328 replies to this topic

[Agent 76]

Brian de Palma would do a fantastic and realistic Bond.

[HellIsHere]

I THINK Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson ARE CRAZY if they don't get Quentin Tarantino to remake Casino Royale. If they adapt Casino Royale IT COULD SIMPLY BE THE MOVIE EVENT of next year... If they get another director instead everyone I know is going to laugh with it, because it is a very silly decision! Let's think straight: no "big" director wants to make a Bond movie these days (they're big action movies but with no interest in terms of direction style!) and then we have this huge name - Tarantino - who wants to do a real damn good James Bond movie, that can bring the flair and noir style we sought in the last couple of titles... IF EON AGREES WITH TARANTINO THEY'LL GET EXTRA PUBLICITY WITH THE NEW BOND TITLE AND EVERYONE IS GOING TO SEE THIS MOVIE: BOND FANS and TARANTINO FANS... Off course it will be a huge hit worlwide and if they could maintain the budget below the $100 million (remember that Cubby Broccoli did something similar during the 80's with frozen production costs) they could recover all the production costs and be more profitable than ever. MGM executives ARE MAD IF THEY DON'T CONVINCE THE BROCCOLI's TO CHOOSE AN AMERICAN DIRECTOR LIKE TARANTINO.

[Agent 76]

I THINK Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson ARE CRAZY if they don't get Quentin Tarantino to remake Casino Royale. If they adapt Casino Royale IT COULD SIMPLY BE THE MOVIE EVENT of next year... If they get another director instead everyone I know is going to laugh with it, because it is a very silly decision! Let's think straight: no "big" director wants to make a Bond movie these days (they're big action movies but with no interest in terms of direction style!) and then we have this huge name - Tarantino - who wants to do a real damn good James Bond movie, that can bring the flair and noir style we sought in the last couple of titles... IF EON AGREES WITH TARANTINO THEY'LL GET EXTRA PUBLICITY WITH THE NEW BOND TITLE AND EVERYONE IS GOING TO SEE THIS MOVIE: BOND FANS and TARANTINO FANS... Off course it will be a huge hit worlwide and if they could maintain the budget below the $100 million (remember that Cubby Broccoli did something similar during the 80's with frozen production costs) they could recover all the production costs and be more profitable than ever. MGM executives ARE MAD IF THEY DON'T CONVINCE THE BROCCOLI's TO CHOOSE AN AMERICAN DIRECTOR LIKE TARANTINO.

Totally agree!

[Willie Garvin]

I THINK Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson ARE CRAZY if they don't get Quentin Tarantino to remake Casino Royale. If they adapt Casino Royale IT COULD SIMPLY BE THE MOVIE EVENT of next year... If they get another director instead everyone I know is going to laugh with it, because it is a very silly decision! Let's think straight: no "big" director wants to make a Bond movie these days (they're big action movies but with no interest in terms of direction style!) and then we have this huge name - Tarantino - who wants to do a real damn good James Bond movie, that can bring the flair and noir style we sought in the last couple of titles... IF EON AGREES WITH TARANTINO THEY'LL GET EXTRA PUBLICITY WITH THE NEW BOND TITLE AND EVERYONE IS GOING TO SEE THIS MOVIE: BOND FANS and TARANTINO FANS... Off course it will be a huge hit worlwide and if they could maintain the budget below the $100 million (remember that Cubby Broccoli did something similar during the 80's with frozen production costs) they could recover all the production costs and be more profitable than ever. MGM executives ARE MAD IF THEY DON'T CONVINCE THE BROCCOLI's TO CHOOSE AN AMERICAN DIRECTOR LIKE TARANTINO.

Who knows?With a Bond film Tarantino might even prove to be the equal of the great Terence Young.It'd certainly be an event--a movie even the non Bond fans would probably attend.Critics would come in droves and assign such a film an importance many of the Bonds never receive.

But I seriously doubt that Eon or MGM will ever hand over the reins of a Bond film to any director who is so famous that he'd actually overshadow the motion picture itself.The Bonds have all been producer's pictures--not director's.The director has never been more important than each of the films.And the star of each movie is always supposed to be the James Bond character and the actor who plays him--no one else. So it's unlikely Eon wants to make:

A Film by Quentin Tarantino.
Casino Royale
starring Pierce Brosnan as Ian Fleming's James Bond 007.
Produced by Albert R.Broccoli's Eon Productions.
Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino .

This is still possible,of course but highly unlikely.Michael G.Wilson's already said that although Eon now owns Casino Royale they have no interest whatsoever in making a film of it--except as an original using the title and little else.I also don't think that he or his sister take kindly to Tarentino's and Brosnan's agressive campaign(or Brosnan's "Opaque"..."Paralysis" public comments) to make this film.

Therefore,I predict that Bond 21 will be directed by Martin Campbell from an original screenplay by Purvis and Wade.And Pierce Brosnan might star--if Eon meets his price and also gives him some measure of creative control over the film.

Edited by Willie Garvin, 07 May 2004 - 08:16 PM.

[Kingdom Come]

I think there is a tendancy more and more these days to overestimate directors. The cinematographer and designer and editor and above all the writer/s are more important especially on Bond. Bond directors are usually just 'managers'. For example on Goldeneye there is no trace of a Campbell 'style' throughout the film. It was directed in a very neutral way trying to appeal to as many opinions out there/here as possible. That kind of directing would stiffle too many other more talented directors who would/could be considered, like Fincher, who has too much integrity to fit this mold. But as a career move, being associated with one Bond film could be good for a directors career, or not as has been proven before.

[Willie Garvin]

I think there is a tendancy more and more these days to overestimate directors. The cinematographer and designer and editor and above all the writer/s are more important especially on Bond. Bond directors are usually just 'managers'. For example on Goldeneye there is no trace of a Campbell 'style' throughout the film. It was directed in a very neutral way trying to appeal to as many opinions out there/here as possible. That kind of directing would stiffle too many other more talented directors who would/could be considered, like Fincher, who has too much integrity to fit this mold. But as a career move, being associated with one Bond film could be good for a directors career, or not as has been proven before.

I agree.Most directors do tend to be overrated,especially in light of all the important contributions made by everyone else in the various technical departments--not to mention the screenwriters.I don't think it's any director's place for him to attempt leaving his unique stamp on a James Bond movie.Why do that?To say "I was there"?What real purpose does that serve?Critics like this and it certainly flatters a director's ego but it's ultimately a pointless pursuit, particularly with the Bonds--but not just them alone.As with almost all big movies the Bonds are made by a team and they don't represent the result of one individual.Even the most "Artistic" directors usually work with other people to make their films.

And among all of the Bond directors only Terence Young really had a unique style,and his was so perfect for the series that's since been imitated--in various degrees-- by everyone else who followed him. And it probably always will be.

[Kingdom Come]

That's my point exactly. No director has made a Bond film that could be seen as their own 'style' that is why they, in my opinion, are only 'managers' not directors in the true sense and so should not be given so much importance.

As for your view on Young, I couldn't disagree with you more, his films are truly AWFUL. A collection of coma inducing bores. FRWL is so badly directed that that last scene in Venice, you could be forgiven for thinking the man must have been drunk.

I've said this before on this site but a good example of directors away from Bond being afforded too much importance is Ridley Scott. In watching, probably most of his films and try and count the times you see HIS talent. Most of the time you will clearly see only the talents of his Designer [Norris Spencer] his Cimematographer [John Mathieson] his Editor [Pettro Scalia] etc and he is not alone.

[Willie Garvin]

Complete agreement.Although we'll simply have to disagree agreeably regarding Terence Young.Especially regarding From Russia With Love.I think it's the best film of the series,and I'm resolute in my opinion .

Edited by Willie Garvin, 08 May 2004 - 05:56 PM.

[Moore Not Less]

Therefore,I predict that Bond 21 will be directed by Martin Campbell from an original screenplay by Purvis and Wade.And Pierce Brosnan might star--if Eon meets his price and also gives him some measure of creative control over the film.

W.G. I would welcome a return of Martin Campbell to direct Bond 21. He did a very good job on GoldenEye, in my opinion. His previous experience in the spy/espionage field (e.g. Edge Of Darkness), his attention to detail, his ability to motivate, and the fact that he cared about Bond are some of the main reasons why GoldenEye was so successful. Because of the popularity of GoldenEye the series was successfully revived and Campbell deserves as much praise as anyone for that achievement.

