Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Sam Mendes to direct Bond 23?


902 replies to this topic

#361 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:07 PM

Why is an Oscar winning director willing to entertain Bond in the first place?


I can think of a few reasons.

Every director, and I don't care who he is, has at some point fantasised about making a Bond film. Even someone like Peter Greenaway or Derek Jarman will have at some point or another entertained thoughts of "How would I do Bond?" - this isn't quite the same thing as saying that every director in the world wants to make a Bond film, but I do believe that it's something that's crossed the mind of all - yes, all - filmmakers, even if just as a momentary bit of daydreaming.

Also, the Bond director is a rare breed. There are only eight men walking this earth (nine if you count Irvin Kershner) who can say that they have directed a Bond film. It's a rather exclusive club.

If Mendes - or another Oscar-winning director - were to do Bond, it'd make him look like a more versatile and exciting filmmaker. Unless I'm mistaken, Mendes is currently known mostly as a purveyor of rather ponderous dramas. 007 would be good PR for him - it'd make it look as though he had a bit of spunk and wasn't just an old stick-in-the-mud.

The pay and perks would be - I assume - very good.

Finally, perhaps Mendes has a personal reason for wishing to do BOND 23. Let's say it requires extensive location shooting in China and Mendes has always wanted to spend a few weeks in China. I'm not ascribing such motives to him, but there's a story in William Goldman's Adventures in the Screen Trade about a producer who bought a script set in New Zealand purely because he'd always fancied going there.

Oh, and I'd almost forgotten: Bond is a guaranteed global blockbuster. Mendes will get the largest audiences and grosses of his life. Unless Morgan has indeed come up with a genuinely shocking storyline that's so good that Eon has decided to run with it, it's likely that BOND 23 will be yet another fundamentally conservative piece of good old-fashioned mainstream entertainment, so there'll be limits on what Mendes will be able to "say", but no matter - he'll still be "speaking" to the masses on a scale he's never known, not even with his Best Picture winner AMERICAN BEAUTY. Quite an inducement, as Mr Lazenby said. And Mendes will be able to explore styles and themes that his usual fare doesn't allow for, thus enabling him to stretch himself and hone his craft.

#362 blueman

blueman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2219 posts

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:07 PM

I think Mendes is a firm statement from EON not to leave the path chosen. Bond now is not just action entertainment. It is about the character (...)

Yes, this is the "path" that started with TWINE. But so far I'm not impressed with the outcome. Maybe it is time to re-think

Oh I think if began (or attempted to anyway) back with LTK, just had some fits and starts. Took the full-on reboot to hit the nail on the head IMO, count me as very happy with the results and glad EON seems to be sticking on the "path." B)

#363 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 25814 posts
  • Location:Studio City, CA

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:18 PM

I think Mendes is a firm statement from EON not to leave the path chosen. Bond now is not just action entertainment. It is about the character (...)

Yes, this is the "path" that started with TWINE. But so far I'm not impressed with the outcome. Maybe it is time to re-think?

With the exception of CR, me neither. My fear is with Morgan and Mendes (not to mention P&W who set us on this path) we will just plunge deeper into the "dramatic." Campbell was able to pull this off, to keep CR from becoming morose, because he understands what these movies need to be at the end of day -- great action adventure entertainment. Bond has been hemorrhaging the "fun" quotient from some time now. QOS was acutely un-fun. Nothing in this current creative line-up looks to be addressing that. Just the opposite. But, as always, we'll just have to wait and see. Maybe Morgan or Mendes "gets it" in a way that will surprise us all.

#364 DaveBond21

DaveBond21

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 18026 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia (but from the UK)

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:23 PM

Why is an Oscar winning director willing to entertain Bond in the first place?


I can think of a few reasons.

Every director, and I don't care who he is, has at some point fantasised about making a Bond film. Even someone like Peter Greenaway or Derek Jarman will have at some point or another entertained thoughts of "How would I do Bond?" - this isn't quite the same thing as saying that every director in the world wants to make a Bond film, but I do believe that it's something that's crossed the mind of all - yes, all - filmmakers, even if just as a momentary bit of daydreaming.

