902 replies to this topic

[Safari Suit]

Chaplinesque silent era.

I was thinking more Keystone Cops.

Here I'm going to say something like "But we already had that with AVTAK!!! LOLZ!!!" and everyone will think it's hilarious and totally wont groan.

[Harmsway]

To 'despise' a movie above all others denotes, imo, a strong degree of moral disapproval.

So you're deciding my reasons for me, Dodgie?

Personally, I'm convinced that Harms reacted in horror to the spank the monkey scene.

By no means, Dodgester. Where you got the notion that I'm somehow a prude who can't handle honest depictions of sexuality, I'll never know, especially since I've expressed a great deal of adoration for some very sexually graphic films.

[DamnCoffee]

I think a dark thriller bond film Like Casino royale or Quantum of solace or From Russia with love.


What are your thoughts?

I think a dark thriller Bond film, like Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace or From Russia with Love.


What are your thoughts?


___________________


This doesn't make sense? This is a thread about whether Mendes is directing Bond 23. I don't really get why you've said this?

[Safari Suit]

He didn't, it was from a thread he started that merged with this thread.

[Quantumofsolace007]

He didn't, it was from a thread he started that merged with this thread.

yes and i have no idea why it was merged.......


I would Like to know specifically what style of bond film people think Bond 23 will be with Mendes at the helm.


I mean if it was say Nolan or Singer I could plainly see what style they'd be going for (Nolan gritty realism Singer either dark and mysterious or Popcorn thriller) But mendes is a complete mystery to me and looking at his CV well we go from a dark Drama (road to perdition) to a film about life in modern suburbia (American beauty)So I fiugre People like Zorin Mharkin etc could Share their views and i'd get a genuine sence for bond 23.


However that plan backfired... Maybe I'll post on Sammendes Imdb board page at least this way i can get an answer.

[byline]

AMERICAN BEAUTY gives us a story that is simultaneously sentimental and devoid of humanity.

I couldn't disagree more . . . but of course that's the beauty of opinions; we all have 'em.

My take on "American Beauty" was that everyone was searching for his or her vision of happiness. And, if happiness can't be achieved, then at least temporarily eliminating pain by satiating desire, would do the trick. But the main character got it figured out right before his end. It didn't matter that it wouldn't be significant or anything beyond banal to anyone else; the important thing was that, for him, he got it right. That, for me, was the story, and a very engaging one, at that.

Different strokes, Zorin. If I'm looking for a similar film from that year, I'll take MAGNOLIA, which is similarly self-important, but deals in a much richer set of emotions and ideas. I don't see any searing honesty in AMERICAN BEAUTY, but I do see it in MAGNOLIA.

Now that's interesting. I love both films equally!

Edited by byline, 11 February 2010 - 01:19 AM.

[Zorin Industries]

He didn't, it was from a thread he started that merged with this thread.

yes and i have no idea why it was merged.......


I would Like to know specifically what style of bond film people think Bond 23 will be with Mendes at the helm.


I mean if it was say Nolan or Singer I could plainly see what style they'd be going for (Nolan gritty realism Singer either dark and mysterious or Popcorn thriller) But mendes is a complete mystery to me and looking at his CV well we go from a dark Drama (road to perdition) to a film about life in modern suburbia (American beauty)So I fiugre People like Zorin Mharkin etc could Share their views and i'd get a genuine sence for bond 23.


However that plan backfired... Maybe I'll post on Sammendes Imdb board page at least this way i can get an answer.

You could always check out some of Mendes work for yourself?

[Dekard77]

Is it safe to say Mendes films common approach is tragedy or failure to commit? All his movies have pretty much the same themes but explored with great care. Revolutionary Road and American Beauty are two of my favs but utterly depressing to watch .

Edited by Dekard77, 11 February 2010 - 10:53 AM.

[Safari Suit]

I'm guessing one or two people will disagree vehemently with me on this, but I expect Mendes' filmography doesn't contain any obvious tip-offs to how his Bond 23 will (or how his Bond 23 would) be like, just as Forster's Bond movie isn't a particularly obvious match with his previous films.

[Zorin Industries]

I'm guessing one or two people will disagree vehemently with me on this, but I expect Mendes' filmography doesn't contain any obvious tip-offs to how his Bond 23 will (or how his Bond 23 would) be like, just as Forster's Bond movie isn't a particularly obvious match with his previous films.

Exactly.

