Tamahori for BOND 21 now!
#1
Posted 06 September 2002 - 06:00 PM
But MGM has historically been very short sided (and cheap) when it comes to this sort of thing.
#2
Posted 06 September 2002 - 06:33 PM
#3
Posted 06 September 2002 - 11:28 PM
It's MGM.
#4
Posted 06 September 2002 - 11:40 PM
Originally posted by zencat
How do we know they haven't done that?
It's MGM.
Hehehehhehe, I had a good laugh from reading that
And its very very true
#5
Posted 06 September 2002 - 11:48 PM
Bond is facing some tuff competition this year, but it looks like Bond may take the crown.
#6
Posted 06 September 2002 - 11:54 PM
#7
Posted 06 September 2002 - 11:58 PM
My final decission will be made after I've been to Die Another Day
#8
Posted 07 September 2002 - 02:41 AM
#9
Posted 07 September 2002 - 06:40 AM
#10
Posted 07 September 2002 - 07:50 AM
#11
Posted 07 September 2002 - 08:21 AM
As for the change in directors, didn't they try and get Campbell back for TND but he turned them down. No one wanted Spottiswood again after that difficult shoot and then some complained Apted seemed overwhelmed by the scope of Bond and out of his element when it came to action. So it wasn't as if before they had this GREAT director that everyone wanted back but they decided to pass and find another.
But if DAD fulfills it's promise I say they latch on to Tamahori b/c with the producer's insistence on getting non A-level directors who won't demand final cut it's harder to find a director of the right caliber to do a Bond film. If they find one in Tamahori, then they should by all means hold on to him and also get some continuity for the series behind the camera.
#12
Posted 07 September 2002 - 08:42 AM
#13
Posted 07 September 2002 - 03:28 PM
#14
Posted 07 September 2002 - 03:34 PM
#15
Posted 07 September 2002 - 04:08 PM
#16
Posted 07 September 2002 - 05:22 PM
MGM may whine about the odd girl here and there, and even market others here and there. Surely they can only offer approval or disapproval for the director but ultimately it is Eon who say that they're going with such and such a director.
I'm all for having a crack at MGM where necessary but on this occasion, let us see what Eon proposes to do about this.
#17
Posted 07 September 2002 - 11:43 PM
Oh yeah, and Tattersall too!
#18
Posted 08 September 2002 - 08:28 AM
#19
Posted 08 September 2002 - 11:46 AM
#20
Posted 08 September 2002 - 03:19 PM
MGM is the one who pays the bills so they have everything to do with it. Eon can say, "We'd like Tamahori back," but MGM has to agree and make Tamahori an attractive deal. Remember, MGM and Eon are 50/50 owners in Bond and choice of director is not something a studio let's a producer decide alone.Originally posted by Simon
Am I right in thinking that it is nothing to do with MGM but Eon, who have to do the signing?
#21
Posted 08 September 2002 - 06:25 PM
From the looks of the film so far, I agree with most everyone about Tamahori and Tattersall.
Dave
#22
Posted 08 September 2002 - 07:05 PM
#23
Posted 08 September 2002 - 10:11 PM
#24
Posted 04 October 2002 - 06:58 PM