Also, the Bond director is a rare breed. There are only eight men walking this earth (nine if you count Irvin Kershner) who can say that they have directed a Bond film. It's a rather exclusive club.

If Mendes - or another Oscar-winning director - were to do Bond, it'd make him look like a more versatile and exciting filmmaker. Unless I'm mistaken, Mendes is currently known mostly as a purveyor of rather ponderous dramas. 007 would be good PR for him - it'd make it look as though he had a bit of spunk and wasn't just an old stick-in-the-mud.

The pay and perks would be - I assume - very good.

Finally, perhaps Mendes has a personal reason for wishing to do BOND 23. Let's say it requires extensive location shooting in China and Mendes has always wanted to spend a few weeks in China. I'm not ascribing such motives to him, but there's a story in William Goldman's Adventures in the Screen Trade about a producer who bought a script set in New Zealand purely because he'd always fancied going there.

Oh, and I'd almost forgotten: Bond is a guaranteed global blockbuster. Mendes will get the largest audiences and grosses of his life. Unless Morgan has indeed come up with a genuinely shocking storyline that's so good that Eon has decided to run with it, it's likely that BOND 23 will be yet another fundamentally conservative piece of good old-fashioned mainstream entertainment, so there'll be limits on what Mendes will be able to "say", but no matter - he'll still be "speaking" to the masses on a scale he's never known, not even with his Best Picture winner AMERICAN BEAUTY. Quite an inducement, as Mr Lazenby said. And Mendes will be able to explore styles and themes that his usual fare doesn't allow for, thus enabling him to stretch himself and hone his craft.


A very well written post, Loomis.

B)

#365 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5608 posts
  • Location:Portland OR

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:34 PM

Yes, this is the "path" that started with TWINE. But so far I'm not impressed with the outcome. Maybe it is time to re-think?


Well since CR is the most critical and commercially successful Bond film in ages, I think many people might like that "path"

I also don't think DAD falls into that "path"

#366 blueman

blueman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2219 posts

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:34 PM

I think Mendes is a firm statement from EON not to leave the path chosen. Bond now is not just action entertainment. It is about the character (...)

Yes, this is the "path" that started with TWINE. But so far I'm not impressed with the outcome. Maybe it is time to re-think?

With the exception of CR, me neither. My fear is with Morgan and Mendes (not to mention P&W who set us on this path) we will just plunge deeper into the "dramatic." Campbell was able to pull this off, to keep CR from becoming morose, because he understands what these movies need to be at the end of day -- great action adventure entertainment. Bond has been hemorrhaging the "fun" quotient from some time now. QOS was acutely un-fun. Nothing in this current creative line-up looks to be addressing that. Just the opposite. But, as always, we'll just have to wait and see. Maybe Morgan or Mendes "gets it" in a way that will surprise us all.

Ah there's the rub: never liked the heightened "fun" quotient EON pasted onto Bond, prefer the comparatively less fun outings like OHMSS and QOS and FRWL and DN. For me the more Fleming-like the better, but get the desire for EON's "fun" Bond, at its best - GF, TSWLM - it's certainly entertaining.

I suspect Morgan/Mendes will roll with the current Bond, but yeah maybe toss in a bit more fun? Darker than QOS would send the fan boards into a Craig-cast-as-Bond sized tizzy.

#367 Dr.Fell

Dr.Fell

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 178 posts

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:38 PM

Also, the Bond director is a rare breed. There are only eight men walking this earth (nine if you count Irvin Kershner) who can say that they have directed a Bond film. It's a rather exclusive club.



I think your over inflating the Bond directors Loomis. B)

#368 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 07 January 2010 - 11:40 PM

I also don't think DAD falls into that "path"


Agreed. I don't think that DAD falls into this "path" either. If anything, the "path" that is being referred to here has delivered some of my absolute favorite Bond films (LTK, CR, QOS), so I'd be more than happy if they keep travelling down it.

#369 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 08 January 2010 - 01:49 AM

So, Haggis is out, then?


Thankfully, yes.

