181 replies to this topic

[DamnCoffee]

Do you think the producers would wait for Mendes to be available again? How much of the success of Skyfall and SPECTRE will we be putting down to Mendes? What impact has he had on the scripts/stories or the direction that the movies are going?

 

If we argue that he is an integral part, then they would want to keep the Craig-Mendes team for as long as possible.

 

If the stories are happening without Mendes being involved, then it doesn't matter if he directs or when he is available.

 

I do have a feeling that the next one will likely be Craig's last. (I'm not saying that I think it should be, though). If SPECTRE performs as well as Skyfall, then I feel that they should get Mendes back to round off Craig's era as Bond. It may be considered a 'safe option' by some,  but thematically it really would make sense. I'm all for a wide range of directors to take a shot at Bond, but I feel that now, if the next one is Craig's swansong, then having anyone other than Mendes directing wouldn't really make a lot of sense. (not saying no to Martin Campbell, though) 

 

If what I think is going to happen with SPECTRE, then I'm completely expecting Skyfall, SPECTRE and BOND 25 to form some sort of loose trilogy. Even though it was confirmed that it was going to be a standalone film, I really wouldn't be at all surprised if the original idea for a two parter came back into play again. I just have that feeling. 

Edited by DamnCoffee, 07 April 2015 - 04:49 AM.

[Call Billy Bob]

not saying no to Martin Campbell, though

 

I'd love him back, but to begin Bond 7's tenure. Campbell has a good reputation for being the right man to direct a new Bond.

[tdalton]

I think I'd have to pass on Martin Campbell directing Bond #7's debut.  He'll be somewhere in the neighborhood of 76-77 years old when it's time to start thinking about Bond 26.  

 

There's also bound to be some director out there who could do a terrific job of introducing a new Bond.  At this point, we know how Campbell would go about directing a new Bond's intro.  I wouldn't mind seeing someone else's take on it for the next one.

[x007AceOfSpades]

I don't think age is an issue. Martin Scorsese for example is 72 (73 in Nov.) and still making top quality films.

[JCRendle]

What has Campbell directed recently? The last production I remember him being involved in was the lackluster Green Lantern, about 5 years ago   

[tdalton]

What has Campbell directed recently? The last production I remember him being involved in was the lackluster Green Lantern, about 5 years ago   

 

Just some work in TV.  Green Lantern was his last feature.

 

Given his age and lack of productivity in recent years, I don't think Campbell would be the best choice to introduce the next Bond.  

[sharpshooter]

I'd love Campbell to come back and introduce Bond #7. Films like Green Lantern aren't exactly the best, but even so, Campbell delivers the goods with Bond. I'd trust him to do the job. It'd be an amazing story too. A trilogy of films across the space of about 25 years, introducing three Bond actors.

[SecretAgentFan]

They will want to re-hire Mendes.  He might come back because it would make his tenure a trilogy, also it might be Craig´s last film - and it´s another anniversary movie, too.

 

After that, a longer pause again - and a re-boot with a new actor in 2020.

[x007AceOfSpades]

I'd love Campbell to come back and introduce Bond #7. Films like Green Lantern aren't exactly the best, but even so, Campbell delivers the goods with Bond. I'd trust him to do the job. It'd be an amazing story too. A trilogy of films across the space of about 25 years, introducing three Bond actors.

Agreed.

[DaveBond21]

They will want to re-hire Mendes.  He might come back because it would make his tenure a trilogy, also it might be Craig´s last film - and it´s another anniversary movie, too.

 

After that, a longer pause again - and a re-boot with a new actor in 2020.

 

Well he said the reason he came back for SPECTRE, was the script and the story really appealed to him. So it would need to be the same for the next one, and not just "doing a 3rd Bond".

 

 

 

I'd love Campbell to come back and introduce Bond #7. Films like Green Lantern aren't exactly the best, but even so, Campbell delivers the goods with Bond. I'd trust him to do the job. It'd be an amazing story too. A trilogy of films across the space of about 25 years, introducing three Bond actors.

Agreed.

 

 

Yes, I would love to see Campbell direct again but he will be quite old by then.

[x007AceOfSpades]

 

They will want to re-hire Mendes.  He might come back because it would make his tenure a trilogy, also it might be Craig´s last film - and it´s another anniversary movie, too.

 

After that, a longer pause again - and a re-boot with a new actor in 2020.

