148 replies to this topic

[doublenoughtspy]

Something about the strong phrasing, seemingly an effort to prevent any sort of positive Haggis result. It was almost daring me to vote for it. A poll made to prove a point rather than gather fan sentiment. I couldn't help myself.

Glad you enjoyed my strong phrasing. No script doctoring involved

I think alot of the "ridiculous polarity" is imaginatry. Any comment remotely prasing Haggis is construed as an extreme one. If you like Haggis and dare to suggest he made a nice contribution to the CR script (a not unreason assuption as the other credited writers on the script were the people who brought you such classics as The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day) then you must think him to be "important than Ian Fleming", and "the most critical component".

Hell, maybe he was "the most critical component". I mean, of all the critical componets, someone must has bee the most critical.

I hope I haven't said any praise of Haggis is unwarranted. What I object to is people automatically assuming that everything good in CR MUST have come from Haggis.

Does someone have a subtitled DVD that denotes when a plot point or a line of dialog has come from Haggis and not P&W? A script version where P&W input is colored red and Haggis' colored blue?

Film is a collabrative medium. Assigning absolute credit (or blame) is pretty difficult. But if CR was more Haggis than P&W, he could have asked for arbitration and had his name first in the credits. That didn't happen.

Do I have to point out all the times the same set of writers & production personnel worked on two or more films yet we got radically different results quality wise?

AVTAK & TLD - Maibaum/Glen on both - radically different result.

Dalton is the difference between those two films. The writing and directing are much of a muchness. Dalton elevates TLD to a higher level than it deserves. I give him all the credit for TLD. All of it. Including that nice bit of camera work when Saunders is killed. "Dalton more important than Ian Fleming". You can quote me on that*.

* - Don't quote me on that.

From now on, I'm going to write Haggis as "Hagggggggggggggis", to emphasise his importance.

So TLD is all Dalton, but CR is all Haggis. Wasn't there an actor change in that film too?

[kneelbeforezod]

this thread is ridiculous

[Bondian]

[quote name='kneelbeforezod' post='843496' date='27 February 2008 - 00:53']this thread is ridiculous[/quote]
I agree. I think it's time for the 'Man turns into a Scotsman' sketch.

[quote]Newsvendor's Voice: Read all about it! Read all about it! Man turns into Scotsman!

(Mix through to Potter's front gate. His with is being interviewed by obvious plainclothes man.)

Inspector: Mrs Potter - you knew Harold Potter quite well I believe?

Wife: Oh yes quite well.

Inspector: Yes.

Wife: He was my husband.

Inspector: Yes. And, er, he never showed any inclination towards being a Scotsman before this happened?

Wife: (shocked) No, no, not at all. He was not that sort of person...

Inspector: He didn't wear a kilt or play the bagpipes?

Wife: No, no.

Inspector: He never got drunk at night or bought home black puddings?

Wife: No, no. Not at all.

Inspector: He didn't have an inadequate brain capacity?

Wife: No, no, not at all.

Inspector: I see. So by your account Harold Potter was a perfectly ordinary Englishman without any tendency towards being a Scotsman whatsoever?

Wife: Absolutely, yes. (suddenly remembering) Mind you he did always watch Dr Finlay on television.

Inspector: Ah-hah! ... Well that's it, you see. That's how it starts.

Wife: I beg your pardon?

Inspector: Well you see Scottishness staffs with little things like that, and works up. You see, people don't just turn into a Scotsman for no reason at all... (goes rigid with Scots accent.) No further questions!

(The words are hardly out of his mouth when he turns into a Scotsman and spins round and disappears up road in fast motion. Pan with him. Cut to bus queue: man in a city suit and bowler hat suddenly changes into a Scotsman with beard, twizzles round and speeds out of shot. Cut to street.' policeman pointing way for woman with a pram. Suddenly he changes into a Scotsman and scuffles out of shot. She looks aghast for a moment and then she too changes into a Scotsman and hurtles off after him. The baby suddenly develops a beard and the pram follows her. Single shot of black jazz musician in cellar blowing a blue sax solo. He changes and whizzes off. Squad of soldiers being drilled. Suddenly they all change into bearded Scotsmen and race off in unison. Pan with them past sign: 'Welsh Guard'.)

