273 replies to this topic

[B5Erik]

Great to see that Haggis will be back to write the final draft(s) of the script for Bond 22. I had a feeling they'd find a way to bring him back.

But I like the short list of directors in the article - especially Alex Proyas! I, Robot and Dark City? I'm sold.

[stamper]

I don't thing Haggis is responsible for any of CR jewels, other than some fine, and less fine dialogue.

SPOILER

For example, the terrorist who blows himself was nowhere in the december draft, Bond just ended up shooting him. The change is either Craig's idea, or Martin Campbell's. In any case, it makes the difference in that scene. Without this ending, the scene would just be another incursion in Brosnan era action territory. As it ends, it makes an exciting chase pay off BIG TIME, as is the smile on Bond's face when the explosion flashes on him.

END SPOILER

Now, this is what makes the essence of Bond : cinematic moments of either suspense, or surprise, that no one in the audience saw coming. That was the essence of the early flicks, and it got lost to loony circus like scene in the 70's.

What can be expected from Bond 22 is more scene that surprise us.

[sharpshooter]

Agreed.

Haggis has some brilliant ideas. It is good for other people to have input and see the script from a different perspective.

I look forward to Haggis keeping order, and noticing his input.

[Zorin Industries]

I don't thing Haggis is responsible for any of CR jewels, other than some fine, and less fine dialogue.

For example, the terrorist who blows himself was nowhere in the december draft, Bond just ended up shooting him. The change is either Craig's idea, or Martin Campbell's.

Can I ask why members of the public think they were privy to ANY draft of CASINO ROYALE? Supposedly "leaked" screenplays are rarely anything to do with any particular real draft of a script and Eon wouldn't be flippant enough to see that happen.

And let's be honest here - how the hell does anyone know what Daniel Craig or Martin Campbell brought to the creative table? Were you there? Was the person who allegedly leaked what was being purported as the script present at every script meeting too?

Thinking about it...has any big budget mainstream film that has allegedly seen its' screenplay leaked finally resembled anything that bored fans thought they had been privy to?

And whilst we are talking about jewels and CASINO ROYALE, it is surely apparent just how vital Paul Haggis' contribution was to the film. Just look at DIE ANOTHER DAY and THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. Both were written by Neil Purvis and Robert Wade and both were not all that. When Haggis joined them on Craig's debut, the results speak for themselves. There are vast improvements evident in the screenplays of the last two Bond films.

[stamper]

The CR jewels that were the most debatable were Daniel Craig's one, mind you

[Safari Suit]

And whilst we are talking about jewels and CASINO ROYALE, it is surely apparent just how vital Paul Haggis' contribution was to the film. Just look at DIE ANOTHER DAY and THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. Both were written by Neil Purvis and Robert Wade and both were not all that. When Haggis joined them on Craig's debut, the results speak for themselves. There are vast improvements evident in the screenplays of the last two Bond films.

True, but a person's writing can improve. Otherwise people at University would be writing at the same level they did at first school.

[HildebrandRarity]

For example, the terrorist who blows himself was nowhere in the december draft, Bond just ended up shooting him. The change is either Craig's idea, or Martin Campbell's.

Funny that. And here stupid 'ole me all along thought it was Ian Fleming's idea from the book he wrote in 1953 called Casino Royale. I believe in that case it was two of them who got blown up by their own bomb.

Why is Haggis getting so much credit and why is everyone forgetting Fleming?

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 28 May 2007 - 12:47 PM.

[HildebrandRarity]

And whilst we are talking about jewels and CASINO ROYALE, it is surely apparent just how vital Paul Haggis' contribution was to the film. Just look at DIE ANOTHER DAY and THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. Both were written by Neil Purvis and Robert Wade and both were not all that. When Haggis joined them on Craig's debut, the results speak for themselves. There are vast improvements evident in the screenplays of the last two Bond films.

So, basically you don't think that the second biggest gap perhaps gave the producers a chance to re-think Bond 22's "tone"? They did replace Brosnan with Craig which to me indicated that they were dedicated to making Bond 22 a serious and very high quality film. The credit for the quality control generally and for the quality of CR specifically, in my mind, goes solely to the two people who make the hiring decisions.

