99 replies to this topic

[draxingtonstanley]

MASTER AND COMMANDER, IMO, is about as perfect as movies get. It was sadly passed over, but was the best film of its year, and is certainly one of the best of the decade. I would be ecstatic if Weir was brought on board.

I totally agree. I loved that film,still hoping for the next Jack Aubrey installment. Peter Weir as Bond director would have me pretty excited. Unlikely though. Sadly.

[crheath]

I say give Tony Scott a chance. Crimson Tide? Top Gun? Didn't he interview to direct QOS? I was against him at first, but after Marc Forster's jiggling camera and confusing editing, I think he would have done better.

We need to go back to hiring an action director for Bond.

Edited by crheath, 19 November 2008 - 04:57 PM.

[mario007]

I would be happy with a good script and any director who hates fast cuts and shaky cam!!!

Edited by mario007, 19 November 2008 - 02:56 AM.

[Harmsway]

I saw give Tony Scott a chance. Crimson Tide? Top Gun? Didn't he interview to direct QOS? I was against him at first, but after Marc Forster's jiggling camera and confusing editing, I think he would have done better.

You don't like Forster's camera work and editing and yet you want to bring in Tony Scott, the man who has become the King of Irritating Camera Movements and Over-Editing? Explain your logic.

We need to go back to hiring an action director for Bond.

No, we just need to find a talented director who's still capable of handling action sequences. They're not impossible to find, you know.

[DKelly]

My vote goes to Danny Boyle. Based on his films 28 Days Later and Sunshine(and considering the fact that his newest film, Slumdog Millionaire, is getting rave reviews), I think he has potential to make a great Bond film.

Edited by DKelly, 19 November 2008 - 03:43 AM.

[Sir James Moloney]

Wish list:

Peter Weir

Sam Mendes

Alfonso Cuarón

Joe Wright


Any of these and the film being called Shatterhand and I´d be of to the moon.

[Mister E]

MASTER AND COMMANDER, IMO, is about as perfect as movies get. It was sadly passed over, but was the best film of its year, and is certainly one of the best of the decade. I would be ecstatic if Weir was brought on board.

Well are opinions greatly differ. I loved Russel Crowe but I wasn't too crazy about the film.

I saw give Tony Scott a chance. Crimson Tide? Top Gun? Didn't he interview to direct QOS? I was against him at first, but after Marc Forster's jiggling camera and confusing editing, I think he would have done better.

You don't like Forster's camera work and editing and yet you want to bring in Tony Scott, the man who has become the King of Irritating Camera Movements and Over-Editing? Explain your logic.

We need to go back to hiring an action director for Bond.

No, we just need to find a talented director who's still capable of handling action sequences. They're not impossible to find, you know.

Agreed on both counts. Anyway, I remember someone suggested in another thread that maybe TV directors could give Bond a go ? I think Jon Jones should be considered.

[Elvenstar]

Im all 4 Vaughn, Mann, Cuaron and Weir.
I love Gore Verbinsky but it's very unlikely that he decides to direct a Bond movie.
I dont like Wright at all. He seemed to watch 'Russian Ark' by our own Sokurov a 1000 times and then it strangely became 'his style'

[Zorin Industries]

Paul W.S. Anderson

Michael Apted

Michael Bay

Danny Cannon

Rob Cohen

Brett Ratner

Eli Roth

Roger Spottiswoode

Sylvester Stallone

Lee Tamahori

Simon West

John Woo

Really?

I would say they are all wrong. Or have done it already and not been well received.

Although I know he's said that he won't return for Bond 23, I'd love to see Forster return for another film. I loved what he did with QUANTUM OF SOLACE, and I'd love to see him give us another Bond film.

Other than Forster, I'd like to see:

Gavin Hood (RENDITION & TSOTSI)

Tony Scott (SPY GAME & MAN ON FIRE)

Michael Mann (COLLATERAL & HEAT)

Yes to Gavin Hood. You are thinking out the box here. Others take note.

Tony Scott has been approached and creative differences led to things not working.

Micheal Mann doesn't make good films. Watch the floodgates open. His films are very inaccessible (sans MOHICANS). COLLATERAL and MIAMI VICE are soulless.

And let's not cast a director because he has included Bond like action in his films guys. That is like wanting to cast Clive Owen because he has worn a tuxedo in THE CROUPIER.