Ah there's the rub: never liked the heightened "fun" quotient EON pasted onto Bond, prefer the comparatively less fun outings like OHMSS and QOS and FRWL and DN. For me the more Fleming-like the better,


Which is why they should be fun, fantastical, pulpy, yet gritty entertainment, with a noir-esque edge - just like the novels.

#370 danslittlefinger

danslittlefinger

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3680 posts
  • Location:“If not here . . . then elsewhere.”

Posted 08 January 2010 - 02:05 AM

On IMDB it states that Mendes is "in negotioations".

Would IMDB post that if they weren't sure? Has that ever happened before?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/

Directed by
Sam Mendes (in negotiations)

Writing credits
(in alphabetical order)

Peter Morgan screenplay
Neal Purvis screenplay
Robert Wade screenplay

#371 Peckinpah1976

Peckinpah1976

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 351 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 08 January 2010 - 02:30 AM

As long as they can cite a source for their information anyone can submit updates to IMDB and given the level of media coverage that the Mendes story has recieved, it wouldn't be difficult.

#372 danslittlefinger

danslittlefinger

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3680 posts
  • Location:“If not here . . . then elsewhere.”

Posted 08 January 2010 - 02:34 AM

As long as they can cite a source for their information anyone can submit updates to IMDB and given the level of media coverage that the Mendes story has recieved, it wouldn't be difficult.


Ah ok. Not too sure how IMDB worked really on a professional level.

I guess to update you have to be a member of IMDB pro.

#373 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 03:08 AM

I think Mendes is a firm statement from EON not to leave the path chosen. Bond now is not just action entertainment. It is about the character (...)

Yes, this is the "path" that started with TWINE. But so far I'm not impressed with the outcome. Maybe it is time to re-think?

With the exception of CR, me neither. My fear is with Morgan and Mendes (not to mention P&W who set us on this path) we will just plunge deeper into the "dramatic." Campbell was able to pull this off, to keep CR from becoming morose, because he understands what these movies need to be at the end of day -- great action adventure entertainment. Bond has been hemorrhaging the "fun" quotient from some time now. QOS was acutely un-fun. Nothing in this current creative line-up looks to be addressing that. Just the opposite.

Indeed.

#374 Quantumofsolace007

Quantumofsolace007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3488 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 03:30 AM

As long as they can cite a source for their information anyone can submit updates to IMDB and given the level of media coverage that the Mendes story has recieved, it wouldn't be difficult.


Ah ok. Not too sure how IMDB worked really on a professional level.

I guess to update you have to be a member of IMDB pro.

MI6.co.uk emailed there memebers saying Mendes is the director.

I want to believe he is i really really do.... but still no confrimation.


or denial.

To quote le chiffe "I'm a little confused"

#375 bondrules

bondrules

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2190 posts
  • Location:America

Posted 08 January 2010 - 03:56 AM

Who are Forrester and Mendez, are they directors as well ? I've some posts on this thread with those names mentioned.

#376 blueman

blueman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2219 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 04:54 AM

So, Haggis is out, then?


Thankfully, yes.

Ah there's the rub: never liked the heightened "fun" quotient EON pasted onto Bond, prefer the comparatively less fun outings like OHMSS and QOS and FRWL and DN. For me the more Fleming-like the better,


Which is why they should be fun, fantastical, pulpy, yet gritty entertainment, with a noir-esque edge - just like the novels.

Fun like asking for a toy snake to be wrapped lengthwise? Just don't recall anything like that in Fleming, you might even say he was dour, at least in comparison to EON's take on his creation.

There's fun to be had reading the novels, but cuz of the fantastical and noir-esque and pulpy yet gritty edge to them. In that regard QOS arguably comes closest to the tone Fleming set in the novels, but doubt 23 goes that extreme, audiences just don't seem to take to it quite as well as to a lighter approach. B)

#377 Dr.Fell

Dr.Fell

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 178 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 05:03 AM

I think Mendes is a firm statement from EON not to leave the path chosen. Bond now is not just action entertainment. It is about the character (...)

Yes, this is the "path" that started with TWINE. But so far I'm not impressed with the outcome. Maybe it is time to re-think?

