396 replies to this topic

[[dark]]

I guess we can probably rule out Campbell, too, as it looks like he's attached to Green Lantern, due out at the end of 2010. Unless Bond 23 hits screens at the end of 2011 and Campbell feels like leaping from one big budget film to another.

I have the feeling that Campbell is permanently out of the frame for a future Bond film, unless EON throws absolute mountains of cash at him (and I imagine they don't feel that need, really).

I suspect so, too. He probably knows he'll never top Casino Royale. I only saw him as a possibility because he doesn't seem to have done anything since (though I notice he's currently helming Mel Gibson's new film).

Is Stephen Frears still a possibility? His schedule seems to be clear. Frears was attached to direct the Jinx spin-off film all those moons ago.

[kneelbeforezod]

I saw The International over that weekend and was impressed with how director Tom Tykwer made use of the panoramic camera. Investigation as well as action sequences looked very impressive. The quality of the script was another matter, but in terms of a director who is competent at giving a film a nice, stylish and competent visual style, my vote would probably go to Tykwer.

He really knew what is means to use the possibilities of widescreen. There were several good quality shots in which certain people or objects were moving within the widescreen (1:2.35) parameters. Those wouldn't have been possible in full screen and probably not in 1.85 either. QOS had many very close range shots and fast cuts which didn't take advantage of the scope of widescreen.

So, yeah, Tom Tykwer, although he would need a good script, not something that raed like The International (which ended up being mediocre as a film overall).

Agreed. Average film, but slick and stylish direction. The Guggenheim shootout would have a made a great Bond scene.

[Mr. Blofeld]

I saw The International over that weekend and was impressed with how director Tom Tykwer made use of the panoramic camera. Investigation as well as action sequences looked very impressive. The quality of the script was another matter, but in terms of a director who is competent at giving a film a nice, stylish and competent visual style, my vote would probably go to Tykwer.

He really knew what is means to use the possibilities of widescreen. There were several good quality shots in which certain people or objects were moving within the widescreen (1:2.35) parameters. Those wouldn't have been possible in full screen and probably not in 1.85 either. QOS had many very close range shots and fast cuts which didn't take advantage of the scope of widescreen.

So, yeah, Tom Tykwer, although he would need a good script, not something that raed like The International (which ended up being mediocre as a film overall).

Agreed. Average film, but slick and stylish direction. The Guggenheim shootout would have a made a great Bond scene.

I'm afraid, though, that he would turn out to be another Lewis Gilbert, who, though he used his camera well, had some pretty poor writing in his first and last Bond films.

[Quantumofsolace007]

What?
Where did you get the idea the producers had a 6 name shortlist?

QOS had a short list i assume bond 23 does as well.

[Martini]

Among the already mentioned directors I would like:

- Martin Campbell (CR proved i.m.o. that it is a good idea to hire a director again)
- Edward Zwick
- Clint Eastwood (Since he played iconic heros himself, I think he could make Craig a cool lonesome wolf even more. Among his recent pieces of art, 1982´s Firefox qualifies him for the job.)
- Philip Noyce
- Shekhar Kapur (loved Elizabeth - The Golden Age)
- Andrew Niccol (or maybe as writer)
- David Cronenberg
- Brian Singer
- Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck (the German guy who made The Live of Others)

Not yet mentioned (at least I hope so):

- Darren Aranofsky (has that arty Forster-like reputation, and music by Clint Mansell would be cool)
- Werner Herzog (made recently the very good Rescue Dawn with Christian Bale)
- Paul Schrader
- Vincenzo Natali (Cube, Cypher, the latter had a bondian style)
- Alan Parker

Edited by Martini, 27 February 2009 - 09:28 AM.

[Zorin Industries]

the only 2 directors from 007's past i see as possible for bond 23

Alfonso Cuarón Who did additional voices in QOS i would argue is on the short list (if they already have one at eon) for bond 23 He's in the producers minds and he is a good director so i see it working.

Roger Mitchell Nearly did Tommorow never dies nearly did Quantum of solace maybe 3rd time is a charm?


as for who else is on that list of 6 directors the producers have in mind who knows I don't think it will be the same list as last time personnaly depending on where they are going with the story and with Quantum i think the have the chance to do a "goldfinger" type film or perhaps stay on this dark and gritty route they have set out in Casino Royale and Quantum of solace I'd argue there might be a thriller director on the list... We'll see. I'm hoping rumours come soon.

Roger Michell is not up to the task physically (by his own admission apparently).

[Quantumofsolace007]

After seeing 28 days later is wish the Boyle Rumour was true.