(Quick animated shot of flying saucer disappearing over city skyline. Cut to big close-up of passionate kiss. It goes on for some moments. Foggy lens... romantic music. Keep on big close-up as they talk. She is none too intelligent.)

She: Charles...

Charles: Darling...

She: Charles...

Charles: Darling, darling...

She: Charles... there's something I've got to tell you...

Charles: What is it darling?

She: It's daddy ... he's turned into a Scotsman...

Charles: What! Mr Llewellyn?

She: Yes, Charles. Help me, please help me.

Charles: But what can I do?

She: Surely, Charles, you're the Chief Scientist at the Anthropological Research Institute, at Butley Down - an expert in what makes people change from one nationality to another.

Charles: So I am! (pull out to reveal they are in a laboratory; he is in a white coat, she is in something absurdly sexy) This is fight up my street!

She: Oh good.

Charles: Now first of all, why would anyone turn into a Scotsman?

She: (tentatively) Em, for business reasons?

Charles: No, no! Only because he has no control over his own destiny! Look I'll show you...

(He presses a button on a control board and a laboratory TV screen lights on with the words 'only because they have no control over their own destinies '.)

She: I see.

Charles: Yes! So this means that some person or persons unknown is turning all these people into Scotsmen...

She: Oh, what kind of heartless fiend could do that to a man?

Charles: I don't know ... I don't know ... all I know is that these people are streaming north of the border at the rate of thousands every hour. If we don't act fast, Scotland will be choked with Scotsmen...

She: Ooh!...

(Zoom in on her face. Cut to as many bearded Scotsmen as possible, hurtling through wood in fast motion. Follow than, ending up with skyline shot as per 'Seventh Seal'. They all still have the arm outstretched in front of them and as always they are accompanied by bagpipe music. Shot of border with large notice: 'Scotland Welcomes You'.)

American Voice: Soon Scotland was full of Scotsmen. The over-crowding was pitiful.

(They all dash across harder and then stop abruptly once they're ever. They stand around looking lost.)

American Voice: Three men to a caber.

(Cut to three Scotsmen tossing one caber. Cut to Scots wife in bed with bearded husband. Pull back to reveal five other Scotsmen in the bed. Short but brilliant piece of animation from T. Gilliam to show England emptying of people and Scotland filling up, ending with a till sound and a till sign coming up out of England reading: 'Empty'. Track into England. Film of a deserted street. Wind, a dog sniffing, newspaper blowing along street. Close-up sign on shop doom 'Gone to lunch' ( lunch is actually crossed out) Scotland'. Close-up another sign on a shop door.' 'McClosed'. Shop sign: McWoolworths & Co '.)

American Voice: For the few who remained, life was increasingly difficult.

(Man suddenly folds up newspaper and runs round comer. Re-emerges driving bus. Drives it halfway to stop and then leaps out with bus still moving. Runs to stop, and puts out hand. Bus stops. He leaps on, rings bell, runs round to front and drives the bus off again. As bus drives out of. flame we just see a couple of Scotsmen flashing past camera with arms outstretched. Pan slowly round empty football stadium. Eventually we pick up a solitary spectator, halfway up and halfway along in stand opposite where the players come out. He suddenly leaps to his feet cheering. Cut to players' tunnel and one player emerging and a referee with ball. They kick off. Player goes straight down field and scores.
Spectator disappointed.
A quick shot of flying saucer again.
Studio. the laboratory again. Charles is looking through microscope, when the door flies open and she bursts in.)

She: Charles! Thank goodness I've found you! It's mummy!

Charles: Hello mummy.

She: No, no, mummy's turned into a Scotsman...

Charles: Oh how horrible... Will they stop at nothing?

She: I don't know - do you think they will?

Charles: I meant that rhetorically.

She: What does rhetorically mean?

Charles: It means, I didn't expect an answer.

She: Oh I see. Oh, you're so clever, Charles.

Charles: Did mummy say anything as she changed?

