235010970/
1. He has his own nailed-down idea for a movie and will stick to it, which won't jive with the producers and it probably won't happen that way.
2. He has an approach/tone he's pitched knowing that Eon will have hands in every pie, and is open to being the craftsman for their ultimate vision. Which I think is not the case.
For example, read any detailed interview about Casino Royale and you learn that Campbell had A LOT of creative control over the script, and even more control over shooting. He apparently worked the hell out of people, and got stuff done on time. He's a craftsman. But he also probably has more trust from Eon than any other person outside of the family at this point. So it's going to be different for Nolan.
The question right now probably is still: Are Eon even willing to meet with him? They'll meet, hear him out, and Eon will make a decision. It may have already happened. It will come down to who they want in the room for every meeting, not necessarily who nails their press junket interviews when asked about Bond.
https://youtu.be/eWBJ-60L8Lg?t=1359
- They have been on a friendly terms for many years
- Both currently have working relationships with Universal
- Martin Campbell is most likely too old, and who EON usually rely on to kick off the new era
- Nolan has talked about his dream of making a bond film since he has very young
- Nolan seems to be hitting another peak in his career with Oppenhiemer, snagging him now would be great buzz for the reboot
- Nolan says he would only be interested in doing his own take on the character, so realistically it's now or never
- Nolan has been away from the franchise scene for a decade and may want to dip his toe back into that arena, especially after the comparatively dense Oppenhiemer
The stars really do seem to be aligning...
The stars do appear to be aligning though, and a Nolan Bond film would be a marketing dream.
https://variety.com/2023/film/news/christopher-nolan-directing-bond-movie-failed-howard-hughes-biopic-1235675429/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/christopher-oppenheimer-sag-aftra-strike/
Note: IIRC, if you see OPPENHEIMER in 70mm IMAX there are no "coming attraction" previews. So, the three hour running time is exactly that; 3 hours. Speaking for myself, far too often its' the 15-20 minutes of previews that make the moving going experience a chore and not the length of the film itself. Of course, "intermissions" would be nice, but I stand a better chance of dating a super model before they come back. :))
Composer
90% - Ludwig Göransson
5% - Hans Zimmer
5% - someone else
Cinematographer
95% - Hoyte van Hoytema
5% - someone else
Editor
80% - Jennifer Lame
10% - Lee Smith
10% - someone else
Production Designer
60% - Nathan Crowley
20% - Ruth De Jong
20% - someone else
Costume Designer
50% - Jeffrey Kurland
20% - Lindy Hemming
5% - Ellen Mirojnick
25% - someone else
The only Bond spinoff that we ALL need.
Love it.
THIS SUMMER, CHECK YOUR RADIATION SHIELDS!
Cillian Murphy is exceptional, portraying a 20th-century Dr. Frankenstein, realising too late the limitless capacity for destruction of his creation. Murphy's cheekbones and eyes have never been put to better use. Robert Downey Jr disappears into his role as Lewis Strauss and delivers an outstanding performance. On the downside, the female roles are poorly served, and Nolan's biggest directorial misstep involves an ill-judged sexual fantasy scene.
The ending, with its Dr. Strangelove-esque overtones, is a real gut punch that struck a chord with me. The film touches on the question of whether Oppenheimer should be forgiven for his contributions. Overall, great film.
I posted this earlier in the “ Director” topic.; it very much reflects how I feel.
If Nolan were to ever direct Bond, I agree that now woukd appear to be the perfect time all things considered.
I was not overly impressed with the last three DC films, I am very much in favour of seeing what Nolan can do with Bond. It is a given we will get great practical set pieces.
Very long, too much dialogue, and also didn't think the film really delivered on the message it was supposed to be doing (I guess) which is the shock and horror of such a bomb being dropped, the fact that we never see the devastation it can cause. It felt like Nolan ducked out of such horrifying images. And this is not a film that you have to see on IMAX, or even the cinema. It's mainly a talky drama, with very little in way of visual spectacle, so doesn't need to be seen on the big screen. It could easily have been done as a Netflix drama at home on TV.
If Nolan were to direct a Bond film, he would need to go back and tap into what he did with the Batman trilogy, because now he has turned into a pretentious, boring filmmaker. I wouldn't let him anywhere near a Bond movie going by his past 2 movies.
The editing, narrative structure, epic visuals, and unrelenting score are pretty unusual for a biopic and give it that signature Nolan flavour. While there thematic/filmmaking elements from all his previous films that culminate in Oppenheimer’s story being told in a uniquely Nolanesque manner, I’ve found his previous filmography to be elevated popcorn flicks (and I mean that in the most positive way possible), while this feels like an indie/arthouse biopic with the budget and production value of a summer blockbuster.