404 replies to this topic

[SecretAgentFan]

I don´t know. I can´t see any reason that would interest them in doing a Bond film, not even money. And they already found out that a big budget does not work for them.

[RMc2]

Oh, there's no way in hell they'd do it (and I sincerely hope they don't). But it'd still be awesome.

[Dustin]

I suppose for a director it comes down to the question 'Do I want to make this kind of film, this kind of story?' If the answer is 'no'- or even 'I don't know' - then one should better stay clear. There are many fine directors for whom the Bond world just doesn't work, regardless of budget or script, the Coens probably amongst those.

[Agent 76]

Christopher Nolan

Tom Hooper

Duncan Jones

 

one of these, please. 

[Sir Godfrey]

I suggest Len Wiseman. What do you think about him ?

[x007AceOfSpades]

I suggest Len Wiseman. What do you think about him ?

 

You must be joking?

[seawolfnyy]

At this point, as long as the film is out BEFORE 2016, I don't care who directs.

[x007AceOfSpades]

As long as it's someone with taste and some sort of standards.

 

 

AND NOT MARC FORSTER

[tdalton]

At this point, as long as the film is out BEFORE 2016, I don't care who directs.

 

I can't say that I particularly care who directs Bond 24 at this point either.  What I'm more concerned about is the script.  Now that we've had a changeover in the writing team, I'm hoping to see a dramatic improvement in the scripts for the future films.  

[SecretAgentFan]

It definitely will be interesting to see whether all the questionable stuff really came from P & W - or if that was due to those writers who re-wrote them. Or directors who forced their ideas on them.

 

But I fear that any new director will bring in his own writer - so apart from some basic idea (or not even that) Logan´s treatment might very well get tossed out.

 

Also, I do question Logan´s ability to write a great franchise film. STAR TREK: NEMESIS showed that he did not really know (or care?) a lot about that series (and neither did director Stuart Baird who kept saying the wrong character names - and yes, it was THAT Stuart Baird who has edited Bond so well before). And SKYFALL, as it seems, was mainly a product of P & W and then Sam Mendes and the actors giving huge input into what Logan had to write. At first I thought: this Silva-introducing monologue is fantastically written. Then Mendes revealed that it was him who told Logan the whole story.

Edited by SecretAgentFan, 28 May 2013 - 05:14 AM.

[x007AceOfSpades]

No man shall ever utter the words "Star Trek: Nemesis".

 

But I see where you are coming from.

[seawolfnyy]

Let's not forget though, that John Logan also wrote Any Given Sunday, The Aviator, Sweeney Todd and Hugo. Also, in the same vein, while Martin Campbell did great directing (the good, but overrated) Goldeneye and Casino Royale, he also directed Green Lantern. So, one bad work does not break the artist. Yes Logan wrote Star Trek: Nemesis, but he also wrote numerous great films. Skyfall also shows that Logan can do franchise films. Granted, we'll have to see how he does without P&W, but I think he'll be alright.

 

P.S.- I agree with you Ace, keep Marc Forster away.

[x007AceOfSpades]

I'm not knocking him, I think he's great, but Star Trek: Nemesis.....

[Sir Godfrey]

 

I suggest Len Wiseman. What do you think about him ?

 

You must be joking?

 

 

I don't. Action scenes are the best point in his movies, i think that with a good script, he can direct an excellent Bond.

And his wife is the pretty Kate Beckinsale who could be a good Bond Girl.

[x007AceOfSpades]

The only good film he's directed is Live Free Or Die Hard, and that's saying much as it feels a bit generic and slightly below par in terms of Die Hard. The man is a hack and couldn't direct an action scene to save his life. Total Recall for example, one of the worst films I've seen, and worst remakes, It has all noises and explosions and guns and not soul, similar to much of his work.

 

and his wife isn't that pretty either, I don't think she can act, personally. I want Len Wiseman and his talentless wife to stay away from Bond.

 

On the other hand, I hear The Expendables 3 needs a direct, Maybe Wiseman can do that.

[RMc2]

Also, I do question Logan´s ability to write a great franchise film. STAR TREK: NEMESIS showed that he did not really know (or care?) a lot about that series (and neither did director Stuart Baird who kept saying the wrong character names - and yes, it was THAT Stuart Baird who has edited Bond so well before). And SKYFALL, as it seems, was mainly a product of P & W and then Sam Mendes and the actors giving huge input into what Logan had to write. At first I thought: this Silva-introducing monologue is fantastically written. Then Mendes revealed that it was him who told Logan the whole story.

 

 

Let's not forget though, that John Logan also wrote Any Given Sunday, The Aviator, Sweeney Todd and Hugo. Also, in the same vein, while Martin Campbell did great directing (the good, but overrated) Goldeneye and Casino Royale, he also directed Green Lantern. So, one bad work does not break the artist. Yes Logan wrote Star Trek: Nemesis, but he also wrote numerous great films. Skyfall also shows that Logan can do franchise films. Granted, we'll have to see how he does with P&W, but I think he'll be alright.

 

P.S.- I agree with you Ace, keep Marc Forster away.

 

I find it really hard to rate Logan as a writer because he's worked on few projects from genesis to end product, and rarely written solo. So his worst work can be explained away by pointing out the negative input of others - Baird and Spiner on Star Trek: Nemesis, for example - while his best work is hard to distinguish from that of his collaborators - P&W, Bardem and Mendes on SkyFall, for instance. Then there are his solo projects like Sweeney Todd and Hugo, which not only divide audiences, but are actually heavily based on other materials (a novel in the case of Hugo, a playbook in the case of Sweeney Todd).

 

In many ways he's the best example of the collaborative nature of filmmaking; how much a film's success and achievements rest on many shoulders, and how unfairly distributed are the accolades from critics and audiences.

