No Time To Die: Production Diary

1176717681770177217732507

Comments

  • Posts: 1,448
    I reckon Guy Ritchie should put Sherlock Holmes 3 on hold to serve mother England and rescue Bond from all the no name directors

    Guy Richie is a FAKE!!! Believe me. A BS merchant. Just look at the crap he has made.
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I dont think they have a lot to lose with Craig's last...if its a relatively unknown director then so be it.

    It would hardly be the first time.

    Exactly Dr.
  • Posts: 12,213
    I don’t know why people are so hung-up over the possibility of a lesser-known director. There’s just as much chance for the film to still be great. Hasn’t the series historically been helmed by directors who didn’t do many other famous movies?
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    I reckon Guy Ritchie should put Sherlock Holmes 3 on hold to serve mother England and rescue Bond from all the no name directors

    Guy Richie is a FAKE!!! Believe me. A BS merchant. Just look at the crap he has made.

    That's quite an opinion there, ColonelSun. Do you know something we don't? I like a number of his films quite a bit, that's how I judge him.
  • Posts: 19,339
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    I reckon Guy Ritchie should put Sherlock Holmes 3 on hold to serve mother England and rescue Bond from all the no name directors

    Guy Richie is a FAKE!!! Believe me. A BS merchant. Just look at the crap he has made.

    That's quite an opinion there, ColonelSun. Do you know something we don't? I like a number of his films quite a bit, that's how I judge him.

    I love Lock Stock,Snatch and to a lesser degree but still really good the 2 Sherlock films...
  • ColonelSun wrote: »
    I reckon Guy Ritchie should put Sherlock Holmes 3 on hold to serve mother England and rescue Bond from all the no name directors

    Guy Richie is a FAKE!!! Believe me. A BS merchant. Just look at the crap he has made.


    He has been hit or miss but the first Sherlock Holmes film is a genuinely good time. Uncle is on my list to watch still.

    It does appear as though movie audiences are fatigued on his style, though, and I don’t see him agreeing to do a Bond film unless he could Ritchie it up, which I don’t see Eon permitting.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    And just when you thought the thread couldn’t get any worse, someone nukes it with a Ritchie bomb. Jesus Christ.
  • The guy who made King Arthur Legend of the Sword. Yeah I'll pass.
  • Shardlake wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    2018. Wake up.

    I'm not saying someone like Clarkson couldn't deliver a good Bond movie. No one can know, in fact. I'm saying that the idea of a Bond movie IN 2018 made by someone who never made a feature film in her life it's a long shot. If you look at the best blockbuster ever made (especially in this era of over saturated blockbuster franchises) they always have a strong director with a clear, strong and personal vision behind it. Assuming as a fact that any TV director could deliver a great movie of this size just because in 2018 TV is no more just soap opera crap it's also wrong.

    Yes, there are people like Peter Jackson who directed TLotR after some small horror b-movies, but it was a dream project for him, something he worked on for a decade. This scenario here is very different, with pre-production and script polishing goin on without even a director 3/4 months from principal photography.

    Nobody is assuming that it's going to be great. The issue here is that some people have already assumed that it won't be. Of course it could turn out to be rubbish. Anything could happen. Spectre had an Oscar-winning director coming back from the most successful Bond film in 40 years, and look how that turned out.

    Throwing out things like "TV directors wouldn't be able to handle the schedule" just makes you look ignorant. I mean that in the nicest way possible considering how this thread has riled me today.

    Mods: apologies for the language slips earlier. Though, to my credit, the first drafts were far cussier.

    I'd be interested to know where @matt_u is qualified to question the @ColonelSun but then why again should I bother we are living in a time where utter novices can talk down people of experience.

    Also I apply this to things happening other than just a Bond internet forum.

    If @matt_u is part of the industry I of course apologise.

