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
You nailed it. If Gregg were the heir apparent, the sale wouldn't have happened. The podcast alluded to something he did.
I think whoever carries on producing these films will need that - especially the experience and resilience. Hopefully they'll understand Bond as much as MGW and BB did.
A studio executive or producer is going to have very different motivations. This person, by definition, can be fired.
Yes, exactly.
It's a shame because I really don't like his style of direction, where he shoots everything from a subjective perspective. I like the much more classic craft of filmmaking, where you try and give as much information through the blocking and composition of scenes. Nolan doesn't really do that, he likes to have an individual shot for each character, and gives information through exposition. Basically he sacrifices specificity of an image for a general sense of scope and emotion. Alfonso Cuaron is the exact opposite, he's always very meticulous about the intent behind each individual shot and movement. His films are a joy to appreciate, even if you aren't following the story.
Exactly, and some actually do it all. Soderbherg, for example, does his own framing, lighting,…, storyboarding, writing,… And there are plenty of directors who are like that. Good ones, at that.
To be fair Soderbergh’s an unusual example. Most directors simply don’t have the expertise to be DoP on their own films, at least in the context of a multi hundred million dollar budget film. Even when Soderbergh does it it’s with films that are smaller scale by comparison. I suspect he has an excellent and large crew around him too, and I think that’s one of the reasons him and the likes of Paul Thomas Anderson have given for either not crediting a DoP at all, or using a fake name when they take that responsibility - the cinematography becomes much more collaborative amongst that team. Nolan’s shot his own first feature film, but that was basically a no budget film and very intimate, seemingly lit with lamps and daylight.
But yes, the director is responsible for a lot creatively even if they don’t actually write or photograph the film themselves (as we’ve seen in the recent past the director of Bond brings along the DoP, often who they’ve worked with in the past. Same for writers etc).
Directors decide on the texture of the thing, not just where the camera looks or the lighting, they make the tone of the piece, they tie it all together, they decide how the words on the page are played out.
It’s a very odd scene and obviously we don’t fully know how it was directed. It could be an indication that the director wasn’t directing in this instance too. I do maintain directors can’t control a performance - many would say they prefer to direct the actor on set as little as possible with the most work done through rehearsal and prior talks about the scene. Perhaps Brosnan’s instinct was that Bond is angry due to being betrayed and is projecting it onto Graves (and to be honest I can see Brosnan going for that as an actor) and Tamahori just went with it. A better director would have gone through the scene prior, not said explicitly how the actors should say the lines (always a bad choice) but just kinda set the tone before the cameras rolled. Or perhaps it was just fundamentally directed weirdly and this is the result.
If Cuarón were to direct, I wonder who he’d bring on to DoP. He’s worked with Emmanuel Lubezski mainly to the point they began their careers together (and much of their style is intermixed with each other). That said he worked with an alternative cinematographer for his Harry Potter film and shot the lower budget Roma himself.
Cuarón directing Bond would be a dream, but was there anything in the wind about that at some point? I can't recall if he was ever considered, even by most of us.
Sort of. He was considered back in '99 for TWINE. And I think his name has popped up but occasionally (I don't think he's made a film in a while though so he might not be the first many think of).
Cuaron was offered the TWINE job but turned it down because he would be forced to rely on the second unit at EONs disposal instead of shooting action scenes himself. The way they operated on such a tight schedule made it impossible for the director to oversee at every level. Plus he was young at the time and thought the experience would be overwhelming (before he did Potter). He also has a audible cameo in QoS as one of the enemy pilots.
Interestingly were Cuaron to direct Bond 26 that would make he the oldest director in the series history, beating Campbell in Casino.
EDIT: 10 years ago he was still enthusiastic about Bond.
There's the thing we don't talk about. Bond films had longevity because they are all re-watchable, no matter how many warts they have. Streaming stuff is just stream. Once gone down the river, there will be no 450th watch, let alone 45th, 15th, or even second watch.
Amazon can't do anything until the deal has been completely finished and the contracts finalized. I, for one, am glad I don't have to picture Craig as Bond any more. Also I believe they need to find a relative unknown who will not bring a lot of pre conceived baggage to the role.
Yes I’d be more interested in Cuarón than Nolan too.