She: (with an air of tremendous revelation) Yes! she did, now you come to mention it

(A long pause as he waits expectantly.)

Charles: Well, what was it?

She: Oh, she said ... 'Them!' (thrilling chord of jangling music and quick zoom into her face) Is there someone at the door?

Charles: No ... It's just the incidental music for this scene.

She: Oh I see...

Charles: 'Them' ... Wait a minute!

She: A whole minute?

Charles: No, I meant that metaphorically ... 'Them' ... 'Them' ... She was obviously referring to the people who turned her into a Scotsman. If only we knew who 'They' were ... And why 'They' were doing it... Who are 'Them'?

(Crashing chord... cut to a small still of a Scottish crofier's cottage on a lonely moor. Slow zoom in on the cottage.)

American Voice: Then suddenly a clue turned up in Scotland. Mr Angus Podgorny, owner of a Dunbar menswear shop, received an order for 48,000,000 'kilts from the planet Skyron in the Galaxy of Andromeda.

(Mix to interior of highland mens wear shop. An elderly Scottish couple are poring over a letter which they have on the counter. Oil lamps etc.)

Mrs Podgorny: Angus how are y'going to get 48,000,000 kilts into the van?

Angus: I'll have t'do it in two goes.

Mrs Podgorny: D'you not ken that the Galaxy of Andromeda is two million, two hundred thousand light years away?

Angus: Is that so?

Mrs Podgorny: Aye ... and you've never been further than Berwick-on-Tweed...

Angus: Aye ... but think o' the money dear ...

[Leon]

He also clearly doesn't know much about the title an it's origin so he can't really comment on it anyway can he?

Is it reasonable to expect that a Bond screenwriter, be, oh I don't know, familiar with Fleming's work?

Over time surely, you expect him to have read and revised every single Fleming Bond work including the short stories (of which this film isn't actually based)? You're a Bond fan living in a dream world if you are.

Reality is that big name, quality screenwriters like Paul Haggis have a lot of work and though he got well aquainted with Casino Royale for the film he can't have time to read every single Bond book and short story before he's deemed qualified to write a film. This has nothing to do with Quantum of Solace besides anything they may have altered and penned in long after haggis finished on the script, so he had no reason to know what that highly unusual and complicated meaning was that Fleming came up with.

Here all we have is "no comment", and some hot air about him not liking the title...by MTV. MTV...people here actually believe that they don't slant stories for shock factor? "Bond screenwriter doesn't like new title!! Shock, Horror!"...er no, again all he said was "no comment".

This doesn't make him a bad writer or unfit for Bond, he did an excellent job on CR as the script was blatantly miles better than anything P&W ever did before.

And here you are making the assumption that because Haggis worked on it - all the good parts must be his and all the bad parts must belong to P&W.

Do I have to point out all the times the same set of writers & production personnel worked on two or more films yet we got radically different results quality wise?

Sure,

TND: Decent but became pretty bad towards the end
TWINE: Just plain bad
DAD: God awful

CR: Amazing

People seem to be falling over themselves to say that "ooh - they brought in Haggis - that showed they meant business. He's the king!"

Not seen anyone say that myself, seen support for his hiring, especially after Casino Royale turned out to be far removed from anything of recent times and excellent.

Well, let's see - they brought in Oscar Winner (ooh!) Paul Dehn to polish Goldfinger.

Should we give all credit of Goldfinger's success to Dehn?

I'm not familiar with his works and the works of the other writer, so I couldn't tell you which was more likely to have given the best to that script in terms of quality writing.

Are you just playing devil's advocat or do you actually think it would be better not to have Haggis work on the Bond scripts any more? Just P&W maybe?

Edited by Leon, 27 February 2008 - 01:51 AM.

[Harmsway]

Does someone have a subtitled DVD that denotes when a plot point or a line of dialog has come from Haggis and not P&W? A script version where P&W input is colored red and Haggis' colored blue?

Good points. But we do have interviews from P&W and Haggis that start to dissect a little of what was different about their drafts. Haggis was very responsible for the final shape CASINO ROYALE took. Some things that didn't exist in P&W's draft:

-The Madagscar chase.
-The stairwell fight and its aftermath.
-The Venice finale as it finally took shape.