    I’m relatively new here, but there seems to be this hierarchy of members here, with the “first class” posters clutching their pearls any time someone “dares to impugn their honor”. It’s certainly unique on the internet, and I suspect it’s that way because it simply doesn’t work. (No disrespect to the management, but if someone tried that in communities I manage, they’d be shown the door)

    While there may be some room to work on tone, the “HOW DARE YOU” police that come out any time one of the elite is questioned really are quite silly. As are the histrionics of “I have been questioned, and now I will leave unless this injustice is corrected!” being posted with regularity by certain members. Rather smacks of attention seeking.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited September 2018 Posts: 7,864
    MooreFun wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    2018. Wake up.

    I'm not saying someone like Clarkson couldn't deliver a good Bond movie. No one can know, in fact. I'm saying that the idea of a Bond movie IN 2018 made by someone who never made a feature film in her life it's a long shot. If you look at the best blockbuster ever made (especially in this era of over saturated blockbuster franchises) they always have a strong director with a clear, strong and personal vision behind it. Assuming as a fact that any TV director could deliver a great movie of this size just because in 2018 TV is no more just soap opera crap it's also wrong.

    Yes, there are people like Peter Jackson who directed TLotR after some small horror b-movies, but it was a dream project for him, something he worked on for a decade. This scenario here is very different, with pre-production and script polishing goin on without even a director 3/4 months from principal photography.

    Nobody is assuming that it's going to be great. The issue here is that some people have already assumed that it won't be. Of course it could turn out to be rubbish. Anything could happen. Spectre had an Oscar-winning director coming back from the most successful Bond film in 40 years, and look how that turned out.

    Throwing out things like "TV directors wouldn't be able to handle the schedule" just makes you look ignorant. I mean that in the nicest way possible considering how this thread has riled me today.

    Mods: apologies for the language slips earlier. Though, to my credit, the first drafts were far cussier.

    I'd be interested to know where @matt_u is qualified to question the @ColonelSun but then why again should I bother we are living in a time where utter novices can talk down people of experience.

    Also I apply this to things happening other than just a Bond internet forum.

    If @matt_u is part of the industry I of course apologise.

    I’m relatively new here, but there seems to be this hierarchy of members here, with the “first class” posters clutching their pearls any time someone “dares to impugn their honor”. It’s certainly unique on the internet, and I suspect it’s that way because it simply doesn’t work. (No disrespect to the management, but if someone tried that in communities I manage, they’d be shown the door)

    While there may be some room to work on tone, the “HOW DARE YOU” police that come out any time one of the elite is questioned really are quite silly. As are the histrionics of “I have been questioned, and now I will leave unless this injustice is corrected!” being posted with regularity by certain members. Rather smacks of attention seeking.

    Thank you. Someone needed to say it.
  • Posts: 4,619
    I don't want Guy Ritchie anywhere near a Bond film. Having said that, if it came down to Ritchie or SJ Clarckson, I would be willing to beg Barbara Broccoli on my knees to hire Ritchie.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 19,339
    MooreFun wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    2018. Wake up.

    I'm not saying someone like Clarkson couldn't deliver a good Bond movie. No one can know, in fact. I'm saying that the idea of a Bond movie IN 2018 made by someone who never made a feature film in her life it's a long shot. If you look at the best blockbuster ever made (especially in this era of over saturated blockbuster franchises) they always have a strong director with a clear, strong and personal vision behind it. Assuming as a fact that any TV director could deliver a great movie of this size just because in 2018 TV is no more just soap opera crap it's also wrong.

    Yes, there are people like Peter Jackson who directed TLotR after some small horror b-movies, but it was a dream project for him, something he worked on for a decade. This scenario here is very different, with pre-production and script polishing goin on without even a director 3/4 months from principal photography.

    Nobody is assuming that it's going to be great. The issue here is that some people have already assumed that it won't be. Of course it could turn out to be rubbish. Anything could happen. Spectre had an Oscar-winning director coming back from the most successful Bond film in 40 years, and look how that turned out.

    Throwing out things like "TV directors wouldn't be able to handle the schedule" just makes you look ignorant. I mean that in the nicest way possible considering how this thread has riled me today.

    Mods: apologies for the language slips earlier. Though, to my credit, the first drafts were far cussier.

    I'd be interested to know where @matt_u is qualified to question the @ColonelSun but then why again should I bother we are living in a time where utter novices can talk down people of experience.