[Station Domino]

I would like to see what John Woo can do with a Bond film. MI2 and his BMW short film The Hostage (with none other than Mr. Clive Owen) are the stuff of Bond. Period.
I want to see John Woo bring his "Woo-ism" to Jame Bond.
http://usa.bmwfilms....sa&film=hostage

By the way, The Hostage was the winner of the Los Angeles International Short Film Festival for Best Action Short.

[Franz Sanchez]

I used to think Woo was great but these days he just seems to be a case of style over substance. I agree that Martin Campbell would be a viable choice as 'Goldeneye' was easily the most grounded of the Brosnan Bonds so far.

Edited by Franz Sanchez, 27 May 2004 - 05:41 PM.

[SeanValen00V]

John McTiernan ('Die Hard', 'The Hunt for Red October' & 'The Thomas Crown Affair')
McTiernan is probably the fan favorite. Brosnan has stated repeatedly that he'd love McTiernan to direct a Bond. But why hasn't it happened yet? Well, two reasons. One; EON prefers Commonwealth filmmakers. Since John is American, this kinda puts him out of the race. Second; McTiernan is probably too strong-minded for EON to consider him. They prefer directors who are cheaper and easier to work with. I'm sure McTiernan would direct a terrific Bond film, but I doubt it will happen. But that's just my personal opinion

Probabley right, there's alot of good directors who'll direct Bond fine, but we have to be realistic about how EON operates, not always the best person gets chosen.

[SeanValen00V]

[quote name='Franz Sanchez' date='27 May 2004 - 17:41'] I used to think Woo was great but these days he just seems to be a case of style over substance.

Edited by SeanValen00V, 27 May 2004 - 08:03 PM.

[SPECTRE ASSASSIN]

Martin Campbell. You know why.
Yeah !! He's winning !!

>^..^<

I agree.

But I wanted Martin Campbell before I even looked at the poll.

[Qwerty]

Everyone is choosing these directors without thinking maybe, will EON let them do this or that, will the directors' style and talent be comprimised too much with constraints by EON.

With Campbell back though, they would have gone through the ropes already so to speak. So it might not be as complete a case if he was brought back.

[hoodman22]

I would like to see what John Woo can do with a Bond film. MI2 and his BMW short film The Hostage (with none other than Mr. Clive Owen) are the stuff of Bond. Period.
I want to see John Woo bring his "Woo-ism" to Jame Bond.
http://usa.bmwfilms....sa&film=hostage

By the way, The Hostage was the winner of the Los Angeles International Short Film Festival for Best Action Short.

Nooo! Not Woo! he makes entertaining action films (Hard Boiled), but look what happens when he tries character development (Windtalkers). And Paycheck was god-awful.

Anyways, Tarantino should get Harvey and Bob Weinstein go to Eon and the Broccoli's and buy the rights for Casino Royale, and the rights for "James Bond" and "007" (but not the Eon symbol with the gun and everything) for one film. Then it could be released through Mirimax and Tarantino would not be hindered by Eon and the Broccoli's.

[Johnboy007]

I re-watched Patriot Games this afternoon. This has been one of my favorite movies to watch. I hadn't realized Phillip Noyce directed it. From watching Patriot Games, I could see Phillip Noyce's style in a Bond movie.

A return of Martin Campbell would be welcome as well.

[Blythy]

I really want tarantino to make Casino Royale, feldman's "spoof", while it contained more of the original novel than you only live twice did, it's still pretty crap, apart from a few half decent bits.

Now, imagine Tarantino's scripted version of casino royale, it would totally break with the bond formula (good because the formula is what is holding bond back in some areas), we'd get original james bond: blood, sweat and all, and we wouldn't have purvis and wade involved in any part.

I enjoyed some of the camerawork that tamahori brought to DAD, but the story pretty much sucked, and just went too ludicrous in parts. If tarantino came in, there'd be less of the crap and more of the suspense and the villainy of the books.

[Qwerty]

Now, imagine Tarantino's scripted version of casino royale, it would totally break with the bond formula (good because the formula is what is holding bond back in some areas), we'd get original james bond: blood, sweat and all, and we wouldn't have purvis and wade involved in any part.

Probably, Tarantino working on Casino Royale would mean a break away from the normal formula. No Purvis and no Wade would be a positive in my view, just don't want to see Bond 21 written by them. However you have to figure exactly how far and how close to the limits Tarantino would go if he had the chance.