Say what you will, but that makes a pretty big impact, in addition to a lot of the dialogue tweaks he was brought in to edit.

But if CR was more Haggis than P&W, he could have asked for arbitration and had his name first in the credits.

P&W were probably very much responsible for the basic structure of CASINO ROYALE (and that's the kind of thing that would define primary credit). But that still could have been a crappy screenplay.

Often the problems with these screenplays lies not in structural issues, but in the details. And while I admit this is a guess (but one based on P&W's prior quality of work and how nice the CR script turned out), but I imagine that it was Haggis' work on polishing it up that ultimately gave it the level of quality that it did. I think it's a little telling that Babs and MGW refused to give Craig the script until Haggis had polished it, or thought that Haggis was really needed in the first place.

[HildebrandRarity]

It appears that while he was on and off the picket line (from, what, late October to February 13?) he could not have been bothered to keep some sort of meaningful tabs on a project on which he CLEARLY has 3rd writing credit. (It seems as if he handed the draft and that was it. Finis! Kaput! That was it!)

It also appears that in the days and weeks since the unveiling of the title ("not my title") up until this past Sunday Haggis had not bothered asking anyone about what the title means...as if he could care less (or, perhaps, as if his ego had taken a hit.) Curious, wouldn't you agree, that someone so attached to one of the biggest projects of the year (indeed, the biggest for the massive Sony corporation) could not be bothered to take the time to inquire what 'quantum of solace' means within the context of "his script".

Come to think of it...it's both amusing as well as pathetic.

It appears that the driving forces behind this production, primarily Michael W., Barbara B., Daniel C. and Marc F. are driving full force ahead WITHOUT the help of the 3rd credited writer on this project...as if they don't really require his services. Business as usual.

The more I think about it, the more I feel that Casino Royale (2007) was more down to Ian Fleming and Daniel Craig than Paul Haggis.

I only care about the quality of the end product come Nov 7. Haggis, it appears, is no longer involved. I suspect they deliver the goods regardless...and that they were always going to deliver the goods regardless. The individuals on the team that remains are willing, it appears, to subjugate themselves to the greater good of creating an outstanding James Bond movie. Haggis, I imagine, will have been duly paid and his name will appear as a footnote, i.e. third writing credit, to those watching the event on the big screen.

[kneelbeforezod]

its getting more and more surreal!

[Harmsway]

It appears that while he was on the picket line (from, what, October to February 13?) he could not have been bothered to keep tabs on a project on which he CLEARLY has 3rd writing credit.

It's more EON's job to keep him in the loop than it is his own, actually.

It appears that the driving forces behind this production, primarily Michael Wilson, Barbara Broccoli, Daniel Craig and Marc Forester are driving full force ahead WITHOUT the help of the 3rd credited writer on this project.

Sure. That was understood during the writer's strike.

...as if they don't really require his services.

They did require his services, and he lended himself to them. Way back three months ago, when he was slaving over the screenplay.

Haggis, I imagine, will have been duly paid and his name will appear as a footnote, i.e. third writing credit, to those watching the event on the big screen.

It's technically the second credit, which is still rather prominent (and we have yet to know how the credits will appear on the final poster). P&W count as one credit - they write as a team.

its getting more and more surreal!

It's quite ridiculous, honestly.

[Leon]

its getting more and more surreal!

Indeed, I think this quote sums it up nicely:

it's both amusing as well as pathetic.

Typical anal Bond fans thinking that because he worked on a Bond film that Bond should be his life.

[Bondian]

its getting more and more surreal!

Or even better Surreyall.

I'm gonna open up a new site called www.paulhiggisisnotbondorevenlikesthefactheswrittenthebloodything.com.

Damn. Thought that Python sketch would have calmed things down a bit. lol

[kneelbeforezod]

Slightly off topic but...

One of the strangest arguments I hear when people criticise Haggis is that he is "arthouse". There was somebody on here really laying into Haggis, despite having never seen a single one of his films. He refused to entertain the idea of actually watching one, insisting that Haggis was "arthouse" and an "Oscar-baiter".