    Also I apply this to things happening other than just a Bond internet forum.

    If @matt_u is part of the industry I of course apologise.

    I’m relatively new here, but there seems to be this hierarchy of members here, with the “first class” posters clutching their pearls any time someone “dares to impugn their honor”. It’s certainly unique on the internet, and I suspect it’s that way because it simply doesn’t work. (No disrespect to the management, but if someone tried that in communities I manage, they’d be shown the door)

    While there may be some room to work on tone, the “HOW DARE YOU” police that come out any time one of the elite is questioned really are quite silly. As are the histrionics of “I have been questioned, and now I will leave unless this injustice is corrected!” being posted with regularity by certain members. Rather smacks of attention seeking.

    Its this thread.

    Believe me,i was here from the start and did a lot to get the threads on this site off and running ,we are all not like it,but you come in this thread and you need to be prepared.

    Welcome here anyway @MooreFun ..good to have you aboard.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    MooreFun wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    2018. Wake up.

    I'm not saying someone like Clarkson couldn't deliver a good Bond movie. No one can know, in fact. I'm saying that the idea of a Bond movie IN 2018 made by someone who never made a feature film in her life it's a long shot. If you look at the best blockbuster ever made (especially in this era of over saturated blockbuster franchises) they always have a strong director with a clear, strong and personal vision behind it. Assuming as a fact that any TV director could deliver a great movie of this size just because in 2018 TV is no more just soap opera crap it's also wrong.

    Yes, there are people like Peter Jackson who directed TLotR after some small horror b-movies, but it was a dream project for him, something he worked on for a decade. This scenario here is very different, with pre-production and script polishing goin on without even a director 3/4 months from principal photography.

    Nobody is assuming that it's going to be great. The issue here is that some people have already assumed that it won't be. Of course it could turn out to be rubbish. Anything could happen. Spectre had an Oscar-winning director coming back from the most successful Bond film in 40 years, and look how that turned out.

    Throwing out things like "TV directors wouldn't be able to handle the schedule" just makes you look ignorant. I mean that in the nicest way possible considering how this thread has riled me today.

    Mods: apologies for the language slips earlier. Though, to my credit, the first drafts were far cussier.

    I'd be interested to know where @matt_u is qualified to question the @ColonelSun but then why again should I bother we are living in a time where utter novices can talk down people of experience.

    Also I apply this to things happening other than just a Bond internet forum.

    If @matt_u is part of the industry I of course apologise.

    I’m relatively new here, but there seems to be this hierarchy of members here, with the “first class” posters clutching their pearls any time someone “dares to impugn their honor”. It’s certainly unique on the internet, and I suspect it’s that way because it simply doesn’t work. (No disrespect to the management, but if someone tried that in communities I manage, they’d be shown the door)

    While there may be some room to work on tone, the “HOW DARE YOU” police that come out any time one of the elite is questioned really are quite silly. As are the histrionics of “I have been questioned, and now I will leave unless this injustice is corrected!” being posted with regularity by certain members. Rather smacks of attention seeking.

    Thanks for this exquisite post, this should be stickied among the internet and beyond.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 214

    OwenDavian wrote: »
    To be honest I'm not particularly keen on a woman directing Bond 25 and that is my opinion I stand by. Bond is a man's man in a small testosterone fueled world. A woman directing a Bond film sounds like a politically correct gimmick to me, especially in this day and age, to cater to certain 'movements'. There is a reason most boys, when they're young, play with guns and are rowdy in general and the majority of women aren't. I don't know of any female director who is particularly keen on Bond, car chases, seducing women, to name a few.

    Kathryn Bigelow and Patty Jenkins to name two.

    Based on what films exactly? That abomination called Wonder Woman I had to turn off due to its complete lack of quality? Bigelow comes close, to decent-ish action that is, but Bond is a different animal. She's also expressed she has no interest in Bond, so that's that.

    Based on the amazingly choreographed action sequences in WW. But you turned off the movie so you wouldn't know.
  • MooreFun wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    2018. Wake up.

