Brosnan may want Ang Lee, but I want John McTiernan!
#1
Posted 03 April 2001 - 05:44 AM
The Thomas Crown Affair was brilliantly directed and seemed like a great audition to do a Bond film. After proving his action movie credentials with Die Hard many people had him pegged as a Bond director over 10 years ago. With Thomas Crown he showed just how deftly he can handle actors - particularly Pierce Brosnan - and more suble scenes that rely on wit rather than bombast. Bombast we knew he was great at already!!
With Apted dropping out this seems like the perfect time to bring McTiernan on board!
#2
Posted 03 April 2001 - 09:35 AM
#3
Posted 05 April 2001 - 09:50 AM
And while on this point. I personally bleieve McTiernan is a brilliant director - who works excellently with Pierce! He did TC for MGM so who knows, he may end up directing Bond 20! Let's hope so, though I still wouldn't mind if Michael Apted returned. I felt his TWINE was quite good.
#4
Posted 05 April 2001 - 04:46 PM
But MY first choice is McTiernan.
#5
Posted 05 April 2001 - 06:20 PM
#6
Posted 05 April 2001 - 09:41 PM
But he's knocking on a bit now... I mean, bus pass material.
Although I think he would make a good choice, I don;t think he's the one to provide the style re require of 4th Bonds (AKA Thunderball & Moonrake (god forbid))
J
#7
Posted 05 April 2001 - 09:42 PM
#8
Posted 06 April 2001 - 01:49 AM
Who directed Ronin? It owuld be great to have him just for the car chase scenes!!
#9
Posted 09 April 2001 - 04:28 AM
#10
Posted 09 April 2001 - 11:37 AM
McTiernan could handle both, if the script is good enough.
#11
Posted 09 April 2001 - 11:52 PM
Jacques Nexus (09 Apr, 2001 12:37 p.m.):
McTiernan is a good choice, although Ang Lee is okay. Lee would concentrate on character development much like Apted and the rest of the film crew handles the action anyway. In the end who directs isn't as important as what's in the script. The script decides the movie's style, ie. plot or character driven story.
McTiernan could handle both, if the script is good enough.
I tend to disagree there. I think they're equally as important. Just say they gave us teh best script and you and I directed it. We wouldn't know the first thing about directing - and basically the film would be unbearable to watch!!
#12
Posted 10 April 2001 - 04:45 PM
I just hope that they actually consider him (and let him do the film his way, rather than putting restrictions on him).
And the director DOES have as much impact as the script - a good script given poor direction still makes for a weak movie!
A good script with John McTiernan directing makes for a GREAT movie!!
#13
Posted 11 April 2001 - 03:07 AM
#14
Posted 11 April 2001 - 05:59 AM
I'm not even aware of all the movies he's directed, just those two, Die Hard With A Vengeance, and Nomads (I think he did that one). I should check IMDB.
But seriously, his style would be perfect for Bond. He showed a talent for directing big action movies with his 2 Die Hard films, and he showed a little more wit and sophistication on Thomas Crown. I just get a really good feeling about him doing a Bond film - like with a good script it could be one of the 5 or 6 best Bond films. It's just a gut feeling I've got.
#15
Posted 11 April 2001 - 06:14 AM
Quite a list.
Get me Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli on the phone! They've GOT to hire this guy! ;-)
#16
Posted 11 April 2001 - 11:56 AM
Also, look at Campbell. His GOLDENEYE lacked character and plot detail, yet watch his classic TV drama, EDGE OF DARKNESS and see he is a good director.
As I said the script is the key. Any competent director wants a good script but they don't always get them. They have to work with what they've got.
#17
Posted 12 April 2001 - 07:27 AM
B5Erik (11 Apr, 2001 07:14 a.m.):
No wonder I like McTiernan, he also did Predator, The Hunt For Red October (another great Bond warm up - with Sean Connery!), and Medicine Man (again with Sean Connery!).
That is an amazing list!!! Wow, I never knew he did all those!!