148 replies to this topic

[Eddie Burns]

Hmmm....yesh...

Well good news that Forster's doing well but I find it strange that Haggis doesn't really know how the title works in context of the film. Even if he didn't know, surely he could have followed it up, so as to not look unsure when asked. Considering all these decisions were made without him then its up to him to find out.

He comes across as disappointed in not being able to name the title himself as well as the fact that he hasn't heard from the producers. Probably a dent on his ego (because he does come across as big-headed), nothing more. I guess its a case of big-time writer not feeling big-time. This is Bond, NO-ONE is bigger.

I'm sure he had a title for consideration when he finished the script. He must have, and he must have believed in it. I remember Craig on Jonathan Ross saying quite specifically that the name of the movie did not 'hark back to Fleming'. I think they did have a title then (whether it was Haggis' or not we don't know) but changed at the last minute. Obviously this change resulted in many titles, including a Haggis one (if such existed), to be scrapped.

[MarcAngeDraco]

He does seem a bit 'prickly' about the title. From the "it's not my title" and "No comment" comments he comes off like he's not being much of a team player (IMO). And perhaps that's because he doesn't feel like he's part of the team, based on his other comments...

[Mr. Blofeld]

If that's so, perhaps the producers should realize this and ask him back for a brief period...

[stamper]

Let's face it, the title takes a lot of edge out of this second Bond adventure with Craig.

Consider the power of Casino Royale as a title, regardless of the content, script, actors etc

Casino : implies game. Poker. Cards. Lots of bums in seat due to the current popularity of all these today.

Royale : the top, the best, king of the hill.

Associate these two words with 007 and you got the Bond record of bums in seats it shattered.

Now Quantum of Solace = something about a physician ? E=MC2 ? Here's what the bums in seat of the previous movies will think : I hated mathematics at school. I'll think I'll skip this one. We'll catch it up on DVD.

It's a bad title. 007 would have been good because it would have implied it's the ultimate Bond movie. Just like Dark Knight, it's classy, exciting. Quantum of Solace : I'm tired saying it, writing it, thinking it.

They decided on a title, and that's it.

[craigbegins]

It's a little worrying that one of the writers of the film has no idea how the title works into the plot of the film, especially considering Daniel Craig's comments that it does indeed tie into the film somehow. Also isn't it a bit strange that Haggis says he's had nothing to do with the production since he handed in his draft, and yet he knows that everything is going fantastically well..

[sharpshooter]

Haggis has heard the film is going well. That's all I care about.

[plankattack]

When it comes to the title, I'm with Haggis here (surprise, surprise, I hear some of you mutter). It not his, and he's clearly not a fan of it. Why is that such a heinous, disloyal, bite-the-hand-that-feeds-him position to have?

Look at the recent YOLT thread and others where we've been critical of EON where they've kept Fleming's title yet dumped the story. All they've done here is take Haggis story and dumped the title (once again stealing a Fleming title and ignoring the original source material).

If I were Haggis I'd be a bit miffed - all of us have been split on how much of the credit for CR should go to Fleming, P&W, or Haggis; now the latter is going to get the credit or the criticism for coming up with an original story, and yet whatever title he suggested was deemed not good enough. Instead the producers have done what they've always done - taken a Fleming and slapped it on another script. I'm not Haggis' biggest fan, yet I can't fault him for feeling a bit put out. And IMHO, just because because he feels that way doesn't suddenly make him "disloyal," "tabloid baby-killer" etc. And he still took a moment to say how well he'd heard it was going. He could just as easily have said "no comment" there too.

The creative field is a very personal one. Give the guy a break.

[Shrublands]

He is not allowed to talk about anything to do with the film, he is just avoiding questions.

He is obviously not a fan of the title all the same.

[Jim]

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."

[Ace Roberts]

I take a "measure of comfort" in knowing the film is going well and that Bond will have his cut at revenge. Haggis is probably "disappointed" that he didn't have an opportunity to complete a polished version - and particpate in the discussions that led to the final choice of the title. So - his response is not surprising - at least to me.

[marktmurphy]

So there's been no extra polish, then? Sort of funny, I expected them to have another pass through it, but it's good news I suppose as it means the October script must have been pretty on the money and the bits they've already shot are good.