[Dr. Julian Gorner]

With the emotional depth of Bond's loneliness explored and somewhat pacified, I feel that it leaves the playing field wide open for just about anything. In the novels, Vesper's suicide leaves him with a desire to exact revenge on the organization SMERSH which had caused her betrayl. He does this many times over in the following exploit 'Live And Let Die' and many others. In QOS, Quantum as a secret organization is hardly dismantled. Greene was a mere agent, albiet a major player, but he didn't run the show. After all, he was assasinated by persons unknown with two bullets to the back of his head, and Mr. White is still out there. The point is, Quantum could very well be the next SPECTRE, or the next Union if you have read the Benson novels. This leaves things wide open. If we were going to stay with an emotionally impacted and floundering Bond, the director of choice would be without a doubt Christopher Nolan. Just look what he did for Batman! If we were wanting to go with something grittier, but down to earth and dealing with real-life espionage like John Gardner's Bond novel 'Icebreaker', why not aim hopes high and approach John Frankenheimer of "Ronin" and "The French Connection" cinema fame? Yes! Finally, lets not forget that the Bond we have been seeing lately is a reintroduction to the masses. Prequels, if you will. New Bond, New Generation. Working fine so far, but why not take a skidding sharp turn back into the old formula? Feels like quite a while since we have seen a large-scale operation with global upheaval in mind. In the end, Quantum has really only concerned themselves with funding South American terrorists and water rights, at least as far as we know. Shake things up and bring back a doomsday device and a global extortin scheme! Yes! After "Die Another Day", we may have needed a breather from the formula because the film was such an over-the-top monster, but I believe that it is high time to get back to it. Just, for the love of God, leave Lee Tamahori out. Cheers!

[Royal Dalton]

I reckon it'll be Tom Hooper.

[Quantumofsolace007]

I reckon it'll be Tom Hooper.

any reason why?

[Royal Dalton]

Only that he's in the right place at the right time.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

MMMAAAAARTTTIN CAAAAMPBEEEELLLLLL !

I pray every night for his return.

[Bucky]

i would love for alfonso cuaron to direct a bond movie. i thought children of men was amazing and he has also proven that he is capable of doing franchise films as he directed what was in my opinion easily the strongest of the harry potter films.

[tdalton]

After finally seeing Zodiac, I'm going to have to join in with those suggesting David Fincher for the director's chair of a Bond film. I can only imagine how good a Bond film we would get with the likes of Fincher in charge. Also, given how much control EON apparently gave Marc Forster, I don't think that it would be outside of the realm of possibility that perhaps Fincher could be brought on board.

[Bucky]

i think fincher would be great. not sure if i see him doing it but who knows, he did do panic room. if they cant get an oscar winning director might as well go for an oscar nominated one.

[tdalton]

i think fincher would be great. not sure if i see him doing it but who knows, he did do panic room. if they cant get an oscar winning director might as well go for an oscar nominated one.

I think that with the new approach to making the films, that anyone is a possibility in the director's chair. I never would have thought, even after Casino Royale, that EON would be able to land someone of Marc Forster's quality to direct a Bond film. Now that someone like that has taken the reigns of a Bond film, I don't see any reason why some of the other high-quality directors in Hollywood like Fincher couldn't be brought aboard to bring something new to the franchise.

[Bucky]

while it does seem like they are going after higher quality directors there are still some that just wouldnt agree to do things the way eon is used to.

one that comes to mind right away is christopher nolan which is unfortunate since he seems to be a bond fan and i would love to see him do one.

[HH007]

i think fincher would be great. not sure if i see him doing it but who knows, he did do panic room. if they cant get an oscar winning director might as well go for an oscar nominated one.

I think that with the new approach to making the films, that anyone is a possibility in the director's chair. I never would have thought, even after Casino Royale, that EON would be able to land someone of Marc Forster's quality to direct a Bond film. Now that someone like that has taken the reigns of a Bond film, I don't see any reason why some of the other high-quality directors in Hollywood like Fincher couldn't be brought aboard to bring something new to the franchise.

Hey, Lee Tamahori was a high quality director earlier in his career.

That said, I would pee myself if Fincher directed a Bond film.

[Judo chop]

That said, I would pee myself if Fincher directed a Bond film.

Fincher makes me nervous. He makes, almost exclusively, moody and melancholy pieces (Alien3, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, Se7en, Zodiac, CCOBB).

Do either of those qualities belong in Bond? Especially considering Craig has practically announced that, tonally, Bond 23 is turning away from QOS and heading down the road towards Thunderball territory? (A plan which I support). Fincher’s films are consistently downers. They're good, but tonally speaking they subdue. They don't lift you out of your seat thinking "Wow! What a grand adventure that was!". I don’t think he’s right for Bond now.

Having said that, Fincher might have been a great director for QoS. Or, if the plan was to continue digging into Bond’s psyche and to take him even deeper into calamity, maybe Fincher might be the guy to pick up where Forster left off. But I think we’re done with all that.

[tdalton]

That said, I would pee myself if Fincher directed a Bond film.

Fincher makes me nervous. He makes, almost exclusively, moody and melancholy pieces (Alien3, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, Se7en, Zodiac, CCOBB).

Do either of those qualities belong in Bond? Especially considering Craig has practically announced that, tonally, Bond 23 is turning away from QOS and heading down the road towards Thunderball territory? (A plan which I support). Fincher’s films are consistently downers. They're good, but tonally speaking they subdue. They don't lift you out of your seat thinking "Wow! What a grand adventure that was!". I don’t think he’s right for Bond now.