Edited by RMc, 28 May 2013 - 09:29 AM.

[Sir Godfrey]

The only good film he's directed is Live Free Or Die Hard, and that's saying much as it feels a bit generic and slightly below par in terms of Die Hard. The man is a hack and couldn't direct an action scene to save his life. Total Recall for example, one of the worst films I've seen, and worst remakes, It has all noises and explosions and guns and not soul, similar to much of his work.

 

and his wife isn't that pretty either, I don't think she can act, personally. I want Len Wiseman and his talentless wife to stay away from Bond.

 

On the other hand, I hear The Expendables 3 needs a direct, Maybe Wiseman can do that.

 

Personnally when I learnt Mendes would direct Skyfall, I was very surprised and I was afraid. Whereas I was found of American Beauty and Road of Perdition, I couldn't imagine him directing a great Bond movie.

Of course, I was totally wrong.

 

Now, I suggest Len Wiseman. Of course, there are more talentuous directors (but don't, we'll probably never see a man like Nolan directing a Bond film) but I think it's not impossible : some people criticized Skyfall because there were not action scenes enough...

 

And as far as my opinion is concerned, I find Beckinsale very beautiful.

[SecretAgentFan]

Let's not forget though, that John Logan also wrote Any Given Sunday, The Aviator, Sweeney Todd and Hugo. Also, in the same vein, while Martin Campbell did great directing (the good, but overrated) Goldeneye and Casino Royale, he also directed Green Lantern. So, one bad work does not break the artist. Yes Logan wrote Star Trek: Nemesis, but he also wrote numerous great films. Skyfall also shows that Logan can do franchise films. Granted, we'll have to see how he does with P&W, but I think he'll be alright.

 

P.S.- I agree with you Ace, keep Marc Forster away.

 

Since I, of course, cannot know the exact production history of those films you mention it is mainly my impression that I´m giving here. But still, Logan seems to be best at one thing: making connections with powerful directors. But those directors are extremely tough and develop their material without giving much room to the writers. Oliver Stone will not have given Logan any wiggle room on "Any Given Sunday". Martin Scorsese only does what he wants. And hey, even Stuart Baird (if one believes what has been said about the production of "Nemesis") basically said what Logan had to do.

 

And that´s what he also did on SKYFALL, obviously: he served the director and wrote what Mendes wanted. Which is perfectly fine and the only way to survive in this business, of course. But I have yet to read a Logan script that clearly proves that he can do great work on his own. His theatre work is different, and this is where he excels.

 

It would be interesting if he were paired with a director who can still be controlled by EON, someone who is not distinguished enough yet or even is the "journeyman director" so many critics like to ridicule.

 

However, IMO, the combination of a solid director and a workman-like writer has produced the best Bond films (see Terence Young/Guy Hamilton/John Glen and Richard Maibaum).

Edited by SecretAgentFan, 28 May 2013 - 09:36 AM.

[tdalton]

Regarding Len Wiseman, I don't think he would be the right choice for the kind of Bond film that EON is interested in making at this point.  EON is going to be in full-blown prestige mode with Bond 24.  They've gotten a taste of what it's like to be respected by the Academy, and on top of that they made an obscene amount of money by catering Skyfall to what the Academy is looking for in Oscar-nominated films.  There is no reason for them not to keep going with that, at least until the audience tells them to stop.  Len Wiseman can't deliver them that kind of film.  If and when they return to a more straight-forward approach to the action film, perhaps he could be a reasonable choice.  The franchise has done worse than what Len Wiseman would probably deliver in a Bond film, so I can't say that it would be the disaster of a film that some would probably predict it to be, although I also can't say that Wiseman would be any where near the top of my list of ideal directors.

[SecretAgentFan]

Well put.

 

I´m only glad that BOND 24 cannot use the same Bond-M relationship of the last decade(s). Even another personal angle would be very hard to justify. Not that this would stop them if they wanted to pursue this.

[x007AceOfSpades]

I'd love a straightforward mission with a completely unrelated PTS, please.

[tdalton]

I´m only glad that BOND 24 cannot use the same Bond-M relationship of the last decade(s). Even another personal angle would be very hard to justify. Not that this would stop them if they wanted to pursue this.

 

They'll find a way.  They're in a similar position now that they were when they brought Judi Dench on board.  They've got a terrific actor in the role of M and they're not going to want to keep them in the background.  The sole bright spot to that, however, is that there is no possible way that Mallory can be as incompetent as M as his predecessor was.

[SecretAgentFan]

And M would not be the quasi-mother - something that has been done to death (pardon the pun).

[Sir Godfrey]

Regarding Len Wiseman, I don't think he would be the right choice for the kind of Bond film that EON is interested in making at this point.  EON is going to be in full-blown prestige mode with Bond 24.  They've gotten a taste of what it's like to be respected by the Academy, and on top of that they made an obscene amount of money by catering Skyfall to what the Academy is looking for in Oscar-nominated films.  There is no reason for them not to keep going with that, at least until the audience tells them to stop.  Len Wiseman can't deliver them that kind of film.  If and when they return to a more straight-forward approach to the action film, perhaps he could be a reasonable choice.  The franchise has done worse than what Len Wiseman would probably deliver in a Bond film, so I can't say that it would be the disaster of a film that some would probably predict it to be, although I also can't say that Wiseman would be any where near the top of my list of ideal directors.

 

mmh...ok I'm convinced !

[Royal Dalton]

Peter Webber.

[coco1997]

EXCLUSIVE: Nicolas Winding Refn Could Be Directing the Next Bond

 

 

 

[Dustin]

That would be quite some news...

[Sir Godfrey]

Very good !

[Bucky]

I would be down with that.

[x007AceOfSpades]

If he doesn't go all Drive on it, then I'm all for it.