[Simon]

A certain Mr Eastwood makes a habit of shooting the first draft scripts from Haggis.

It's all in the pedigree.

[kneelbeforezod]

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."

lol very true. I don't like the title at all, but that is very true.

He does seem a bit 'prickly' about the title. From the "it's not my title" and "No comment" comments he comes off like he's not being much of a team player (IMO). And perhaps that's because he doesn't feel like he's part of the team, based on his other comments...

I agree.

I really like Haggis and his contribution to Bond, but I do sometimes get the feeling that his heart isn't really in it... the way he seems to get irritated when all anyone ever wants to talk about is Bond. The way he doesn't seem to be part of the team, like you say. My completely baseless theory is that he enjoys writing the Bond films, he gets a nice paycheck, but he doesn't really get on with the producers and won't be back for Craig's third outing.

[SecretAgentFan]

Haggis handed in his draft before the strike. It was approved. A Bond film title always is subject to the ideas of many people above the line. Wilson himself said that they had decided on "QOS" shortly before the press conference.

Haggis is pissed that his title wasn

[Judo chop]

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."

Is that Elvis?

I

[stamper]

Thunderball sounds cool. QOS sound like mathematic class. And most of us found that boring.

[Skudor]

I get the distinct impression that Mr Haggis doesn't feel like he's part of the gang and doesn't appreciate them picking this title. Cry-baby. I don't really care either. Would have been nice if he could have been more supportive...

[Judo chop]

Thunderball sounds cool. QOS sound like mathematic class. And most of us found that boring.

You Only Live TWICE. Or is it the upper-level of the mathematics that bothers you in this case?

We'll see how mathematics plays into the success of the film. We'll see...

[HildebrandRarity]

He's industry rag tabloid. Hollywood Reporter/Variety...that sort of thing.

And...check the official press release at the start-of-production news conference. He's got second writing credit on Quantum Of Solace BEHIND P+W!

He gets involved in one blockbuster (Casino Royale...which was mainly written by Ian Fleming and then P+W) and now he's the be-all-and-end-all of the James Bond franchise where the balance hangs on his every word?

that! James Bond is bigger than Connery or Brosnan or any one individual in the real world, let alone a hired gun of a writer!

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you...He's coming across like an ungrateful little prick!

And of course "it's not (your) title", Paul. It's an Ian Fleming title, you prick...You know? Ian Fleming? The guy who actually created the character? Or have you now taken ownership of James Bond after 2nd and 3rd writing credit on 2 of 22 movies?

Oh, calm down.

Fine. But his ego seems to have gone pear shaped and larger than warranted. He had 4th writing credit on Casino Royale (Behind Ian Fleming, Purvis and Wade) and, if one is to go by the official press conference statement, 3rd writing credit (behind Purvis and Wade) on "Bond 22/Q0S" and because he doesnt get his way on a title he becomes a cry baby and effectively turns on the producers like a viper.

Eastwood and the Hollywood rags may think he's the be-all, etc but James Bond is rarefied territory and exponentially larger than the art house fare he writes for Eastwood.

I could care less if he returns for Bond 23. There must be more than a handful of extremely gifted screen writers who'd be willing to work for less than Haggis for an organization like Eon and with a production team with pedigree. Haggis is not the only writer out there. If Eon can attract a Craig, a Dench, a Forster, et al then they can attract any young talent in any discipline of the movie business.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Fine. But his ego seems to have gone pear shaped and larger than warranted. He had 4th writing credit on Casino Royale (Behind Ian Fleming, Purvis and Wade) and, if one is to go by the official press conference statement, 3rd writing credit (behind Purvis and Wade) on "Bond 22/Q0S" and because he doesnt get his way on a title he becomes a cry baby and effectively turns on the producers like a viper.

That's a gross exaggeration and you know it... unless you know something we don't.

[Harmsway]

because he doesnt get his way on a title he becomes a cry baby and effectively turns on the producers like a viper.

Uh... where? I see "no comment." Not a vicious turn on the producers "like a viper." There's nothing vicious about that interview... he's rather gracious about the state of QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

[Jim]

... because he doesnt get his way on a title he becomes a cry baby and effectively turns on the producers like a viper.

