1017 replies to this topic

[Odd Jobbies]

I think the next logical step after SPECTRE was always going to be to deliver SPECTRE II - BLOFELD STRIKES BACK. But if we think a bit about it it's so predictable you would rather head in a different direction, especially since the books already went that way and the series tries hard to avoid the too obvious.

Also sometime early on it seems the prevailing air around SPECTRE turned into farewell rather than unfinished business. At any rate the thread could have been picked up again or left alone for a time; either version seems possible.

Scripts? Eon must have countless of them, most obviously discarded earlier versions of the films we know. Whether 24 and 25 as a two part version was actually in an advanced stage we don't know (yet). But it's just as possible we've actually already got the better part of that supposed second part with SPECTRE. It's the longest film and there was doubtlessly some of it left behind on the cutting room floor. One could imagine a more solid first half, expanded with Bellucci's part and maybe Leiter, ending more or less with Bond meeting a still mysterious Swann who is abducted in his presence. Bond being left behind bleeding in the snow. The whole nonsensical Eyes subplot could then have started BOND 25.

At any rate there will be actual substantive news regarding the future of BOND 25 if it's going to happen anytime soon.

All this is true, but my point is that if a 2018 release is announced, then they likely already had the story, perhaps even a script ready now.

 

As for the avoiding the the novels because they're predictable... FRWL and CR suggest there's some benefits in sticking more closely to Fleming.

 

I think Spectre's final scene was pretty clever, in terms of Craig's fickleness. Should he not return his Bond retired gracefully. Should he return they have the perfect set up for 25's inciting incident: the assassination of Swann. This is moving the final scene of Fleming's OHMSS to the first scene of Fleming's YOLT.

 

In OHMSS Tracey's death is a mistake - Bond the intended target. But in this iteration Blofeld prefers to torture Bond, rather than kill him, so i'm going for Swann being the intended target.

[Pushkin]

Well, taking more time does not mean: everybody can finally bring their A-game.  In fact, more time for preparation than necessary brings on a number of problems: more second-guessing by the moneylenders and the creative personnel, meaning more changes to everything, meaning more insecurity and a tendency to compromise and overwrite.

 

If you have a clear visiion and a compact time frame in which to fulfill it you will get a much better result.

 

I guarantee you this: there will always be people totally unhappy with the script - because everything´s subjectve and people will have different opinions.  And also, it is the safe way for anybody involved with a film production to remain unimpressed by a script because that way when the film tanks they can always say: oh, I told you so, the script just wasn´t there.  

 

 let´s not forget how much DC praised the scripts for SKYFALL and SPECTRE.  Both had lots of holes which, I strongly believe, weren´t there from the beginning but were the result of intensive meddling.  Because if you want to make everyone happy ideas will start to not fit together anymore.

 

I do not post on here that often but I visit here multiple times each week. I certainly respect your opinion given that you work in the industry and I do not. Having said that, I respectfully disagree on the issue of time given to prepare a script.

 

I have written for a living for a very long time. While I don't write fiction or much for the public - I write a lot and also have lots of people approving/making changes to what I write, I am still concerned with getting a solid story line and avoiding what might be akin to plot holes.

 

My experience has been that more time almost always benefits the writing. While things can certainly get manipulated by higher ups as I go through approval processes, I have found stuff that is written very fast is frequently lacking in a solid story or at the very least lacks a needed polish. The bigger issue with other people making changes has had more to do with personality. Some people love to re-write just about everything while others are more apt to look at the bigger picture and only make changes that are truly warranted. I don't work in the entertainment world but I am guessing there probably similar types of people there too.

 

If I look at the releases going back to Brosnan, I ask myself what are the best films. IMHO, they would be Goldeneye, Casino Royale and Skyfall (I know you see plot holes in that last one but there always are in escapist movies I think  and it stands up very well IMHO). I believe in each of these cases the script was not rushed (I stand to be corrected as dates between films does not necessarily tell the whole story). I am not saying that a longer time for writing will always equal a better script but I think rushed scripts are much more likely to lead to results like Quantum of Solace (or worse). That said, I am assuming Die Another Day likely had more time for writing and was atrocious (though I always loved the first half of that film).  

 

Moving forward I don't think a Bond film every 2 years is necessarily good idea as I think it will eventually burn people out on Bond. But doing 3 Bond films in 7-9 years is feasible if the EON and MGM (or whomever takes their place) start planning accordingly. That in my mind means preliminary work on the next film is being worked on before the current film is released (i.e., probably starting after filming is complete).