[Loomis]

It's not like Marc Forster is a truly great director.

Which directors currently active (if any) would you define as great?

It's hard to say, and depends by what parameters you define "great." Any way you do it, I think, Forster has so far failed to match up... he's a quite good director, but he has yet to make a real triumph.

I'll have to think hard about this one and get back to you. I've seen plenty of great films from recent years, but I don't know that I'd consider the filmmakers behind each one of them great filmmakers. I feel like I need perspective to make the call. Paul Thomas Anderson, maybe, or perhaps David Fincher.

Well, by "great" I mean in the league of Bergman, Eisenstein, Fellini, Kurosawa, Satyajit Ray, Truffaut - that kind of thing.

I mean a director who almost 100% of the time comes up with a film that's absolutely brilliant, and who also manages to change cinema with his unique style and world view.

Myself, I don't see any directors like that today, although that may be down to ignorance on my part. I guess you could make a case for someone like Zhang Yimou. But Paul Thomas Anderson? David Fincher? Puh-leaze.

[bond 16.05.72]

Paul W.S. Anderson

Michael Apted

Michael Bay

Danny Cannon

Rob Cohen

Brett Ratner

Eli Roth

Roger Spottiswoode

Sylvester Stallone

Lee Tamahori

Simon West

John Woo

Really?

I would say they are all wrong. Or have done it already and not been well received.

Although I know he's said that he won't return for Bond 23, I'd love to see Forster return for another film. I loved what he did with QUANTUM OF SOLACE, and I'd love to see him give us another Bond film.

Other than Forster, I'd like to see:

Gavin Hood (RENDITION & TSOTSI)

Tony Scott (SPY GAME & MAN ON FIRE)

Michael Mann (COLLATERAL & HEAT)

Yes to Gavin Hood. You are thinking out the box here. Others take note.

Tony Scott has been approached and creative differences led to things not working.

Micheal Mann doesn't make good films. Watch the floodgates open. His films are very inaccessible (sans MOHICANS). COLLATERAL and MIAMI VICE are soulless.

And let's not cast a director because he has included Bond like action in his films guys. That is like wanting to cast Clive Owen because he has worn a tuxedo in THE CROUPIER.

Zorin I agree with you alot but Mann doesn't make great films, you've probbaly picked 3 of his worst there.

Manhunter ia superb and 10 times better than Red Dragon, Heat is a masterpiece and Insider isn't far behind.

I guess you don't like him and to be honest I'm not sure he'd suit Bond but doesn't make good films thats funny.

[Zorin Industries]

My notions right now would be....


Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck

Paul Andrew Williams

Neil Marshall

Kevin MacDonald

John Maybury

Nick Love

Fernando Meirelles

[avl]

The Michael Mann of Last of the Mohicans would be a dream come true. Since then though, not so much.

[Harmsway]

Well, by "great" I mean in the league of Bergman, Eisenstein, Fellini, Kurosawa, Satyajit Ray, Truffaut - that kind of thing.

I mean a director who almost 100% of the time comes up with a film that's absolutely brilliant, and who also manages to change cinema with his unique style and world view.

If you're going to define it like that, then no, I don't see anybody, but it's always hard to define the "greats" without the benefit of perspective. There may very well be a few in that vein.

Myself, I don't see any directors like that today, although that may be down to ignorance on my part. I guess you could make a case for someone like Zhang Yimou.

I don't think Yimou's in that class.

But Paul Thomas Anderson? David Fincher? Puh-leaze.

Well, again, I didn't know what standard you were going by. Compared to Forster and a lot of their peers, these guys certainly are great, if only for having produced some great films. It seems to me that we have some really great films these days, just not earth-shattering directors who are changing the world with their world view.

Though I do imagine that I consider Paul Thomas Anderson much more highly than you do, based on our very different reactions to THERE WILL BE BLOOD.

[Judo chop]

Though I do imagine that I consider Paul Thomas Anderson much more highly than you do, based on very different reactions to THERE WILL BE BLOOD.

P.T.A. would be an exciting, high-anxiety choice for me. There’s not enough data for me to feel ‘confident’ (for whatever that would be worth) that he’d be right for Bond, but the imagination runs wild with the thought.

[DamnCoffee]

I'm going to be awkward and say Forster. Since he was far from being a failure.

