What Directors Should Helm A Bond Film?

17576777880

Comments

  • MalloryMallory Do mosquitoes have friends?
    Posts: 2,024
    The russian gulag and rocket sets were built in Canada, so they were definitely in the script.
  • talos7 wrote: »
    There are several prominent directors working well into their 80’s ; I’ve seen recent interviews with Campbell, he’’s fit, energetic and enthusiastic. There may be reasons for him not to direct; age is not one of them.

    At this point, I don't want a dated Bond movie. Younger and fresher approach, please.
  • 007HallY wrote: »
    According to Robert Wade it read a bit like a pastiche.
    Unbelieveable that Robert Wade of all people had the gall to call someone else's Bond script "pashtiche"!
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    edited December 2023 Posts: 1,255
    007HallY wrote: »
    Actually I would like to know, what was in the Boyle/Hodge script? Apparently they had some stuff in it, the producers and Craig liked, otherwise they wouldn't have got the gig in the first place. Boyle said, that EON bought and paid for the script, and that they own the script, and could do with it whatever they want. The only thing would be, if they want use it or parts of it, they'd have to credit Boyle and Hodge in one or the other way. A Russian bad guy would not be that unrealistic these days.

    From my understanding (so obviously I don’t know 100%) Boyle/Hodge’s script was essentially a version of NTTD with a very different plot and set of characters. It was commissioned by EON so the broad outline of Bond being retired, getting called on one last mission, and eventually dying (and having a daughter) would have been there. We even know in later drafts Madeline Swann was written back in, or at least this was the plan.

    My gut instinct is that their ‘script’ is not a single script, but a series of drafts at various stages of completion. Boyle has mentioned little tidbits - the story ‘going to space’ by the third act which involved a giant rocket, a Russian villain, a Cold War element that would have brought Bond ‘back to his origins’ etc. I think there were even mentions of Bond being captured and getting put in a gulag style prison and some sort of subplot involving M (can’t remember what exactly - M ordering a hit on him or something?) We’ve also got concept art for his script in which we see an underwater laboratory, solar panels by a statue, a train etc. According to Robert Wade it read a bit like a pastiche.

    I think if any of it is used it’ll be very broad ideas or little bits and pieces. I don’t think they’d need to credit Boyle/Hodge, and we wouldn’t know for certain who came up with them (usually the producers discuss the story with the writers before they begin writing and contribute ideas).

    @007HallY: Thanks for your post, your informations are very interesting, did not know that much about this. Very much appreciated!
  • edited December 2023 Posts: 2,530
    007HallY wrote: »
    According to Robert Wade it read a bit like a pastiche.
    Unbelieveable that Robert Wade of all people had the gall to call someone else's Bond script "pashtiche"!

    Yes, P&W have written stuff which can certainly be criticised as pastiche! But it’s worth saying that by Boyle’s own admission the script had some pretty crazy ideas in it.

    I always say I think it points to what the producers wanted from Bond 25. It was always going to be a more elaborate, big scale affair. It was always going to be a very ‘different’ type of Bond movie, a lot more apocalyptic/impressionistic than Craig’s previous films with a mix of darkness and humour. It does seem to me Boyle and Hodge went a bit too overboard, but obviously the way they handled the situation is the reason they left. Personally, I think we’re better off with what we got.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Actually I would like to know, what was in the Boyle/Hodge script? Apparently they had some stuff in it, the producers and Craig liked, otherwise they wouldn't have got the gig in the first place. Boyle said, that EON bought and paid for the script, and that they own the script, and could do with it whatever they want. The only thing would be, if they want use it or parts of it, they'd have to credit Boyle and Hodge in one or the other way. A Russian bad guy would not be that unrealistic these days.

    From my understanding (so obviously I don’t know 100%) Boyle/Hodge’s script was essentially a version of NTTD with a very different plot and set of characters. It was commissioned by EON so the broad outline of Bond being retired, getting called on one last mission, and eventually dying (and having a daughter) would have been there. We even know in later drafts Madeline Swann was written back in, or at least this was the plan.

