48 replies to this topic

[crashdrive]

I don't see how the announcement that Frears was going to direct 'Jinx' increases McTiernan's chances of directing a Bond film. Eventhough Frears is the most respected of the (potential) Bond directors, he's still very much your garden variety Bond director. Experienced, versatile and above all British. Untill EON makes an offer to an American director, I don't see McTiernan's chances getting any higher.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

I don't see how the announcement that Frears was going to direct 'Jinx' increases McTiernan's chances of directing a Bond film.  

Not sure I claimed it did. Like Frears, McTiernan may be considered a "low profile, high quality" director, but I don't mean to imply that Eon's interest in Frears has given McTiernan a leg up. I was merely speculating whether McTiernan's chances might have increased anyway.

Originally posted by crashdrive

he's still very much your garden variety Bond director. Experienced, versatile and above all British.  

I do not agree that Frears is "very much your garden variety Bond director". As I wrote on another thread (http://forums.comman...=&postid=174580):

And I still find Stephen Frears a very curious choice for director. Although he fits the Eon profile to a T in most respects, he is best known as a maker of serious-minded "social conscience" films, heavily involved in left wing politics. Of course, Tamahori did ONCE WERE WARRIORS, but long before DIE ANOTHER DAY he'd tried to carve out a career as a mainstream Hollywood filmmaker (and had gained action experience, which is something Frears almost totally lacks), with the likes of MULHOLLAND FALLS and ALONG CAME A SPIDER, and he now seems happy to do XXX 2. Of course, Frears has had his brushes with the Hollywood big league, too (he directed HIGH FIDELITY), but he appears to have always tried to make "quality" pictures (DANGEROUS LIAISONS, HERO) rather than commercially-minded thrillers and other films with mass appeal. Bluntly, he's never "sold out". And what has he given us lately? His last two films were a moving, critically-lauded look at exploited immigrants in London (DIRTY PRETTY THINGS) and the story of Tony Blair's rise to leadership of the Labour Party (THE DEAL). I'm not a fan of Frears, as such, but I'd always cite him as a director of great intelligence and integrity, and I can't help wondering what it was that excited him about the JINX script, and what he would have brought to the film.

[crashdrive]

Originally posted by Loomis
I was merely speculating whether McTiernan's chances might have increased anyway.

Well, the answer to that is no. Quite the opposite in fact. The announcement proves us that EON indeed might be interested in filmmakers who have made a big contribution to Commonwealth cinema. Filmmakers who are versatile and have experience with dramatic filmmaking. And John McTiernan doesn't fit this profile. It's just wishfull thinking on your part I'm afraid (in my humble opinion of course).

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

Well, the answer to that is no. Quite the opposite in fact. The announcement proves us that EON indeed might be interested in filmmakers who have made a big contribution to Commonwealth cinema. Filmmakers who are versatile and have experience with dramatic filmmaking. And John McTiernan doesn't fit this profile. It's just wishfull thinking on your part I'm afraid (in my humble opinion of course).  

The only respect in which McTiernan doesn't fit the profile is nationality. He is versatile and has experience in dramatic filmmaking. And I've conceded many times that his nationality may prove an insurmountable barrier to his being hired for Bond. However, none of us knows what will happen. I've never claimed that McTiernan is one of the likeliest (as opposed to best) candidates for the director's chair on BOND 21. At the same time, I'm unwilling to dismiss him as a possibility.

And I still think that, nationality apart, Frears is a much more suprising choice for a Bond (spinoff) film than McTiernan. McTiernan doesn't only make DIE HARD-style movies. With only a couple of exceptions, Frears does only make serious-minded "social conscience" films for adults.

[crashdrive]

Originally posted by Loomis
I still think that, nationality apart, Frears is a much more suprising choice for a Bond (spinoff) film than McTiernan.