I think people are pissed with him because they think that there's too much action and Forster was trying too hard in making it feel like a Bond movie.

[Zorin Industries]

I'm going to be awkward and say Forster. Since he was far from being a failure.

I think people are pissed with him because they think that there's too much action and Forster was trying too hard in making it feel like a Bond movie.

That's exactly the name I keep coming back to. But he will not be around to have a Bond film out in 2010 as he is doing his zombie flick.

[Loomis]

It seems to me that we have some really great films these days, just not earth-shattering directors who are changing the world with their world view.

Agreed. The only director I see out there who's doing stuff that's new and earthshattering and making a lot of waves with his world view is Michael Moore, but admire him as I do I'd hardly rank him alongside the likes of Eisenstein, Fellini, Kurosawa and so on.

I guess you can only identify true giants of cinema, literature or anything else with the benefit of an awful lot of hindsight, but I just don't see any real titans operating any more. Who is Joe Wright compared to David Lean? Who are cigar-toting admen like Ridley Scott? Are Park Chan-wook and Wong Kar Wai, lovely though a couple of their flicks undoubtedly are, the true heirs of Kurosawa, Mizoguchi and Ozu? I'd laugh if my heart were not so heavy for my beloved cinema.

I mean, there's obviously Stallone, but other than Sly....

ETA: Actually, maybe there is a director out there who bears comparison with the all-time greats: Kitano Takeshi. Apart from him, though, all I hear is the chirping of crickets, basically. Bertolucci is another vague possibility, but, c'mon, don't make me scrape the damn barrel here.

[avl]

I'm going to be awkward and say Forster. Since he was far from being a failure.

I think people are pissed with him because they think that there's too much action and Forster was trying too hard in making it feel like a Bond movie.

That's exactly the name I keep coming back to. But he will not be around to have a Bond film out in 2010 as he is doing his zombie flick.

I'd like Cuaron. His long-take action in Children of Men (a masterpiece IMHO) would be an interestingly different take on Bond. It would definitely continue to "shake things up" as Babs put it

[plankattack]

Tony Gilroy.

[crheath]

I saw give Tony Scott a chance. Crimson Tide? Top Gun? Didn't he interview to direct QOS? I was against him at first, but after Marc Forster's jiggling camera and confusing editing, I think he would have done better.

You don't like Forster's camera work and editing and yet you want to bring in Tony Scott, the man who has become the King of Irritating Camera Movements and Over-Editing? Explain your logic.

We need to go back to hiring an action director for Bond.

No, we just need to find a talented director who's still capable of handling action sequences. They're not impossible to find, you know.

Crimson Tide and Top Gun had irritating camera work? Yeah, I guess that's why they bombed so badly...

[Harmsway]

Crimson Tide and Top Gun had irritating camera work? Yeah, I guess that's why they bombed so badly...

TOP GUN and CRIMSON TIDE aren't indicative of the current Tony Scott. He's in a different place now. Since those films, he's devolved as a filmmaker, now producing over-edited, bizarrely shot tripe (see: MAN ON FIRE, DOMINO, DEJA VU).

[Harmsway]

I guess you can only identify true giants of cinema, literature or anything else with the benefit of an awful lot of hindsight, but I just don't see any real titans operating any more.

While I don't, either, I'm not going to make a verdict. A lot of the greatest films that people now hold to be brilliant were somewhat passed over during their time, and it takes a long time for some of these filmmakers to develop their reputations. So we'll see.

Who is Joe Wright compared to David Lean?

Well, nobody. But that's Joe Wright. I wouldn't put Wright in the league of the best directors working right now, much less the best directors of all time.

And the more I think about it, the more I think Paul Thomas Anderson could very well end up on the list of all-time great directors. He's just getting started, fist off, and I see enough promise in him to imagine him becoming a giant later on. But I do see THERE WILL BE BLOOD as one of the all-time great cinematic achievements, so...

[crheath]

Crimson Tide and Top Gun had irritating camera work? Yeah, I guess that's why they bombed so badly...

TOP GUN and CRIMSON TIDE aren't indicative of the current Tony Scott. He's in a different place now. Since those films, he's devolved as a filmmaker, now producing over-edited, bizarrely shot tripe (see: MAN ON FIRE, DOMINO, DEJA VU).

