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
Blaming Babs for all their troubles seems rather inappropriate. She's hardly responsible for MGM being in and out of bankruptcy proceedings. Your posts come across as ravings of a too-obsessed fan who possibly needs to take a step back.
Exactly. Several reviews said "Move over, Bond" or made similar statements to that effect. M:I is on the ascent, and Bond simply isn't. Blame doesn't lie with any one person, but it's clear things need to change, and I suspect Boyle was going to take this film in exactly the wrong direction. As would Christopher Nolan.
Bond needs directors who make Bond films. Not directors who make films of their own starring James Bond. Boyle, Nolan, they'd all do the latter.
I really don't know... Ask this question to Kathleen Kennedy when she hired Lord & Miller and Colin Trevorrow...
Maybe they were super fascinated by the idea of a Bond movie with Boyle's visual style and they liked his idea... but in the end he went too far. If I recall correctly Danny Boyle is also a friend of Daniel Craig. We all know Babs is desperately in love with Daniel... XD
A better question is do you understand movies at all ?
You can't know that, can you? It could be Mendes 2.0 for all we know.
... which I think is the point of that Hollywood Reporter article.
That's what I feared about Boyle: Mendes 2.0. Or rather a Mendes with all his flaws and none of his qualities. Older but no wiser.
-If Boyle walked because he was being difficult about trivial issues, then good riddance
-If the producers pushed him out over same, I'm inclined to be less generous.
-If Craig pushed him out, I'd agree that perhaps he's been given too much control.
Obviously the first job here is to deliver a great film. But my feeling is that with all the time off, the delays, and the uncertainty, a steady hand on the tiller is desperately needed. Ditching the director at this point does little for my confidence, though I'm certainly happy to be proved wrong later.
And I suspect the exact opposite. People love Craig as Bond.
omg..........compare TWINE with Skyfall............Apted's film doesn't even come close.
Sadly, I think you're right.
A m e r I c a n
???????
Hmm. Well I like TWINE Better. Everyone in the film is more competent and makes better decisions. And it is fun. I like Skyfall but I much prefer TWINE.
Seconded. SF is objectively better but I have a better time with TWINE. Sophie Marceau, more Bond elements, and Arnold's score doesn't hurt.
Exactly. :-bd
And what makes you say that? @PanchitoPistoles
+1
Honestly, though, I haven't been able to sit through either movie since I saw them in the cinema.
TLD comes to mind.
MI Fallout’s basic plot was as simple as it gets. Find nukes. Stop them going off. Just like Octopussy and several Bonds from yesteryear. Tried and true.
What MI did was trump the CR toilet scene with breathtaking brutality. It dumped a mind-boggling action sequence into the middle of Paris that simply doesn’t let up whether on four wheels, two, or on foot.
Meanwhile, things just went from bad to worse at Camp Broccoli.
Boyle was the wrong choice from the start. B25 needs an engaging espionage mission with top notch action scenes. The idea that Boyle was scared off by the scale doesn’t wash. He signed on for Bond, not Harry Palmer.
The irony is that Boyle and Craig probably wanted the same thing. To explore Bonds tortured mind further.
But it isn’t hard to see a scenario where Daniel Craig was progressively threatened by Boyle’s ideas. A younger, arguably better looking, physically imposing villain might have been more problematic than people think.
So Boyle was wrong from the start and in Daniel Craig we have a painfully sensitive, cantankerous actor-producer with little left in the tank. He’s collected so many barnacles over the journey that it’s little wonder a probing, challenging director was cut.
All up, it’s obvious Bond needs to extract himself from the angsty, heavy-handed web Craig has (in part) created for himself. Especially when market competitors are winning plaudits for simply being adrenalin soaked gut-punches.
I always thought B25 represented a high degree of difficulty. The chances of Craig going out on a high were just diminished further. Wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if he walked. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed his interpretation of Bond but in all honesty I’d be content if Spectre was his Waterloo.
There is surely no way that Eon have retained his services. I think the great irony is that if they want to make the December start date, they'll have to ask P&W back. They are Eon's writers. It's hilarious as their old script was tossed out for Hodge's draft. Now they'll be the ones to fix the script to Eon's specification.
This whole 'Danny Boyle experiment' has been such a farce. Personally, I think if Eon want an auetur they need to leave them to get on with it. You don't hire Danny Boyle and then get annoyed when he won't listen to you. Filmmakers like Boyle and Mendes have individualistic sensibilities. That's the reason you hire them!
I hope the film is delayed a year and Daniel Craig walks. Then this guy can play 007...
+1
No, thank you.