902 replies to this topic

[danslittlefinger]

I just posted this in the Craig forum but thought it interesting to post here as Craig's schedule seems pretty full if rumours of what he will star in are true:
http://www.collider....el_craig_01.jpg

As we reported on Monday, Robert Downey Jr. has dropped out of the adaptation of Scott Mitchell Rosenberg comic book series Cowboys & Aliens. But now we are hearing through sources that Daniel Craig is in negotiations to replace him in the lead role of Zeke Jackson. Obviously, this would be very cool since it would be his first collaboration with Jon Favreau, who is directing the film from a script by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman (Star Trek), and Damon Lindelof (Lost).

Let me stress: “In negotiations” means that Craig has not been cast in the role. What it means is that they’re trying to work out a deal for him to star, but sometimes things don’t work out. Maybe the schedule for Bond 23 moves up or he decides to do a different project. Whatever the reason, let me stress once more: Daniel Craig is in negotiations for the role, but he has not been cast.

[dinovelvet]

I just posted this in the Craig forum but thought it interesting to post here as Craig's schedule seems pretty full if rumours of what he will star in are true:
http://www.collider....el_craig_01.jpg

As we reported on Monday, Robert Downey Jr. has dropped out of the adaptation of Scott Mitchell Rosenberg comic book series Cowboys & Aliens. But now we are hearing through sources that Daniel Craig is in negotiations to replace him in the lead role of Zeke Jackson. Obviously, this would be very cool since it would be his first collaboration with Jon Favreau, who is directing the film from a script by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman (Star Trek), and Damon Lindelof (Lost).

Let me stress: “In negotiations” means that Craig has not been cast in the role. What it means is that they’re trying to work out a deal for him to star, but sometimes things don’t work out. Maybe the schedule for Bond 23 moves up or he decides to do a different project. Whatever the reason, let me stress once more: Daniel Craig is in negotiations for the role, but he has not been cast.

Good to see Daniel going after the credible, dramatic parts again

[danslittlefinger]

I just posted this in the Craig forum but thought it interesting to post here as Craig's schedule seems pretty full if rumours of what he will star in are true:
http://www.collider....el_craig_01.jpg

As we reported on Monday, Robert Downey Jr. has dropped out of the adaptation of Scott Mitchell Rosenberg comic book series Cowboys & Aliens. But now we are hearing through sources that Daniel Craig is in negotiations to replace him in the lead role of Zeke Jackson. Obviously, this would be very cool since it would be his first collaboration with Jon Favreau, who is directing the film from a script by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman (Star Trek), and Damon Lindelof (Lost).

Let me stress: “In negotiations” means that Craig has not been cast in the role. What it means is that they’re trying to work out a deal for him to star, but sometimes things don’t work out. Maybe the schedule for Bond 23 moves up or he decides to do a different project. Whatever the reason, let me stress once more: Daniel Craig is in negotiations for the role, but he has not been cast.

Good to see Daniel going after the credible, dramatic parts again

Well yes and apparently THAT is going to be in 3-D too!
http://thefilmstage....cowboys-aliens/

With Robert Downey Jr. officially leaving the project a few days ago, Iron Man 2 director Jon Favreau is already in negotiations with another star for his next blockbuster, Cowboys & Aliens. Collider reports that Daniel Craig is in talks take over Downey’s role. As previously reported, the film may start shooting in 3D as soon as this July. Check out the full Scott Mitchell Rosenberg comic here. With Lost’s Damon Lindelof helping Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (Star Trek, Transformers 2) on script duties, I’m definitely excited!

[MattofSteel]

I hadn't seen anything of Daniel Craig that had convinced me he'd be a good Bond, either.

You hadn't seen Layer Cake?

I hadn't upon his announcement, no. I watched it about 3 days later .

Truthfully - and trust me, I love Layer Cake (watch it probably annually now) and Craig's performance is phenomenal - but I still don't see a lot of Bond in that character. A token scene here and there, but for the most part XXXX is played as a conservative, very considerate man who spends most of the movie 'in over his head.' Hardly Bondian, I've always thought.

I want to be clear on this too - I never, ever said a derogatory thing about Daniel Craig prior to CR's release. I was 100% of the "wait and see" mentality. The reward was well worth it.

All I can do with new Bond creatives - Mendes included - is adopt the same approach.

[Quantumofsolace007]

I hadn't seen anything of Daniel Craig that had convinced me he'd be a good Bond, either.

You hadn't seen Layer Cake?

I hadn't upon his announcement, no. I watched it about 3 days later .

Truthfully - and trust me, I love Layer Cake (watch it probably annually now) and Craig's performance is phenomenal - but I still don't see a lot of Bond in that character. A token scene here and there, but for the most part XXXX is played as a conservative, very considerate man who spends most of the movie 'in over his head.' Hardly Bondian, I've always thought.

