273 replies to this topic

[SecretAgentFan]

"Letters from Iwo Jima" was released after CR - so it did not figure in EON`s decision to get Haggis. They wanted him after "Crash".

But you seem to have a very different opinion of Bond in general (criticizing OHMSS for Bond getting married and disliking the train sequence in CR)...

[byline]

I don't want an entirely different look or feel, at least not when it's connected to a specific director. Because then it becomes an auteur franchise, where this becomes "Tony Scott's Bond" rather than just Bond.

I'm all for innovation and freedom from formula in BOND 22. Heck, I'd be glad if it's edgier and bolder than CASINO ROYALE ever was. But I don't think we need to go to overly stylistic and radical direction styles to accomplish that. You wanna bring in good, higher-grade directors? Fine. Let's get a Matthew Vaughn or a Stephen Frears or something like that, who'll do a good job without doing distracting camera and editing tricks. After all, the primary battleground for making Bond "fresh" is the script, not stylized direction.

Amen. I agree completely! IMO, it needs to feel like a Bond movie with elements that trace through the franchise, but disgtinguish itself with elements that make it edgier and darker. That's what I feel "Casino Royale" achieved so beautifully.

I would always be in favor of a Peter Weir Bond. IMHO, the tone of his films so far would suggests he would really suit the more realistic approach of Craig's acting and Haggis's writing.

Now there's an interesting suggestion.

Yup, I like that idea.

[byline]

I'll agree the film really gets going once we hit the train scene, but the material before that I still find great. It's a little more tradition action-oriented Bond, but it's great stuff.

The Parkour chase? One of the best action scenes Bond has ever had in the franchise. It's a little over the top, but man, it's so intense that who cares? It's absolutely thrilling. The scenes in the Bahamas? Stylish, beautiful... with an old style flair. It all moves a little fast, but it's still full of classic little bits. "Guten Abend"; Bond winning Dimitrios' car, then taking Solange out for a spin; Bond and Solange in the room (as sexy a scene the Bond films have had, IMO); Bond in Bodyworlds; Bond pursuing Carlos through the airport... I mean, just lots of good material, right after the other.

Yup, I saw the film multiple times in the theatre, and even though I knew what was going to happen, that Parkour chase scene had me sitting forward in my seat, gripping the armrests with sweaty palms every time. Just beautifully choreographed, shot and edited.

For me, those opening scenes were wonderful, but it was obvious that we were also getting to know this newly minted 007. By the time he and Vesper met on the train, we were comfortable with him, and that's when the film hit its stride. I'm trying to imagine the preceding scenes written and filmed in any other way, but I've got nothin'. IMO, they're darn near perfect.

[byline]

You've got to wonder exactly what WOULD be good enough for certain people. EON could resurrect Ian Fleming and get him to write the script, get the ghosts of Alfred Hitchcock and Stanley Kubrick to co-direct it, Elvis Presley to do the theme song and Beethoven to score it, and someone would still be complaining that Felix is black.

LOL, OK, that's my favorite quote of the day!

[Gabriel]

I would kill to see a Bond directed by Ridley Scott or Tony Scott! People can make all sorts of disparaging remarks about them but both the Scott brothers are tremendously talented. Either one could do tremendous service to a good screenplay!

[byline]

As for Haggis, we just got THE BLACK DONNALLYS a show about a bunch of people who weren't black.

Humor aside, the series is based on a real-life family of the same name. Never watched the series, so I can't comment on whether it was any good or not. But at least it was based on true events. If people are so literal-minded that they can't get any other interpretation of the title, well, that's a whole 'nother discussion.

[byline]

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...

Ugh, no. Sorry, but I just can't see it.

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?

True, but it sounds like Fleming's element from the book was missing from that December draft. Somebody came up with the idea of including it, and it appears likely it was either Campbell or Craig. I think that was the poster's point.

And "Letters From Iwo Jima" which BOMBED.

It may have bombed at the box office, but it's an extraordinary film.

[Harmsway]

I would kill to see a Bond directed by Ridley Scott or Tony Scott! People can make all sorts of disparaging remarks about them but both the Scott brothers are tremendously talented. Either one could do tremendous service to a good screenplay!