The fact is that Paul Haggis may write about some very serious issues, but his main skill is making films which deal with those issues that are totally accessible. Lars Von Trier he 'aint.

If i can bring my mum into this: she wouldn't go near an "arthouse" film if you paid her... and yet she cried at Million Dollar Baby... she cried at In The Valley of Elah... I can't confirm if she cried at Crash but she certainly enjoyed it.

Anyway, just felt like getting that off my chest. Seriously, if you think Haggis is arthouse you should stick to Good Luck Chuck...

[DaveBond21]

This thread was OK at first, but now it's gone a bit weird.

[doublenoughtspy]

Are you just playing devil's advocat or do you actually think it would be better not to have Haggis work on the Bond scripts any more? Just P&W maybe?

I'm playing Devil's advocate. The more the merrier - I think 3 writers are better than 1 any day.

[Jim]

How vigorous all this is.

I wonder what happens when some real news turns up?

[Colossus]

This thread was OK at first, but now it's gone a bit weird.

Those are the best kind of threads.

[Zorin Industries]

Please - let's leave out stupid voting tactics like this thread begins with. Once again, there is a gaping cavernous Ken Adam sized hole between fan and film maker. The truth right now is that no-one knows what QUANTUM OF SOLACE means in the context of the final film itself. Well, Eon do. And so - probably - does Paul Haggis as I very much doubt he would be up for divulging key plot points in a red carpet interview.

And just because something doesn't follow a classical Hollywood paradigm when it comes to structure does not make it 'arthouse'. If we are describing 'arthouse' as being different from the norm, then surely DR NO was an 'arthouse' film upon its release as no-one had seen that sort of spy thriller before.

Let's leave Paul Haggis alone. And let's leave the film makers to make their films and the fans to complain about what they like. This fever pitch for information on QUANTUM OF SOLACE is baffling me....

Edited by Zorin Industries, 27 February 2008 - 12:21 PM.

[stamper]

It's because the title sucks.

[dodge]

It's because the title sucks.

Thank you. Finally, someone is able to put the whole thing into clear, Chaucerian English. Now, the body slams against Paul Haggis--whom we are lucky to have--for his off the cuff remark...would you be with me in calling the horrible hullaballoo "doody ka-ka"?

By the way, in closing, does anyone really expect any-bleepin'-body to say Marc Forster isn't doing an absolutely fabulous job? Has any-bleepin-body in Eon history ever said "We picked the wrong director"? If the film fails blame Paul Haggis....if it works, say Marc Foster rewrote the script?

[Lounge Lizard]

The title Quantum of Solace, in literary terms, translates to:

'Be nice to each other.'

The title Quantum of Solace, in movie terms, translates to:

'Can you spot the two O's and the 7 dropping in there? Good!'

Which is all right with me, I guess.

Some people blame Broccoli & Wilson for picking the wrong title. Others blame Haggis for not supporting said title. And then there's people who are worried that maybe the film has too many talented people on board, and that vain, evil Hollywood types will all try and bypass EON in order to impose their own visions on the project, transforming the James Bond franchise into arty, liberal-minded Oscar-bait owing more to Gabriel Garcia Marquez than to Ian Fleming. Frankly, I find all those worries quite baffling.

[HildebrandRarity]

I have a couple of legitimate questions:

Is Haggis now basically done with this production and is no longer needed by Eon in any capacity? Is he exclusively working on other projects and, as a result, does not have the time to spend on this production?

These are even-handed questions and i'm curious as to whether anyone here has any inkling of the answers to the above questions.

Any answers in the affirmative would suggest that his sole contribution to this James Bond film was in the fleshing out of the story by Purvis and Wade (i.e. writing the screenplay) sometime between summer and the day before the WGA strike last year. And, as a result, his involvement ended then and there on or about November 4th, I believe.

So, in the end, his involvement in Quantum Of Solace (which he did not know would be the name of the film...and, then obviously, did not know how the team was going to tie-in/reference the title to the film) concluded over a year prior to it's release...IF the answers to the above question are in the affirmative.

