120 replies to this topic

[Matt_13]

Baz reporting? I believe it.

[archer1949]

If Nolan can get it out without a delay, I say bring it on! Otherwise,  give it to someone who can make it in time.

[tdalton]

Can't say that I'm excited by this news, but it had to be expected.  EON already had financial success with a Nolan-esque Bond film, so why not follow that up with an actual Nolan Bond film.  

 

Hopefully this ends up not being true, but it does seem like the next logical step from Skyfall.  

[graric]

 

 

 

If this is true, then we can expect any number of the following actors to appear in BOND 24:

Christian Bale
Marion Cotillard
Joseph Gordon-Levitt
Tom Hardy
Michael Caine

Cillian Murphy
Ken Watanabe

Not likely. What are you basing your statement on? Because he has used a few actors in different films? Is he the first director to do this?

 

My comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Still, Nolan has a reputation for using many of the same actors repeatedly in his films. I wouldn't really oppose any of those actors appearing in BOND 24, although I'd say Watanabe and Murphy are probably the most likely as they're not as high profile as the rest.

 

Sorry. I've just seen this before. People jump to assumptions that they know exactly who Nolan would cast as if he is doing the casting. Nobody ever says anything like this about David Fincher who also has used and uses collaborators or any other director for that manner.

 

 

Well in this case Nolan is probably not comparable to Fincher as he is so much to Tarantino (who would find a way to write a role for Samuel L Jackson in to any Bond he would be involved in, and probably cast Christoph Waltz as the villain) while most directors like using certain collaborators from time to time Nolan and Tarantino are both good examples of directors who have recurring supporting casts that they like to draw on for their films.
 Michael Caine, for example, is all but guaranteed to be in any film that Nolan directs at this point as Nolan himself has referred to him as his 'lucky charm' and he has appeared in every Nolan film since Batman Begins, Cillian Murphy would also be a very likely candidate for a supporting role as the only recent Nolan film he didn't have a small role in was The Prestige.
While it is abit of tongue in cheek joke to talk about Nolan and his recurring cast members he clearly does have a team of people he loves working with, both on and off-screen in much the same way Sam Mendes go to composer is always Thomas Newman (which would be interesting from a Bond perspective because if he did direct it this would be his first film not produced by Emma Thomas, who I doubt Barbara and Michael would want involved in any sort of producing capacity.)

[The Shark]

I think Nolan could do gadgets, girls and guns very nicely.

 

He can do gadgets and guns.

 

Could EON hire a more Aspergian director?

[SecretAgentFan]

It´s only a rumor right now, and, actually, I don´t think that Nolan will do the next Bond or one at all.

 

As one of the most high profile directors right now it was only a matter of time before he got contacted by EON / mentioned in the press.

 

And one of the biggest problems preventing him from doing a Bond film probably is this: he would want to co-produce. That is surely a No-Go for EON.

[coco1997]

And one of the biggest problems preventing him from doing a Bond film probably is this: he would want to co-produce. That is surely a No-Go for EON.

But don't you think that Nolan, if he reveres the Bond franchise as much as he claims, would put his ego aside and let EON hold onto the production reins?

Well in this case Nolan is probably not comparable to Fincher as he is so much to Tarantino (who would find a way to write a role for Samuel L Jackson in to any Bond he would be involved in, and probably cast Christoph Waltz as the villain) while most directors like using certain collaborators from time to time Nolan and Tarantino are both good examples of directors who have recurring supporting casts that they like to draw on for their films.

 Michael Caine, for example, is all but guaranteed to be in any film that Nolan directs at this point as Nolan himself has referred to him as his 'lucky charm' and he has appeared in every Nolan film since Batman Begins, Cillian Murphy would also be a very likely candidate for a supporting role as the only recent Nolan film he didn't have a small role in was The Prestige.
While it is abit of tongue in cheek joke to talk about Nolan and his recurring cast members he clearly does have a team of people he loves working with, both on and off-screen in much the same way Sam Mendes go to composer is always Thomas Newman (which would be interesting from a Bond perspective because if he did direct it this would be his first film not produced by Emma Thomas, who I doubt Barbara and Michael would want involved in any sort of producing capacity.)

Well said.

I suppose this also means we would get a Hans Zimmer-scored soundtrack.  

[Dustin]

And one of the biggest problems preventing him from doing a Bond film probably is this: he would want to co-produce. That is surely a No-Go for EON.

But don't you think that Nolan, if he reveres the Bond franchise as much as he claims, would put his ego aside and let EON hold onto the production reins?