 

My 2 cents for what it's worth.    
 

While I disagree with you on this, I very much enjoy your posts.

 

All the best.

[Dustin]

I think the next logical step after SPECTRE was always going to be to deliver SPECTRE II - BLOFELD STRIKES BACK. But if we think a bit about it it's so predictable you would rather head in a different direction, especially since the books already went that way and the series tries hard to avoid the too obvious.

Also sometime early on it seems the prevailing air around SPECTRE turned into farewell rather than unfinished business. At any rate the thread could have been picked up again or left alone for a time; either version seems possible.

Scripts? Eon must have countless of them, most obviously discarded earlier versions of the films we know. Whether 24 and 25 as a two part version was actually in an advanced stage we don't know (yet). But it's just as possible we've actually already got the better part of that supposed second part with SPECTRE. It's the longest film and there was doubtlessly some of it left behind on the cutting room floor. One could imagine a more solid first half, expanded with Bellucci's part and maybe Leiter, ending more or less with Bond meeting a still mysterious Swann who is abducted in his presence. Bond being left behind bleeding in the snow. The whole nonsensical Eyes subplot could then have started BOND 25.

At any rate there will be actual substantive news regarding the future of BOND 25 if it's going to happen anytime soon.

All this is true, but my point is that if a 2018 release is announced, then they likely already had the story, perhaps even a script ready now.

As for the avoiding the the novels because they're predictable... FRWL and CR suggest there's some benefits in sticking more closely to Fleming.

I think Spectre's final scene was pretty clever, in terms of Craig's fickleness. Should he not return his Bond retired gracefully. Should he return they have the perfect set up for 25's inciting incident: the assassination of Swann. This is moving the final scene of Fleming's OHMSS to the first scene of Fleming's YOLT.

In OHMSS Tracey's death is a mistake - Bond the intended target. But in this iteration Blofeld prefers to torture Bond, rather than kill him, so i'm going for Swann being the intended target.

The best punishment for Bond is to leave him and Swann well alone and watch how the two of them claw each other's eyes out.

[RMc2]

 

 

I think the next logical step after SPECTRE was always going to be to deliver SPECTRE II - BLOFELD STRIKES BACK. But if we think a bit about it it's so predictable you would rather head in a different direction, especially since the books already went that way and the series tries hard to avoid the too obvious.

Also sometime early on it seems the prevailing air around SPECTRE turned into farewell rather than unfinished business. At any rate the thread could have been picked up again or left alone for a time; either version seems possible.

Scripts? Eon must have countless of them, most obviously discarded earlier versions of the films we know. Whether 24 and 25 as a two part version was actually in an advanced stage we don't know (yet). But it's just as possible we've actually already got the better part of that supposed second part with SPECTRE. It's the longest film and there was doubtlessly some of it left behind on the cutting room floor. One could imagine a more solid first half, expanded with Bellucci's part and maybe Leiter, ending more or less with Bond meeting a still mysterious Swann who is abducted in his presence. Bond being left behind bleeding in the snow. The whole nonsensical Eyes subplot could then have started BOND 25.

At any rate there will be actual substantive news regarding the future of BOND 25 if it's going to happen anytime soon.

All this is true, but my point is that if a 2018 release is announced, then they likely already had the story, perhaps even a script ready now.

As for the avoiding the the novels because they're predictable... FRWL and CR suggest there's some benefits in sticking more closely to Fleming.

I think Spectre's final scene was pretty clever, in terms of Craig's fickleness. Should he not return his Bond retired gracefully. Should he return they have the perfect set up for 25's inciting incident: the assassination of Swann. This is moving the final scene of Fleming's OHMSS to the first scene of Fleming's YOLT.

In OHMSS Tracey's death is a mistake - Bond the intended target. But in this iteration Blofeld prefers to torture Bond, rather than kill him, so i'm going for Swann being the intended target.

The best punishment for Bond is to leave him and Swann well alone and watch how the two of them claw each other's eyes out.

 

 

I agree - it would be wonderful to begin Bond 25 (after the titles) with a wordless montage of Bond and Swann having an apparently wonderful life together, only for tensions to reveal themselves with meaningful looks and gestures. Then MI6 comes calling and Bond has the perfect excuse to escape domestic hell...

[sharpshooter]

You know, that would be a really interesting angle for them to go. We haven't seen Bond with a woman long term in the films before. It's always on again, off again. Bond 25 could fast forward to show Bond becoming bored of what Fleming called the soft life. He eventually becomes sick of being domesticated, just as Tiffany Case found him too difficult to live with.

