343 replies to this topic

[Dustin]

Don't worry, I mainly mentioned Luhrmann for MOULIN ROUGE and ROMEO + JULIET, both of which I found fascinating. I haven't seen AUSTRALIA or the GATSBY trailer yet. Perfectly OK if Luhrmann doesn't fit the bill for Bond. With Niccol my reasons for suggesting him are GATTACA, THE TRUMAN SHOW (production and script) and IN TIME, although that last one is really a mixed bag and could and should have been much better.

[triviachamp]

Ken Loach, Mike Leigh, Judd Apatow, Joss Whedon, Terrence Malick, Michael Haneke, the Coens, Michael Moore, Lars Von Trier, Costa-Gavras and Apichatpong Weerasethakul should take a stab at some point.

[Dustin]

Well, I bet von Trier would make an event of it...

[License to Trill]

I actually quite liked Haywire. It definitely had its quirks, but there was quite a lot there that I wouldn't mind seeing appear in a Bond movie at some point in the future. I definitely have to disagree on the action sequences. Aside from the opening footchase that was set to an Ocean's 11-style piece of music (and seemingly no sound effects), I thought the action was fantastic. The fight scenes were brutal and thankfully ventured away from using the shaky-cam and quick-cut editing and instead allowed the audience to actually watch the actors fight.

well IMO action scenes are nothing spectacular (far cry), but perhaps the best part of the film nevertheless. the absence of "shaky" cameras makes action scenes that much better.

the thing about the action scenes is that you have to understand what's going on, and at the same time it must not look staged. it has to be somewhat complicated (not too much); somewhat unorthodox. a single fight consist VERY RARELY of one perfect streak of best possible punches for the moment, as they fight in difficult real-life environment (not in a training gym) and they don't have time to "think" - they must execute first thing that comes to mind even if it's not a best one. (in addition, as we think we know what would be the best move we root more for our hero LOL...)

take for example every single action scene in Gladiator (IMO done brilliantly). you can see director (Ridley Scott) though out every single move and detail, and at the same time you can see the protagonists are not "thinking" or just "dancing" (as in many action flicks). also, it has dynamic yet not shaky cameras.

since I mentioned him, of course legendary Ridley Scott would IMO do a good Bond film. if you are a Bond fan and haven't seen Body of Lies - do it now (I guess one could argue it's a real-life Bond film, it may not be exactly that but it really doesn't matter).

[OmarB]

I'm gonna play devils advocate and support Bay. I see a lot of great names mentioned, but I love to jump to the defense of Bay.

Firstly, if he does a Bond film it will be huge. Bay does commercial film, it's what he excels at. He drops all the needed ads and makes it look good.

Bay says "Shoot for the edit," and he excels at it. His cinematography is top notch, his camerawork is bar non, his editing is masterful (the man is an editor by trade), he knows how to milk a shot (everything looks good, always). He's also really bombastic. Nobody does big action like Bay. Him doing Bond would totally be the modern "F--- subtlty" entry into the cannon, perhaps even surpassing MR. Just imagine a big Bond film on a MR level with bay's acumen for using effects.

I disagree with everything you said. So strongly that I really have to force myself not to say anything more.

That angry over another person's opinion huh? Hilarious.

[DominicGreene]

I'm gonna play devils advocate and support Bay. I see a lot of great names mentioned, but I love to jump to the defense of Bay.

Firstly, if he does a Bond film it will be huge. Bay does commercial film, it's what he excels at. He drops all the needed ads and makes it look good.

Bay says "Shoot for the edit," and he excels at it. His cinematography is top notch, his camerawork is bar non, his editing is masterful (the man is an editor by trade), he knows how to milk a shot (everything looks good, always). He's also really bombastic. Nobody does big action like Bay. Him doing Bond would totally be the modern "F--- subtlty" entry into the cannon, perhaps even surpassing MR. Just imagine a big Bond film on a MR level with bay's acumen for using effects.

I disagree with everything you said. So strongly that I really have to force myself not to say anything more.