Having said that, Fincher might have been a great director for QoS. Or, if the plan was to continue digging into Bond’s psyche and to take him even deeper into calamity, maybe Fincher might be the guy to pick up where Forster left off. But I think we’re done with all that.

Well, even though we're probably not headed for that type of Bond film, that's exactly what I would like to see from a Bond film. I would love to see a Bond film that actually ended on a down note, rather than ending in a triumphant victory for Bond.

[Pierce - Daniel]

Cuaron is the bovioucs choice, and it seems insane if the producers haven't offered out to him already. He has the art background they like, and he can carry a franchise, and is ompetent shooting action.
Surely it's easy for them?

Another suggestion...Tom Twyker?

[Judo chop]

But regardless, melancholy is to Bond what holy water is to vampires. Fincher would need resist that tendency. Nobody wants to leave a Bond film feeling like they just had a 2-hour Swedish massage.

[Harmsway]

That said, I would pee myself if Fincher directed a Bond film.

Fincher makes me nervous. He makes, almost exclusively, moody and melancholy pieces (Alien3, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, Se7en, Zodiac, CCOBB).

Do either of those qualities belong in Bond?

Certainly not in the quantities Fincher would deliver them. Even Fleming at his most melancholy (YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE), never had anything resembling the typical Fincher moodiness.

Fincher would be quite inappropriate, I daresay. Even if we're going for the darker Bond, we need a more vibrant director than Fincher, who generally goes for murky colors.

[Judo chop]

Fincher would be quite inappropriate, I daresay. Even if we're going for the darker Bond, we need a more vibrant director than Fincher.

I’m glad you agree. I was afraid your completely unjustified attachment to CCOBB was a sign that Fincher had possessed your mind.

()

There’s no doubt that Fincher has a talent. Whether he could do a 180 from his usual mood and bring the sizzle is another question. I suppose after Campbell’s work on CASINO ROYALE, just about any degree of transformation is possible. If it came to be, I’d be a nervous wreck pre-trailer leakage.

[tdalton]

I don't see any reason why Fincher couldn't deliver something closer to the more "traditional" Bond film. As far as the visual look of his films, I would say that Quantum of Solace had a somewhat similar look as Zodiac, nor did it have a particularly happy ending. I don't think that Fincher would be all that big of a departure from what Forster was doing, although I do think that he would turn in a much better film than Forster did with Quantum of Solace (which was fantastic to begin with).

[Harmsway]

I don't see any reason why Fincher couldn't deliver something closer to the more "traditional" Bond film.

Because he probably wouldn't want to.

As far as the visual look of his films, I would say that Quantum of Solace had a somewhat similar look as Zodiac, nor did it have a particularly happy ending.

I'm going to strongly disagree as far as the looks go. ZODIAC was deeply enmeshed with Fincher's trademark murky browns and greens. While there were sections of QUANTUM OF SOLACE that had some murky browns and greens, as well, there were also many with vibrant hues that I've never seen Fincher produce.

I don't think that Fincher would be all that big of a departure from what Forster was doing,

Maybe not - though it would almost certainly be even darker and moodier. But I think that's very much the wrong direction to go for BOND 23. BOND 23 needs to be more overtly fun and vibrant than QUANTUM OF SOLACE was.

[tdalton]

I don't think that Fincher would be all that big of a departure from what Forster was doing,

Maybe not - though it would almost certainly be even darker and moodier. But I think that's very much the wrong direction to go for BOND 23.

I guess that it just comes down to preference of direction for BOND 23 as to whether certain directors would be a good choice or not. For me, going back to a more "traditional" approach to Bond filmmaking is not what I want to see. I would rather see them continue what they've started with Quantum of Solace and Casino Royale, and a director like Fincher would be a perfect candidate to continue the franchise down that road.

If they're going to go forward with the more traditional approach, I still think that Fincher could succeed there as well, but he wouldn't be as ideal of a candidate for that type of film.

[Harmsway]

For me, going back to a more "traditional" approach to Bond filmmaking is not what I want to see.

Same here.

But I don't think the only way to be untraditional is to go "dark" and "moody," which is undoubtedly what Fincher would bring to the table. His visual style to date is entirely inappropriate for Bond, and he doesn't have a good grasp on "fun," either.

I think you can be vibrant and more overtly fun than QUANTUM OF SOLACE while still producing an unusual, untraditional BOND 23.

[tdalton]

For me, going back to a more "traditional" approach to Bond filmmaking is not what I want to see.

Same here.

But I don't think the only way to be untraditional is to go "dark" and "moody," which is undoubtedly what Fincher would bring to the table. His visual style to date is entirely inappropriate for Bond, and he doesn't have a good grasp on "fun," either.

I think you can be vibrant and more overtly fun than QUANTUM OF SOLACE while still producing an unusual, untraditional BOND 23.

Of course, the current "dark" and "moody" tone of the franchise is not the only way to be unconventional, but I would like to see them stick with it for another film or two. It's a refreshing change from the over-the-top films of the 1990s and early part of this decade. Perhaps they could return to it towards the end of Craig's tenure, with Fincher directing a film that also contained a finale at the Garden of Death.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

What about Brian Singer? I enjoyed Valkyrie very much.