    I'm not saying someone like Clarkson couldn't deliver a good Bond movie. No one can know, in fact. I'm saying that the idea of a Bond movie IN 2018 made by someone who never made a feature film in her life it's a long shot. If you look at the best blockbuster ever made (especially in this era of over saturated blockbuster franchises) they always have a strong director with a clear, strong and personal vision behind it. Assuming as a fact that any TV director could deliver a great movie of this size just because in 2018 TV is no more just soap opera crap it's also wrong.

    Yes, there are people like Peter Jackson who directed TLotR after some small horror b-movies, but it was a dream project for him, something he worked on for a decade. This scenario here is very different, with pre-production and script polishing goin on without even a director 3/4 months from principal photography.

    Nobody is assuming that it's going to be great. The issue here is that some people have already assumed that it won't be. Of course it could turn out to be rubbish. Anything could happen. Spectre had an Oscar-winning director coming back from the most successful Bond film in 40 years, and look how that turned out.

    Throwing out things like "TV directors wouldn't be able to handle the schedule" just makes you look ignorant. I mean that in the nicest way possible considering how this thread has riled me today.

    Mods: apologies for the language slips earlier. Though, to my credit, the first drafts were far cussier.

    I'd be interested to know where @matt_u is qualified to question the @ColonelSun but then why again should I bother we are living in a time where utter novices can talk down people of experience.

    Also I apply this to things happening other than just a Bond internet forum.

    If @matt_u is part of the industry I of course apologise.

    I’m relatively new here, but there seems to be this hierarchy of members here, with the “first class” posters clutching their pearls any time someone “dares to impugn their honor”. It’s certainly unique on the internet, and I suspect it’s that way because it simply doesn’t work. (No disrespect to the management, but if someone tried that in communities I manage, they’d be shown the door)

    While there may be some room to work on tone, the “HOW DARE YOU” police that come out any time one of the elite is questioned really are quite silly. As are the histrionics of “I have been questioned, and now I will leave unless this injustice is corrected!” being posted with regularity by certain members. Rather smacks of attention seeking.

    I think It's more to do with people getting fed with up with the toxic rhetoric being spouted by a few posters.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,487
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    Bond would not have survived for over 50 years if Eon didn't understand the landscape.
    What if they used to understand the landscape, but do not understand it anymore? Food for thought...

    Then they probably wouldn't have hired two upcoming female directors, one being highly praised for her TV and cinematography work, for their next two non-Bond films.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited September 2018 Posts: 1,318
    OwenDavian wrote: »
    OwenDavian wrote: »
    To be honest I'm not particularly keen on a woman directing Bond 25 and that is my opinion I stand by. Bond is a man's man in a small testosterone fueled world. A woman directing a Bond film sounds like a politically correct gimmick to me, especially in this day and age, to cater to certain 'movements'. There is a reason most boys, when they're young, play with guns and are rowdy in general and the majority of women aren't. I don't know of any female director who is particularly keen on Bond, car chases, seducing women, to name a few.

    Kathryn Bigelow and Patty Jenkins to name two.

    Based on what films exactly? That abomination called Wonder Woman I had to turn off due to its complete lack of quality? Bigelow comes close, to decent-ish action that is, but Bond is a different animal. She's also expressed she has no interest in Bond, so that's that.

    Based on the amazingly choreographed action sequences in WW. But you turned off the movie so you wouldn't know.

    I never told you where I decided to turn it off. I find it a horrible film, you don't, accept it and move on. Also, since you're a relatively new member here post amount wise, you should know it's not allowed to double post.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    I think it's important to remember that one of the most polarizing Bond films - one which has regrettably had a negative impact on this community since its release and put members at each others throat - was made by a famed Oscar winning director who had previously made one of the most critically acclaimed and most successful Bond films of all time. Pretty much the same team returned for the sequel as well. So experience and reputation perhaps isn't all it's cracked up to be.

    At the end of the day we don't really know what the concept or scope for B25 is. If it's suitably scaled down, then I don't see why a 'mere tv director' (**cool it - I'm just playing around**) can't handle it.

