Sam Mendes Wants to return for Bond 24

124

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    RC7 wrote:

    There's a big difference between a film that gets a massive box office and is trash and one that is a great film in its own right (TDKR). It may have taken a hit for its ambition and looser script and may not be the best of the Batman Trilogy, but TDKR is no lesser an immaculate film worthy of the praise and commercial success it has garnered.

    TDKR is good, but it is not even close to immaculate.

    Are you a Batman fan?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote:

    There's a big difference between a film that gets a massive box office and is trash and one that is a great film in its own right (TDKR). It may have taken a hit for its ambition and looser script and may not be the best of the Batman Trilogy, but TDKR is no lesser an immaculate film worthy of the praise and commercial success it has garnered.

    TDKR is good, but it is not even close to immaculate.

    Are you a Batman fan?

    A massive Batman fan. Just finished EP-17.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    RC7 wrote:
    RC7 wrote:

    There's a big difference between a film that gets a massive box office and is trash and one that is a great film in its own right (TDKR). It may have taken a hit for its ambition and looser script and may not be the best of the Batman Trilogy, but TDKR is no lesser an immaculate film worthy of the praise and commercial success it has garnered.

    TDKR is good, but it is not even close to immaculate.

    Are you a Batman fan?

    A massive Batman fan. Just finished EP-17.

    What are you referring to? Gotta love acronyms...
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote:
    RC7 wrote:

    There's a big difference between a film that gets a massive box office and is trash and one that is a great film in its own right (TDKR). It may have taken a hit for its ambition and looser script and may not be the best of the Batman Trilogy, but TDKR is no lesser an immaculate film worthy of the praise and commercial success it has garnered.

    TDKR is good, but it is not even close to immaculate.

    Are you a Batman fan?

    A massive Batman fan. Just finished EP-17.

    What are you referring to? Gotta love acronyms...

    Batman - episode 17 - New 52. Any Bat fan worth their salt would know. Thought you'd be right on it being a big fan.
  • RC7 wrote:
    Risico007 wrote:
    interesting well we'll see soon enough I wonder if Logan's two page outline has a title....:D

    You know what, it likely does.
    'Skyfall' was the title of the script draft Logan was working on back in April 2011, I guess it either just stuck or the team grew rather attached to it.


    Wade added the title SF - remember P&W wrote SF, Logan added dialogue and polish.

    'Once Upon a Spy' was the title when P&W first worked on the screenplay after QOS, most likely the time when Peter Morgan was still somehow involved in the project.

    Once Mendes came on the script took a different avenue and the title was ditched and suggestions like 'Silver Bullet' were made but none stuck. As far as I know the working title was Skyfall around April 2011 as storyboards and documents used by the crew have leaked online referring to Bond 23 as 'Skyfall' with those dates. The title was decided very early on, it's surprising how they kept it secret for so long, I can see why it is a big spoiler to the film's third act.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote:
    Risico007 wrote:
    interesting well we'll see soon enough I wonder if Logan's two page outline has a title....:D

    You know what, it likely does.
    'Skyfall' was the title of the script draft Logan was working on back in April 2011, I guess it either just stuck or the team grew rather attached to it.


    Wade added the title SF - remember P&W wrote SF, Logan added dialogue and polish.

    'Once Upon a Spy' was the title when P&W first worked on the screenplay after QOS, most likely the time when Peter Morgan was still somehow involved in the project.

    Once Mendes came on the script took a different avenue and the title was ditched and suggestions like 'Silver Bullet' were made but none stuck. As far as I know the working title was Skyfall around April 2011 as storyboards and documents used by the crew have leaked online referring to Bond 23 as 'Skyfall' with those dates. The title was decided very early on, it's surprising how they kept it secret for so long, I can see why it is a big spoiler to the film's third act.

