273 replies to this topic

[zencat]

Yes, it's true. A glorious day!

Paul Haggis Returns

Casino Royale scribe takes reins of Bond 22 script

[box]Haggis has Bond's number -- again
By Jay A. Fernandez, Special to The Times
May 23, 2007

Paul Haggis, the Oscar-winning writer-director of "Crash" and co-writer of "Casino Royale," is cementing a reputation for ruthless efficiency and resourcefulness as distinctive as 007's. Sony has finally lured Haggis back to work on the script for the "Royale" follow-up, temporarily titled "Bond 22," which is slated for release on Nov. 7, 2008.

Haggis is currently in the editing room finishing up "In the Valley of Elah," a drama inspired by real events that he wrote and directed about a career officer investigating the disappearance of his soldier son after he returns from the most recent Iraq conflict. He has additional projects lined up as producer, director and/or writer, so the Bond producers must have dangled, shall we say, very seductive creative and financial incentives for him to return to the Bond juggernaut.

Haggis has more than earned whatever he's being paid to rework the "Bond 22" screenplay by regular Bond writers Neal Purvis and Robert Wade ("The World Is Not Enough," "Die Another Day"). His rewrite of Purvis and Wade's "Casino Royale" script helped to revitalize the aging franchise and give it the edgier credibility it needed to hook a new generation of fans and score the franchise's biggest box office

[Harmsway]

Great news!

Interesting that Haggis was offered the director's chair (he would have been an interesting choice, though it's easy to see why he would want to turn it down... at least he's writing). I never knew Ted Griffin was attached as screenwriter.

[Righty007]

Oh yeah!

[zencat]

Whoa, I missed that on my first read. They offered it to Haggis to direct. Wow.

Does anyone still believe Haggis' only contribution to CR was a "dialogue polish"?

[K1Bond007]

Well this is good news IMO.

Though I have to question this only because of the Ted Griffin name drop that is news to me and Haggis being offered director. I guess neither are outside the realm of possibility, but still.. given Bond rumors. You know...

[Harmsway]

Whoa, I missed that on my first read. They offered it to Haggis to direct. Wow.

Does anyone still believe Haggis' only contribution to CR was a "dialogue polish"?

Nah. I never did. I always figured his contribution was much bigger than many suggested, and I'm sure there's a reason they've fought to bring him back. Now all we need is a return run from a re-energized Campbell...

[Bucky]

excellent news. this makes me even more excited for bond 22

[Tarl_Cabot]

Tony Scott knows how to make a movie look real purty, which is what Bond films used to be known for;granted he's a .500 hitter at best but I vote for him. I loved Man on Fire(didn't bother with Domino).

Oh Man, he could make a georgous Bond film.

[DaveBond21]

This is good news. Haggis did a good job on the CR script.

[dinovelvet]

Great stuff...now maybe Haggis' involvement will entice Campbell to come back too!

[Turn]

I'm sure there's a reason they've fought to bring him back. Now all we need is a return run from a re-energized Campbell...

My thoughts exactly.

Let's hope they keep the winning formula intact the way many of the early films did until it runs out of steam. Part of the problem with the Brosnan era was too many different creative people came and went and there was little consistency from one film to the next. With a box office blockbuster and a critical success in CR behind them, why not continue?

[TheREAL008]

*Crosses fingers for Campbell's return*

The best news I've heard all day.

[Johnboy007]

Bond22 appears to be headed on the right track.

[DaveBond21]

Wow, yes, imagine if this news enticed Campbell to return and continue where he left off with Casino Royale.

Then Bond 22 would be in the same vein.

[ChronoBreak]

Sweet! Bring back Campbell, and Bond 22 is firmly on its way to greatness.

[The Richmond Spy]

I agree...Haggis + Campbell seem to be a winning formula so this is great news! Less than 18 months until Bond 22!

[Royal Dalton]

Latest word is, he'll get round to polishing the script, as soon as he's finished polishing his head.

[sharpshooter]

Best news, great way to start the day. Bond 22 should be of the same standard with Haggis.

Campbell, please come back. I know you wouldnt want to tarnish you two excellent film record, but you are too good

[Genrewriter]

Great news.

[Mamadou]

Yippee!

