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
And Edgar Wallace should have written one! ;)
Since there was actually some news, I came back to this thread to read the comments,
but since I hadn't been here in 2 and a half weeks, I read through tens of pages of discussion about Craig coming back or not, Christopher Nolan, Sam Mendes, other directors, previous Bond movies and hopes and speculation for future Bond movies, time between movies, previous Bond actors, possible future Bond actors, and Tom Cruise (go figure). And plenty other stuff. Phew. A few comments on some of that below.
Not happeni... oh wait, Bale as villain might be fun. With Hardy, cool. Villains. :)
Probably true about being too established for them, but I really don't believe he would want the job, either. As for "difficult", that's tabloids and internet for you; just because the guy had one minor issue with one person nine years ago, and which was blown out of all proportion as well as taken out of context. I have never seen any indication of "difficult" being the industry view, quite the opposite in fact. By all accounts he seems to be well liked and respected. After a career of over 30 years one would imagine that by now a few people would have already said how "difficult" he was to work with, instead of what they actually say.
***
The Tom Cruise discussion came up again. I don't know why that keeps happening, considering Cruise hasn't been, isn't, and never will be Bond, and Craig and Cruise are completely different actors and people, with vastly different types of careers, and interests. So Cruise has done plenty of action films, and Craig does action in Bond films, but... a lot of actors do action stuff. I don't get the Bond connection to Cruise, specifically, or the need to compare Craig to Cruise.
***
It really does.
***
That's my understanding as well, seems like a fun and fun-loving, generally easy-going and relaxed guy. He doesn't often seem all that broody with media, either, from what I've seen.
It's somewhat weird to mention that you don't know him personally, as if anyone here did or suggested that they did. GL is surely better informed than you or I would be, but that's a different matter. It is indeed obvious we don't, any of us, personally know him. - I'm sure you didn't mean it in a negative way, I know you're not the type, but just saying that to me that seemed like a weird comment to make. I agree the sardonic and the sarcastic suiting him very well when it comes to humour. Other types might as well, but SP didn't work for me, either - in general, though, so I can't really single out delivery of humour from the overall clunkiness of writing.
Oh, you will be. :)
How's it going so far?
Me too. For the many reasons mentioned by @thelivingroyale, @bondjames, @Shardlake, and others.
I don't think the long gaps have been down to the actor, and I haven't gotten the impression that one is more approachable than the other or more enthusiastic about the work. - Anyway, I like both actors a lot, though.
Yes, it does seem like an obvious fit and an opportunity that shouldn't be missed. I like their work together a lot.
True. Both how the eventual movie turns out and it's commercial success are mostly out of actors' hands, there's only so much they can do about the general quality of the movie, and only so much they are responsible for when it comes to marketing. They're only parts in a big machine.
So true. And not just that, but during as well. And after, of course - editing, which takes are chosen, what scenes get left out entirely, etc.
You remember correctly. (and Aronofsky :) )
Very few people front blockbusters on a regular basis. So yeah, he probably won't. Likely isn't what he wants to do, either.
Yeah, happens to everyone. I bet those movies wouldn't have been better with other actors.
I agree. He's a wonderful actor, and having been in bad movies as well doesn't make him a bad actor. Every actor is in bad movies, too. It's sort of inevitable, considering what movie-making processes are like.
How long any movie feels like to any viewer varies. If it feels like a chore then clearly one doesn't enjoy it - the length itself has little to do with that.
However, most of Nolan's movies aren't actually long.
Following 70 minutes (done on a shoestring budget and all that, so a somewhat different case, but I don't know if he'd even have wanted to make it longer),
Dunkirk 106 minutes,
Memento 113 minutes,
Insomnia 118 minutes,
The Prestige 130 minutes,
Batman Begins 140 minutes,
Inception 148 minutes.
So: 4 out of 10 under 2 hours, 7 out of 10 under 2 and a half hours. None over 3 hours (the longest being Interstellar at 169 minutes).
Personally I don't consider movies under 2 and a half hours to even be long, so I wouldn't say Nolan's movies are long in general.
If you dislike them, though, they'll probably all feel long to you. The same would go for any other movies. A 2 hour movie will feel long if you hate it, a 2 hour 30 minute movie won't feel long if you love it.