[SecretAgentFan]

 

Well, taking more time does not mean: everybody can finally bring their A-game.  In fact, more time for preparation than necessary brings on a number of problems: more second-guessing by the moneylenders and the creative personnel, meaning more changes to everything, meaning more insecurity and a tendency to compromise and overwrite.

 

If you have a clear visiion and a compact time frame in which to fulfill it you will get a much better result.

 

I guarantee you this: there will always be people totally unhappy with the script - because everything´s subjectve and people will have different opinions.  And also, it is the safe way for anybody involved with a film production to remain unimpressed by a script because that way when the film tanks they can always say: oh, I told you so, the script just wasn´t there.  

 

 let´s not forget how much DC praised the scripts for SKYFALL and SPECTRE.  Both had lots of holes which, I strongly believe, weren´t there from the beginning but were the result of intensive meddling.  Because if you want to make everyone happy ideas will start to not fit together anymore.

 

I do not post on here that often but I visit here multiple times each week. I certainly respect your opinion given that you work in the industry and I do not. Having said that, I respectfully disagree on the issue of time given to prepare a script.

 

I have written for a living for a very long time. While I don't write fiction or much for the public - I write a lot and also have lots of people approving/making changes to what I write, I am still concerned with getting a solid story line and avoiding what might be akin to plot holes.

 

My experience has been that more time almost always benefits the writing. While things can certainly get manipulated by higher ups as I go through approval processes, I have found stuff that is written very fast is frequently lacking in a solid story or at the very least lacks a needed polish. The bigger issue with other people making changes has had more to do with personality. Some people love to re-write just about everything while others are more apt to look at the bigger picture and only make changes that are truly warranted. I don't work in the entertainment world but I am guessing there probably similar types of people there too.

 

If I look at the releases going back to Brosnan, I ask myself what are the best films. IMHO, they would be Goldeneye, Casino Royale and Skyfall (I know you see plot holes in that last one but there always are in escapist movies I think  and it stands up very well IMHO). I believe in each of these cases the script was not rushed (I stand to be corrected as dates between films does not necessarily tell the whole story). I am not saying that a longer time for writing will always equal a better script but I think rushed scripts are much more likely to lead to results like Quantum of Solace (or worse). That said, I am assuming Die Another Day likely had more time for writing and was atrocious (though I always loved the first half of that film).  

 

Moving forward I don't think a Bond film every 2 years is necessarily good idea as I think it will eventually burn people out on Bond. But doing 3 Bond films in 7-9 years is feasible if the EON and MGM (or whomever takes their place) start planning accordingly. That in my mind means preliminary work on the next film is being worked on before the current film is released (i.e., probably starting after filming is complete).

 

My 2 cents for what it's worth.    
 

While I disagree with you on this, I very much enjoy your posts.

 

All the best.

 

 

Thank you, Pushkin, for replying so measuredly.  I welcome any opinon and kudos to you for being a writer who likes to re-write and take your time.

 

Just to clear this up: generally, I do agree that having enough time to write something is always preferable to having to write with not enough time.

 

The problem in the screenwriting business is that you never have the luxury of time.  You have to be willing to train yourself to deliver fast and well.  It is akin to newspaper writing, with a deadline always looming.  In fact, starting out as a journalist is pretty good training for screenwriters.

 

Then it all depends on that first draft - and, yes, to rush that one will hurt you later because you need the basic structure of your story strong enough to hang on it everything else.  But when you have achieved that it is, in my experience at least, better to have a shorter window for external meddlement because that will protect your vision enormously.  The more people have time to chime in you will suffer because everything´s debatable and in the end highly subjective.

[SecretAgentFan]

The best punishment for Bond is to leave him and Swann well alone and watch how the two of them claw each other's eyes out.

 

Ha!  That would really make for an unusual teaser: Bond being stalked by a mysterious figure who just wants to him to do the dishes and take out the garbage...  Or Madeleine looking at the couch potato watching soccer games -"Oh, James, you´re not the man I fell in love with during a fight with an evil henchman on a train towards your stepbrother´s evil lair..."

[sharpshooter]

A montage of Bond going to the casino and lazing about would be nifty, set to a cue similar to Barry's 'Try'.

[SecretAgentFan]

True.

 

But any Bond film beginning with him doing... well, not a spectacular stunt would be kind of irritating, wouldn´t it?

