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 agree. Why the hell are some so hard on John Glen? I thought he made good Bond films.
It certainly is good news Logan working on Bond 24 if SF is as good as people say but I won't be getting my hopes up too much. P & W brought a Flemingsque element back to the series and did something different which was missing from GE and TND. Sure, their dialogue was pretty terrible at times but I in other areas I believe they were a good influence on the series. I'd like to see what Logan comes up with by himself first before waxing lyrical about how wonderful it is that P & W have left the franchise. No doubt Logan will write a good yarn with nice character development and a few twists and turns thrown in maybe.
I think you're splitting hairs. I'm fully aware what the director is supposed to do. My point about Hitchcock is that (according to the myth he created anyway) he storyboarded scenes to such a degree that he did not even have to look through the camera because he'd already fully conveived the shot. I was contrasing Mendes with this (probably untrue) Hitchcock myth that the director fully conceives of and controls the entire creative process. In reality most directors, in collaboration with their colleagues will continue tweaking or even significantly changing elements until the last minute. Now, with CGI, I suppose you could say that process doesn't ever really end.
Yes a designer might give a client what he wants, but my point is you could give 100 production designers the same brief and their designs will all be either radically or subtly different. So this idea that what we see on screen is the precise recreation of one man's creative vision is essentially nonsense. Yes I refered to Mendes as an 'auteur' but in order contrast him with the hack for hire traditiom of the series, not in the belief that any one actually believes in auteur theory. I thought that had all been debunked a long time ago.
Not only this, but the fact is that most Bond directors, until recently, don't seem to have had much choice over their production team. They were hacks who were hired in to deliver a product. Ken Adam doubtless worked with Terence Young and Guy Hamilton, but what they all got was a Ken Adam set, whether that's what they asked for or not. If you can't recognise that Ken Adam's individual input was as significant an element in the creation of those early Bond films as the directors then we're clearly never going to agree.
The whole reason that an auteur type director is going to want to work with a specific production designer is because they will have confidence in that designer's ability to either correctly intepret their vision or bring ideas to the table to complement what they are trying to achieve.
I suspect that in reality there are a multitude of different creative collective decisions and collaborations that take place between the director and the team that lead to the final product. I suspect the occassions when it is a one way street of director simply dictating his vision are either a) rare or b) creatively not conducive to producing very good films.
And we haven't even got onto location scouts, costume designers, make up artists, casting directors... but sure, what a film looks like is all down to one guy and his secret powers of telepathy.
Haserot will probably have you believe he wrote the screenplay too... and the theme tune...
Infact Mendes is a veritable Dennis Waterman.
I'm sorry but if you take bond character too seriously you just look abut like a horses ass.
CR stayed the right side of the line but I think they crossed it with Skyfall
u saw it today?
Yes it's a good'un.
You're talking rubbish.
He's finalizing deal to write 2 movies, that will have a story arc.
QUANTUM IS BACK! HOORAY!
Awesome! A two film story-ark involving Quantum, this must mean that Blofeld will be coming back to the series! SO excited!!!
I thought it was amazing but not the best one ever, but that's me, not you. Just wait n make up your own mind when you see it.
Ditto
A great film but not best bond.
Top 10 probably.
A few too many inconsistencies for my liking.
The villain did NOTHING for me nor the Bond girl.
Cubby was always against rebooting. While I LOVE CR and have supported the reboot this film opened a can of worms. Bond 24 needs to use the new established characters and just move on. Stop looking back to bonds past and have an engaging story. Quantum and mr white would be a great way to go.
The return of Quantum is a big 'meh' as far as I'm concerned as they have been somewhat underwhelming thus far IMO.
I'm far more perturbed by this expectation that Blofeld will return as I think we could be heading down a slippery slope here. OK we have got a new M,Q and MP but thats been done before and can be overlooked but once we get a new Blofeld for things to conclude logically it means we have to have a new Tracy and then we are straying into remake territory which I'm not sure is particularly wise. Dont get me wrong a big YOLT style romp with Blofeld holding the world to ransom for Bond 24 and then a remake of OHMSS by Mendes with Craigs Bond getting married is certainly a mouthwatering prospect but I would just like to urge caution.
That said if we got a big balls out YOLT/TSWLM style film, a remade OHMSS and then a fairly faithful to Flemings YOLT with Bond devastated by the loss of Tracy all starring Daniel Craig and with someone like Malkovitch as Blofeld then I couldnt complain.
Then they could lead into the assassination attempt on M as the PTS of Bond 27 with a new Bond. Actually I think I'm talking myself out of my own argument!!! Bring it on!!
It would seem a shame to just forget about them, I don't believe SF is a reboot as some of the reviews are saying we are on the same time line as CR & QOS it's just we've had some time since and Bond is a more seasoned 007.
The 2 film arc is interesting though and I think remaking or even going slightly down the road of attempting a OHMSS for the Craig era is something I wouldn't support. I think Logan needs to strike on his own, definitely continue to mine Fleming for ideas but remaking is not a good idea, if Quantum is over then so be it but I feel they still have potential and I don't see the Craig or any future Bond for sometime regressing back into the Moore era shenanigans, Craig's Bond will stay relatively grounded just with a more lightness of touch that was evident in Skyfall.
lol.. i would rather see new 'super villains' than the same one rehashed.... and frankly, the concept of Blofeld works better in the time period in which he existed - not so sure it would work in today's world - but who knows....... if he comes back eventually - then cool... but personally, i would rather him stay where he is at.