I wonder, is that just a question of putting aside one's ego? Or is it really more to do with not damaging one's own market value by cutting back on the influence without having to and setting an example?

Strictly in business terms the ability of making exactly the films one wants to do probably outweighs the chance to do a Bond film; all the more so as Nolan has already used various elements of Bond lore without having to sacrifice his influence.

At the moment Nolan's standing in the industry is almost unprecedented, with the studio execs trusting him with a lot more than they would ordinarily be comfortable with. If Nolan agreed to become director-for-hire for Eon he might well have to suffer for it with his own future projects. And I think Nolan knows his market value is high right now, with a possible Bond film probably not having much more positive effect. I could see Nolan taking the chance in ten or twenty years, when his hotness-factor has petered out somewhat and he either needs a stunt or can do as he pleases. Right at the moment I don't think he'd regard Bond as fitting into his career.

It's quite interesting how Nolan invites extreme reactions with the audience though. There seems to be little middle ground, most people either love or hate his work. With the majority at the moment quite obviously liking what they get from his oeuvre. It seems the obvious way to go after Mendes and SKYFALL's spectacular financial result. The next logical step would probably be Spielberg.

Edited by Dustin, 18 May 2013 - 12:49 PM.

[Matt_13]

Nolan loves Bond. I remember reading a few articles where he mentioned how underrated OHMSS is, and that it was actually his favorite of the bunch. I figured they'd approach him, given how often Mendes talked about how influential The Dark Knight was on the production of Skyfall. I think Nolan would be all over the opportunity if his schedule was open. In the past, and especially after the seriously mediocre Dark Knight Rises, I haven't wanted Nolan near the franchise. That said, after seeing how Sam's fandom and enthusiasm bolstered the making of Skyfall, I feel like Nolan would find equal joy in making a Bond, potentially to similar results. He won't go for a producing credit.

[Hockey Mask]

Two words: Spiel berg

[SecretAgentFan]

 

 

And one of the biggest problems preventing him from doing a Bond film probably is this: he would want to co-produce. That is surely a No-Go for EON.

But don't you think that Nolan, if he reveres the Bond franchise as much as he claims, would put his ego aside and let EON hold onto the production reins?

I wonder, is that just a question of putting aside one's ego? Or is it really more to do with not damaging one's own market value by cutting back on the influence without having to and setting an example?

Strictly in business terms the ability of making exactly the films one wants to do probably outweighs the chance to do a Bond film; all the more so as Nolan has already used various elements of Bond lore without having to sacrifice his influence.

At the moment Nolan's standing in the industry is almost unprecedented, with the studio execs trusting him with a lot more than they would ordinarily be comfortable with. If Nolan agreed to become director-for-hire for Eon he might well have to suffer for it with his own future projects. And I think Nolan knows his market value is high right now, with a possible Bond film probably not having much more positive effect. I could see Nolan taking the chance in ten or twenty years, when his hotness-factor has petered out somewhat and he either needs a stunt or can do as he pleases. Right at the moment I don't think he'd regard Bond as fitting into his career.

It's quite interesting how Nolan invites extreme reactions with the audience though. There seems to be little middle ground, most people either love or hate his work. With the majority at the moment quite obviously liking what they get from his oeuvre. It seems the obvious way to go after Mendes and SKYFALL's spectacular financial result. The next logical step would probably be Spielberg.

 

 

I think you are absolutely right. If Nolan agrees to do Bond without producing (or even co-producing) it would damage the "brand" he has been establishing extremely successfully.

 

In the end, I believe EON and Nolan have in fact been talking. But not about BOND 24. Maybe not even about Bond in general. Just a casual meeting of producers respecting each other, or picking his brain concerning possible replacements for Mendes. Maybe... asking him whether Zach Snyder is easy enough to work with and a good fit for BOND 24?

[Dustin]

In the end, I believe EON and Nolan have in fact been talking. But not about BOND 24. Maybe not even about Bond in general. Just a casual meeting of producers respecting each other, or picking his brain concerning possible replacements for Mendes. Maybe... asking him whether Zach Snyder is easy enough to work with and a good fit for BOND 24?

Haven't thought about Snyder, could indeed be a topic in some informal fireside chat.

[coco1997]

If Nolan directs, maybe we'll finally get David Bowie as a villain. 

[S K Y F A L L]

If Nolan can get it out without a delay, I say bring it on! Otherwise,  give it to someone who can make it in time.

SF left everyone wanting more Bond. Waiting till 2016 would be a long wait. These long breaks in between sequels seems more common then ever though.  

