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
A sequel that jumps to the fourth book, with a director that isn't Fincher, starring an all-new cast. And just like that, 100% of my interest went out the window.
This. I hope it makes even less money than Fincher's version. Maybe then they'll realize the best way forward was to give the original cast and crew what they wanted (more money/freedom), so they could craft the best film. I know it's a business, and this will likely be the cheaper option for them, but jumping to the fourth novel with an all new cast doesn't inspire any sort of confidence on the box office front.
1) Pascal was sacked. The studio said she resigned, but Pascal said publicly she was fired.
2) As part of her separation package, she got a producer deal at Sony. That's why she was producer of Ghostbusters and will get a producer credit on Spider-Man: Homecoming, where Kevin Feige & Co. are doing the heavy lifting.
I think it was always a mixture of Fincher wanting more freedom, Craig wanting more money, with the remake not being a tremendous success at the box office to warrant that decision for a sequel.
...and Sony wanting to do it cheaper.
If Mara still had interest, then there would be no sense in recasting her, too, when they could've just gone with a less expensive actor in the role - this is, of course, assuming that Mara didn't cost much, either, but who knows.
Either way, at least it's now 1,000% confirmed that I'll never be getting the sequel I wanted, so I needn't worry about or ponder it anymore.
In Hollywood, even when you fail, you often land in a soft spot. That's certainly the case with Pascal.
Fincher's movie was very disappointing, as was DC's performance IMO. I'm not surprised they struggled to get a sequel off the ground. Given how huge those books were it's a fairly damning indictment of all involved that the film was such a flop - lacking in drama, tension, believability.
It should act as a reminder to DC that after Bond his career options are likely to diminish rapidly. He should hang on in there as long as he can - 2 more films would be my advice. And he should show a little more outward commitment to the series as well. He may have done wonders for Bond, but the reverse is also true.
I'm fairly sure he fully appreciates it, but more indication that he actually enjoys the job, rather than resenting it, would make him slightly more endearing to fans I think.
I had quite enjoyed the book and felt it had clear filmic potential but found the movie very BBC TV on a Sunday afternoon. Not what I had been expecting from Fincher at all. I remember going into the cinema with very high expectations.
The mish mash of accents was very distracting. Why is everyone else speaking in their Scandinavian (or put on) accents and DC speaks clipped English? Made it feel like one of those lame euro-blamanges that only gets funding as part of some Austrian tax dodge.
The denouement in the killer's basement is cliched even in the book, and needed imaginative handling to give it some impact, which Fincher entirely failed to do.
Close to zero chemistry between DC and Rooney Mara didn't help either.
Yeah. Just disappointing really. Not a disaster, just not very good and pretty forgettable.
I beg to differ. BO and critical response says otherwise as well. And like me, I think a lot of people expected and wanted it to be really good.
But glad to hear some people enjoyed it. 'Okay' would be about as effusive as I could get about it.
If I'm honest it cemented my belief that DC is not quite the charismatic, BO magician that some would like to make out. I see his post Bond future as a solid character actor in good ensemble movies, not as a leading man. Which to be fair to him is probably not far from where he sees himself either.
It's a truism that Bond is bigger than any one actor. Even Sean found that out. It conveys a status and gravitas on the incumbent that is unlike any other role.
I disagree on the production values though. I thought the film looked absolutely outstanding from start to finish. Great glossy & yet dark atmosphere.
I'm just ticked that we aren't going to get the direct sequel. The Swedish version of The Girl Who Played With Fire is my favourite of the original 3 and I was so looking forward to seeing Mara & Craig in the English version.
Never really achieved lift off in terms of the thriller dimension or the characterisations.
Agree Rooney Mara probably best thing about it.
I really think it has to do with the fact that the source material is serviceable but needed a little finessing to elevate it above the pedestrian, and that is something Fincher just wasn't able to do.
May be he overestimated the quality of the book and thought a straight, faithful adaptation was all that was required.
Couldn't agree more. It's one of my favourite films, and I am beyond disappointed that we'll never get to see at least the completed trilogy. In all honesty, I love DC as Bond, but I would rather see him as Blomkvist.
I'm still baffled as to how anyone thought releasing TGWTDT in December was a good idea. Of all the films in the world, that absolutly is not a film you release at Christmas. And no doubt, that is part of the reason it didn't do as well at the box office as they had hoped.
Very well said Sir Hilary Thankyou .