That angry over another person's opinion huh? Hilarious.

Everything you said about Michael Bay is true. The only exception to Michael Bay? He will never understand what cinema MEANS; what it means to make a movie that lasts forever, to give audiences a powerful message, to inspire people, to make wonderful characters, qualities such as these is the reason why Michael Bay is such a horrible director.

Edited by DominicGreene, 28 May 2012 - 09:42 PM.

[tdalton]

I actually quite liked Haywire. It definitely had its quirks, but there was quite a lot there that I wouldn't mind seeing appear in a Bond movie at some point in the future. I definitely have to disagree on the action sequences. Aside from the opening footchase that was set to an Ocean's 11-style piece of music (and seemingly no sound effects), I thought the action was fantastic. The fight scenes were brutal and thankfully ventured away from using the shaky-cam and quick-cut editing and instead allowed the audience to actually watch the actors fight.

well IMO action scenes are nothing spectacular (far cry), but perhaps the best part of the film nevertheless. the absence of "shaky" cameras makes action scenes that much better.

the thing about the action scenes is that you have to understand what's going on, and at the same time it must not look staged. it has to be somewhat complicated (not too much); somewhat unorthodox. a single fight consist VERY RARELY of one perfect streak of best possible punches for the moment, as they fight in difficult real-life environment (not in a training gym) and they don't have time to "think" - they must execute first thing that comes to mind even if it's not a best one. (in addition, as we think we know what would be the best move we root more for our hero LOL...)

take for example every single action scene in Gladiator (IMO done brilliantly). you can see director (Ridley Scott) though out every single move and detail, and at the same time you can see the protagonists are not "thinking" or just "dancing" (as in many action flicks). also, it has dynamic yet not shaky cameras.

since I mentioned him, of course legendary Ridley Scott would IMO do a good Bond film. if you are a Bond fan and haven't seen Body of Lies - do it now (I guess one could argue it's a real-life Bond film, it may not be exactly that but it really doesn't matter).

I completely disagree regarding Haywire. The fight scenes are excellent, and far more realistic than a lot of what we see in the modern action films. While they are of course choreographed and staged, they look far less so than action or fight scenes from most movies released today. The actors actually look like they're engaged in a realistic fight rather than the staged nonsense that we see in most action films. Those scenes might not be as exciting to watch in the traditional sense that we're used to with scenes of that nature, but I find them to be more visceral and more entertaining because of the realism.

As for Ridley Scott, I'd prefer that EON look in a different direction for any upcoming Bond film. While Scott's reputation as a director is well deserved when considering the entire body of work, his recent films haven't been particularly great, IMO.

[The Shark]

take for example every single action scene in Gladiator (IMO done brilliantly). you can see director (Ridley Scott) though out every single move and detail, and at the same time you can see the protagonists are not "thinking" or just "dancing" (as in many action flicks). also, it has dynamic yet not shaky cameras.

No, there is a lot of handheld "shaky-cam" work in GLADIATOR, along with the a hefty amount of digital grading, removed frames, speed ramping, high grain film stock, sharp changes in shutter speed and so on.

[x007AceOfSpades]

Well TDalton, I'm about to start watching Haywire right now and I'll see if Soderbergh is a possible director (even though he's on my list haha) before he retires.

[x007AceOfSpades]

Let me just say this, Steven Soderbergh for Bond 24. Haywire was a great film. Loved the way Soderbergh did his cinematography and editing in the film. It didn't seem like any old tiring way action scenes were shot. It felt kind of brand new and great. I think he could pull it off.

[Dustin]

Still haven't seen it. Neither the Oceans. But I loved KAFKA and SOLARIS. Not sure if Soderbergh fits Bond (or Bond Soderbergh). Isn't he in favour of style over substance?

[tdalton]

I'm not sure that I would suggest Soderbergh as a Bond director either. I was mainly just coming to the defense of Haywire, which is a very solid film in its own right, but I'm not sure I'd want to see a Bond film done that way. There are two things from Haywire that I'd like to see make the leap to a Bond film, and those people responsible for the fight scenes and Gina Carano. The fight scenes were great, but it lacks in terms of the overall narrative.