    My gut instinct is that their ‘script’ is not a single script, but a series of drafts at various stages of completion. Boyle has mentioned little tidbits - the story ‘going to space’ by the third act which involved a giant rocket, a Russian villain, a Cold War element that would have brought Bond ‘back to his origins’ etc. I think there were even mentions of Bond being captured and getting put in a gulag style prison and some sort of subplot involving M (can’t remember what exactly - M ordering a hit on him or something?) We’ve also got concept art for his script in which we see an underwater laboratory, solar panels by a statue, a train etc. According to Robert Wade it read a bit like a pastiche.

    I think if any of it is used it’ll be very broad ideas or little bits and pieces. I don’t think they’d need to credit Boyle/Hodge, and we wouldn’t know for certain who came up with them (usually the producers discuss the story with the writers before they begin writing and contribute ideas).

    @007HallY: Thanks for yor post, your informations are very interesting, did not know that much about this. Very much appreciated!

    No worries, this is only from what I’ve pieced together on these forums. It’s odd that we know all these little details about the script and yet we don’t know more big picture things like what exactly the villain’s scheme was (beyond a giant rocket of some sort, which I suspect the film would have built up to, so perhaps even Bond’s death would have been similar to that of NTTD).

    https://imgur.io/a/B8JQn0O Here’s the concept art that was made for it by Tim Browning if you haven’t seen them already. Again, I first saw them through these forums. Very interesting, and not entirely different to the look/feel of NTTD.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 660
    007HallY wrote: »
    https://imgur.io/a/B8JQn0O Here’s the concept art that was made for it by Tim Browning if you haven’t seen them already. Again, I first saw them through these forums. Very interesting, and not entirely different to the look/feel of NTTD.
    That is interesting. Some of that is reminiscent of Wakanda in Marvel's Black Panther.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,255
    So these were the sets designed by Mark Tildesley? Interestingly, when Boyle left, he thought, he might get fired, too. But then Fukunaga called him and said, he liked the designed sets, and asked him to stay onboard.
  • edited December 2023 Posts: 2,530
    007HallY wrote: »
    https://imgur.io/a/B8JQn0O Here’s the concept art that was made for it by Tim Browning if you haven’t seen them already. Again, I first saw them through these forums. Very interesting, and not entirely different to the look/feel of NTTD.
    That is interesting. Some of that is reminiscent of Wakanda in Marvel's Black Panther.

    Apparently some of it was set in Nambia (which I guess is where the image of the solar panels is meant to be). Bond was set to be retired and living in Spain before being roped into his last mission (not quite sure that makes as much sense as him living in Jamaica though, but sure).

    Some people here have said those images/details remind them of MR. I can see that. Does seem odd looking back now. One would have thought Boyle’s film was meant to be a more grounded FRWL style affair.
    So these were the sets designed by Mark Tildesley? Interestingly, when Boyle left, he thought, he might get fired, too. But then Fukunaga called him and said, he liked the designed sets, and asked him to stay onboard.

    From my understanding it’s concept art, but I presume from the designs by Tildesley, yes. I don’t know how far they got into making these designs practically speaking (it’d likely be just the interior/studio stuff), but it seems they did begin building them.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,698
    talos7 wrote: »
    There are several prominent directors working well into their 80’s ; I’ve seen recent interviews with Campbell, he’’s fit, energetic and enthusiastic. There may be reasons for him not to direct; age is not one of them.

    At this point, I don't want a dated Bond movie. Younger and fresher approach, please.

    Ageism is as distasteful as any other ism, thank you

    This film has a 78 year old director and it looks fresh, energetic and exciting. It would be a huge, shallow mistake to not consider a director based on age.