I don't think any director is hired for what they have done before and that alone. It is what they can bring that is new to the series. Why would a Nolan or Singer do exactly what they have always done? Where would the creative opportunity for anyone be in that?

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

I was a bit doubtious about Mendes, but if Campbell says he'll be good, well, he knows better than me

[MattofSteel]

I'm on board with Safari Suit. There was nothing - absolutely nothing - in Forster's resume prior to QOS that might suggest he could merely go so far as even handling a Bond film.

Obvious criticisms notwithstanding, I thought he acquitted himself marvelously overall. He brought things (back) to it I hadn't anticipated ever seeing, with an inspired sense of combining the nostalgic with the contemporary. A brilliant job, and I'd expect Mendes will, at the very least, deliver no less of an effort.

[Harmsway]

I'm guessing one or two people will disagree vehemently with me on this, but I expect Mendes' filmography doesn't contain any obvious tip-offs to how his Bond 23 will (or how his Bond 23 would) be like, just as Forster's Bond movie isn't a particularly obvious match with his previous films.

It's true.

I'm on board with Safari Suit. There was nothing - absolutely nothing - in Forster's resume prior to QOS that might suggest he could merely go so far as even handling a Bond film.

Well, I definitely disagree with that statement. There was plenty to suggest that Forster could handle the job, and do very well at it.

[Quantumofsolace007]

Going back in time When Forester was announced I wasn't on Mi6 or CBN. My only bond outlet was imdb.... those were dark days lol.

Point of tyhe story was the general consensus was those who were familiar with forester were nervous/apprehensive those who weren't were hopefull and optimistic and after the amazing Casino royale i didn't want to be nervous or apprehensive.


The key difference is Mendes has at least done some shoot out battles in Road to perdition. So it's not like he's a complete stranger to action.

But now the general consensus seems to be unless you want to see films other then bond Mendes's CV give no clue on what bond 23 will be like....

Shame cause Road to perdition looks like a dark noiresque kind of film would love it for bond 23 to have those elements.

[Rufus Ffolkes]

They could certainly do a lot worse than Mendes (and have done in the past) and yet I can't get too excited at the prospect of him directing Bond 23.

Mendes makes impeccably crafted films, but there's something cold and remote about them - I don't find them emotionally engaging. I appreciate the skill and intelligence that has gone into the work, but I can't say that I've really enjoyed any of them, though admittedly I haven't seen Away We Go yet.

I'm still a bit disappointed that Danny Boyle seems to be out of the running, though it's early days yet. It doesn't seem like the MGM situation is going to resolve itself any time soon and who knows if Mendes will want to stick around long enough to see it through. I don't imagine he has any shortage of projects in the works.

[Safari Suit]

the general consensus seems to be unless you want to see films other then bond Mendes's CV give no clue on what bond 23 will be like....

Shame cause Road to perdition looks like a dark noiresque kind of film would love it for bond 23 to have those elements.

Who says it wont? It might well do. It might well not. It might well have done if somebody else directed it.

I'm not saying Mendes' filmography doesn't contain any clues to what a Mendes Bond film will be like but it's not like you can go "oh Mendes directed Road To Perdition and Revolutionary Road, that means it will be a tragic gritty noir drama about a couple where everyone wears hats" any more than Forster's Bond turned out to have Bond coming to terms with being a fictional character, or writing Peter Pan or so forth

[dodge]

To 'despise' a movie above all others denotes, imo, a strong degree of moral disapproval.

So you're deciding my reasons for me, Dodgie?

Personally, I'm convinced that Harms reacted in horror to the spank the monkey scene.

By no means, Dodgester. Where you got the notion that I'm somehow a prude who can't handle honest depictions of sexuality, I'll never know, especially since I've expressed a great deal of adoration for some very sexually graphic films.

By no means. There was an 'imo' in that opinion, based on observation through the years. And I stick to it...Harmsie.

[bond 16.05.72]

I think the reason that people want Campbell to return is he's not paticularly individual or has his own style, this may well be what people want for a Bond film, the ingredients the character and nothing that veers from that.

With the exception of a few scenes we saw nothing in Royale we hadn't seen before it was just executed better than it had been done for years but the team MC assembled around him were just as responsible for it's success, he also had a Fleming novel and a big epic journey for Bond, Forster in comparrison was just bookending the story, I might not have found is experiment entirely satifying but he at least injected something of himself into the film.