If Soderbergh could return to his form on Traffic, I'd be for it, but I'd fear we'd get something that would come across as a cross between Ocean's 11 and Haywire, which I'm not sure would work for a Bond film.

[echo]

Soderbergh is an interesting idea, but he seems to be in an experimental phase now which would be all wrong for Bond.

[x007AceOfSpades]

True. But if he were to step out of his experimental phase for Bond, it could be good.

As for the possibility of having Matthew Vaughn for Bond 24, not happening. Vaughn is slowly beginning work on the sequel to X-Men: First Class which is set to come out July 18th, 2014. Same year as Bond 24. Maybe if Guy Ritchie isn't doing Sherlock Holmes 3 or another British Crime film he could step in. I've always enjoyed his films minus Swept Away. And is improving as a filmmaker.

[lechero]

Nolan still wants to direct Bond film in the future:

http://blogs.indiewi...tm_medium=feed#

[Odd Jobbies]

Nolan still wants to direct Bond film in the future:

http://blogs.indiewi...tm_medium=feed#

Here's the same story from Slashfilm.com:

he does say that he was serious about making a James Bond film, a desire he voiced back in 2010.
As cool as a Christopher Nolan Bond movie might be, it seems as unlikely as the Quentin Tarantino version of Casino Royale always was. Bond controllers EON Productions have their way of doing things, and Nolan has his way of doing things, and it seems unlikely that those two methodologies would go hand in hand.
Nolan does tell Empire that he met with producers about Bond, but that any film with his name on it “would have to be the right situation and the right time in their cycle of things.” Precisely what “the right situation” is can be open to question, but since part of Nolan’s working method is exerting total control, he might want to cast his own Bond. Given how much effort EON puts into choosing and marketing their Bond, that could be the one and only stumbling block that matters.

Personally i don't agree with the editorial on Nolan's quote. I don't see him demanding to re-cast when there's already such a great actor in the role - in fact i'd imagine Craig makes the deal that much sweeter. Fassbinder keeps getting bandied about, and he'd indeed be a great Bond, but no better than Craig - who's to say!?
And while Nolans oft collaborator Hardy (whom i think is the best actor out there right now - see Bronson and Warrior), i don't see Nolan casting him as Bond. He would make a great villain, as i'm sure he will in Dark Knight Rises.

I'd see the only hurdle being control of the final cut, but since they've already snagged Mendes, an auteur in his own right, then i'd guess Eon have become more flexible on this point. They'd need to believe in and trust the vision of the Director, but Nolan seems no more untrustworthy, or likely to screw too much with the format than Mendes would. I can understand why Eon couldn't commit to Tarrantino's voiceover driven version of CR - who knows how he'd want to subvert things in the edit, but i think these editorials have it totally wrong by using Eon's resistance to Tarrantino as a rationale to their possible restance to Nolan.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Nolan is eventually announced as Director of Bond 24. In fact i'd bet that talk among the Execs already has it down to Mendes returning and Nolan...

[Dustin]

In fact i'd bet that talk among the Execs already has it down to Mendes returning and Nolan...

Mendes returning and Nolan??? What do you mean? Nolan for BOND 25? Or Mendes and Nolan doing 24?

It seems EON has asked any director since Tamahori to come back for the next, so I take it they would want some kind of stability, some distinctive trademark stamp on their films. Only it didn't work out this way and Campbell's the only one since the days of Glen to actually have another go, although only after considerable time. Perhaps Nolan would even turn out as just what EON is looking for? I suspect the greater danger lies in Nolan not wanting to go into another long term relationship with a project.

[Odd Jobbies]

In fact i'd bet that talk among the Execs already has it down to Mendes returning and Nolan...

Mendes returning and Nolan??? What do you mean? Nolan for BOND 25? Or Mendes and Nolan doing 24?

Sorry if that was unclear. I meant Eon's current wish list for Bond 24 being down to just 2 names, Menes and Nolan.