 

Well he said the reason he came back for SPECTRE, was the script and the story really appealed to him. So it would need to be the same for the next one, and not just "doing a 3rd Bond".

 

 

 

I'd love Campbell to come back and introduce Bond #7. Films like Green Lantern aren't exactly the best, but even so, Campbell delivers the goods with Bond. I'd trust him to do the job. It'd be an amazing story too. A trilogy of films across the space of about 25 years, introducing three Bond actors.

Agreed.

 

 

Yes, I would love to see Campbell direct again but he will be quite old by then.

 

I don't see age as a problem..

[SecretAgentFan]

The reason Mendes came back definitely was not the script.  Let´s be realistic here - he is a former arthouse director who lost the critics with his last films (and the audience had stayed away since THE ROAD TO PERDITION).  SKYFALL was his big chance to rebrand himself - and it worked out beautifully.  Of course, he was lured back in by the money.  And that´s perfectly fine - who wouldn´t have been?

 

Sure.  He wanted to have a good enough script - he does not want to squander his reputation by doing a hack job.  And he will bring his huge talent to the table again in SPECTRE.

 

But if Craig will do another one and SPECTRE is a huge success at the box office - of course, EON will want to keep this combination going.

 

 

Concerning another Campbell hire - well, if you´re not Clint Eastwood, reaching your mid-70´s will slow you down.  And the immensely exhausting work on a Bond film might prove too much for him.

[Vauxhall]

Also, the script was, by all accounts, in terrible shape when Mendes joined the film. Improvements came further down the line.

[tdalton]

Concerning another Campbell hire - well, if you´re not Clint Eastwood, reaching your mid-70´s will slow you down.  And the immensely exhausting work on a Bond film might prove too much for him.

 

Agreed.  The Bond films would seem to be more demanding on their directors than the kind of fare that Eastwood tends to direct, with all of the globe-trotting and the numerous major action set pieces. 

 

Besides, we've had two Bond actors introduced by Campbell.  If we had to have Campbell return, I'd much rather see him come back to do a film that wasn't a debut for an actor, to see how he'd handle a more straight-forward Bond film that didn't need to take the time to introduce a new Bond.

[glidrose]

They will want to re-hire Mendes.  He might come back because it would make his tenure a trilogy, also it might be Craig´s last film - and it´s another anniversary movie, too.

Anniversary for what?

[Call Billy Bob]

 

They will want to re-hire Mendes.  He might come back because it would make his tenure a trilogy, also it might be Craig´s last film - and it´s another anniversary movie, too.

Anniversary for what?

 

I think he means it being the 25th film. The "silver" film, if you will.

[Thevan7F]

It be good Bond 25 in 2017 with Daniel Craig in 5th Bond movie, His new Boss Ralph Fienn, Naomi Harries, & his gadget master Ben Whishaw as Q. Even I agree for the 55th anniversary of the Franchise celebrations. There should be the 55th anniversary James Bond Franchise Documentary narrated by ex bond cast. How about it for the 55th Anniversary 007 Franchise.

                   

[DavidJones]

I think directors are overrated. The script is what counts - hence, the script-writers are the most important thing. I know the industry doesn't believe that, but it's the truth.

Edited by DavidJones, 15 April 2015 - 08:51 PM.

[SecretAgentFan]

I think directors are overrated. The script is what counts - hence, the script-writers are the most important thing. I know the industry doesn't believe that, but it's the truth.

 

Being a screenwriter myself, my vanity would like to say you´re right.

 

But you´re not.  Sure, without a script no film could be made.  And a great script is essential for a good film.

 

But without a competent director, no film could be made either.  And make no mistake - it´s an extremely difficult job.  And I don´t even mean the creative side of it.

 

Being a director means you have to stand the pressure from those who hire (and can fire) you: producers, studio executives etc.  And on the other side there is the huge pressure from managing a crew, the actors and the daily time race to get your shots ready and wrapped.  With all constraints of time and money, this is a high pressure, demoralizing, health-destroying, psyche-torturing job that can only be done be people who thrive on chaos, yet can maintain strict order and organization while handling a vast variety of egos and the constant fear of failure.

 

It´s no surprise that such persons can easily become dictators, ruling only by fear - and those directors are the worst kind, even if their movies might turn out well, yet - is that worth making the lives of others truly miserable?

 

Then there are the truly great directors who can guide others simply because they have charisma and know how to be kind without becoming pushovers.  Those are the ones you want to work with - and they can elevate the best script to a truly great film. 