I want to be clear on this too - I never, ever said a derogatory thing about Daniel Craig prior to CR's release. I was 100% of the "wait and see" mentality. The reward was well worth it.

All I can do with new Bond creatives - Mendes included - is adopt the same approach.

A healthy attitude Matt one I wish more would adopt.

[jaguar007]

I hadn't seen anything of Daniel Craig that had convinced me he'd be a good Bond, either.

You hadn't seen Layer Cake?

I hadn't upon his announcement, no. I watched it about 3 days later .

Truthfully - and trust me, I love Layer Cake (watch it probably annually now) and Craig's performance is phenomenal - but I still don't see a lot of Bond in that character. A token scene here and there, but for the most part XXXX is played as a conservative, very considerate man who spends most of the movie 'in over his head.' Hardly Bondian, I've always thought.

I want to be clear on this too - I never, ever said a derogatory thing about Daniel Craig prior to CR's release. I was 100% of the "wait and see" mentality. The reward was well worth it.

All I can do with new Bond creatives - Mendes included - is adopt the same approach.

That is one of the brilliant things Daniel Craig, most of his roles are so different from one another.

[MattofSteel]

He's an incredibly versatile actor. I can't claim to have seen Road to Perdition, either - I'm itching to sit down and watch it.

[jaguar007]

He's an incredibly versatile actor. I can't claim to have seen Road to Perdition, either - I'm itching to sit down and watch it.

GREAT performance. Very un-Bond like. He holds is own against Paul Newman. I need to see that again (I saw it before Casino Royale came out).

[bondrules]

He's an incredibly versatile actor. I can't claim to have seen Road to Perdition, either - I'm itching to sit down and watch it.

GREAT performance. Very un-Bond like. He holds is own against Paul Newman. I need to see that again (I saw it before Casino Royale came out).

He hit out of the park in RTP. One of the many reasons why that movie is flawless.

[Zorin Industries]

If a director like Sam Mendes was to direct the next James Bond film, he would do a sterling job. Why wouldn't he? One of the (very) few widely held agreements about SOLACE were the Bregenz scenes. A lot of people warmed to that stylistic flourish with narrative credibility. That was solely down to the film's director and that is what good directors bring to their work.

Another example I will give stems from a film I saw last night. There is an early dialogue-free scene in EASTERN PROMISES where Viggo Mortenson's driver character NIKOLAI pulls his car up to a kerb and stops millimetres away from Naomi Watt's parked motorbike. That one visual gesture of conveying how Mortenson has no qualms about getting far too close (in many ways) to Watts is there in a directorial choice from Cronenberg. This is where Bond needs directors like Forster and potentially Mendes. The films can only evolve. If not, we stall at Part 17 MISSION TO MOSCOW with a McG wannabee directing Bond into the ground. The producers of the films are still creative forces. They still want to explore and enhance their own journey with Bond through different (better) directors, actors, writers, musicians and design bods.

This current story about Mendes is not the suggestion that he is making THE SPY WHO LOVED ME in a 1977 stylee. This is the notion/suggestion that creatives of his ilk will take Bond forward or even just do different things along familiar lines (the more likely outcome). Mendes would not be aiming beneath himself either. We are now in a time when directors did not only grow up with a few 007 films floating around the TV channels and VHS rental stores but also a whole canon of films. It is a potential honour and creative challenge to directors working today. We are not in that time anymore of ex-editors shooting the second unit and then getting the directing gig after an Eon passing out parade.

Good casting is not just about who appears infront of the camera.

[Bondesque]

Very well stated Zorin! Bringing in Directors who have depth can only help the franchise. Bond will always be Bond, yet there are many aspects where a Director can have great impact. I loved the Opera scene in QOS (and Im not a huge fan of QOS)which is a perfect example of your point. That film needed more such moments.

Road To Perdition is filled with such examples. Mendes will be superb.

[ACE]

If a director like Sam Mendes was to direct the next James Bond film, he would do a sterling job. Why wouldn't he? One of the (very) few widely held agreements about SOLACE were the Bregenz scenes. A lot of people warmed to that stylistic flourish with narrative credibility. That was solely down to the film's director and that is what good directors bring to their work.

Another example I will give stems from a film I saw last night. There is an early dialogue-free scene in EASTERN PROMISES where Viggo Mortenson's driver character NIKOLAI pulls his car up to a kerb and stops millimetres away from Naomi Watt's parked motorbike. That one visual gesture of conveying how Mortenson has no qualms about getting far too close (in many ways) to Watts is there in a directorial choice from Cronenberg. This is where Bond needs directors like Forster and potentially Mendes. The films can only evolve. If not, we stall at Part 17 MISSION TO MOSCOW with a McG wannabee directing Bond into the ground. The producers of the films are still creative forces. They still want to explore and enhance their own journey with Bond through different (better) directors, actors, writers, musicians and design bods.