Campbell was just right for Royale but I don't think it marks him out as a Director to return, he was hired to bring CR to the screen and he did admirably but he was lucky to have the material, he certainly wasn't coming off the back of a hugely successful reboot or had a writers strike to contend with, I still have my problems with QOS but I find myself not against about the idea of Forster returning, a Forster directed CR would indeed have been an interesting propostion.

Mendes is still more an exciting option than a jobbing Campbell returning.

[MattofSteel]

I'm on board with Safari Suit. There was nothing - absolutely nothing - in Forster's resume prior to QOS that might suggest he could merely go so far as even handling a Bond film.

Well, I definitely disagree with that statement. There was plenty to suggest that Forster could handle the job, and do very well at it.

I wasn't suggesting he was incapable of handling a film of that scope, magnitude, or quality (he was already an extremely successful director!), but rather that he could produce a film of the tone, excitement, and commerciality, and otherwise multi-purposed elements required of a successful Bond film.

All I meant was, a "Bond film" seemed the farthest thing removed from the spectrum of projects he'd directed to that point.

[Quantumofsolace007]

the general consensus seems to be unless you want to see films other then bond Mendes's CV give no clue on what bond 23 will be like....

Shame cause Road to perdition looks like a dark noiresque kind of film would love it for bond 23 to have those elements.

Who says it wont? It might well do. It might well not. It might well have done if somebody else directed it.

I'm not saying Mendes' filmography doesn't contain any clues to what a Mendes Bond film will be like but it's not like you can go "oh Mendes directed Road To Perdition and Revolutionary Road, that means it will be a tragic gritty noir drama about a couple where everyone wears hats" any more than Forster's Bond turned out to have Bond coming to terms with being a fictional character, or writing Peter Pan or so forth

true but i still maintain I'd like to see Mendes add the thriller myster noir esque feel to bond 23.


time will tell what if anything will come out of all this.

[Zorin Industries]

Point of tyhe story was the general consensus was those who were familiar with forester were nervous/apprehensive those who weren't were hopefull and optimistic and after the amazing Casino royale i didn't want to be nervous or apprehensive.

Really? That's a bit of a narrow and probably unfounded statement to make, no?

The key difference is Mendes has at least done some shoot out battles in Road to perdition. So it's not like he's a complete stranger to action.

Not ONE director has ever been hired to direct a Bond film using those parameters and criteria.

But now the general consensus seems to be unless you want to see films other then bond Mendes's CV give no clue on what bond 23 will be like....

Shame cause Road to perdition looks like a dark noiresque kind of film would love it for bond 23 to have those elements.

What ANY director has done in any of their other non Bond work has little bearing on what they could or would do for Bond.

There is no general consensus anywhere about Bond and Sam Mendes. Why would a rumour that is stifled with the very real situation at MGM produce any sort of consensus in the film community? That makes no sense.

If people will not take the time to watch the work of a director like Sam Mendes until he is officially announced as helming a future Bond film then a director of his CV and outlook is sort of wasted on those fans anyway.

[blueman]

I'm on board with Safari Suit. There was nothing - absolutely nothing - in Forster's resume prior to QOS that might suggest he could merely go so far as even handling a Bond film.

Well, I definitely disagree with that statement. There was plenty to suggest that Forster could handle the job, and do very well at it.

I wasn't suggesting he was incapable of handling a film of that scope, magnitude, or quality (he was already an extremely successful director!), but rather that he could produce a film of the tone, excitement, and commerciality, and otherwise multi-purposed elements required of a successful Bond film.

All I meant was, a "Bond film" seemed the farthest thing removed from the spectrum of projects he'd directed to that point.

Forster's body of work shows a director gifted in many genres and able to work within different styles of direction equally well, also a great actors' director. I was very excited he got the nod for QOS and expected a very good Bond film from him, based on what he'd done previously. He did not disappoint (for this Bond fan at least), made the best Bond film since OHMSS.

[Quantumofsolace007]

Point of tyhe story was the general consensus was those who were familiar with forester were nervous/apprehensive those who weren't were hopefull and optimistic and after the amazing Casino royale i didn't want to be nervous or apprehensive.

Really? That's a bit of a narrow and probably unfounded statement to make, no?

The key difference is Mendes has at least done some shoot out battles in Road to perdition. So it's not like he's a complete stranger to action.

Not ONE director has ever been hired to direct a Bond film using those parameters and criteria.

But now the general consensus seems to be unless you want to see films other then bond Mendes's CV give no clue on what bond 23 will be like....

Shame cause Road to perdition looks like a dark noiresque kind of film would love it for bond 23 to have those elements.