Illogical perhaps, but not surprising. Frears was already discussed as a potential candidate by both of us (although we both agree that his chances were probably slim). McTiernan however goes against EON's Commonwealth policy. I agree McTiernan is a more logical choice than Frears (and probably better), but I would be more surprised if EON hires McTiernan, than Frears.

[Roebuck]

Originally posted by DLibrasnow
That's the British director Peter Hunt who also gave us the excellent James Bond movie On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and the movie "Gold".

Apologies DLibrasnow. The Yahoo Movies entry for

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

McTiernan however goes against EON's Commonwealth policy.  

And it all comes down to how much of a sticking point that policy is. If Eon is quite determined never to let a non-British/non-Commonwealth director near a Bond film, then we may indeed forget about McTiernan (unless he were to take British citizenship:p). However, there is evidence that directors like John Landis, John Woo and Brett Ratner (and McTiernan himself) have been in discussions to direct an Eon Bond film in the past.

If you were to tell me that there is no evidence that Eon is about to change it's "policy", I'd agree with you, but I'd also point out that there is also no evidence that Eon will never change it.

[DLibrasnow]

[quote]Originally posted by Roebuck


Apologies DLibrasnow. The Yahoo Movies entry for

[crashdrive]

Originally posted by Loomis
However, there is evidence that directors like John Landis, John Woo and Brett Ratner  have been in discussions to direct an Eon Bond film in the past. If you were to tell me that there is no evidence that Eon is about to change it's "policy", I'd agree with you

Here's a sample from an interview between Clint Morris of MovieHole fame and Brett Ratner.

Clint: "Is there anything you haven't been able to do that you wanted to do?"

Brett: "I wanted to do James Bond, the latest one, Die Another Day, the actors wanted me, the producers (that's interesting btw) wanted me, but the studio didn't want to hire me, because I wasn't foreign."

If they did not hire an American the last 40 years, why would they change now? If they didn't allow filmmakers like John Woo, Steven Spielberg, Ang Lee, Brian de Palma and Brett Ratner to direct a Bond film, why would they allow McTiernan?

It's very possible that EON will change their policy sometimes, but I doubt they will in the near future.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

Brett: "I wanted to do James Bond, the latest one, Die Another Day, the actors wanted me, the producers (that's interesting btw) wanted me, but the studio didn't want to hire me, because I wasn't foreign."

The producers? Wilson and Broccoli, in other words? But they are Eon (aren't they?) - the very people who apparently won't hire Americans. By "the studio", I presume Ratner means MGM - but why MGM would want only "foreign" directors is, of course, anyone's guess.

Could it be that this Brits-and-Commonwealth-citizens-only policy is actually MGM's, not Eon's?

Originally posted by crashdrive

If they did not hire an American the last 40 years, why would they change now? If they didn't allow filmmakers like John Woo, Steven Spielberg, Ang Lee, Brian de Palma and Brett Ratner to direct a Bond film, why would they allow McTiernan?  

Woo is alleged to have been offered GOLDENEYE, but turned it down (I can't vouch for the truth of that, though). Spielberg, Lee and De Palma are much more auteurs than McTiernan is - they'd be likely to want to stamp their "personal vision" all over a Bond film, and would also be likely to want far too much creative control. McTiernan would probably be quite happy to just make a good old-fashioned Bond flick of the kind we all know and love (with his own spin, of course - but, as I've already stated, I don't think his style would clash with the general look or tone of the series), and not stray from the wishes of Broccoli and Wilson. He's no longer the star director he once was, and I'm sure he'd be philosophical about not having final cut. Ratner is a young whizzkid who's not yet "settled down" and is still an unknown quantity (Eon tends to hire middle-aged directors who've been in the game for quite a while) - but he's reputedly arrogant, volatile and generally very difficult to work with.

McTiernan fits the profile more or less to a T, except for one thing: he's American. None of the other directors you've mentioned, crash, come remotely as close as McTiernan does to fitting the profile, so that's why The Powers That Be would be more likely to take McTiernan over them.