[sharpshooter]

But any Bond film beginning with him doing... well, not a spectacular stunt would be kind of irritating, wouldn´t it?

Not for me. The pre-title sequences for Live And Let Die and The Man With The Golden Gun didn't feature Bond in the flesh. They instead focused on bad guys killing people. I'd be okay with Bond 25 beginning with Blofeld being busted out of jail. It would be thrilling and ominous if handled correctly. 

[Odd Jobbies]

The best punishment for Bond is to leave him and Swann well alone and watch how the two of them claw each other's eyes out.

Lol!  I think you've revealed P&W's plot for Blofeld's revenge in 25!

 

Excellent

[Dustin]

True.

But any Bond film beginning with him doing... well, not a spectacular stunt would be kind of irritating, wouldn´t it?

It would be pretty spectacular seeing Bond rushed to the hospital in an ambulance, paramedics using a defibrillator on him, running with the stretcher to the shock room, Bond half conscious looking at the ceiling lights, face of a doctor appearing, explaining to him they'll now put a glass wire into his heart to leave a stent there, gloved hands with catheter probe appearing, bit of blood on the green sheets, doctor explaining they are now inside his heart, Bond asking the doctors to excuse the trouble so late into the night, looking for the monitor to see what happens.

Beside which Blofeld and Hinx are standing; Blofeld in terribly good spirits and perfectly restored, smiling.

'Don't worry, I'm only here to watch; I won't interfere, James, big injun promise...'

Fight ensues during which Bond strangles Hinx with the glass fibre catheter from his heart, all the time bleeding copiously from the open catheter lock on the right side of his neck...

[SecretAgentFan]

Wow!

[Dustin]

Feel free to use it...

[Odd Jobbies]

in my experience at least, better to have a shorter window for external meddlement because that will protect your vision enormously.  The more people have time to chime in you will suffer because everything´s debatable and in the end highly subjective.

 

Boy do those words ring true!

 

It's slightly different in editing. I find it's good to get the first cut viewed asap, because changes will inevitably come and the more basic the first cut, the less painful it is to recut. If i don't  agree with any major changes i'll recut as quickly as possible in order to show how they don't work (though sometimes i'm proved wrong and find they do actually work better...sometime  )

 

Once i'm happy with the notes i've gotten then i'll re-cut slowly to leave, as you put it, the smallest window for more changes. They're always the bad, vanity, or panic changes that screw it all up. The final act of Spectre stinks of such changes.

[Dustin]

The final act of Spectre stinks of such changes.

Very much so. Though I think some odd ends are scattered all over the script the last act is the main letdown. Much could have been rescued by a solid finale.

[SecretAgentFan]

Feel free to use it...

 

As I keep saying: you´ve got the goods, Mister.  And I would love to read a whole Bond story of yours.

 

The final act of Spectre stinks of such changes.

Very much so. Though I think some odd ends are scattered all over the script the last act is the main letdown. Much could have been rescued by a solid finale.

 

 

According to the leaked Sony notes it was - surprisingly - a matter of budget cuts which led to the whole compromise that the botched third act became.  If you look at the previous drafts the whole idea of returning to London would have made much more sense, with Bond in pursuit of the kidnapped Madeleine, fighting Irma Bunt in a rainstorm while the building was torn apart.

 

But, hey, EON likes to use old, non-filmed parts of scripts, so maybe that setpiece will appear in BOND 25.

[Odd Jobbies]

TBH, as the material stands i think it'd be a better movie if it cut from Blofeld's lair blowing up to Bond picking up the Aston Martin and driving off with Swann.

 

Far from ideal, but better than the tv-spooks finale we got, with contrivance, coincidence and sheer luck used to push through almost every story beat.

[MISALA1994]

The best punishment for Bond is to leave him and Swann well alone and watch how the two of them claw each other's eyes out.

Lol! I think you've revealed P&W's plot for Blofeld's revenge in 25!

Excellent

"Thumbs up"

Edited by MISALA1994, 25 April 2017 - 04:01 PM.

[RMc2]

TBH, as the material stands i think it'd be a better movie if it cut from Blofeld's lair blowing up to Bond picking up the Aston Martin and driving off with Swann.

 

Far from ideal, but better than the tv-spooks finale we got, with contrivance, coincidence and sheer luck used to push through almost every story beat.

 

Yeah, it should really have ended with a longer battle as Blofeld's lair blew up, with the Aston Martin epilogue as you say.