This current story about Mendes is not the suggestion that he is making THE SPY WHO LOVED ME in a 1977 stylee. This is the notion/suggestion that creatives of his ilk will take Bond forward or even just do different things along familiar lines (the more likely outcome). Mendes would not be aiming beneath himself either. We are now in a time when directors did not only grow up with a few 007 films floating around the TV channels and VHS rental stores but also a whole canon of films. It is a potential honour and creative challenge to directors working today. We are not in that time anymore of ex-editors shooting the second unit and then getting the directing gig after an Eon passing out parade.

Good casting is not just about who appears infront of the camera.

Wha him say.

[Dekard77]

My exact question is why didn't we have more depth in QOS? I mean they spent a lot of time with elaborate action scenes but hardly any an extension of scenes like Bond doing any detecting or dialogue. I do love QOS but feel that if they hired a director with flair for drama than action and deliver the opposite. On the other hand am glad it wasn't a bore like The International.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

My exact question is why didn't we have more depth in QOS? I mean they spent a lot of time with elaborate action scenes but hardly any an extension of scenes like Bond doing any detecting or dialogue. I do love QOS but feel that if they hired a director with flair for drama than action and deliver the opposite. On the other hand am glad it wasn't a bore like The International.

I agree with your views on Quantum Of Solace, but not on your views about The International! I thought it was an intelligent and well-paced thriller.

[ACE]

The International! I thought it was an intelligent and well-paced thriller.

Same here. Really underrated. Twyker for Bond anyday.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

The International! I thought it was an intelligent and well-paced thriller.

Same here. Really underrated. Twyker for Bond anyday.

Twyker isn't a bad shout for director actually. Maybe if the Mendes deal falls through...

P.S. I want to assure CBners that I am IN FAVOUR of Mendes, and in no part want his alleged negotiations for director to fall through!

Twyker for Bond 24!

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

If a director like Sam Mendes was to direct the next James Bond film, he would do a sterling job. Why wouldn't he?

Quite.

[Eric Stromberg]

This current story about Mendes is not the suggestion that he is making THE SPY WHO LOVED ME in a 1977 stylee. This is the notion/suggestion that creatives of his ilk will take Bond forward or even just do different things along familiar lines (the more likely outcome). Mendes would not be aiming beneath himself either.
Good casting is not just about who appears infront of the camera.

Bullseye, Zorin. With the selection of Marc Forster and now possibly Sam Mendes, the franchise handlers seem serious about elevating the film series to a new level. This is very exciting to me.

If these heavyweight directors are the wave of the future for 007, how about bringing in some serious writers, too? That combination with an actor like Daniel Craig could usher in a real Golden Age for the series with some very high quality films. As good as Bond has been lately I can imagine it getting even better.

[Dekard77]

The International has some strong points, but the pacing was off. The piano music (sounds like a rip off from a Herbie Hancock track ) was way to repetitious. That did make the film seem a bit boring for me. However the shootout at the museum was a thrill.

[Zorin Industries]

If these heavyweight directors are the wave of the future for 007, how about bringing in some serious writers, too?

In terms of cache, zeitgeist, credibility and canny casting...you don't get more "heavyweight" than Peter Morgan right now.

[Quantumofsolace007]

I just posted this in the Craig forum but thought it interesting to post here as Craig's schedule seems pretty full if rumours of what he will star in are true:
http://www.collider....el_craig_01.jpg

As we reported on Monday, Robert Downey Jr. has dropped out of the adaptation of Scott Mitchell Rosenberg comic book series Cowboys & Aliens. But now we are hearing through sources that Daniel Craig is in negotiations to replace him in the lead role of Zeke Jackson. Obviously, this would be very cool since it would be his first collaboration with Jon Favreau, who is directing the film from a script by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman (Star Trek), and Damon Lindelof (Lost).

Let me stress: “In negotiations” means that Craig has not been cast in the role. What it means is that they’re trying to work out a deal for him to star, but sometimes things don’t work out. Maybe the schedule for Bond 23 moves up or he decides to do a different project. Whatever the reason, let me stress once more: Daniel Craig is in negotiations for the role, but he has not been cast.

Good to see Daniel going after the credible, dramatic parts again

I've never heard of Cowboys and Aliens until now, but I don't think there's anything about Craig that would make me believe he could play an alien.