    Yeah it was 'Once Upon a Spy' originally. I'm not debating though, I'm saying, Wade came up with the title. He's mentioned it in numerous interviews, and I heard it from the horses mouth when I met him in bar before the Premiere.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    RC7 wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    RC7 wrote:

    There's a big difference between a film that gets a massive box office and is trash and one that is a great film in its own right (TDKR). It may have taken a hit for its ambition and looser script and may not be the best of the Batman Trilogy, but TDKR is no lesser an immaculate film worthy of the praise and commercial success it has garnered.

    TDKR is good, but it is not even close to immaculate.

    Are you a Batman fan?

    A massive Batman fan. Just finished EP-17.

    What are you referring to? Gotta love acronyms...

    Batman - episode 17 - New 52. Any Bat fan worth their salt would know. Thought you'd be right on it being a big fan.

    I refuse to read the crap DC push out, and only bother with graphic novels instead of monthly comics (haven't read them for years and years). We live in a world where Batman is completely forgotten by even the men that wrote him best, most of all Frank Miller. What happened to him? He lost any talent he had years ago, like so many in comics today. Now it is the same old clichéd plots with the predictable character deaths where the character inevitably returns "from the dead" by way of some massively unintelligible plot twist a year or two later. DC may want to illicit a startling WOW out of me, but all they'll get is a sigh. I may be a Batman fan, but I am not a fan of wasting my time. DC may think that "starting fresh" with the New 52 will spark some kind of creativity, but boy are they wrong. I would love it if they killed off a major character and actually kept them dead for once.

    But I won't expect much. These are the same people that made prequels to Watchmen, and tried to milk that comic to the bones like all their other properties. Now excuse me while I go wipe the memory of writing this from my head.

    Anybody got one of those cool memory-wiping sticks from Men in Black?! No? Didn't think so... :-L
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I happen to think Scott Snyder is awesome and none of what you say is applicable to his Batman. The Court of Owls is as good as anything Miller did. I prefer Loeb and Sale anyhow.
  • Posts: 1,407
    ^Back on topic about a director possibly doing two back to back Bond films since John Glen....

    My one concern is that Mendes is being pressured back. Skyfall was so good because Mendes put his heart and soul into it and you can tell this by the audio commentary on the Blu Ray (If you haven't listened to it yet, do it). I just hope if he comes back it's because HE wants to and not because of anyone else or a pay increase.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited February 2013 Posts: 28,694
    Loeb and Sale's Batman stuff is great. I wish they would do another graphic novel together (Batman wise).

    Sorry for going off topic...
  • Posts: 2,081
    bondbat007 wrote:
    ^Back on topic about a director possibly doing two back to back Bond films since John Glen....

    My one concern is that Mendes is being pressured back. Skyfall was so good because Mendes put his heart and soul into it and you can tell this by the audio commentary on the Blu Ray (If you haven't listened to it yet, do it). I just hope if he comes back it's because HE wants to and not because of anyone else or a pay increase.

    I don't quite see how he could be pressured back, really. He can surely get other work, and he hardly desperately needs the money. He had a great time first time around, and he is a Bond fan, plus he is friends with Daniel. If he'll do another one, it'll surely be because he wants to.

  • Whenever I read interviews with Sam Mendas (When he was promoting Skyfall) He always said an interviews...No. But now he is 75% on board. Sam Mendas would do a excellent job directing Bond 24. But the only way he would be on board 100% is when Jon Logan is finish writing the script. I have faith in Jon Logan, so if Sam Mendas likes the script, he should jump on board to helm Bond 24.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,601
    It was upsetting at first knowing that he was exhausted and his ideas were running low after SF, but then as time went on, the film made a lot more money than anticipated, and the possibility of him returning grew and grew, he's really debating it now. I can't wait for some concrete information on the film in the coming months.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 2,081
    Whenever I read interviews with Sam Mendas (When he was promoting Skyfall) He always said an interviews...No. But now he is 75% on board. Sam Mendas would do a excellent job directing Bond 24. But the only way he would be on board 100% is when Jon Logan is finish writing the script. I have faith in Jon Logan, so if Sam Mendas likes the script, he should jump on board to helm Bond 24.