Barbara and Michael could have hired another acclaimed polisher and CR likely would have ended up being essentialy the same. If the 1953 source material had not been available for B+W and for P+W to adapt, then Haggis would have had nothing to work with.

Bond 22 will be a clean slate. We'll see how good it will be. We'll then see if Haggis is any good at penning a James Bond action adventure.

I'M RESERVING JUDGEMENT UNTIL NOV 17 '08.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 28 May 2007 - 12:55 PM.

[Bucky]

For example, the terrorist who blows himself was nowhere in the december draft, Bond just ended up shooting him. The change is either Craig's idea, or Martin Campbell's.

Funny that. And here stupid 'ole me all along thought it was Ian Fleming's idea from the book he wrote in 1953 called Casino Royale. I believe in that case it was two of them who got blown up by their own bomb.

Why is Haggis getting so much credit and why is everyone forgetting Fleming?

That was one part that semi-bothered me on repeat viewings. I always hope that like the book there would be blood and guts flying everywhere and Bond not smiling. If only Tarantino had directed CR...

[Royal Dalton]

Not really all that clever of Bond to let him blow himself up, considering the ground was covered in gasoline.

[stamper]

Ah yeah, that's right, and I was the one when watching the DVD, that reported here that this end scene was adapted from the other scene in the book !
But whomever had the idea, was not one of the writers, at this was not in the shooting script, that I happened to browse thru while standing in the continuity girl's place one day in Prague. (this just for those who may think that I, horror, downloaded it off the internet).

[Napoleon Solo]

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"?

Zencat, you would know more details than I, but as I understand it the WGA requires a writer to have done a substantial amount of work to merit a screen credit. A "dialogue polish" in and of itself wouldn't make it. For example, in 1990, Warren Beatty and Bo Goldman rewrote the script for Dick Tracy (and novelizations of the movie even had them credited as screen writers). But, in the final movie, only the two original writers got the screen writing credit.

[stamper]

So Haggis will direct Bond 22 then ? It better be as good as Thunderball !

[Harmsway]

So Haggis will direct Bond 22 then ? It better be as good as Thunderball !

No, the article said Haggis turned the director's postion down (perhaps because of scheduling, perhaps because of lack of desire).

[HildebrandRarity]

So Haggis will direct Bond 22 then ? It better be as good as Thunderball !

No, the article said Haggis turned the director's postion down (perhaps because of scheduling, perhaps because of lack of desire).

Perhaps he didn't have the confidence to helm anything other than indy-type stuff?

Apted was well regarded until he took on the huge undertaking of a year long Bond process.

[Harmsway]

So Haggis will direct Bond 22 then ? It better be as good as Thunderball !

No, the article said Haggis turned the director's postion down (perhaps because of scheduling, perhaps because of lack of desire).

Perhaps he didn't have the confidence to helm anything other than indy-type stuff?

Actually, this is also likely. A Bond film is a huge undertaking, with a long shoot and many units going at once. Perhaps he didn't feel prepared to take that on.

[HildebrandRarity]

So Haggis will direct Bond 22 then ? It better be as good as Thunderball !

No, the article said Haggis turned the director's postion down (perhaps because of scheduling, perhaps because of lack of desire).

Perhaps he didn't have the confidence to helm anything other than indy-type stuff?

Actually, this is also likely. A Bond film is a huge undertaking, with a long shoot and many units going at once. Perhaps he didn't feel prepared to take that on.

Bond 22 is probably going to be a $175 mil production (excl. marketing). What did Crash cost?

Kettle of fish as they say.

[Harmsway]

Bond 22 is probably going to be a $175 mil production (excl. marketing).

What makes you think that? CASINO ROYALE had around $130 million as a budget, and I can't imagine BOND 22 being much larger in scale.

[HildebrandRarity]

It was listed at 150 mil at box office mojo. I'm assuming a reasonable level of inflation.