Love the title, though. Right up there with LESBIAN VAMPIRE KILLERS and SNAKES ON A PLANE, and definitely better than THE HILDEBLAND RARITY, THE PROPERTY OF A LIFETIME MOVIE, or RISICKO.

I'm getting to the point where I feel if I ask you "how are you today" you'll respond "I hate all remaming fleming titles" and rant and rave about how bad they are when all I asked was how are you today.



I still am hoping then Mendes is announced as director with a timetable as to when this will be released and when it will film. Heck at this point i've heard everything from Release date June 2011 to november 2012

[The Shark]

If these heavyweight directors are the wave of the future for 007, how about bringing in some serious writers, too?

In terms of cache, zeitgeist, credibility and canny casting...you don't get more "heavyweight" than Peter Morgan right now.

Quite, though why P&W?

[The Shark]

I'm getting to the point where I feel if I ask you "how are you today" you'll respond "I hate all remaming fleming titles" and rant and rave about how bad they are when all I asked was how are you today.

Besides, opposing the remaining Fleming titles is sort of my raison d'être right now.

In real life too?

i.e. "SAY NO TO RISICO, HILDEBRAND RARITY AND PROPERTY OF A LADY FOR BOND 23" banners and posters streaming from your house...

[Eric Stromberg]

In terms of cache, zeitgeist, credibility and canny casting...you don't get more "heavyweight" than Peter Morgan right now.

It's a good start. But in the future I'd also like to see significant screenwriters engaged that are swimming below the surface of "right now." Not bottom feeders, but those who may not be the flavor of the week anymore but could still bring fresh ideas to the stories.

[Safari Suit]

The International has some strong points, but the pacing was off. The piano music (sounds like a rip off from a Herbie Hancock track ) was way to repetitious. That did make the film seem a bit boring for me. However the shootout at the museum was a thrill.

I agree with you, I wont refute the claims that it was intelligent, which I suppose it was in a very conscious manor, but well paced? I put it with a lot of the Tom Clancy films; too dry to be really fun, not substantive enough to really be anything "more".

[Quantumofsolace007]

I'm getting to the point where I feel if I ask you "how are you today" you'll respond "I hate all remaming fleming titles" and rant and rave about how bad they are when all I asked was how are you today.

Besides, opposing the remaining Fleming titles is sort of my raison d'être right now.

In real life too?

i.e. "SAY NO TO RISICO, HILDEBRAND RARITY AND PROPERTY OF A LADY FOR BOND 23" banners and posters streaming from your house...

For that alone I Will gladly have baccrat instead of texas hold em in bond 23 (one thing you really want) glad to see i'm not the only one who questions Gravity at times...


And i'll bite
Gravity how are you today?

[Quantumofsolace007]

In real life too?

i.e. "SAY NO TO RISICO, HILDEBRAND RARITY AND PROPERTY OF A LADY FOR BOND 23" banners and posters streaming from your house...

Can't. Trailer park association doesn't allow flags (of any nationality), banners, political bumper stickers, garden gnomes, basketball goals, or plastic flamingos to be on display on a person's property. Some damned civil rights workers stole a lawn jockey I put on my front porch last year.

QUANTUMOFSOLACE007 asked:

Gravity how are you today?

I'm lovely today. How are you my good man?

I'm alright I guess.

[Zorin Industries]

If these heavyweight directors are the wave of the future for 007, how about bringing in some serious writers, too?

In terms of cache, zeitgeist, credibility and canny casting...you don't get more "heavyweight" than Peter Morgan right now.

Quite, though why P&W?

Because they clearly have a very healthy working relationship with Eon and everyone involved is obviously enjoying the process on each film. It's probably as simple as that. Yes, Eon and co need the films to be a success (and I don't think Purvis and Wade have lost anyone any money at Bond HQ) but the writing /development process needs likeminded shorthand between producer/s and writer/s. I would say Purvis and Wade are welcome back for that reason alone.

But in the future I'd also like to see significant screenwriters engaged that are swimming below the surface of "right now."

Eon House are probably more aware of who those writers are more than anyone (and they champion and support new writers and new writing all the time - especially now) but a Bond writer needs a certain sensibility, outlook, ability to adapt and bend at all times as well as a CV. A lot of writers have worked on Bond that most people don't have a clue about.

[Dekard77]

P&W needs to go. Bring in some new blood. Peter Morgan is a brilliant addition but it's not enough as I feel P&W will try to make it mediocre.

[quantumofsolace]

EON are aware of what P&W can do and keep bringing them back . They are happy with them and we have little idea of what were the brilliant parts or the crap parts of the last 2 Bond films that they wrote. Babs and Mikey are happy so let them run with it. They sure are enthusiastic enough and the recent track record of Morgan would suggest the script could be very good indeed.