 

Can't say that I'm excited by this news, but it had to be expected.  EON already had financial success with a Nolan-esque Bond film, so why not follow that up with an actual Nolan Bond film.  

Hopefully this ends up not being true, but it does seem like the next logical step from Skyfall.  

I agree with what you said. I'm just a little curious why you hope it is not true? Clearly not a fan but anything in particular?

 

 

 

 

 

If this is true, then we can expect any number of the following actors to appear in BOND 24:

Christian Bale
Marion Cotillard
Joseph Gordon-Levitt
Tom Hardy
Michael Caine

Cillian Murphy
Ken Watanabe

Not likely. What are you basing your statement on? Because he has used a few actors in different films? Is he the first director to do this?

 

My comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Still, Nolan has a reputation for using many of the same actors repeatedly in his films. I wouldn't really oppose any of those actors appearing in BOND 24, although I'd say Watanabe and Murphy are probably the most likely as they're not as high profile as the rest.

 

Sorry. I've just seen this before. People jump to assumptions that they know exactly who Nolan would cast as if he is doing the casting. Nobody ever says anything like this about David Fincher who also has used and uses collaborators or any other director for that manner.

 

 

Well in this case Nolan is probably not comparable to Fincher as he is so much to Tarantino (who would find a way to write a role for Samuel L Jackson in to any Bond he would be involved in, and probably cast Christoph Waltz as the villain) while most directors like using certain collaborators from time to time Nolan and Tarantino are both good examples of directors who have recurring supporting casts that they like to draw on for their films.
 Michael Caine, for example, is all but guaranteed to be in any film that Nolan directs at this point as Nolan himself has referred to him as his 'lucky charm' and he has appeared in every Nolan film since Batman Begins, Cillian Murphy would also be a very likely candidate for a supporting role as the only recent Nolan film he didn't have a small role in was The Prestige.
While it is abit of tongue in cheek joke to talk about Nolan and his recurring cast members he clearly does have a team of people he loves working with, both on and off-screen in much the same way Sam Mendes go to composer is always Thomas Newman (which would be interesting from a Bond perspective because if he did direct it this would be his first film not produced by Emma Thomas, who I doubt Barbara and Michael would want involved in any sort of producing capacity.)

 

I was reading Michael Caine is already cast in INTERSTELLAR. I would think Nolan knows he would be losing a lot of creative control going into a Bond film and would not be interested if he wasn't ready to try something new and fresh from what he has been involved in already. Maybe he wants a break from all the work and wants to direct a sure winner.

 

 

And one of the biggest problems preventing him from doing a Bond film probably is this: he would want to co-produce. That is surely a No-Go for EON.

But don't you think that Nolan, if he reveres the Bond franchise as much as he claims, would put his ego aside and let EON hold onto the production reins?

Well in this case Nolan is probably not comparable to Fincher as he is so much to Tarantino (who would find a way to write a role for Samuel L Jackson in to any Bond he would be involved in, and probably cast Christoph Waltz as the villain) while most directors like using certain collaborators from time to time Nolan and Tarantino are both good examples of directors who have recurring supporting casts that they like to draw on for their films.

 Michael Caine, for example, is all but guaranteed to be in any film that Nolan directs at this point as Nolan himself has referred to him as his 'lucky charm' and he has appeared in every Nolan film since Batman Begins, Cillian Murphy would also be a very likely candidate for a supporting role as the only recent Nolan film he didn't have a small role in was The Prestige.
While it is abit of tongue in cheek joke to talk about Nolan and his recurring cast members he clearly does have a team of people he loves working with, both on and off-screen in much the same way Sam Mendes go to composer is always Thomas Newman (which would be interesting from a Bond perspective because if he did direct it this would be his first film not produced by Emma Thomas, who I doubt Barbara and Michael would want involved in any sort of producing capacity.)

Well said.

I suppose this also means we would get a Hans Zimmer-scored soundtrack.

 

I agree with your first point, I don't think Nolan would say he wants to do a Bond film unless he was willing to play along with EON's influence. Perhaps Nolan will changes things up a bit by using different actors, composers and now it appears TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY Cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema is to Shoot INTERSTELLAR. [1] 

I wonder how Nolan would feel about working with David Arnold or Thomas Newman and even possibly Adele again....

[S K Y F A L L]

 

 

And one of the biggest problems preventing him from doing a Bond film probably is this: he would want to co-produce. That is surely a No-Go for EON.