With the exception of CR, me neither. My fear is with Morgan and Mendes (not to mention P&W who set us on this path) we will just plunge deeper into the "dramatic." Campbell was able to pull this off, to keep CR from becoming morose, because he understands what these movies need to be at the end of day -- great action adventure entertainment. Bond has been hemorrhaging the "fun" quotient from some time now. QOS was acutely un-fun. Nothing in this current creative line-up looks to be addressing that. Just the opposite.

Indeed.



Well a less cyncial view could be that they hiring a team to simply strike a balance with the fun as well as the drama. That is why I think they have yet to dump Purvis and Wade.

#378 Lazenby

Lazenby

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 107 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 05:07 AM

audiences just don't seem to take to it quite as well as to a lighter approach. B)
[/quote]



The issue that I and probably many others had with QOS was that the character of James Bond could have been Jason Bourne or Clark from the Clancy novels. The characteristics that distinguish Bond from all others was not there. No matter how dark Bond 23 may be, as long as Mendes keeps Bond Bond, fans will be happy. I understand that the argument will be that Craig's Bond in QOS was closer to the novels as Dalton was. I like the books, but actually prefer Connery's Bond over Fleming's.

Edited by Lazenby, 08 January 2010 - 05:11 AM.


#379 Dr.Fell

Dr.Fell

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 178 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 05:15 AM

The issue that I and probably many others had with QOS was that the character of James Bond could have been Jason Bourne or Clark from the Clancy novels. The characteristics that distinguish Bond from all others was not there. No matter how dark Bond 23 may be, as long as Mendes keeps Bond Bond, fans will be happy. I understand that the argument will be that Craig's Bond in QOS was closer to the novels as Dalton was. I like the books, but actually prefer Connery's Bond over Fleming's.



I still don't see where the Bourne is coming from no matter how much I dislike QOS. I like the fact that they illustrated Bond's job was messy just like Fleming's novel; I hardly recall a single moment from them when Bond's kills were neat. As matter of fact reading Goldfinger recently I thought of Craig when Bond coldy recounts the killing of that Mexican with his bare hands, staring down a double burbon as he remembers.

#380 blueman

blueman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2219 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 05:20 AM

Fair enough Laz, many on the fan boards do. But Craig in QOS reminded me more of Bond in Fleming's like-minded revenge tale YOLT than the non-Bond characters you cite. Which I greatly appreciated as I consider it EON's great failure to have never filmed - or even tried to film - what is, along with DN and OHMSS, one of Fleming's best novels. With QOS, we got as close as we'll likely ever get to late Fleming Bond and Fleming's YOLT - and I'll very gladly take it. B)

#381 Dr.Fell

Dr.Fell

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 178 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 05:21 AM

Fair enough Laz, many on the fan boards do. But Craig in QOS reminded me more of Bond in Fleming's like-minded revenge tale YOLT than the non-Bond characters you cite. Which I greatly appreciated as I consider it EON's great failure to have never filmed - or even tried to film - what is, along with DN and OHMSS, one of Fleming's best novels. With QOS, we got as close as we'll likely ever get to late Fleming Bond and Fleming's YOLT - and I'll very gladly take it. B)


Yes and hopefully this time the writers could come up with a plot as colourful as a Fleming novel. :tdown:

#382 blueman

blueman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2219 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 05:28 AM

Morgan said "shocking"... could be TWINEish and wretched, but could be something else indeed. Now this Mendes news, really very exciting to see EON - finally - do with Bond what Fleming himself did. Crossed fingers for another step forward.

#383 Dr.Fell

Dr.Fell

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 178 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 05:30 AM

Morgan said "shocking"... could be TWINEish and wretched, but could be something else indeed. Now this Mendes news, really very exciting to see EON - finally - do with Bond what Fleming himself did. Crossed fingers for another step forward.



I'm really not going rely on "shocking" because the possiblities are endless. I am going to just pray that they brought these people in because it will be a fun film with top-notch talent.