What ANY director has done in any of their other non Bond work has little bearing on what they could or would do for Bond.

There is no general consensus anywhere about Bond and Sam Mendes. Why would a rumour that is stifled with the very real situation at MGM produce any sort of consensus in the film community? That makes no sense.

If people will not take the time to watch the work of a director like Sam Mendes until he is officially announced as helming a future Bond film then a director of his CV and outlook is sort of wasted on those fans anyway.

so because I don't want to waste my time on a film that looks kinda cool but could be bad (road to perdition) I'm suddenly an Idiot who Mendes directing as bond is to much for me to grasp...or have I confused your post Zorin?

[DamnCoffee]

Point of tyhe story was the general consensus was those who were familiar with forester were nervous/apprehensive those who weren't were hopefull and optimistic and after the amazing Casino royale i didn't want to be nervous or apprehensive.

Really? That's a bit of a narrow and probably unfounded statement to make, no?

The key difference is Mendes has at least done some shoot out battles in Road to perdition. So it's not like he's a complete stranger to action.

Not ONE director has ever been hired to direct a Bond film using those parameters and criteria.

But now the general consensus seems to be unless you want to see films other then bond Mendes's CV give no clue on what bond 23 will be like....

Shame cause Road to perdition looks like a dark noiresque kind of film would love it for bond 23 to have those elements.

What ANY director has done in any of their other non Bond work has little bearing on what they could or would do for Bond.

There is no general consensus anywhere about Bond and Sam Mendes. Why would a rumour that is stifled with the very real situation at MGM produce any sort of consensus in the film community? That makes no sense.

If people will not take the time to watch the work of a director like Sam Mendes until he is officially announced as helming a future Bond film then a director of his CV and outlook is sort of wasted on those fans anyway.

so becvause I don't want to waste my time on a film that looks kinda cool but could be bad (road to perdition0 I'm suddenly an Iditio who mednes directing as bond is to much for me to grasp...or have i confused your post Zorin?

So because I don't want to waste my time on a film that looks kinda cool, but could be bad (Road to Perdition) I'm suddenly an idiot, who Mendes directing Bond is to much for me to grasp? Or have I confused your post, Zorin? *


____________________

When did he say you're an idiot? I think you are confused.

[byline]

Point of tyhe story was the general consensus was those who were familiar with forester were nervous/apprehensive those who weren't were hopefull and optimistic and after the amazing Casino royale i didn't want to be nervous or apprehensive.

Really? That's a bit of a narrow and probably unfounded statement to make, no?

The key difference is Mendes has at least done some shoot out battles in Road to perdition. So it's not like he's a complete stranger to action.

Not ONE director has ever been hired to direct a Bond film using those parameters and criteria.

But now the general consensus seems to be unless you want to see films other then bond Mendes's CV give no clue on what bond 23 will be like....

Shame cause Road to perdition looks like a dark noiresque kind of film would love it for bond 23 to have those elements.

What ANY director has done in any of their other non Bond work has little bearing on what they could or would do for Bond.

There is no general consensus anywhere about Bond and Sam Mendes. Why would a rumour that is stifled with the very real situation at MGM produce any sort of consensus in the film community? That makes no sense.

If people will not take the time to watch the work of a director like Sam Mendes until he is officially announced as helming a future Bond film then a director of his CV and outlook is sort of wasted on those fans anyway.

so because I don't want to waste my time on a film that looks kinda cool but could be bad (road to perdition) I'm suddenly an Idiot who Mendes directing as bond is to much for me to grasp...or have I confused your post Zorin?

I think you've confused Zorin's post. The point he was making -- and forgive me if I misinterpret this -- is that Sam Mendes has a pretty remarkable filmography. Whether you like his work or not, that fact is indisputable from an industry standpoint. So I do think that for anyone worrying about whether he can do the job on a Bond film, but not taking the time to actually watch his films, the point is sort of lost. If a person hasn't bothered to watch any of those films before, then for that person is it really worth debating the finer points of what that director brings to the table . . . especially since he's not even been officially announced as the director of the next Bond film?

[JimmyBond]

That's a fair point actually. And if I had some extra money to spend on things like renting (or buying) movies, I would check out some of his work. I've actually been told I "have to" see American Beauty, and I'm quite keen on seeing Road To Perdition as well.