    Like I stated, Campbell is a very fit vital veteran director, who gets Bond




  • edited December 2023 Posts: 466
    Really? it's deja vu for me.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,847
    Danny Boyle said that his and Hodge's script 'would have been very topical now - it was all set in Russia, which is of course where Bond came from, out of the Cold War. It was set in present-day Russia and went back to his origins, and they just lost, what’s the word… they just lost confidence in it. It was a shame really. What John Hodge and I were doing, I thought, was really good. It wasn’t finished, but it could have been really good.’
    There were rumours that for most of the film, Bond would've been held captive by the villain, although I can't find a direct comment on that by Boyle himself.
    Mark Tildesley said ‘Danny’s crazy, madcap ideas didn’t quite tie up with what Barbara and Michael had planned’, while Purvis said that after Boyle and Hodge left, ‘we went back to what we’d done. And then we changed things with Cary over several months in the attic at Eon.’ However, Boyle said that the idea of Bond having a daughter was in Hodge's script, although NTTD used it in a ‘different way.’ There were rumours that Boyle and Hodge had Bond eventually being rescued by a female spy - whether she'd've turned out to have been his daughter, I dunno.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,814
    dean-martin-wave.gif
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,698
    Interesting if true, Bond and Bourne courting the same director.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,146
    I think from next year, Bond 26's news would be less vague.
  • I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,698
    I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

    Well, while there may be some potential in doing another Bourne, it pales in comparison to Bond. Taking the story above with a grain of salt, if I were offered both there’s no doubt that I’d pick Bond.
  • edited December 2023 Posts: 466
    talos7 wrote: »
    I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

    Well, while there may be some potential in doing another Bourne, it pales in comparison to Bond. Taking the story above with a grain of salt, if I were offered both there’s no doubt that I’d pick Bond.
    I think he wants to have a job.
  • Edward Berger is not a bad director but why would they even consider him when Chris Nolan is eager and available? 🤦‍♂️
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited December 2023 Posts: 1,146
    I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

    Yeah. The truth is, Bond is more colourful than Bourne. No matter how serious a Bond film is, it still comes with a gunbarrel sequence, Bond theme, title song, exotic locations, etc. So these things keep fans interested for the next instalment, as we want to see the new gunbarrel design, the new variation of the Bond theme, the new artist for the title song, etc. I can't say the same about Bourne.
  • Edward Berger is not a bad director but why would they even consider him when Chris Nolan is eager and available? 🤦‍♂️
    Probably because Nolan is a name that is too big for Eon? After the experience with Boyle, Broccoli and Wilson may want to have a less well-known director that could still bring some auteur vibes, without imposing them a direction for the series. While I do have some problems with All Quiet on the Western Front, they were more related to historic and adaptation matters. With this movie, Berger demonstrated he was a talented director and he could bring something fresh to the series.
  • Posts: 9,664
    Interesting very interesting
  • talos7 wrote: »
    I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

    Well, while there may be some potential in doing another Bourne, it pales in comparison to Bond. Taking the story above with a grain of salt, if I were offered both there’s no doubt that I’d pick Bond.

    I agree that Bourne pales in comparison to Bond, which is why I personally don’t see any potential in another Bourne film at this rate. If I was offered both I’d certainly pick Bond based off general principle.
    I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

    Yeah. The truth is, Bond is more colourful than Bourne. No matter how serious a Bond film is, it still comes with a gunbarrel sequence, Bond theme, title song, exotic locations, etc. So these things keep fans interested for the next instalment, as we want to see the new gunbarrel design, the new variation of the Bond theme, the new artist for the title song, etc. I can't say the same about Bourne.

    Definitely. The issue is Bourne is too constricted to the real world, and also too constricted to that tone/style of that Universe. There really isn’t much variation in Bourne, even the change from Doug Liman to Paul Greengrass didn’t feel super jarring. The only changes there was that Greengrass brought in all the “Bourne-isms” like shaky cam and etc.