The answers would be revealing in that it would provide some indication as to how 'important' his contribution is to Q0S is, given that his first draft was binned given that he'd be disconnected with the project for a year prior to the Nov 7, 2008 release and given that a lot of creative work is going on on this thing between Nov 4, 2007 and Nov 7, 2008.

[Harmsway]

Is Haggis now basically done with this production and is no longer needed by Eon in any capacity?

Yes.

Is he exclusively working on other projects and, as a result, does not have the time to spend on this production?

He's working on HONEYMOON WITH HARRY. I don't know if it's a matter of him no longer having the time to spend on QoS (though it might be... I know he has to get working on that film), but EON clearly seems satisfied with the job he did and has no desire to bring him back for more work, and so he'll naturally move along to his own projects.

So, in the end, his involvement in Quantum Of Solace (which he did not know would be the name of the film...and, then obviously, did not know how the team was going to tie-in/reference the title to the film) concluded over a year prior to it's release...IF the answers to the above question are in the affirmative.

Quite right.

[HildebrandRarity]

Is Haggis now basically done with this production and is no longer needed by Eon in any capacity?

Yes.

Is he exclusively working on other projects and, as a result, does not have the time to spend on this production?

He's working on HONEYMOON WITH HARRY. I don't know if it's a matter of him no longer having the time to spend on QoS (though it might be... I know he has to get working on that film), but EON clearly seems satisfied with the job he did and has no desire to bring him back for more work, and so he'll naturally move along to his own projects.

So, in the end, his involvement in Quantum Of Solace (which he did not know would be the name of the film...and, then obviously, did not know how the team was going to tie-in/reference the title to the film) concluded over a year prior to it's release...IF the answers to the above question are in the affirmative.

Quite right.

OK. So...what does it mean to have a contracted employee not be part of the creative decision-making process between Nov 4, 2007 and Nov 4-7, 2008? Does it mean that he's mainly a hired gun for fleshing out a story and nothing more? If so, where, in your mind, does he fit in the creative process for Q0S in terms of importance? Objectively speaking? Given that he spent three-odd months on an 18-odd month process?

[Harmsway]

OK. So...what does it mean to have a contracted employee not be part of the creative decision-making process between Nov 4, 2007 and Nov 4-7, 2008?

Not much for a writer, whose role in the creative decision-making process is often limited to the writing stage. A writer contributes by writing the screenplay, and Haggis had already done that. I think EON felt confident that they could make what small changes needed to be made and took the initiative of doing so.

Does it mean that he's mainly a hired gun for fleshing out a story and nothing more?

That's how it is for most screenwriters. Even ones as big as Paul Haggis. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is Forster's film, not Haggis' (Haggis' desired story direction with the film was ultimately changed, remember?).

If so, where, in your mind, does he fit in the creative process for Q0S in terms of importance? Objectively speaking?

He's still quite important. Just as any very good screenwriter is important. They lay the foundation for what the director and cast will do, and if that foundation isn't solid, things can fall apart.

[HildebrandRarity]

Thanks, Harmsway, for once again providing us with your even-handed and lucid observations.

[00Twelve]

Is Haggis now basically done with this production and is no longer needed by Eon in any capacity?

Yes.

Is he exclusively working on other projects and, as a result, does not have the time to spend on this production?

He's working on HONEYMOON WITH HARRY. I don't know if it's a matter of him no longer having the time to spend on QoS (though it might be... I know he has to get working on that film), but EON clearly seems satisfied with the job he did and has no desire to bring him back for more work, and so he'll naturally move along to his own projects.

So, in the end, his involvement in Quantum Of Solace (which he did not know would be the name of the film...and, then obviously, did not know how the team was going to tie-in/reference the title to the film) concluded over a year prior to it's release...IF the answers to the above question are in the affirmative.

Quite right.

OK. So...what does it mean to have a contracted employee not be part of the creative decision-making process between Nov 4, 2007 and Nov 4-7, 2008? Does it mean that he's mainly a hired gun for fleshing out a story and nothing more? If so, where, in your mind, does he fit in the creative process for Q0S in terms of importance? Objectively speaking? Given that he spent three-odd months on an 18-odd month process?

