Michael Fassbender & Christopher Nolan
#1
Posted 30 June 2012 - 01:49 AM
check the trailer : http://movieline.com...mes-bond-video/
#2
Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:34 AM
#3
Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:00 PM
Fassbender on the other hand wouldn't be too bad as Craigs successor in the role.
Edited by AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän, 30 June 2012 - 04:04 PM.
#4
Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:58 PM
#5
Posted 30 June 2012 - 05:13 PM
I agree wholeheartedly. And Tarantino certainly has proven himself... as a hack.I suppose both Tarantino and Nolan are as much a sign of their times as they are relevant in their own right. Both hit a certain nerve, fill a gap the audience didn't exactly know was there before they were told so, and in the end both will have to prove their value beyond the fashionable fad in the future. Both directors suffer from the modern habit to proclaim a new genius every other month.
Edited by AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän, 30 June 2012 - 05:13 PM.
#6
Posted 30 June 2012 - 06:52 PM
#7
Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:02 PM
In my opinion Christopher Nolan is the most overrated filmmaker of today. Neither of his Bat-flicks nor Inception were good but exercises of shallowness portrayed as profound. The way I see it, Nolan worship is as annoying as Tarantino worship of mid-to-late 90's...
Fassbender on the other hand wouldn't be too bad as Craigs successor in the role.
I very much agree on this point, although I will say that I do enjoy BATMAN BEGINS and, to a lesser extent, INSOMNIA. But the rest of Nolan's resume I think fits your description quite well.
Also agreed on Fassbender, although I hope by the time that Craig is done in the role he'll be too old to take over.
Welcome to CBn, by the way.
#8
Posted 01 July 2012 - 12:09 AM
#9
Posted 02 July 2012 - 02:02 AM
#10
Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:53 PM
As for Nolan, I like his films a lot. The only problem with him directing a Bond film is that he, like Tarantino, has his own style. When I went to watch Inception I knew nothing about the film, not even who was directing it, but within a few minutes I could tell it was a Nolan film. The Hans Zimmer music and just the style and feel of it gave it away. A Nolan-directed Bond film will feel like a Bond film set in Nolan's universe rather than a Bond film set in Bond's universe. Also, I doubt Wilson and Broccoli will give him that much creative control, and I doubt Nolan will be ok with having such limited control.
#11
Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:20 PM
#12
Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:51 PM
Nolan is Emperor's new clothes as far as I'm concerned.
Yep. A humourless, dull, one note, autistic director with zero understanding of the human condition. Completely wrong for Bond.
#13
Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:56 PM
Nolan is Emperor's new clothes as far as I'm concerned.
Yep. A humourless, dull, one note, autistic director with zero understanding of the human condition. Completely wrong for Bond.
Couldn't agree more.
#14
Posted 18 September 2012 - 03:20 PM
#15
Posted 18 September 2012 - 06:34 PM
#16
Posted 18 September 2012 - 07:22 PM
#17
Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:07 PM
As for Fassbender where did the Nolan connection come from? I think he is out of the question now that he is in the X Men franchise.
And for Nolan, he has a lot of time to prove himself to EON hes only 42.
#18
Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:41 PM
#19
Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:52 PM
When Craig retires, there will be a lot of talk about Cavill, but I think we can rule him out. In the first place, he was not really "the runner-up" to Craig. He was merely the favorite of Martin Campbell. Eon wasn't interested, and it's Eon who will select Craig's replacement. Moreover, Cavill's career path has taken him out of the running. An actor who has played Superman will never play James Bond. Even without Superman, his profile is already too high for him to be considered, and his profile (and price) will be even higher in 2020 or whenever the time comes to cast a new Bond. Basically, I think he's the new Hugh Jackman. He'll be photoshopped into an Aston Martin and heralded as "the obvious choice". Then Eon will announce another guy that Americans have never heard of.
I had heard of Daniel Craig before Casino Royale. I remember way back when I first saw him upstage Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider and I also remember him from Munich and Archangel.
#20
Posted 18 September 2012 - 10:41 PM
#21
Posted 18 September 2012 - 11:29 PM
When Craig retires, there will be a lot of talk about Cavill, but I think we can rule him out. In the first place, he was not really "the runner-up" to Craig. He was merely the favorite of Martin Campbell. Eon wasn't interested, and it's Eon who will select Craig's replacement. Moreover, Cavill's career path has taken him out of the running. An actor who has played Superman will never play James Bond. Even without Superman, his profile is already too high for him to be considered, and his profile (and price) will be even higher in 2020 or whenever the time comes to cast a new Bond. Basically, I think he's the new Hugh Jackman. He'll be photoshopped into an Aston Martin and heralded as "the obvious choice". Then Eon will announce another guy that Americans have never heard of.
I had heard of Daniel Craig before Casino Royale. I remember way back when I first saw him upstage Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider and I also remember him from Munich and Archangel.
And upstage he did, and I forgot about Archangel, what a great mini-series that was.