I see that a lot. Well, I wish I was rich enough to travel abroad to go to the movies... If I was I would have.
No slow build-up, you're dropped right into it, and then it just keeps escalating. No backstories for any characters. No actual lead(s), it's very much an ensemble piece. Very little dialogue.
It's also not a traditional war film. There are no regular battles, nor regular victory, no portrayal of typical machismo or big heroics, no emotional manipulation of the viewer, no gore, no detailed/extended death scenes of individuals. It's not about homes or loved ones, what anyone has done in the past or what they'd like to do in the future. It's only about the now, what everyone has in common, this moment and how to survive it. It works in a different way that war films normally do. Here war is the setting, and obviously it's a story of actual history, but it's more a thriller by nature than a war movie. But in the unusual way that it is about war, I think it's very effective - more so IMO, because of not having seen this kind of approach to it before.
In general... he seems to be loving his main job as dad. Also works as an actor occasionally. In relation to Nolan... they always seemed to get on very well, and to have lots of mutual respect, I don't think anything has "happened" there. They did 4 movies together, with Bale as lead or co-lead in all of them, and Nolan has done only 2 movies after TDKR. I wouldn't expect Bale to be in all Nolan films anyway, and Bale was working on other movies when Nolan was doing those two. Since last working with Nolan, Bale has worked with 7 other directors on 8 movies (2 not yet released ). Plus one other movie collapsed 13 days before they were due to start because, well, dad stuff - playing with kids can seriously harm your health. There have been 2 further Oscar nominations to add to the win before TDKR. Most importantly the 2nd child arrived. He's been busy enough I suppose. The most recent official sighting (apart from pics with fans) was at Chris Cornell's memorial service in May. Generally regular, quiet life. Apparently starts shooting his 9th post-TDKR movie in September.
And there's the Scott Cooper film Hostiles with Rosamund Pike, Wes Studi, Adam Beach, Q'orianka Kilcher, Jesse Plemons, Ben Foster, Paul Anderson, Stephen Lang etc., and (old pal) Andy Serkis' Rudyard Kipling adaptation (Bale as Bagheera) is in post-production.
Adam McKay is hardly "artsy" but it's hilarious seeing that description anywhere near his name. :P I suppose Terrence Malick would be considered "artsy", though, so there's that.
I'd love Craig and Bale to work together on something, btw. I also suspect they'd have fun together... (I think they both generally have fun with people they work with anyway, but they also share some stuff, so might be interesting.)
You pretty much summed it up. I think I will ignore all the Media again until Eon makes their next OFFICIAL announcement, or Craig has his presstour for LL, and even then i want him on Video. Judging by what we got so far from the various Internet outlets, everything else will be rubbish
On the radio today, when I first heard about this, I swear the news chap said 2018. I thought "Ah! So they have been working quietly in the background for some time, if they are planning to release B25 fall next year.." Imagine my shock when I logged on here.
Regardless of the truth of this, still makes you think what if.
NSNA is looking more and more "legitimate" all the time, eh?
Craig as bond
Nolan to direct and tie up the mess of Spectre
Swann and blowers back
Adele
I think eon realise that Spectre massively underwhelmed not only a large proportion of the fan base but also the general public (please don't quote box office to disprove this)
They also know that the production was so trying they'll want a smoother ride - an approved script and plan pre lensing would be a start
They have two years to sort it out. They usually thrive under pressure
The idea of "official" film also amuses me. In the context of a sell, what does "official" become? Synonymous with EON, as we've always been sold the idea? Then sure it'd be the last.
Ultimately the James Bond film character is tremendous IP. The surest thing in the industry. Any of the major studios is aware of that. They would treat it with kid gloves.
---
I don't normally comment on other's speculation but I have to chime in here. This isn't going to happen (at least not all of the elements that you suggest). Nolan won't touch Swann and Brother with a barge pole. He's not stupid & he doesn't clean up other's rubbish.
We're few in number but With a bit more aging, I can see it. His pop history should not be held against him.
I just don't understand why they wouldn't have announced him yesterday.
He may be waiting on the director before he finalizes his choice.
Amazingly, we made it before page 1000. Imagine how many pages long this thread will be by the time the film actually releases.
I'd just expect EON to want to have more control over the publicity.
If we're in for a change, we likely won't get the announcement until next year, based on prior modus operandi.