I love Ridley. He's able to bring style and substance together in a satsifying mixture. Tony? Well, he can bring style (and I don't usually like the style he brings, but hey, I'll give him credit for it), but his movies are often lacking in substance.

[polyh3dron]

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...

Unfortunately Campbell will not come back for this next Bond because he apparently has fallen from Broccoli's grace somehow.

Edited by polyh3dron, 04 June 2007 - 07:41 PM.

[Harmsway]

Unfortunately Campbell will not come back for this next Bond because he apparently has fallen from Broccoli's grace somehow.

Where did you hear that?

[polyh3dron]

Unfortunately Campbell will not come back for this next Bond because he apparently has fallen from Broccoli's grace somehow.

Where did you hear that?

Reliable hearsay. Haven't you noticed that none of the rumors that have come about say anything about Campbell returning?

Edited by polyh3dron, 05 June 2007 - 12:21 AM.

[Righty007]

Unfortunately Campbell will not come back for this next Bond because he apparently has fallen from Broccoli's grace somehow.

Where did you hear that?

Reliable hearsay. Haven't you noticed that none of the rumors that have come about say anything about Campbell returning?

What position do you hold at Eon Productions Ltd. or Danjaq, LLC?

[Santa]

Reliable hearsay.

Reliable hearsay?

[dodge]

A little more on the importance of Haggis. In two articles* Haggis was reported to have spent a full ten weeks rewring the CR screenplay by P&W. That's quite a bit work than simply 'tweaking' the existing script. Haggis praises the original script, claiming he was brought on board to reconceive and recreate, also to reinvent Bond's background.

_______
* The first was found on Scribbleking. The other, sorry, I neglected to jot down. The wording in each was pretty much the same.

[K1Bond007]

A little more on the importance of Haggis. In two articles* Haggis was reported to have spent a full ten weeks rewring the CR screenplay by P&W. That's quite a bit work than simply 'tweaking' the existing script. Haggis praises the original script, claiming he was brought on board to reconceive and recreate, also to reinvent Bond's background.

Apparently he came up with the stairwell fight and the rundown was Campbell's idea. I don't want to start a new thread, but Haggis got together with Forster last week to talk a little about Bond. The NY Post covered it and it would appear that Haggis was offered the director's chair or he at least considered it. It's implied IMHO. Haggis also says that he wouldn't call Bond 22 a direct sequel like some have been saying, but he did say it will follow on the heels of Royale (well duh.. but yeah.. there you go).

[Harmsway]

A little more on the importance of Haggis. In two articles* Haggis was reported to have spent a full ten weeks rewring the CR screenplay by P&W. That's quite a bit work than simply 'tweaking' the existing script. Haggis praises the original script, claiming he was brought on board to reconceive and recreate, also to reinvent Bond's background.

Apparently he came up with the stairwell fight and the rundown was Campbell's idea. I don't want to start a new thread, but Haggis got together with Forster last week to talk a little about Bond. The NY Post covered it and it would appear that Haggis was offered the director's chair or he at least considered it. It's implied IMHO. Haggis also says that he wouldn't call Bond 22 a direct sequel like some have been saying, but he did say it will follow on the heels of Royale (well duh.. but yeah.. there you go).

Interesting stuff. Seems like Haggis' contribution to CASINO ROYALE was very significant indeed.

[Orion]

with those interviews i am now more psyched about James Bond than i have been since i first saw Casino Royale, Marc Forster is a talented director and we have all seen how perfect a screenwriter Haggis is for Bond, if they get the casting right this film may even top Casino Royale.

[Mr_Wint]

Haggis: "It's going to take me six months to get the script into shape as it is".

Six months! I guess P&W's script is far from being into shape then.

[dodge]

I'm thinking more like 15% P&W and 15% Haggis, and at least 10% for Daniel Craig. Let's face it, if CR had been , everyone would have been happy to make his share of the blame at least 70%.

Wise words. Those percentages seem sound to me--and respectful to all.

[Harmsway]

Haggis: "It's going to take me six months to get the script into shape as it is".

