1025 replies to this topic

[jaguar007]

<!-- censored -->!!! GODDAMMIT!! <!-- censored -->!! MGM, I'm going to sick the Goldeneye satellite on you!! Just <!-- censored -->ing die already!! " Ahem...target coordinates??" "Target is the MGM board of directors!!"

I think Drax's poisonous globes would be more effective. At least then you can get rid of the current board of directors and then replace them with...shall we say...superior specimens.

Solex Agitator would also be useful...and entertaining.

Heck, I want to sick Irma Bunt in a negligee on them.

[Panavision]

<div style="text-align: center;"></div>
<div class="sthead">Bond 23 tabloid reports false, claim trade press</div>
<div class="sub" id="SUBHEAD">Both Daniel Craig and Sam Mendes remain committed to Bond 23</div>

Mendes may remain committed to Bond, but I hope the feeling is not mutual.

Don't get me wrong; Mendes is a very talented director. But I think he's wrong for Bond. At first I did not think he was a bad idea, but then I watched AWAY WE GO, JARHEAD, and AMERICAN BEAUTY, and while they are all very good films in their own right, I came away thinking that 007 doesn't need an art-house director who knows how to do drama. We've had that with TWINE and QOS (though I really like TWINE).

Just because you won 6 NBA Championships as a player doesn't mean you would be a great coach or front-end manager, and just because Mendes is a great drama director doesn't mean his skill set is appropriate for Bond.

Quite frankly, I'd rather have Christopher Nolan direct Bond23. And just on the strength alone of PLANET TERROR I'd recommend Robert Rodriguez over Sam Mendes.

Yep. The last thing Bond needs is an art house director. Look what happened to QoS!

[Zorin Industries]

But Bond has never had an "art house director". And what is "art house"? I'm keen to hear what folk think is the definition of a phrase so readily bandied about.

[The Shark]

But Bond has never had an "art house director". And what is "art house"? I'm keen to hear what folk think is the definition of a phrase so readily bandied about.

I would say the likes of Lindsay Anderson, Derek Jarman, Ken Russell and Nicolas Roeg were true arthouse directors, in the traditional sense. Forster isn't, in my opinion. He's far too mainstream and dispassionate in his sensibilities and outlook. Not daring enough.

However, what matters in this context is that a lot ignorant journalists and film critics do consider him to be one. So in that sense, he's the first Bond director to be considered 'art-house' by the press.

[Cody]

L.A. Times: Daniel Craig wants another shot at Bond

[Tarl_Cabot]

http://popwatch.ew.c...ames-bond-dead/

Saw this at the airport yesterday during a layover. Ugh.