    There is the less impactful marketing element on account of a 'no name' of course. Having said that, I didn't really think Boyle made too many waves when he was announced either despite his bona fides, and actually mentioned that prior to his departure. Clarkson, as a woman in a charged environment, may actually create some positive press and marketing for a while. I'm not saying she should be hired because of her sex, but I don't think it will hurt either.

    Expectations are high. The film will have to deliver. I think they need someone who can bring the best out of the cast, and they have to ensure such cast is top notch too, because that will be a key element in getting people excited for this film given they haven't recast Bond (yes I realize he has his fans, but there's a few of us and the general public who want a change too). Hire a good cinematographer and decent composer, and you're off to the races. Looking forward to some announcements shortly.

    Oh and I'm not the biggest fan of Guy Ritchie, but don't think he's all bad. He's made some decent films in his day.
  • edited September 2018 Posts: 214
    OwenDavian wrote: »
    OwenDavian wrote: »
    To be honest I'm not particularly keen on a woman directing Bond 25 and that is my opinion I stand by. Bond is a man's man in a small testosterone fueled world. A woman directing a Bond film sounds like a politically correct gimmick to me, especially in this day and age, to cater to certain 'movements'. There is a reason most boys, when they're young, play with guns and are rowdy in general and the majority of women aren't. I don't know of any female director who is particularly keen on Bond, car chases, seducing women, to name a few.

    Kathryn Bigelow and Patty Jenkins to name two.

    Based on what films exactly? That abomination called Wonder Woman I had to turn off due to its complete lack of quality? Bigelow comes close, to decent-ish action that is, but Bond is a different animal. She's also expressed she has no interest in Bond, so that's that.

    Based on the amazingly choreographed action sequences in WW. But you turned off the movie so you wouldn't know.

    I never told you where I decided to turn it off. I find it a horrible film, you don't, accept it and move on. Also, since you're a relatively new member here post amount wise, you should know it's not allowed to double post.

    I joined 6 years ago (and have been lurking a lot recently) you joined last month....why does post count matter? And for some reason I'm not seeing posts I made so I'm not intentionally double posting.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Keep it nice chaps....
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited September 2018 Posts: 1,318
    bondjames wrote: »
    I think it's important to remember that one of the most polarizing Bond films - one which has regrettably had a negative impact on this community since its release and put members at each others throat - was made by a famed Oscar winning director who had previously made one of the most critically acclaimed and most successful Bond films of all time. Pretty much the same team returned for the sequel as well. So experience and reputation perhaps isn't all it's cracked up to be.

    At the end of the day we don't really know what the concept or scope for B25 is. If it's suitably scaled down, then I don't see why a 'mere tv director' (**cool it - I'm just playing around**) can't handle it.

    There is the less impactful marketing element on account of a 'no name' of course. Having said that, I didn't really think Boyle made too many waves when he was announced either despite his bona fides, and actually mentioned that prior to his departure. Clarkson, as a woman in a charged environment, may actually create some positive press and marketing for a while. I'm not saying she should be hired because of her sex, but I don't think it will hurt either.

    Expectations are high. The film will have to deliver. I think they need someone who can bring the best out of the cast, and they have to ensure such cast is top notch too, because that will be a key element in getting people excited for this film given they haven't recast Bond (yes I realize he has his fans, but there's a few of us and the general public who want a change too). Hire a good cinematographer and decent composer, and you're off to the races. Looking forward to some announcements shortly.

    Oh and I'm not the biggest fan of Guy Ritchie, but don't think he's all bad. He's made some decent films in his day.

    A fair post by one of my favorite members *applause*. Now let's all gather around the virtual campfire and sing our favorite Bond tunes. In the end it's all about peace and love and perhaps some gun fights. Maybe an explosion here and there, too.
    album_1448655394.jpg
    OwenDavian wrote: »

    I joined 6 years ago (and have been lurking a lot recently) you joined last month....why does post count matter? And for some reason I'm not seeing posts I made so I'm not intentionally double posting.