Six months! I guess P&W's script is far from being into shape then.

No kidding. That's not a simple rewrite... that's an overhaul.

[dodge]

Haggis: "It's going to take me six months to get the script into shape as it is".

Six months! I guess P&W's script is far from being into shape then.

No kidding. That's not a simple rewrite... that's an overhaul.

Sure wish there'd been a fly on the wall at the meetings after reading the P&W script. P&W's 'solid contribution' and 'great work' will continue to be praised. But we're six months' effort here--and not eight-hour days, I'll bet. Overhaul's the word.

[stamper]

And "Letters From Iwo Jima" which BOMBED.

It may have bombed at the box office, but it's an extraordinary film.

Totally, the fact that a film Bombed doesn't mean it sucks, that's a juvenile, adolescent statement to disparage Eastwood based on that one. Dirty Harry 5 did reasonable business,it doesn't mean it's watchable.

Regarding the overhaul thing, I'm not sure Haggis will touch the structure of the script, more like he is working on making every scene count, and that takes a lot of work and time. You might read the 1st draft and the last draft, and think it was just a quick rewrite, but there's no way to tell how long it might go to make something better. For example, the terrorist blowing up in CR in the airport scene, was not in the script. He was just shot. It may have take more intermediate scene rewrites, until they come up with that clever ending. It makes all the difference.

[Harmsway]

Regarding the overhaul thing, I'm not sure Haggis will touch the structure of the script, more like he is working on making every scene count, and that takes a lot of work and time.

Not that long. If you're taking that much time, you're touching more than just the contents of scenes themselves.

And judging by his comments, it seems like he actually did some structural work on CASINO ROYALE.

[Ace Roberts]

Am I the only one having a math problem with taking six months to rewrite the script with a start date of December/January looming ahead? Will this push the start date out or did the six months begin in May?

[Harmsway]

Am I the only one having a math problem with taking six months to rewrite the script with a start date of December/January looming ahead?

He's going to be working on the script through early production (as a movie films, it requires rewrites). So I imagine we're talking about an ongoing process, not a singular rewrite. He'll probably have a draft done in a few months, but he'll keep rewriting after that.

[00Twelve]

Hey, the more time Paul has with the thing, the better, as far as I'm concerned. Just me.

[Ace Roberts]

Am I the only one having a math problem with taking six months to rewrite the script with a start date of December/January looming ahead?

He's going to be working on the script through early production (as a movie films, it requires rewrites). So I imagine we're talking about an ongoing process, not a singular rewrite. He'll probably have a draft done in a few months, but he'll keep rewriting after that.

Makes sense - I guess - if you're not creating new scenes that require major set construction, etc. Brings up an interesting thought process about CR - how much of the script was changed after production start? That's probably one of those "we'll never know" kinds of things.

[dodge]

Am I the only one having a math problem with taking six months to rewrite the script with a start date of December/January looming ahead?

He's going to be working on the script through early production (as a movie films, it requires rewrites). So I imagine we're talking about an ongoing process, not a singular rewrite. He'll probably have a draft done in a few months, but he'll keep rewriting after that.

Question, dear friend. It may help us all draw a better bead on the absolute importance of Haggis' involvement if could shed some light on this: His is a writer of Haggis' caliber paid: project rate? hourly? weekly? I'm assuming he signed for 22, assuming the workload was rougly similar to CR (10 weeks, correct?). Now we're looking at a far longer stretch. I salute his willingness to stand by the film and his commitment to it. Any idea how much extra Eon's been willing to pay?

[K1Bond007]

Haggis: "It's going to take me six months to get the script into shape as it is".

Six months! I guess P&W's script is far from being into shape then.

No kidding. That's not a simple rewrite... that's an overhaul.

Heh.. well have you ever seen a solo P&W script. Oh yes.. that's right... Seriously though, I think they're solid idea men, but not so good with dialogue and drama etc. 6 months sounds about right.

[JimmyBond]

If he does a complete overhaul of the script (as has been suggested) will Purvis and Wade still be eligible for story credit? Could this be the first Bond film in ten years without there names in the credits?