[Blythy]

Now, imagine Tarantino's scripted version of casino royale, it would totally break with the bond formula (good because the formula is what is holding bond back in some areas), we'd get original james bond: blood, sweat and all, and we wouldn't have purvis and wade involved in any part.

Probably, Tarantino working on Casino Royale would mean a break away from the normal formula. No Purvis and no Wade would be a positive in my view, just don't want to see Bond 21 written by them. However you have to figure exactly how far and how close to the limits Tarantino would go if he had the chance.

the carpet beater scene would be interesting, no doubt about that. Although the bond books only really have violence in small parts, and the action is always spaced out while bond investigates and infiltrates. and apart from the carpet bater bit and the smersh guy busting in, there is no violence in Casio Royale (AFAIR)

That's what I liked about Licence to Kill, bond infiltrates Sanchez's drug operations and destroys the organistaion from within, and borrows a lot from the fleming books. (that and the tanker chase scene rocks)

[Qwerty]

Now, imagine Tarantino's scripted version of casino royale, it would totally break with the bond formula (good because the formula is what is holding bond back in some areas), we'd get original james bond: blood, sweat and all, and we wouldn't have purvis and wade involved in any part.

Probably, Tarantino working on Casino Royale would mean a break away from the normal formula. No Purvis and no Wade would be a positive in my view, just don't want to see Bond 21 written by them. However you have to figure exactly how far and how close to the limits Tarantino would go if he had the chance.

the carpet beater scene would be interesting, no doubt about that. Although the bond books only really have violence in small parts, and the action is always spaced out while bond investigates and infiltrates. and apart from the carpet bater bit and the smersh guy busting in, there is no violence in Casio Royale (AFAIR)

Well, not a whole lot, but it is present. That's the problem with a scene like that. You obviously cannot put a scene like that directly into a movie and get a PG-13 rathing while still keeping it 100% true to the book's way of telling it.

Unless they really tried to figure some things out.

[Will]

Paul Greengrass blew me away with Bourne Supremacy - no cgi - just kinetic camera work and killer stunt work. Give him Bond 21!

[Moomoo]

I haven't suggest anyone so here goes....

John McTiernan.

Yep, I am original!

Moomoo

[Janus Assassin]

I voted for Martin Campbell because he did direct Brosnan's best Bond film and I think he will do it again, even with a different actor. But at this point, I do not care, I just do not want Tamahori back and I dont want CGI. Since when does a 007 film need CGI. I understood it in TND, but they overloaded it in DAD.

[Qwerty]

Since when does a Bond film need CGI.

Well as you noted, when it's going to be used to help a scene along and highlight it. Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough are contenders.

Not overload it.

[Janus Assassin]

Well as you noted, when it's going to be used to help a scene along and highlight it. Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough are contenders.

Not overload it

Exactly, in TND and TWINE it was used to highlight the scenes and make them better. Such as the helicopter scene in TND. But in DAD, the ice surfing CGI was obvious as was the ending.

[Qwerty]

Well as you noted, when it's going to be used to help a scene along and highlight it. Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough are contenders.

Not overload it

Exactly, in TND and TWINE it was used to highlight the scenes and make them better. Such as the helicopter scene in TND. But in DAD, the ice surfing CGI was obvious as was the ending.

Indeed. Or the pipeline in The World Is Not Enough, it worked well there.

[M_Balje]

Finaly i saw Hulk and still think that Ang Lee is good enough for a Bond movie.
I like the movie and the acters must stay for Hulk 2 if there make it.
My litle Twine feeling whas good,but i missing a litle romance as Spider Man in The Hulk and that is strange as you see that Michael France doing the sceenplay for this movie and Goldeneye.

But a lot of people here and on the mi6 board,thaught that there is to much romance feeling in Twine.

Do i think the same about Jennifer Connelly as first,yes a litle bit.
If there give here a rol like Denise Richards with a romance like Sophie Marceau,it work. Besides Brosnan Bondgirl,i think she work with Owen too as there want.

[mtonline]

me, ill write it, produce it, direct it, and act in it for free!

M_T

[Qwerty]

me, ill write it, produce it, direct it, and act in it for free!

M_T

Have fun suggesting that to Eon.