    No this account is actually older than that and I had an account before and before that as well. Been lurking here from the very beginning, actually. But who's counting anyway.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited September 2018 Posts: 23,883
    Thanks for the kind words @JeremyBondon. I agree on the post count and length of tenure thing. It's overrated. RE: tunes worth singing together by the campfire, I'm always up for Nobody Does It Better. Despite our understandably varied opinions (where would we be if we all thought alike?) and views on where things should go in the future, I think we can all agree that James Bond is a legend and we wish him well.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    wrote: »
    TR007 wrote: »
    The same three trolls keep spamming this thread. We all need to start ignoring their comments and just chat amongst ourselves until an announcement is made.

    This is getting ridiculous. Where were you last month when this thread was an off topic compilation of sterile complaints about Spectre and futile frustration against Craig and Barbara?

    Having said that, I agree that an announcement is needed. ;)

    BTW thank you @MooreFun for your wise words.
  • God this thread is boring.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,256
    Panchito does have an issue regarding women in the film industry.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    To be honest I'm not particularly keen on a woman directing Bond 25 and that is my opinion I stand by. Bond is a man's man in a small testosterone fueled world. A woman directing a Bond film sounds like a politically correct gimmick to me, especially in this day and age, to cater to certain 'movements'. There is a reason most boys, when they're young, play with guns and are rowdy in general and the majority of women aren't. I don't know of any female director who is particularly keen on Bond, car chases, seducing women, to name a few.

    I know one male director who can't pull of a decent car chase.

    Marc Forster?

    I know plenty including myself that find the QOS PTS thrilling, yes the editing is a little frenetic but compare that to Mendes directing 2 very expensive sports car casually drive around Rome with little next to no suspense.

    JeremyBondon probably thinks Forster directed SPECTRE and Mendes directed QoS, that's the only sensible explanation.
    Murdock wrote: »
    Close the thread for a while please. This is getting out of hand. Children need to be put in time out.
    I will never understand this mindset. Nobody is forcing you to read this thread. Why do you want to deprive others of the possibility to comment here?

    +1
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    I reckon Guy Ritchie should put Sherlock Holmes 3 on hold to serve mother England and rescue Bond from all the no name directors

    Guy Richie is a FAKE!!! Believe me. A BS merchant. Just look at the crap he has made.

    I don't know, I think his Holmes movies are much better than the BBC series. But I wouldn't want him direct a Bond movie.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,530
    This is the same Guy Ritchie who made the following:
    .Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels
    .Snatch
    .Sherlock Holmes 1 and 2
    .The Man from UNCLE

    All good flicks. Hell, I wish he'd done SP instead of Mendes. He's done some shit films but some great ones too.
  • Posts: 17,187
    Remington wrote: »
    This is the same Guy Ritchie who made the following:
    .Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels
    .Snatch
    .Sherlock Holmes 1 and 2
    .The Man from UNCLE

    All good flicks. Hell, I wish he'd done SP instead of Mendes. He's done some shit films but some great ones too.

    Totally agree - and the films you've listed there are all films I enjoy. Wonder what I'm not seeing, as other here call him a BS merchant and whatnot.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited September 2018 Posts: 4,043
    I've personally never been impressed by the guy the first Holmes film was entertaining and I didn't mind Snatch but I remember when Lock Stock was released and went to see at the cinema and left thinking it was the emperors new clothes, Richie just came across to me as Tarantino knock off.

    I gather some like him but he's not for me but if he got the gig I'd give it a shot to see if he delivered the goods despite what I thought of his previous work.

    To be honest his producer mate in my view directed a much better film than anything than he did with Layer Cake, it even took the piss out of Lock Stock with the Duke character well that is what I took from it.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Richie will never direct a Bond movie. He made some enjoyable movies but nothin more. He’s overall overrated. Just my opinion.

    So we know Demange is developing some kind of remake of a Ken Loach movie. He talks about it quite passionately so he’s probably out of the equation now. Like 99%.

    I wonder if they’re really trying to steal McQuarrie from Cruise, as Justin Kroll suggested two times on Twitter... (yes I know he’s american but we’re also in 2018).
Sign In or Register to comment.