Haven't seen those. I'll take a look and rent them. Thanks.

Edited by crheath, 19 November 2008 - 07:33 PM.

[Zorin Industries]

I guess you can only identify true giants of cinema, literature or anything else with the benefit of an awful lot of hindsight, but I just don't see any real titans operating any more.

While I don't, either, I'm not going to make a verdict. A lot of the greatest films that people now hold to be brilliant were somewhat passed over during their time, and it takes a long time for some of these filmmakers to develop their reputations. So we'll see.

Who is Joe Wright compared to David Lean?

Well, nobody. But that's Joe Wright. I wouldn't put Wright in the league of the best directors working right now, much less the best directors of all time.

And the more I think about it, the more I think Paul Thomas Anderson could very well end up on the list of all-time great directors. He's just getting started, fist off, and I see enough promise in him to imagine him becoming a giant later on. But I do see THERE WILL BE BLOOD as one of the all-time great cinematic achievements, so...

I agree that Anderson is a great, great director. But I would cite MAGNOLIA, BOOGIE NIGHTS, PUNCH DRUNK LOVE and THERE WILL BE BLOOD in an attempt to argue against him being a newcomer. Far from it. Bond would be in superb hands though with him. Shame it would never happen.

[Loomis]

And the more I think about it, the more I think Paul Thomas Anderson could very well end up on the list of all-time great directors. He's just getting started, fist off, and I see enough promise in him to imagine him becoming a giant later on. But I do see THERE WILL BE BLOOD as one of the all-time great cinematic achievements, so...

How do you rate his other stuff, though? I quite liked BOOGIE NIGHTS (flawed though it is) and MAGNOLIA, but haven't seen anything else he's done. Barring, of course, THERE WILL BE BLOOD, which I find overrated.

[Harmsway]

I agree that Anderson is a great, great director. But I would cite MAGNOLIA, BOOGIE NIGHTS, PUNCH DRUNK LOVE and THERE WILL BE BLOOD in an attempt to argue against him being a newcomer. Far from it.

I don't mean he's a newcomer, 'cause he isn't. He's been around for a number of years. But I we're still in the early period of his career as a director, and (assuming all goes well), he has a long, promising future ahead of him. I have the feeling that with Anderson, the best is yet to come.

Bond would be in superb hands though with him. Shame it would never happen.

Yeah. That said, though, there have been odd rumblings that Paul Thomas Anderson wants to do the METAL GEAR SOLID adaptation.

How do you rate his other stuff, though?

Well, he's only made HARD EIGHT, BOOGIE NIGHTS, MAGNOLIA, PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE, and THERE WILL BE BLOOD.

Of the list, I've seen all but HARD EIGHT, and liked 'em all to a reasonable degree, my favorites being MAGNOLIA and THERE WILL BE BLOOD. PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE is probably the weakest of his that I've seen, though there's still plenty to commend it.

[Loomis]

Bond would be in superb hands though with him.

Hmmm.... I don't agree. Sure, he's good at weighty epics like BOOGIE, MAGNOLIA and BLOOD, but Bond? C'mon, it's a totally different ballgame. Saying Anderson would be great for 007 would be like saying Kurosawa would have been great for 007, simply because he's a filmmaker of proven ability.

If we're going to suggest famous American directors for Bond, let's at least go first to the likes of Scorsese and Tarantino, who are either 007 fans or have made films with Bondian moments, or both.

[crheath]

Bond would be in superb hands though with him.

Hmmm.... I don't agree. Sure, he's good at weighty epics like BOOGIE, MAGNOLIA and BLOOD, but Bond? C'mon, it's a totally different ballgame. Saying Anderson would be great for 007 would be like saying Kurosawa would have been great for 007, simply because he's a filmmaker of proven ability.

If we're going to suggest famous American directors for Bond, let's at least go first to the likes of Scorsese and Tarantino, who are either 007 fans or have made films with Bondian moments, or both.

I don't think Scorsese would be interested. Also, didn't they turn down Tarantino?

[Mister E]

If we're going to suggest famous American directors for Bond, let's at least go first to the likes of Scorsese and Tarantino, who are either 007 fans or have made films with Bondian moments, or both.

Scorsese is not going make a Bond film. As for Tarantino, he should never be allowed to say the word Bond.