But don't you think that Nolan, if he reveres the Bond franchise as much as he claims, would put his ego aside and let EON hold onto the production reins?

I wonder, is that just a question of putting aside one's ego? Or is it really more to do with not damaging one's own market value by cutting back on the influence without having to and setting an example?

Strictly in business terms the ability of making exactly the films one wants to do probably outweighs the chance to do a Bond film; all the more so as Nolan has already used various elements of Bond lore without having to sacrifice his influence.

At the moment Nolan's standing in the industry is almost unprecedented, with the studio execs trusting him with a lot more than they would ordinarily be comfortable with. If Nolan agreed to become director-for-hire for Eon he might well have to suffer for it with his own future projects. And I think Nolan knows his market value is high right now, with a possible Bond film probably not having much more positive effect. I could see Nolan taking the chance in ten or twenty years, when his hotness-factor has petered out somewhat and he either needs a stunt or can do as he pleases. Right at the moment I don't think he'd regard Bond as fitting into his career.

It's quite interesting how Nolan invites extreme reactions with the audience though. There seems to be little middle ground, most people either love or hate his work. With the majority at the moment quite obviously liking what they get from his oeuvre. It seems the obvious way to go after Mendes and SKYFALL's spectacular financial result. The next logical step would probably be Spielberg.

 

 

Just curious, do you think Spielberg would be the next logical step because not only his financial success but his Oscar recognition? That seems like a thread on its own. 

 

 

I think Nolan could do gadgets, girls and guns very nicely.

 

He can do gadgets and guns.

 

Could EON hire a more Aspergian director?

 

Fair enough. I have to admit I'm not really a big fan of his films love interests. 

[seawolfnyy]

I don't hugely mind Nolan, I just want a Bond by 2015 at the latest. I'm afraid that another 4 year gap could kill much of the positive buzz from Skyfall.

[tdalton]

I agree with what you said. I'm just a little curious why you hope it is not true? Clearly not a fan but anything in particular?

 

I'm just not a fan of Nolan's films in general, with The Dark Knight Rises being the only one of his recent films that I've enjoyed (and, admittedly, I enjoyed that one quite a bit).  The idea of a Nolan-directed Bond film just doesn't get me excited, especially since the finished product would probably turn out to be quite a bit like Skyfall.

[Dustin]

And one of the biggest problems preventing him from doing a Bond film probably is this: he would want to co-produce. That is surely a No-Go for EON.

But don't you think that Nolan, if he reveres the Bond franchise as much as he claims, would put his ego aside and let EON hold onto the production reins?

I wonder, is that just a question of putting aside one's ego? Or is it really more to do with not damaging one's own market value by cutting back on the influence without having to and setting an example?

Strictly in business terms the ability of making exactly the films one wants to do probably outweighs the chance to do a Bond film; all the more so as Nolan has already used various elements of Bond lore without having to sacrifice his influence.

At the moment Nolan's standing in the industry is almost unprecedented, with the studio execs trusting him with a lot more than they would ordinarily be comfortable with. If Nolan agreed to become director-for-hire for Eon he might well have to suffer for it with his own future projects. And I think Nolan knows his market value is high right now, with a possible Bond film probably not having much more positive effect. I could see Nolan taking the chance in ten or twenty years, when his hotness-factor has petered out somewhat and he either needs a stunt or can do as he pleases. Right at the moment I don't think he'd regard Bond as fitting into his career.

It's quite interesting how Nolan invites extreme reactions with the audience though. There seems to be little middle ground, most people either love or hate his work. With the majority at the moment quite obviously liking what they get from his oeuvre. It seems the obvious way to go after Mendes and SKYFALL's spectacular financial result. The next logical step would probably be Spielberg.

Just curious, do you think Spielberg would be the next logical step because not only his financial success but his Oscar recognition? That seems like a thread on its own.

Well, the next director would have to follow in some exceptionally huge footsteps, financially and in terms of critical reception. I can think of only one way to not have the guy at a disadvantage right from the go: have a real heavyweight in the director's chair.

Spielberg would perfectly fit the bill as a master of his profession, a favourite of the critics and the audience. He's proven time and again his ability to make outstanding films, and his appeal to the Academy surely isn't hurting either. The only Bond film more eagerly awaited than one directed by Spielberg would be a Bond film directed by Hitchcock. But as he's unlikely to try a comeback...

[coco1997]

I'm just not a fan of Nolan's films in general, with The Dark Knight Rises being the only one of his recent films that I've enjoyed (and, admittedly, I enjoyed that one quite a bit).  The idea of a Nolan-directed Bond film just doesn't get me excited, especially since the finished product would probably turn out to be quite a bit like Skyfall.