#384 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5608 posts
  • Location:Portland OR

Posted 08 January 2010 - 06:52 AM

Fair enough Laz, many on the fan boards do. But Craig in QOS reminded me more of Bond in Fleming's like-minded revenge tale YOLT than the non-Bond characters you cite. Which I greatly appreciated as I consider it EON's great failure to have never filmed - or even tried to film - what is, along with DN and OHMSS, one of Fleming's best novels. With QOS, we got as close as we'll likely ever get to late Fleming Bond and Fleming's YOLT - and I'll very gladly take it. B)


My dream is to see Craig in a somewhat updated and faithful adaptation of YOLT. Have Bond go after Dr. Shatterhand who actually turns out to be Mr White.

#385 Dr.Fell

Dr.Fell

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 178 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 07:08 AM

Fair enough Laz, many on the fan boards do. But Craig in QOS reminded me more of Bond in Fleming's like-minded revenge tale YOLT than the non-Bond characters you cite. Which I greatly appreciated as I consider it EON's great failure to have never filmed - or even tried to film - what is, along with DN and OHMSS, one of Fleming's best novels. With QOS, we got as close as we'll likely ever get to late Fleming Bond and Fleming's YOLT - and I'll very gladly take it. B)


My dream is to see Craig in a somewhat updated and faithful adaptation of YOLT. Have Bond go after Dr. Shatterhand who actually turns out to be Mr White.


I'd find the revelation of Quantum's leader to be very anticlimactic if it was White. A better idea would be an original character developed like Blofeld in the novels.

Edited by Dr.Fell, 08 January 2010 - 07:09 AM.


#386 Skudor

Skudor

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9286 posts
  • Location:Buckinghamshire

Posted 08 January 2010 - 09:23 AM

Fair enough Laz, many on the fan boards do. But Craig in QOS reminded me more of Bond in Fleming's like-minded revenge tale YOLT than the non-Bond characters you cite. Which I greatly appreciated as I consider it EON's great failure to have never filmed - or even tried to film - what is, along with DN and OHMSS, one of Fleming's best novels. With QOS, we got as close as we'll likely ever get to late Fleming Bond and Fleming's YOLT - and I'll very gladly take it. B)


My dream is to see Craig in a somewhat updated and faithful adaptation of YOLT. Have Bond go after Dr. Shatterhand who actually turns out to be Mr White.


I'd find the revelation of Quantum's leader to be very anticlimactic if it was White. A better idea would be an original character developed like Blofeld in the novels.


I would love it if Quantum is eventually found to be headed by Blofeld. Even if it isn't Blofeld, literally, I hope they get the casting right and find someone they can stick with for a while.

Mr White has, however, become something of an asset to the Bond films - is there anyone here who doesn't like Jesper Christensen's Mr. White? I certainly don't want him to be the evil chimp at the top of the tree, but I'd love to see him swing round again.

#387 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 January 2010 - 10:03 AM

I agree completely, Skudor!

#388 Odd Jobbies

Odd Jobbies

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1573 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 08 January 2010 - 10:09 AM

Me too, Skudor...

#389 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 10:20 AM

Mr White has, however, become something of an asset to the Bond films - is there anyone here who doesn't like Jesper Christensen's Mr. White? I certainly don't want him to be the evil chimp at the top of the tree, but I'd love to see him swing round again.

Absolutely. I’d like him to feature in all of the Craig films in some fashion.

I don’t think Quantum has an individual person in charge. I think it’s basically a consensus deal, with Mr. White being a very respected member. He does represent Quantum quite a bit on high level tasks. Introducing Le Chiffre to Obanno, shooting Le Chiffre and his convoy, etc. He seems to have the smarts and calm that others lack, too. Staying put while other members panicked at the Tosca interruption, and escaping MI6 custody, for example.

#390 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 08 January 2010 - 10:30 AM

Seems like every thread I click into there is some personal pissing match going on between two members. You guys really need to cool it. PM each other if you're dying to argue and insult. The rest of us would like a civil forum to post in.

And for that Zencat I will apologise to you and other likeminded CBNers. But I will always respond to ill-thought out slurs but wholeheartedly understand how that can be futile on these interweb shores.

'Block' is a very useful little tool. If you don't want to see someone's posts you just block them and they don't appear. I expect it has saved me from responding unnecessarily to a few posts that would only have ended up in arguments.

Now you tell me!

Right... how do you do it?!

Any advice would be much appreciated... (!)