#22
Posted 19 September 2012 - 03:38 AM
When Craig retires, there will be a lot of talk about Cavill, but I think we can rule him out. In the first place, he was not really "the runner-up" to Craig. He was merely the favorite of Martin Campbell. Eon wasn't interested, and it's Eon who will select Craig's replacement. Moreover, Cavill's career path has taken him out of the running. An actor who has played Superman will never play James Bond. Even without Superman, his profile is already too high for him to be considered, and his profile (and price) will be even higher in 2020 or whenever the time comes to cast a new Bond. Basically, I think he's the new Hugh Jackman. He'll be photoshopped into an Aston Martin and heralded as "the obvious choice". Then Eon will announce another guy that Americans have never heard of.
I had heard of Daniel Craig before Casino Royale. I remember way back when I first saw him upstage Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider and I also remember him from Munich and Archangel.
And upstage he did, and I forgot about Archangel, what a great mini-series that was.
It really was. Too bad it never really got any attention. As for Nolan, I do believe he could pull off a good Bond film if he were to do it AS A BOND FILM and leave his personal touches out of it. Unlike most, I'm not a TDKR hater. The biggest problem with a Nolan Bond film is that I can tell you the cast right now without him having been announced:
James Bond Christian Bale
Villain Tom Hardy
M Michael Caine
Q Morgan Freeman
Bond girls Scarlett Johansson
Marion Cotillard
Ken Watanabe, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Cillian Murphy would also have parts. It would be too predictable.
Personally, I think David O. Russell would make a great director. Also, here's one out of left field, how about Kathryn Bigelow as the first female Bond director?
And I bet you'd heard of Hugh Laurie before 2004. I'm talking about real Americans. Of course you and I knew about Craig, because we're the sort of scarf-wearing transatlantic pinkos who spend our welfare checks on BBC box sets (and heroin-flavored bananas). But decent folk like J. W. and Maybelle had never heard of no Donald Cregg.
Yep, you know me too well.
#23
Posted 19 September 2012 - 05:22 AM
What I absolute disagree with is the notion that Nolan would make a Bond film with the same cast as his Batman films. There is no reason to believe that he would do that. And he definitely is too clever for such lame-ness.
Visually, I think he would deliver a very interesting Bond film. He is a fan. He knows what he´s doing. But I doubt that the series needs his touch right now. IMO, they need to lighten things up more. That does not mean that I would want a Brett Ratner-kind of director next. Without having seen SKYFALL (which I hope will be brillliant in every which way), just the fact that we will see Bond in a very deep personal crisis that will have an emotional finale strengthens my wish for a Craig entry without angst and any private attachment for the main character.
And Nolan would probably not be interested in that. This, of course, is just me drawing a conclusion from Nolan´s previous films.
#24
Posted 19 September 2012 - 01:04 PM
(...)
(...)
(...)
(...)
Personally, I think David O. Russell would make a great director. Also, here's one out of left field, how about Kathryn Bigelow as the first female Bond director?(...)
Yep, you know me too well.
I've been suggesting Kathryn Bigelow for a while now as the first female Bond director and just a few weeks ago Barbara was asked about her in an interview and she said she would be delighted to have her. Although I'm sure she would have said that about anyone on the spot and was just being professional.
#25
Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:25 PM
I strongly believe if it weren't for Batman Begins we wouldn't have gotten the re-boot of Bond films. Fassbender seems like a nice fellow but I would not want to see him as Bond. Christian Bale or Chris Hemsworth would be ideal in the role.
Nolan is Emperor's new clothes as far as I'm concerned.
Yep. A humourless, dull, one note, autistic director with zero understanding of the human condition. Completely wrong for Bond.
Hyperbole much? Granted CR is a stellar film and portrays Bond as multi-faceted human being. But for the most part the films are just a one note hetero male wish fullfillment fantasy. To carry on as if Bond films are on par with Shakespear or have some deep intellectual meaning is disengenuous and silly.
Edited by Emma, 11 October 2012 - 04:26 PM.
#26
Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:29 PM
Hyperbole much? Granted CR is a stellar film and portrays Bond as multi-faceted human being. But for the most part the films are just a one note hetero male wish fullfillment fantasy. To carry on as if Bond films are on par with Shakespear or have some deep intellectual meaning is disengenuous and silly.
Maybe, but at least they're funny.
#27
Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:49 PM
Hyperbole much? Granted CR is a stellar film and portrays Bond as multi-faceted human being. But for the most part the films are just a one note hetero male wish fullfillment fantasy. To carry on as if Bond films are on par with Shakespear or have some deep intellectual meaning is disengenuous and silly.
The parallels between Bond and Shakespeare are countless: violence, dick jokes, possible racism, quotable dialogue, exotic locales, Judi Dench, stock characters, fiendish plots, an excessive number of Italians...
#28
Posted 16 October 2012 - 12:46 AM
Director : Christopher Nolan
James Bond : Michael Fassbender
Bad guy : Christoph Waltz
Bond girl : Noomi Rapace
Composer : Hans Zimmer
Action places : Sweden, France, Kenya, Australia, Japan.
#29
Posted 16 October 2012 - 01:02 AM
#30
Posted 16 October 2012 - 01:03 AM