Also, Brosnan is coming to the end of his tenure as Bond, and he may start insisting on some creative payback for being the Billion Dollar Bond, such as the ability to get his mates like McTiernan on board. If The Powers That Be want Brosnan for BOND 22, such concessions may be part of the price of Brosnan's participation.

[DLibrasnow]

Originally posted by Loomis


and-Commonwealth-citizens-only policy is actually MGM's, not Eon's?

No it is EONs....It was established by Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman years ago.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by DLibrasnow

No it is EONs....It was established by Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman years ago.  

In that case, why does Ratner say that "the producers" (i.e. Broccoli/Wilson, a.k.a. Eon Productions) wanted him, but "the studio" (i.e. MGM) would only consider foreigners (i.e. non-Americans)?

(A lot of "i.e."s there.)

[crashdrive]

I'm sorry Loomis, but I still see absolutely no proof that EON will change their (or MGM's) policy. There were plenty opportunities for them to hire someone outside of the Commonwealth, but they are just not interested. Woo was interested in directing a Bond film, but Brosnan said in an interview that Michael and Barbara had their own agenda. I highly doubt someone like McTiernan could change their minds (if I'm not mistaking, they already turned him down). You can always dream, but I'm afraid you're going to wake up disappointed.

[DLibrasnow]

Prior to the announcement of Lee Tamahori to direct Die Another Day there was a quite public dispute. One the one hand Pierce Brosnan AND MGM wanted to hire Brett Ratner, however EON refused to go along with the idea and wanted a Commonwealth director.

I have to assume that Ratner was simply confused or mistaken in his quote because the issue was well documented back in 2001.

[DLibrasnow]

This was covered quite extensively in the trades and was even featured on the Kimberly Last website....

MGM and Brosnan wanted Ratner......EON did not.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

if I'm not mistaking, they already turned him down

Do you know when, roughly (and therefore for which film)?

There are all these conflicting stories. A friend of mine who's a fairly well-known British film critic claims McTiernan was offered LICENCE TO KILL (as unlikely as that sounds), while I've read that he was approached at other times by MGM and/or Eon but turned them down.

Anyway....

You may well be right, crash. Like I say, it all comes down to how firmly The Powers That Be are determined to cling to this "Brits-and-Commonwealth-citizens-only" policy. If they're prepared to budge on it (and evidence of whether or not they're about to is neither here nor there, since I'm just making a hypothesis).... if they're prepared to budge, McTiernan has a chance; if not, he doesn't. It's as simple as that.

And maybe I'm vastly overrating McTiernan's abilities and his potential attractiveness to the people who make the Bond films. I don't know, but I just can't help thinking that, if he were British or from the Commonwealth and had exactly the same filmography, TPTB would be beating down his door and begging him to work for them.

Put another way, McTiernan is the only American director I can think of who fits the Bond profile (nationality aside) while at the same time being a "high quality, low profile" filmmaker. Stir in his friendship and good working relationship with Brosnan (whose clout when it comes to picking directors may possibly grow), his stated willingness to do a Bond film, and the fact that he needs a hit very badly, and you've got a convincing candidate.

Originally posted by DLibrasnow

This was covered quite extensively in the trades and was even featured on the Kimberly Last website....

MGM and Brosnan wanted Ratner......EON did not.  

Yes, that's how I always understood it.

[DLibrasnow]

The fact that MGM wanted Brett Ratner is covered in this article from the Guardian:

http://film.guardian...,498115,00.html

"

[Loomis]

[quote]Originally posted by DLibrasnow

The fact that MGM wanted Brett Ratner is covered in this article from the Guardian:

http://film.guardian...,498115,00.html

"

[DLibrasnow]

That does seem strange....I'm guessing the resulting stink in the British Film Industry led MGM to back down from their push to hire Ratner.

I cannot remember where I read it but I seem to remember several respected British film makers (including former Bond director Lewis Gilbert) being outraged at the mere idea that an American was being considered as Director.