 

But that would've meant cutting the MI6 crew out of the finale, and therefore some of the earlier scenes with them, as well as most of the stuff with C...

 

Of course, they could've done a George Lucas-style finale that intercut the MI6 team taking C down in London with Bond and Madeleine escaping from Blofeld's lair. But that would've required a more elegantly structured script (which, as we know from the leaks, was a virtual impossibility unless they delayed shooting).

[Tiin007]

Or it could have simply climaxed with an epic battle at the Moroccan lair (as Felix brings in American special forces after M tells Moneypenny and Q at the restaurant that there is nothing they can do because Denbigh is listening to them).  

 

Then Bond can confront C alone in his office afterwards, in a parallel scene to the opening of CR with Dryden. 

[Odd Jobbies]

Yep, a more fleshed out end battle at the lair was way to go. Smells like lots of chiefs with opinions and Eon feeling like, or forced to, keep them all happy. Maybe it's high time Sony got the heave-ho?! Sure they'll encounter these egos whatever studio they're with (though maybe less melding at Annapurna), it's bad to reward it by sticking with the same studio. A change now will do a better job of keeping the inheritors on their best behaviour.

 

As for C and his dastardly plan. That was nullified the moment Blofeld's lair blew up. All it needed was closure with C. A simple, non-violent confrontation in his lair opposite MI6 to mirror the simple, but witty initial meeting between the two (in which Bond suggested that C**t was an appropriate name for him). This would've been far more satisfying than the 'Famous 5' finale overly contrived in order to give each of the big-name supporting cast their moment in the sun.

 

Then the Aston martin/Swann scene - End Crawl.

 

If i'd seen the cinematic cut before release and had any clout, i'd have told them do 2 pick ups: Bond having a chance to kill Blofeld in his lair, but Blofeld escaping - better still his survival of Bond's attempt is undisclosed until B25 (rather than the reveal of his convoy leaving the lair). Secondly the C/Bond scene in London. Everything else stays as is and i think that would be a far better movie.

 

Personally everything that comes before that London finale, though not perfect, is one of my favourite Bond movies; the opening is superb and the Italy stuff (apart from the incongruously slap stick Fiat driver) is sublime.  The Alps stuff is pretty damn great too (although it pushed plausibility way too far when Bond left Hinx alive). 

 

I even love the Blofeld's lair stuff - i think Waltz nailed the schadenfreude necessary to make his 'life mission' of torturing Bond believable. And seeing him wheel back and forth in his dentist chair, his trousers riding up above his ankles was beyond sinister; real Bros. Grimm - a little Rumpelstiltskin - and to my mind Fleming's best villains are very Bros. Grimm. He wrote Bros. Grimm for the industrial/information age. 

[Tiin007]

Apparently Disney today announced Star Wars Episode IX for May 24, 2019 and Indiana Jones 5 for July 10, 2020.

 

So November / December of 2018 AND 2019 will be free of SW competition.

 

Not that EON are necessarily basing Bond 25's release date around the potential competition, but it looks like end of 2018 and end of 2019 are equally open.

[Professor Pi]

November 2, 2018 is taken by X-Men: Dark Phoenix, but that leaves December open (getting to be a bit of a rush if that were to happen.)  Looking more like December 2019 now (Avatar 2 is in 2020 now.) 

 

Keep in mind that Tomorrow Never Dies, a December release, was #2 to Titanic in its 2nd week, and Casino Royale was second to Happy Feet.  They also moved Quantum of Solace back a week when they thought it'd go against Harry Potter (which eventually got pushed back 6 months, anyway.)

[Tiin007]

I could see why EON would want to avoid competing with Indiana Jones (same audience) and Star Wars (all audiences).

 

Do you think X-Men would take moviegoers away from Bond? The X-Men franchise hasn't been nearly as successful as Disney's Marvel entries, and I'd assume the audiences may not overlap too much.

 

Granted, I am a fan of both X-Men and Bond, but a part of me feels like there may be less overlap among moviegoers as a whole. 

[SecretAgentFan]

I agree - X-MEN, especially now, without Jackman and Stewart, are not a big draw anymore, and I would predict that the following films will flop, especially with all the "teenagers with special powers" on TV taking away the unique selling point.

 

As for the release date shuffle: the December STAR WARS outings definitely take away from the repeat business for Bond, so EON will be relieved to see 2018 and 2019 free of that.  AVATAR might present the same problem for Bond films in the winter.  However, even if AVATAR 2 might attract a huge audience wanting to find out whether the sequel will be to their liking - if that film underperforms the other three sequels will become less of a rival for Bond.

