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
Quite. No edge, little flair. Hire a director with cojones.
Case closed.
Objection.
So you don't want a fresh young director with visual flair and a penchant for character driven action then?
The fact that he doesn't have a large repertoire is of no consequence. It's exactly this thinking that is holding the series back. We want 'established' directors, and all they do is turn Bond into the sort of film they have always made.
Rush was fantastic. Watching it I was actually thinking how in some respects it resembled a Bond movie. Dashing, heavy drinking British hero with a way with the ladies, humourless Euro villain, fast cars, great female leads, explosions.
I remember thinking how the whole cast (apart from Hemsworth) could be directly transposed to a Bond movie and how well it would work.
Brilliant movie if any one hasn't seen it yet.
Thrown out of court on technicality - Tarantino is not a member of the DGA and thus won't be hired by any major studio.
I don't think EON would want Tarantino. I think it would have been fascinating to see a Tarantino Bond movie, if he'd not gone too OTT/camp.
I suspect we'll never know exactly what went on, but Tarantino does like to brag and talk about all kinds of projects he never ends up making, e.g. Modesty Blaise with Uma.
But really, doesn't the fact that Tarantino wanted Brosnan (who would have been 51-52 at the time) in CR suggest that this was not the right approach at all?
Like you say, who knows what was and was not discussed. Tarantino never actually spoke to Babs or MGW, so the 'conversation' didn't get very far. Tarantino probably assumed that to have any chance of EON agreeing he'd have to accept the existing Bond. You don't just waltz in and say you want to direct and recast the lead actor all in one go...
Funny thing is, I definitely think Brosnan suits a Tarantino film more than Craig. I actually think Tarantino could have got Brosnan to deliver his own proper, definitive interpretation of Bond, rather than the wet drippy version he gave us.
Brosnan has shown in other roles that he has the ability to deliver decent performances when well directed. Problem is his Bond had no identity.
https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/post/134061841111/why-spielberg-would-now-turn-down-a-bond-film
Spielberg endorsing the Mendes\Craig combo and hoping it continues whilst this forum has its own Mendes backlash.
While I pretty much dislike the colours and lighting in both SF and SP, I find it pretty ironic that none other trailer than H8ful 8 was shown previously to SP. That oddly reminds me of how I found my breath again when after a row of very fast-cut films I watched Inglorious Basterds.
So I´m almost tempted to wish for Tarantino. But experience shows that I find his films on the whole incongruent. And incongruence is the last thing I need after SP.
The second last thing, after a huge chunk of scenes bathed in sunlight.
Ron Howard is always solid, you know what you get. But he´s never beyond solid, so he has to stay away from Bond.
Michael Mann would be the best choice IMO to redeem the franchise after SF and SP.
Perhaps Denis Villeneuve also, Sicario is the best thriller in a long while. But beside him being busy with the Blade Runner sequel, I´m afraid he would overcomplicate the plot. Both Prisoners and Sicario are told much to complicatedly for Bond. What we need is a clear storytelling that´s fast enough to keep the audience from thinking about the inevitable plot holes in every Bond film.
Didn´t George Miller say he wants a small project with no special effects? Give him a 100mill budget and let him make the next Bond film :-).
Question is, would they be able to keep themselves from loading the script with subtext?
I probably would go anyway.
Nnnoooo. His films are shallow with no characterisation.....We would have another DAD.