    The first three Bourne movies were fine for their time. In fact having just rewatched them lately, I think they’re quite good on their own merits. I think they offered what many audience members were looking for at the time, but tastes have changed since then. That style of “gritty” filmmaking I think has ultimately ran its course, even the Craig era ended up abandoning that “gritty realism” that Bourne inspired. The truth is despite how many people propped up the Bourne series, at the end of the day Bond outlived Bourne, just like he outlived all his other contemporaries. It’s the longest running film franchise for a reason.
  • edited December 2023 Posts: 362
    Probably because Nolan is a name that is too big for Eon? After the experience with Boyle, Broccoli and Wilson may want to have a less well-known director that could still bring some auteur vibes, without imposing them a direction for the series. While I do have some problems with All Quiet on the Western Front, they were more related to historic and adaptation matters. With this movie, Berger demonstrated he was a talented director and he could bring something fresh to the series.

    The problem with a big name director such as Boyle the problem is that they would perhaps want to do something unbondian. That issue does not exist with Chris Nolan. If he were given carte blanche, he would deliver a completely bondian, crowd pleasing movie.

  • It's all about money.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,146
    talos7 wrote: »
    I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

    Well, while there may be some potential in doing another Bourne, it pales in comparison to Bond. Taking the story above with a grain of salt, if I were offered both there’s no doubt that I’d pick Bond.

    I agree that Bourne pales in comparison to Bond, which is why I personally don’t see any potential in another Bourne film at this rate. If I was offered both I’d certainly pick Bond based off general principle.
    I don’t really understand the need for another Bourne movie. I think that franchise has definitely run its course, especially after the last two films and the ‘Treadstone’ series. Ironic considering how much Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass publicly trashed the character of Bond around the release of “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

    Yeah. The truth is, Bond is more colourful than Bourne. No matter how serious a Bond film is, it still comes with a gunbarrel sequence, Bond theme, title song, exotic locations, etc. So these things keep fans interested for the next instalment, as we want to see the new gunbarrel design, the new variation of the Bond theme, the new artist for the title song, etc. I can't say the same about Bourne.

    Definitely. The issue is Bourne is too constricted to the real world, and also too constricted to that tone/style of that Universe. There really isn’t much variation in Bourne, even the change from Doug Liman to Paul Greengrass didn’t feel super jarring. The only changes there was that Greengrass brought in all the “Bourne-isms” like shaky cam and etc.

    The first three Bourne movies were fine for their time. In fact having just rewatched them lately, I think they’re quite good on their own merits. I think they offered what many audience members were looking for at the time, but tastes have changed since then. That style of “gritty” filmmaking I think has ultimately ran its course, even the Craig era ended up abandoning that “gritty realism” that Bourne inspired. The truth is despite how many people propped up the Bourne series, at the end of the day Bond outlived Bourne, just like he outlived all his other contemporaries. It’s the longest running film franchise for a reason.

    I couldn't agree more.
  • Posts: 2,530
    Red_Snow wrote: »

    Seems plausible. Not my first choice, but AQOTWF was well directed. Anyway, this is more along the lines of the sort of director we’ll get as opposed to Nolan I think.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,168
    Great directing in that one. I'd have faith if he was behind the camera for the next one, though perhaps wouldn't be my first choice either.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2023 Posts: 2,847
    talos7 wrote: »
    if I were offered both there’s no doubt that I’d pick Bond.
    If Doug Liman had been offered Bond or Bourne, he'd've picked Bond too! He said that the reason he bought the film rights to The Bourne Identity was because he wanted to direct a Bond film but he knew that EON would never hire him. 'I was sort of making Bourne because I really wanted to make Bond' - ironic that Liman created movie Bourne because he couldn't do Bond and then movie Bourne ended up influencing Bond's next iteration. Funny old world.

  • Posts: 2,530
    I suppose the more interesting questions here are a) is this true and b) which other directors would plausibly be in such a 'handful of candidates' if it was?

    Like I said my gut instinct is it'll be a relatively well established director but not a big name like Nolan or Villeneuve. They will have likely worked on at least one film involving heavier action - Thrillers, War films etc - but their earlier work may well be either smaller scale (any genre) or smaller dramas. If they're not British they will have worked on at least one British or American production. They will have a history of either not writing their own scripts, have directed films that are not from their own scripts, or are used to working in collaboration with other (and each time different) writers.
Sign In or Register to comment.