[Quantumofsolace007]

ah i see Thanks byline

Hey if I get extra money my way Road to perdition I will see irregardless of Mendes directing Bond. (his involvement in bond only means i will bump it up my list of films I want to see rather then wait)



I do want to bring in a director Mharkin hates but I actually enjoy (ocasionally)

If it were announced instead of Mendes Brian Singer was tapped to direct bond 23 I can see clearly the benefit of understanding his CV to be able to argue Why this is a good thing and why this won't be die another day part 2 (actually if Singer directed I would imagine his bond film would be like The Living Daylights or a slightly darker Casino royale still bond and fun to watch but with a level of suspense) Superman returns wasn't great and i still haven't checked out Valkeryie but The Usual Suspects (which I showed my gf tonight, I still get chills at the end) there is a film one needs to see if Singer or Spacey (who underplayed his role so well it made the film that much more amazing) is every seriously metioned for bond. I can only Assume that if I were more knowledgeable about Mendes I'd argue for Road to perdition to be on everyone's viewing list.


I can see Zorin's point a lot more clearly any Singer bond 23 rumours would be lost by those who haven't seen the usual suspects.

Oh and Mharkin watch the usual suspects and then tell me Singer is a bad director I dare you to, valkyre I'd blame more on tom Cruise's over acting (prevlant in the trailers) then anything else I hate Superman so returns just would annoy me no matter who directed it and as for Xmen they are popcorn summer films not meant to be taken seriously Singer did what he could.


BTW it's late and I'm tired I looked this over for typos once through I'll check it again tommorow Please Don't point out any glareing errors (though I know you will) thanks

[tdalton]

ah i see Thanks byline

Hey if I get extra money my way Road to perdition I will see irregardless of Mendes directing Bond. (his involvement in bond only means i will bump it up my list of films I want to see rather then wait)



I do want to bring in a director Mharkin hates but I actually enjoy (ocasionally)

If it were announced instead of Mendes Brian Singer was tapped to direct bond 23 I can see clearly the benefit of understanding his CV to be able to argue Why this is a good thing and why this won't be die another day part 2 (actually if Singer directed I would imagine his bond film would be like The Living Daylights or a slightly darker Casino royale still bond and fun to watch but with a level of suspense) Superman returns wasn't great and i still haven't checked out Valkeryie but The Usual Suspects (which I showed my gf tonight, I still get chills at the end) there is a film one needs to see if Singer or Spacey (who underplayed his role so well it made the film that much more amazing) is every seriously metioned for bond. I can only Assume that if I were more knowledgeable about Mendes I'd argue for Road to perdition to be on everyone's viewing list.


I can see Zorin's point a lot more clearly any Singer bond 23 rumours would be lost by those who haven't seen the usual suspects.

Oh and Mharkin watch the usual suspects and then tell me Singer is a bad director I dare you to, valkyre I'd blame more on tom Cruise's over acting (prevlant in the trailers) then anything else I hate Superman so returns just would annoy me no matter who directed it and as for Xmen they are popcorn summer films not meant to be taken seriously Singer did what he could.


BTW it's late and I'm tired I looked this over for typos once through I'll check it again tommorow Please Don't point out any glareing errors (though I know you will) thanks

While you say that Singer wouldn't turn in a Die Another Day 2 type Bond film, I still think that a Bond film by him would be equally as bad. Aside from The Usual Suspects, which was very early in his career, there's nothing worthwhile on his resume. X-Men, X2, Superman Returns, and Valyrie are all just awful, and I would prefer that EON went in a different direction rather than bringing in a director that can keep the franchise at the current high standard that it's operating at, rather than having the franchise take a step back.

Also, one film doesn't make a director a good director. The Usual Suspects is a good film, but then again, Michael Bay's The Rock is a pretty good film as well, but Bay is not generally considered a very good director either. I take the entire resume of Singer into account, and I don't think that he's a very good director (one good film against four very bad films).

[JimmyBond]

While I can't say Singer is anywhere near my top choice (or even my choice at all) to direct Bond, I disagree that he's a poor director. I thought his two X-Men films were pretty good, leaps and bounds better than Ratner's third X film, and while it's not something I'd see again, there was nothing inherently wrong with Superman either.

[tdalton]

While I can't say Singer is anywhere near my top choice (or even my choice at all) to direct Bond, I disagree that he's a poor director. I thought his two X-Men films were pretty good, leaps and bounds better than Ratner's third X film, and while it's not something I'd see again, there was nothing inherently wrong with Superman either.

I'll agree that his two X-Men films were better than Ratner's third film, but I still thought that they're pretty bad on their own. Valkyrie, however, is the main culprit. Just terrible on every level.