 

But that is too far into the future, actually.  EON will focus now on BOND 25, and for that film a winter release (November, mostly) is the perfect slate, either in 2018 or 2019.

 

Still, DC is not getting younger.  2018 would be the more sensible approach.  (By the way, delaying the next INDIANA JONES for even one more year is bad news for Harrison Ford - or it was already decided behind closed doors that Ford will not return and a new actor will take over, even if they have denied that option before.  For my taste, I love Ford, but he cannot be the Indiana Jones he was when he is in his late 70´s.) 

[Odd Jobbies]

Do you think X-Men would take moviegoers away from Bond?

No, not after all the hard work Bryan Singer has put in to take moviegoers away from X-Men.

[SecretAgentFan]

 

Do you think X-Men would take moviegoers away from Bond?

No, not after all the hard work Bryan Singer has put in to take moviegoers away from X-Men.

 

 

I actually thought that Singer would restore the X-MEN series to the quality of the second film.  But even DAYS OF FUTURE PAST was for me a letdown since it sidelined Wolverine, my favourite character, in the finale when it definitely needed him.  I preferred the Vaughn-reboot to that film.  APOCALYPSE, however, was the low point of the series for me, even worse than the third film.  In retrospect, I wonder if I overrated Singer from the beginning.  I actually only like X2 and SUPERMAN RETURNS.  Any other film by Singer, yes, even THE USUAL SUSPECTS, has things that bother me or bore me.

[RMc2]

 

 

Do you think X-Men would take moviegoers away from Bond?

No, not after all the hard work Bryan Singer has put in to take moviegoers away from X-Men.

 

 

I actually thought that Singer would restore the X-MEN series to the quality of the second film.  But even DAYS OF FUTURE PAST was for me a letdown since it sidelined Wolverine, my favourite character, in the finale when it definitely needed him.  I preferred the Vaughn-reboot to that film.  APOCALYPSE, however, was the low point of the series for me, even worse than the third film.  In retrospect, I wonder if I overrated Singer from the beginning.  I actually only like X2 and SUPERMAN RETURNS.  Any other film by Singer, yes, even THE USUAL SUSPECTS, has things that bother me or bore me.

 

 

I must respectfully disagree. I thought DOFP was a tremendous film, almost better than X2 - and a big reason for that was how it didn't let Wolverine overshadow the other, frankly more interesting, character arcs set up in Vaughn's First Class, yet kept him as a major part. I also think The Usual Suspects is one of the best 10 American films of the 90s - far better than overrrated 'classics' like Fight Club - and Apt Pupil is far too maligned.

 

I agree that X-Men: Apocalypse was something of a travesty ;-) Although Singer still brought great visual quality to it.

Edited by RMc2, 26 April 2017 - 10:19 AM.

[Odd Jobbies]

We can all agree that Apocalypse was an unwatchable, painful experience.

 

IMO DAFP is ok at best. But it's strange how a film with such breadth in terms of time can feel so small. I think the focus on eras and time travel has weighed down the scripts too much. They spend most of their time setting up puzzles and then trying to clarify their resolutions and there's little left for character and character driven drama. X2 pulled off both plot and character drama in equal measure and had plenty of epic scope.

 

They should've concluded the franchise with the dark Phoenix mumbo-jumbo (sorry, writing 'dark Phoenix' in any sentence is as daft as you like!). Now they're stuck because it's really the same old story over and over and they're desperately trying to refresh it with time-hopping at every opportunity and over cooking it.

 

Why repetition works for Bond but not for X-Men is another thesis, but Singer's made it evident that the franchise is dead as a Dodo. Maybe the next, climatic (apparently) instalment will prove me wrong, but i don't imagine many here would bet on it.

 

I like Usual Suspects. I think it's ultimately over rated as it's a box of tricks movie; one big set up for a trick ending so the makers can say 'Hey, fooled ya!'). But the cast and script are tremendous and Singer displays a deft hand that's been in a big budget plaster cast ever since.

 

Valkyrie was a little turgid, but interesting. Hopefully he'll turn towards grown up material more often in the future.

 

Btw, i'd personally put Fight Club above Usual Suspects. Fincher made a movie with epic scope; politically, socially and culturally. It captures everything wrong the modern, materialistic society. It's a perfect movie. Usual Suspects is also a perfect movie - it achieves it's aims without fail. So does Fight Club, but it's aims a far higher and far reaching.