 

That's my concern, as well. As much as I'd love to see what Nolan could do with Bond, I think what the franchise really needs after SKYFALL (and especially after a string of fairly melodramatic entries in the series) is a nice, light and breezy affair in the vein of THUNDERBALL, and I'm not convinced Nolan is even capable of delivering that.

[007jamesbond]

Nolan would make another Skyfall...those who hate skyfall won't like with Nolan directing.......but we will get another real Bond movie! 

[tdalton]

 

I'm just not a fan of Nolan's films in general, with The Dark Knight Rises being the only one of his recent films that I've enjoyed (and, admittedly, I enjoyed that one quite a bit).  The idea of a Nolan-directed Bond film just doesn't get me excited, especially since the finished product would probably turn out to be quite a bit like Skyfall.

 

That's my concern, as well. As much as I'd love to see what Nolan could do with Bond, I think what the franchise really needs after SKYFALL (and especially after a string of fairly melodramatic entries in the series) is a nice, light and breezy affair in the vein of THUNDERBALL, and I'm not convinced Nolan is even capable of delivering that.

 

 

I don't think he's capable of such a Bond film either.  There's certainly nothing that he's done so far that would indicate that, anyway.  

 

I'm not even really looking for Bond 24 to be a piece of light-hearted, escapist fare.  I'd be perfectly fine with them going the darker route yet again, but hopefully this time with a better script and story, neither of which are, IMO, strengths of Nolan's.

[SecretAgentFan]

If only high profile directors get asked to do a Bond film now, I fear, this can only go wrong.

 

The series has endured because it was not auteur-driven. Nolan, IMO, would be wrong because he has a very distinctive style - and that would distract from Bond or be weighing on Bond too heavily.

 

Mendes worked because all of his films were very different. Nolan´s movies have all the same tone. And really, humor was never a part of Nolan´s universe. That does not mean that he could not do it. But it´s improbable that he will suddenly choose to be lighthearted enough.

[Matt_13]

Well, Logan is still penning the script, so there will be humor regardless of whether Nolan directs or not.

[SecretAgentFan]

Hope so. However, any new director will bring his special writer with him. And if Nolan actually signs up, I would not be surprised if his brother would pen the final script.

[Dustin]

I think so, too. There is no guarantee whatever Logan delivers for BOND 24/25 will also be used for those productions, or used at all to be honest. Handing Logan those two gigs was largely a step to sweeten the comeback-pill for Mendes. Impossible to say what Mendes' replacement will make of this, or if maybe that work might be kept reserved as ace-in-the-hole for a future Bond film directed by Mendes.

[S K Y F A L L]

I wonder how long it will be until this rumor/tidbit will be debunked or confirmed by EON and the producers or even Nolan himself...

[tdalton]

Hope so. However, any new director will bring his special writer with him. And if Nolan actually signs up, I would not be surprised if his brother would pen the final script.

 

I would hope so as well, but I also wouldn't be surprised if we saw Nolan jettison a lot of that from the script because it either doesn't play to his strengths as a director (not that we would know, as he's never really incorporated humor on the scale that a film like Skyfall attempted to) or he simply just doesn't like those elements.  Or, Nolan could end up pulling a page from Marc Forster's playbook and begin work on a new script from scratch once he's hired to direct the film.

[univex]

Michael Caine as the villain would be nice

 

Nolan? Not so sure. If he can handle colour and panache, ok. If he goes to that dark pastel colored side of his, I´d say no. Prestige was wonderful BTW.

Baz Luhrmann, as someone joked, HELL NO! Never! About the other Baz being right: he does have a good record. And yes, Nolan would have to have script control at some point, the guy´s a bit paranoid about story, and that´s a good thing in my book.

[TheSilhouette]

Michael Caine as the villain would be nice

 

Nolan? Not so sure. If he can handle colour and panache, ok. If he goes to that dark pastel colored side of his, I´d say no. Prestige was wonderful BTW.

Baz Luhrmann, as someone joked, HELL NO! Never! About the other Baz being right: he does have a good record. And yes, Nolan would have to have script control at some point, the guy´s a bit paranoid about story, and that´s a good thing in my book.

 

With Wally Pfister on his own now, the visual style may be a little less dreary. I wouldn't mind Baz Luhrmann for the title sequence, though. 

[SecretAgentFan]

One thing that would relax me if Nolan were to direct a Bond film: no 3D.