From the overtures Nolan's made regarding Bond i don't think he'd worry about the commitment. Besides, he'd only be committing to one movie. I don't think Eon ever do multi-picture deals (least not these days).

Edited by Odd Jobbies, 05 June 2012 - 02:26 PM.

[Dustin]

In fact i'd bet that talk among the Execs already has it down to Mendes returning and Nolan...

Mendes returning and Nolan??? What do you mean? Nolan for BOND 25? Or Mendes and Nolan doing 24?

Sorry if that was unclear. I meant Eon's current wish list for Bond 24 being down to just 2 names, Menes and Nolan.

From the overtures Nolan's made regarding Bond i don't think he'd worry about the commitment. Besides, he'd only be committing to one movie. I don't think Eon ever do multi-picture deals (least not these days).

Perhaps that is just what the series at this point needs, a longer perspective. For some time now Bond films are planned from one project to the next, with little to no regard for continuity or the scale beyond the imminent production. Perhaps it's time to change that tradition (back?)

Anyway, Nolan is still at the start of his career and could be working for another four or five decades. If he's really eager to do a Bond and if EON is not completely averse to him there's plenty of chance for him down the line. He could even be involved in the casting of the next Bond, why ever not?

[Odd Jobbies]

Yes to all of that!

[echo]

In fact i'd bet that talk among the Execs already has it down to Mendes returning and Nolan...

Mendes returning and Nolan??? What do you mean? Nolan for BOND 25? Or Mendes and Nolan doing 24?

Sorry if that was unclear. I meant Eon's current wish list for Bond 24 being down to just 2 names, Menes and Nolan.

From the overtures Nolan's made regarding Bond i don't think he'd worry about the commitment. Besides, he'd only be committing to one movie. I don't think Eon ever do multi-picture deals (least not these days).

Perhaps that is just what the series at this point needs, a longer perspective. For some time now Bond films are planned from one project to the next, with little to no regard for continuity or the scale beyond the imminent production. Perhaps it's time to change that tradition (back?)

Anyway, Nolan is still at the start of his career and could be working for another four or five decades. If he's really eager to do a Bond and if EON is not completely averse to him there's plenty of chance for him down the line. He could even be involved in the casting of the next Bond, why ever not?

Between Batman and Superman, Nolan's a bit busy these days...

[x007AceOfSpades]

It's not like he was on set for Man Of Steel. He was filming Dark Knight Rises.

[tdalton]

I don't see Batman or Superman as being obstacles to Nolan directing Bond. He's basically done with Batman and, as already said, wasn't even on set for a good portion of the filming of Superman.

With that said, I don't particularly want to see a Nolan-directed Bond film, but he wouldn't be prevented from directing one due to his Batman and Superman obligations.

[x007AceOfSpades]

He could do it in a great way, but I'm really no longer jumping over backwards for Nolan-Bond film. Christopher Nolan isn't the only great director out there.

[Dustin]

Very true. Narrowing the vision on just one big name isn't likely to get good results. Others may be fitted just as good or better even to the job of Bond-on-screen.

[Ren]

I would support Matthew Vaughn and Christopher Nolan.

[Satorious]

I saw Haywire last night. All I can say is that I was massively disappointed with it, style over substance. I'll admit that the actual fist-fight scenes were well handled, Fassbender was good. But the editing was horrible, the music seemed out of place half the time, the fantastic cast was squandered. It clearly thought it was a lot cooler than it actually was (which is Soderbergh's material all over for me personally)! In "action" terms, I was significantly more impressed with what Gareth Evans achieved with The Raid. That one had a budget which was 1/28th of what Soderbergh had for Haywire and it was a lot more gripping, tense and exciting.

[Cody]

He hasn't been before, but I wonder if Danny Boyle will be interested in directing a Bond film after working with Craig and the character on the Olympics opener.

[Odd Jobbies]

He hasn't been before, but I wonder if Danny Boyle will be interested in directing a Bond film after working with Craig and the character on the Olympics opener.

Here's hoping !

[Ren]

Stuart Baird