Eastwood and the Hollywood rags may think he's the be-all, etc but James Bond is rarefied territory and exponentially larger than the art house fare he writes for Eastwood.

Not sure that was any calmer, poppet.

I don't see it in the interview myself and one has to be careful about disseminating material likely to diminish his reputation in the eyes of reasonable people.

I see no petulance on his part, merely some explanation.

[Loomis]

Unlike the rest of us, Paul Haggis has actually worked on QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Should he not be allowed to air his views?

(Views which in any case don't strike me as particularly inflammatory or objectionable.)

For me, Haggis is currently the single most important member of the Bond creative team aside from Broccoli and Wilson. Yep, more important than Forster. Forster will probably not be back for BOND 23, whereas Haggis will hopefully stay. He's the guy I'd save in one of those hot air balloon games. But that's just me.

In any case, I don't give a stuff what Haggis thinks about the title, about Michael G. Wilson, about Jason Bourne, about John McCain, or about anything at all. All I care about is that QUANTUM OF SOLACE is a good film. And I'm sure it will be one.

[sharpshooter]

Haggis is one of the sole reasons for Bond's big fresh comeback. He took a gamble, remember this - people may hate my Bond. They didn't.

[Dunph]

If Haggis is riled, it's not just about the title. The script has already been polished, but not by him.

(I should probably write "reportedly" after that.)

Reportedly.

[HildebrandRarity]

The person who interviewed him on Sunday writes:

"So, believe me when I say that Haggis was less-than-enthusiastic about the three-word title that has been attached to his script. When I asked what he thought of it, he just sighed and said:

[HildebrandRarity]

For me, Haggis is currently the single most important member of the Bond creative team aside from Broccoli and Wilson.

Well that's an opinion. Where has he been for the past 2 months or before he got hired to supplement P+W before last summer? Your theory over looks the fact that the main driving force for the Daniel Craig era thus far has very little to do with a singular writer.

The credit solely goes to Michael and Barbara and you can point to them not rehiring Brosnan (who wanted $22-odd million for Bond 21 after his $17 million DAD pay day) and getting DC for $3 million. That cost saving of $19 million PLUS their desire to make very good movies led them to hire whoever they wanted.

So, Loomis, are you saying that there are no great writers, other than Haggis, out there that Eon can hire?

Haggis is like any other employee on the planet...he's replaceable at the drop of a hat. It happens in business, sport, etc every single day.

[Jim]

Whilst all that's no doubt true, I'm not sure he's coming across as angry or as vituperative as you have otherwise suggested, or as disenchanted as Mr Brosnan's immediate public pronouncements became. Millionaire director and Oscar winner sounds rather detached, frankly.

[Harmsway]

Is it not true that P+W got first billing on the writing credit on the official press release at the production news conference?

Yeah?

If that's the case, how is QOS "his (Haggis') script"?

In the same way that CASINO ROYALE ended up being his script (and it seems he had even more involvement on this one). And I'd argue that it should be called his, because of the amount he brought to it.

Don't read too much into screenplay credits, my friend. They're not always indicative of what went on behind the scenes.

So, Loomis, are you saying that there are no great writers, other than Haggis, out there that Eon can hire?

There are other great writers, but it's hard to tell whether they'd write Bond well. We already know that Haggis seems suited to the job.

[doublenoughtspy]

I'm with Hildebrand Rarity on this one.

Would it have been front page news had Jeffrey Caine not liked "Goldeneye" - "It wasn't MY title" - no.

Would it have been breaking news had Michael Apted's wife, who script doctored TWINE - said "No comment" when asked about the title. I doubt it.

But because it's Haggis - people are acting like there is some significance and that it will have box office or some other consequences.

Sure, Haggis is hot and talented - but he'll be the first to point out that there was a period where all he was known as was the guy who created Walker, Texas Ranger. (and even that was a joke because it was a writer's guild thing - he had the highest percentage of work on the pilot script - but he didn't create the character).

I too am surprised he wouldn't even acknowledge the source of QOS.

And if his title was so awesome, perhaps he should enlighten us.