What did Crash cost?

What i'm saying is screen writing for a book which has been adapted in tone and content by others is one thing...directing a $150 million PLUS blockbuster with huge expectations is something else.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 28 May 2007 - 07:30 PM.

[Harmsway]

It was listed at 150 mil. I'm assuming a reasonable level of inflation.

Where are you getting that number? BOM? If so, I believe that's wrong (BOM isn't the most reliable site for budget info). The official number was

[HildebrandRarity]

[quote name='Harmsway' post='742589' date='28 May 2007 - 19:33'][quote name='HildebrandRarity' post='742587' date='28 May 2007 - 14:25']It was listed at 150 mil. I'm assuming a reasonable level of inflation.[/quote]
Where are you getting that number? BOM? If so, I believe that's wrong (BOM isn't the most reliable site for budget info). The official number was

[Harmsway]

Well, I never disagreed with the stuff about Haggis, Hildebrand - I was only quibbling over the exact numbers, because the budget you presented wasn't what I'd heard. Regardless, the budget was still large, and I imagine that Haggis would feel quite overwhelmed at the prospect of helming a Bond film.

[Dr. Noah]

Haggis doesn't judge a project's do-ability by its budget. He's been around plenty of big budget films, especially in the last three years. I don't know if EON would've been that worried about it, either. Weren't they about to hire Roger Michell? Lewis Gilbert wasn't exactly David Lean when they hired him to direct YOLT, either.

I think they're looking for somebody who is good at character, and can work with them.

[kneelbeforezod]

I guess we can argue about how significant Haggis's contribution was, but given his past credits, we can at least assume that we are going to get another "quality" Bond entry. He's not going to put his name to a DAD or a DAF or a AVTAK. I'm pretty bloody excited to be honest.

Edited by kneelbeforezod, 29 May 2007 - 12:02 AM.

[HildebrandRarity]

He's been around plenty of big budget films, especially in the last three years...

I think they're looking for somebody who is good at character, and can work with them.

Such as?

If so, has he directed?

...

Is a James Bond movie only about character?

DN, I'm usually in your ball park and agree with you on most things around here...but i'll reserve judgement till November '08.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 29 May 2007 - 01:30 AM.

[blueman]

Haggis helped make CR great. Glad he's back for Bond 22.

[DaveBond21]

I think they should put all the potential directors in a ring, and give them a gun each. Last man standing gets to direct Bond 22.

[Dr. Noah]

He's been around plenty of big budget films, especially in the last three years...
I think they're looking for somebody who is good at character, and can work with them.

Such as?
If so, has he directed?
...

Is a James Bond movie only about character?
DN, I'm usually in your ball park and agree with you on most things around here...but i'll reserve judgement till November '08.

Hey, I'm not for or against anybody if they present a good case to direct. Is Roger Michell a big-budget action guy? For every Roger Spottiswoode there has been a Michael Apted. Sorry for he crappy examples, but that's what you get with Bond for the last 12 years...

[stamper]

Hmm, I would say CR is a James Bond movie about the character. That's why it was so good.

[Roger Moore's Bad Facelift]

Haggis, by the way, delivered with MILLION DOLLAR BABY and CRASH two films that were critically lauded AND brought in money.

And "Letters From Iwo Jima" which BOMBED.
Until someone lays out scene-by-scene just what Haggis' contributions were to CR, label me unimpressed.
My guess is, he added the scenes that feel most incongruous to the rest of the movie.
Including: the overly snarky and painfully contrived train repartee, and the downright bizarre finger suckling sequence.

Everyone fails to notice that this movie features the most uxorious, henpecked Bond in franchise history (and that includes OHMSS, in which he actually became a married man!)
And here all along I thought one of the chief criticisms leveled at the Brosnan-era was the insidious PC feminization character.
Gee, I wonder how many schoolmarmish reprimands from M they'll manage to fit in the movie this time out?
Or more character-obliterating lines like, "I love you too, M."

Lord help us all.

Edited by Roger Moore's Bad Facelift, 02 June 2007 - 02:38 PM.