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
I suppose it makes sense to hire the most high profile British director. Nolan is a huge Bond fan, his films make big bucks, perhaps it's a no-brainer to hire the guy!
IMDb get things wrong all the time, believe me, I've had first hand experience of their mistakes more than once - and they also often fail to remove misinformation swiftly.
Delightful!
I know some people are against Chris Nolan, they don't feel his style of film making is a natural fit, but he is a genuine James Bond fan so he'll respect the source material, not take too many liberties. A Nolan Bond film is bound to do big box office even if Craig doesn't return.
Exactly. It's not a concrete fact until at least one of the production companies give an official statement. Hopefully Nolan will get questioned about this when he's promoting Dunkirk though. It would speed up this uncertainty quite a bit.
There would be very little CGI in a Chris Nolan Bond film, which is something we have all wanted - less CGI. Plus we would know he would shoot on real film, using high quality stock. There are objective positives to hiring Nolan, outside of any arguments that he is good for the franchise or not.
Here, here.
https://www.mi6-hq.com/news/christopher-nolan-s-production-company-linked-to-bond-25-170504
As Syncopy has been listed there for quite some time actually ...
Also, Nolan and Craig is a no go because he will want a new vision.
Now, hypothetically speaking, those who don't think he can do it or that he would inject it with too much drama have been drinking the Mendes coolaid for too long. Nolan knows what to do. There's no way Mendes could have given us something as inventive and sublime as the Bat trilogy, Inception, Interstellar (it was bloated but he executed the complex vision & narrative to perfection), or The Prestige for example. It was clear to me that he was experimenting with some of those, spreading his wings & taking risks and I respect him for it. His known love and admiration for Bond will allow him to come back to earth and stay on point.
Hypothetically again, I don't want Hardy as Bond, but I can't criticize his acting skills or his ability to become a character completely and totally. He is a better & more versatile actor than Craig (imho) and so can definitely do it, but I don't want him to. Fassbender would be my choice.
I don't care if they go with an unknown or a famous actor next time out. Unlike others, I think it will be someone more well known. I think it will be a Roger/Pierce direction rather than a Laz/Dalts/Craig one.
---
I agree with @Benny that this is all smoke and mirrors. My view (again) is it's Craig and Mendes for a finale or it's a completely new team and a shakeup coming.
Nolan won't direct a Bond film.
It's great to have people that are passionate about Bond for directors, but that doesn't always equate to positives. We're all walking encyclopedias, but does that give us the keys to the castle? Of course not, as most or all of us would screw up majorly on such a project. Nolan has a track record, of course, but he's white knighted a bit too much. Mendes is now hated, and with Nolan I feel that he would simply get the same backlash for his possible decisions, as he always puts a similar spin on things and goes for super grounded with source material. He could pull off the more fantastical elements I'm sure, but I'd just wonder what his approach would be. If he only does one film, they're wasting him and if he does more or a trilogy, we could be waiting around forever, and he'll stand to get burned out with no new projects to fill the time with.
Auteurs really don't work well within a massive franchise like this, as the studio system is always nipping at their heels. That element is why you won't see Mendes touch Bond with a two-hundred foot pole again. This kind of stuff makes creative people nuts, speaking from experience. There's nothing that kills vision and dreams like sitting in a room full of bean counters who all tell you why your ideas aren't sensible. In the same token, we've seen what happens when creatives are given money to handle. Like Mendes, they could end up blowing millions on a very unnecessary explosion in a desert and putting a production needlessly in a tough budgetary spot.
Remember this is someone who turned down Peter Jackson to be a director and some believe she chose Johnathan Pierce (who is a tremendous actor) over Anthony Hopkins
Doesn't he commentate football matches?
What? Lol
Jonathan Pearce - he's a football commentator, not an actor; whilst Jonathan Pierce is a gospel singer.
This guy however is an actor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pryce
What makes you so sure? You also were 100% sure the final theme song for SP would be done by Radiohead, and unless the lead singer of Radiohead is Sam Smith and nobody told me, you were wrong on that front.
Here, here.
From a comment I wrote previously:
lol close enough
I wouldn't mind this. If Nolan is announced as director, but Craig stays I'd be more than content.
But no cigar.