71 replies to this topic

[Diabolik]

[quote name='Lady Rose' date='26 May 2006 - 07:41' post='560268']
[quote name='marktmurphy' post='560263' date='26 May 2006 - 13:20']
[quote name='Simon' post='560260' date='26 May 2006 - 13:04']

My only surprise with this is that if it is all moving so quickly that Campbell hasn't been signed up for 22, just for speed and continuity if nothing else.
[/quote]

That's exactly why they need another director. Campbell is going to be busy in post-production 'til November and they need to have another director to already be doing pre-production and scouting locations on Bond 22 if it is going to be ready to go in front of the cameras by next January.

It's really not surprising that they are "piggy-backing" the two films. Hollywood has figured out it easier to shoot franchise installments back-to-back (i.e. Back To the Future II and III, Lord of the Rings trilogy, and more recently, Pirates of the Caribbean II and III, in which both are already "in the can."

I also think Sony/Eon is trying to invigorate the series again, having come to the realization that 3 years between films is too long to keep any momentum going with the public. Especailly the teenagers (biggest movie-going demographic) who don't remember the days when you onnly had to wait 12 months-18 months for the next 007 thriller.

(I also think Sony is in desperate need of a "cash cow" that is going to keep the studio going year in and year out).

[tdalton]

I think Stoppard will be a fine choice for a re-write/polish of the script, but Michell is not a good choice for director. Every film of his that I have seen has not been good at all (Enduring Love, Changing Lanes, The Mother), and he has no visual flair on the screen. All three of those films look very much like low-budget, made-for-TV films. I guess that he's a good director for smaller films, but something on the scale of Bond, I'm not sure that he would be a good choice.

[Loomis]

I think Stoppard will be a fine choice for a re-write/polish of the script, but Michell is not a good choice for director. Every film of his that I have seen has not been good at all (Enduring Love, Changing Lanes, The Mother), and he has no visual flair on the screen. All three of those films look very much like low-budget, made-for-TV films. I guess that he's a good director for smaller films, but something on the scale of Bond, I'm not sure that he would be a good choice.

He's a hack who's been reasonably lucky with his choices (I mean, there's no BASIC INSTINCT 2 in his filmography, as with Caton-Jones, and I doubt that Michell would have turned down BI2 if offered it) and has therefore almost by default managed to acquire a fairly good reputation while remaining pretty much stigma-free. Which is a longwinded way of putting: he's probably assumed to be a rather better director than he actually is. A hack who's often taken for a "serious" filmmaker - a deadly combination, that.

The above is almost certainly ridiculously spiteful, harsh, baseless, etc., but then let he among us who has never dissed a celeb (not that Michell is a celeb, of course, which is a point I return to since it makes this Daily Mail piece an unusually believable rumour) on CBn cast the first stone. Or feel free to ignore.

Okay, then, how about this: that fans* can guess the identity of a future Bond director (and there are, after all, plenty of directors out there) a couple of years before his name enters the rumour mill would appear to say a lot more about Eon's conservatism and predictability when it comes to their hiring of directorial talent than about those fans' brilliant deductive skills.

*I seem to recall crashdrive also tipping Michell as a likely candidate for the Bond director's chair.

[tdalton]

Okay, then, how about this: that fans* can guess the identity of a future Bond director (and there are, after all, plenty of directors out there) a couple of years before his name enters the rumour mill would appear to say a lot more about Eon's conservatism and predictability when it comes to the hiring of talent than about those fans' brilliant deductive skills.

Hopefully, one day, EON will decide to completely surprise us all and hire a great filmmaker who is not just an average, run-of-the-mill director. I would love to log on to this site one day and find that someone like Michael Mann or Sydney Pollack (The Interpreter) had been hired by EON to direct a Bond film. At the very least, I think that directors like those would at least give the films a different feel and visual style to them, because most of the Bond films generally have the same style and the same overall presentation that can, at times, grow a bit stale because new things are very rarely attempted with the franchise.

[JimmyBond]

Werent there rumors that Mann was tapped to direct Bond 22 a while back? Sure they are probably baseless, but it's nice to speculate.

[tdalton]

Werent there rumors that Mann was tapped to direct Bond 22 a while back? Sure they are probably baseless, but it's nice to speculate.

That would be fantastic if it turned out to be true, but I doubt that it is. Although, if EON's truly serious about doing things differently this time around and they actually decided to look outside of their normal set-type of director, I would imagine that someone like Michael Mann would have to be on top of the list if they were to break the mold and do something different.

[crashdrive]

Okay, this could be a sign that Michell probably won't be interested in directing Craig in a Bond film. The following excerpt comes from an interview with Roger Michell from FilmExposed Magazine:

Roger Michell (about Craig playing Bond) "Yee-ahh, I think he'd make a great Bond, but I've advised him against it. I just feel that Daniel is beginning to come into his own now, especially with the work he's done in The Mother and Layer Cake. I think to take on Bond now will pigeon-hole him, and as an actor that can be difficult to recover from."

Of course, if Michell feels that Bond could pigeon-hole Craig, he may be up to the challenge to help Craig make Bond 2.2 interesting. But if you look at the choices he has made, he doesn't seem to be the type of director who is a gun-for-hire. But the same could be said about Michael Apted, so time will tell.

[Mathis05]

They should just go out and get Tarantino...they know he wants to do one. What a film that would be!!!

[Tanger]

They should just go out and get Tarantino...they know he wants to do one. What a film that would be!!!

Do a bit of research and you'll see that there are numerous reasons for why that will never, and I mean NEVER happen. And that is said with 100% certainty.

[Harmsway]

They should just go out and get Tarantino...they know he wants to do one. What a film that would be!!!

Do a bit of research and you'll see that there are numerous reasons for why that will never, and I mean NEVER happen. And that is said with 100% certainty.

Neither *should* it happen. I can't see a Tarantino Bond film being anything other than a piece of utter fanwankery, and this is coming from a big Tarantino fan.

[BondReader 007]

They should just go out and get Tarantino...they know he wants to do one. What a film that would be!!!

Do a bit of research and you'll see that there are numerous reasons for why that will never, and I mean NEVER happen. And that is said with 100% certainty.

Neither *should* it happen. I can't see a Tarantino Bond film being anything other than a piece of utter fanwankery, and this is coming from a big Tarantino fan.

I have to agree. I like Tarantino, but I don't think he has the eye for it. I don't think would make a very good Bond film. He's too in your face!

[Skudor]

Bond 22 in 2007 is looking more likely. That's cool. I just hope they remember that they should be making a Bond movie, not a movie about Bond. There's a difference.