Well, it's a bit like the contribution of Verdi to a current Met production of Rigoletto. The original score and libretto has been re-interpreted and re-interpreted, staged differently, directed differently, orchestrated differently, translated differently, and cast differently...hundreds of times. He wasn't around for any of that, nor would have probably approved of every creative decision used to interpret and present his work. But in the end, it's still a "Verdi opera". Haggis wasn't the only writer on QOS, by any stretch of the imagination, but we've got good indications that many of his ideas and lines were used (the first Haggis draft from P&W's original outlines was tossed). I'm sure there can be arguments made to that. However, in any case, the writers don't often get to stick around to authorize the director's decisions. That doesn't diminish the impact of their participation. The writers write it, then they bow out and move on.

Edit: And, naturally, Harms can sweep in and take care of his own discussions with much more efficiency than me.

[dodge]

OK. So...what does it mean to have a contracted employee not be part of the creative decision-making process between Nov 4, 2007 and Nov 4-7, 2008?

Not much for a writer, whose role in the creative decision-making process is often limited to the writing stage. A writer contributes by writing the screenplay, and Haggis had already done that. I think EON felt confident that they could make what small changes needed to be made and took the initiative of doing so.

Does it mean that he's mainly a hired gun for fleshing out a story and nothing more?

That's how it is for most screenwriters. Even ones as big as Paul Haggis. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is Forster's film, not Haggis' (Haggis' desired story direction with the film was ultimately changed, remember?).

If so, where, in your mind, does he fit in the creative process for Q0S in terms of importance? Objectively speaking?

He's still quite important. Just as any very good screenwriter is important. They lay the foundation for what the director and cast will do, and if that foundation isn't solid, things can fall apart.

Could we back up a moment here for just a wee bit more of your expertise? No one has taken the slightest exception to what you have just said here, yet a while back it was generally agreed that Forster would not rewrite the script. Because that's what an auteur would do--and MF was not an auteur.

Do you mean it's his film in the same sense that Bond film has been the reigning director's? Or will this truly be A Film by Marc Forster?

If so, imo, there can be no trashing of Haggis if the film tanks in November. Auteur Glory=Complete Accountability.

[Harmsway]

No one has taken the slightest exception to what you have just said here, yet a while back it was generally agreed that Forster would not rewrite the script. Because that's what an auteur would do--and MF was not an auteur.

Most "auteur" directors don't write their own scripts.

Do you mean it's his film in the same sense that Bond film has been the reigning director's?

Well, largely yes. DIE ANOTHER DAY was undeniably Tamahori's film, just as CASINO ROYALE was undeniably Campbell's film. All Bond directors are supervised by EON, but EON aren't dictators. They might put their foot down occasionally, but if you actually look at the production of the post-Cubby films, they usually pick their director and take an encouraging role, rather than a dominating one.

I imagine with Forster's artistic clout, that control has increased a little bit more. He's definitely had a large part in shaping QUANTUM OF SOLACE into what it is. This is not to the exclusion of MGW/BB's role, but in the end it's Forster directing the camera, not EON. It's going to be Forster's film in close to the same way that HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN was Alfonso Cuaron's film.

If so, imo, there can be no trashing of Haggis if the film tanks in November.

There's no way in hell QUANTUM OF SOLACE is going to utterly tank in November.

But it does seem Haggis has a "get out of responsibility" bit on QUANTUM OF SOLACE, since the story didn't unfold in the direction he suggested.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Where have you taken my thread, mes amis?

[00Twelve]

Never fear, Blofeld, these threads always come back around to the point.


Haggis.

Quantum.

Solace.

"Huh?"

Go.

[Loomis]

Let me get this straight:

1. P&W came up with a story for BOND 22.

2. They wrote a draft screenplay.

3. Haggis came onboard, rewrote their draft and added certain story elements that were....

4. REJECTED! (will we ever know why? Maybe not ) by Broccoli/Wilson/Forster/The Powers That Be.

5. Haggis then wrote a completely new story and script, which is currently being filmed.

Is that correct?