My vote for director goes to Alex Proyas, if they can't get Campbell back. "Dark City" is one of my favorite films. If they continue in this darker vein (if such it can be called), Proyas would be very good at that.

[Harmsway]

Yippee!

My vote for director goes to Alex Proyas, if they can't get Campbell back. "Dark City" is one of my favorite films. If they continue in this darker vein (if such it can be called), Proyas would be very good at that.

Well... I dunno. Proyas is good when Proyas is good, but when he's not, he's woefully mediocre.

[AgentPB]

Well now all i got to say is that he better make a fantastic repeat performance. This actually really excites me! Go Bond 22!

[Qwerty]

Fantastic news! Very, very interesting to hear he was offered the director's chair as well.

[blueman]

Forster. He'd do a great job with a Haggis script.

As much as I like the job Campbell did with CR...I'd still worry with him coming back for Bond 22. Maybe the lightning would strike again, but I'm fine with a director like Forster stepping in--"Stranger Than Fiction" was great and I can see what he did with that material translating to him directing a cracking good spy film. Campbell with a standard spy film = GE, which was problematic IMO (notice the liberal waffling: not saying no, just a worry with Campbell...the Haggis rewrite goes a long ways towards assuaging me, though).

[crheath]

Awesome! He, along with several other members of the new Bond team have really saved the series.

[Harmsway]

Maybe the lightning would strike again, but I'm fine with a director like Forster stepping in--"Stranger Than Fiction" was great and I can see what he did with that material translating to him directing a cracking good spy film.

But could he do great action sequences?

Campbell with a standard spy film = GE, which was problematic IMO (notice the liberal waffling: not saying no, just a worry with Campbell...the Haggis rewrite goes a long ways towards assuaging me, though).

GOLDENEYE isn't a standard spy film, nor does it seem like BOND 22 will be anything like it.

Campbell was even adamant on not going back to GOLDENEYE-style Bond films, saying he'd only consider coming back because this was based on a more interesting Bond.

[tdalton]

Maybe the lightning would strike again, but I'm fine with a director like Forster stepping in--"Stranger Than Fiction" was great and I can see what he did with that material translating to him directing a cracking good spy film.

But could he do great action sequences?

I think that is the wildcard when it comes to Forster as a potential director. Looking over his IMDb page, he hasn't really done a film where there there has been a lot of action, at least none that would approach the scale of what one would expect in a Bond film. With that said, however, I think that hiring a director that isn't an "action" director would be the way to go, as I think that they should definitely scale back the action significantly for Bond 22 as compared to what it was in Casino Royale. Most of the action sequences in recent films have had a gimmick (free-running, invisible car, parachuting snowmobiles, etc.), and I think that it would be great to see significantly less action and have more character development and more small-scale action sequences, such as the stairwell fight in CR.

As far as Haggis returning, I'm not really sure where I stand on it, but at least it shows that EON's trying for continuity with the crew and are continuing to work outside of the formula that had been a part of the previous 20 films.

[Harmsway]

I think that is the wildcard when it comes to Forster as a potential director. Looking over his IMDb page, he hasn't really done a film where there there has been a lot of action, at least none that would approach the scale of what one would expect in a Bond film. With that said, however, I think that hiring a director that isn't an "action" director would be the way to go, as I think that they should definitely scale back the action significantly for Bond 22 as compared to what it was in Casino Royale. Most of the action sequences in recent films have had a gimmick (free-running, invisible car, parachuting snowmobiles, etc.), and I think that it would be great to see significantly less action and have more character development and more small-scale action sequences, such as the stairwell fight in CR.

But shouldn't we still pick a director who can handle the action? After all, action is still in the cards here, whether we scale it back or not. And while I want less action than CASINO ROYALE, I think that's a lost cause. BOND 22 will have just as much action, and it's therefore it's pretty important to have a director that can pull it off.

I'd prefer action to be downscaled to the level of say, THE BOURNE SUPREMACY, with more focus on story and suspense, all building to one rollicking, high-octane, pulse-pounding action sequence. For example, I suggested a high-speed boat chase, but at night, so that objects are only visible like fifteen feet away. I think that could be intense in the hands of the right director.

[00Twelve]

Awesome. Far and away the best news I've heard about Bond 22 yet.

[Harmsway]

Awesome. Far and away the best news I've heard about Bond 22 yet.

Yeah, but there hasn't been much news...