 

Of course, there are also directors who come with an unjustified inflated ego - and they still get jobs despite making one turd after another, simply because they know how to woo the people in power (or have something to blackmail them).

 

So... as in every industry, there are good ones and bad ones, and they are all working.

 

By the way, the same applies to screenwriters. 

[x007AceOfSpades]

Pretty much everything SAF said. It's the script that counts, but in the end it's all on the director who can perfectly bring that script to life.

[Mr_Wint]

We and film fans in general tends to overestimate the importance of the script. That's because we always go to the script in hindsight, when someone else have already turned it into a vision. The script for Raiders of the Lost Ark must be a fantastic read now when we have Spielberg's film in our head.

[Odd Jobbies]

As someone whose made a feature from a dodgy script i can't emphasise enough how important the script is. Sure, everything thereafter has be right in order to realise that scripts potential, but without that solid foundation you'll get clues along the shoot that things don't add up and the edit will be an extended struggle to make something average, let alone good.

[seawolfnyy]

Despite his bungling of Green Lantern, Martin Campbell understands Bond. He's done two great Bond films and he seems to do better with practical effects than the CGI-fest that was GL. I'd be fine with him helming another Bond film once Mendes has had his run. Also, I agree with you Ace, his age won't be a problem.

[x007AceOfSpades]

For me, Green Lantern really isn't all that bad. It's certainly much better than two of Marvel's film that were released that year (in my opinion). One of the biggest problems with Green Lantern was the script and the constant additions and rewrites. Not to mention the film underwent reshoots for key scenes five months until release.. As for the overuse of CGI, I'd hardly say that's to blame Campbell. Yes, he did have a say in the visual effects process with the crew, but I think it was all WB/DC wanting it done that way - even going further to dumping more money into the post production/visual effects process to speed things up, which pretty much rushed everything just to make that summer release. I can see why they went with CGI for the Green Lantern world, as it would be way to costly for practical sets and stuff. The green lantern suit was pretty much all CGI, which looked funny, but again, it's a very complex type of suit to make practically, especially with the lighting effects. Just look at the eradicator suit from Tim Burton's failed Superman Lives.

 

I certainly wouldn't oppose to Campbell returning again. Age doesn't mean anything. There's quite a few directors who well into their sixties seventies that are still making quality films. Age shouldn't prevent someone from being able to direct a film. It certainly didn't prevent Robert Altman on his last feature film despite being in poor health.

[SecretAgentFan]

Yet, they had Paul Thomas Anderson as a standby-director for Altman on the set...

 

And don´t forget: a Bond film is such a massive undertaking, with so much more pressure on the director, highly complicated logistics, constant journeying around the world...  even Clint Eastwood only chooses films now that don´t require him to travel too far and have fairly easy set-ups.

[Grard Bond]

On the other hand... a lot of the actionsene's are not done by the director himself but by the second unit.

For example for The World is not Enough Michael Apted probably didn't direct any of the actionscene's himself.

[x007AceOfSpades]

But that was for his health declining, which I noted...

 

I still don't see the problem in Campbell directing another Bond film, especially on age alone. Just because Clint Eastwood favors easy productions, doesn't mean the same thing for other older directors. Martin Scorsese is over in Taiwan filming right now.

 

But I'm not saying he should direct a Bond film now am I.

 

 

On the other hand... a lot of the actionsene's are not done by the director himself but by the second unit.

For example for The World is not Enough Michael Apted probably didn't direct any of the actionscene's himself.

That is true, however the big, main ones are.

 

Unless you're Christopher Nolan and you don't work with a second unit at all.

[tdalton]

Yet, they had Paul Thomas Anderson as a standby-director for Altman on the set...

 

And don´t forget: a Bond film is such a massive undertaking, with so much more pressure on the director, highly complicated logistics, constant journeying around the world...  even Clint Eastwood only chooses films now that don´t require him to travel too far and have fairly easy set-ups.

 

Couldn't agree more.

[seawolfnyy]

I will say that Green Lantern is one of the harder heroes to adapt to cinema than say Superman or Batman. That said, I do agree that Green Lantern had script and production issues, but Martin Campbell just never had a grasp on it. I don't see it as a knock against him, everyone hits a speed bump along he way. Although, he hasn't done anything since Green Lantern....

[DavidJones]

Is it all that likely that there will be a Bond film in 2017? Will we ever get one every two years again?