    Mendes. ;)

    Well he didn't exactly say "no", he simply didn't want to commit at that stage, which I think is perfectly understandable. He had just finished the previous one, after working on it for longer than any movie before, and he must have been exhausted. Still, it always seemed a possibility that he might return, he was saying all along that he would consider it, just couldn't think about it straight away.

    No idea how accurate the 75% is, and where the figure comes from, but whatever the percentage it certainly seemed bigger by the time of BAFTAs than it had been in October last year. :D Still, as long as it's not 100% it remains to be seen what happens.

    As for Logan, Sam has faith in him, too, since he asked him aboard for SF himself.
    Since Sam agreed to do SF before the script was anywhere near ready that isn't necessarily the deciding factor for him in this project.
    Creasy47 wrote:
    It was upsetting at first knowing that he was exhausted and his ideas were running low after SF, but then as time went on, the film made a lot more money than anticipated, and the possibility of him returning grew and grew, he's really debating it now. I can't wait for some concrete information on the film in the coming months.

    I thought it was to be expected that he was tired and didn't have new ideas immediately after finishing such a long project. I was optimistic watching his interviews in the autumn, because it was so clear he had enjoyed himself immensely.

    I'd love him to do it.

  • hoppimikehoppimike Kent, UK
    Posts: 290
    Martin Campbell, please! ^_^
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Shardlake wrote:
    EON probably think that because SF did the billion not unlike TDK that a longer wait will do it no harm and lets be honest despite the fact TDKR was for me the worst of the trilogy it's box office certainly didn't suffer.

    There's a big difference between a film that gets a massive box office and is trash and one that is a great film in its own right (TDKR). It may have taken a hit for its ambition and looser script and may not be the best of the Batman Trilogy, but TDKR is no lesser an immaculate film worthy of the praise and commercial success it has garnered.

    I'm certainly not suggesting it was rubbish I just found it to not to sustain my interest in it's epic running time, not at one point was I thinking either BB or TDK had outlasted it's welcome but TDKR for me is Nolan's worst film for a number of reasons. The Dark Knight Trilogy follows the same quality trajectory as the original Star Wars Trilogy for me.

    1. Memento
    2. The Prestige
    3. The Dark Knight
    4. Inception
    5. Batman Begins
    6. Insomnia
    7. Following
    8. The Dark Knight Rises.
  • StrelikStrelik Spectre Island
    Posts: 108
    hoppimike wrote:
    Martin Campbell, please! ^_^
    I hope Campbell returns later for Bond 25 or Bond 26. I'm very curious to see what Mendes and Logan might accomplish with Bond 24. The stage is now set with all the staple characters in position (M, Q, Monepenny, etc). More importantly, Mendes and Logan won't be forced to graft their ideas onto a pre-existing script by Purvis and Wade, but can craft the story from scratch.
  • Posts: 14
    If Bond 24 is a non-personal, back to basics Bond movie, Mendes might be concerned with living up to Skyfall's layered story that had character arcs for Bond and others. No matter how good it might be compared to other straight-forward Bond films, it might appear as a disappointment to critics and people who aren't as familiar with the Bond series.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,659
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I can't see Spielberg doing it. The fool will likely want it in 3D, and EON are too smart and refined to agree on such a stupid gimmick. Nolan knows IMAX and no weak 3D is where it is at.

    Calling Spielberg a fool is something I cannot agree with. The man is a genius.

    I have yet to see any genius synonymous with Steven, and he hasn't given me much reason to see it either. When I look at the work of Orson Welles, Michael Curtiz, Hitchcock, Nolan and more, Spielberg gets completely drowned out and looks an amateur. I tend to lost respect for a guy that makes some films not for the love of it but for cashing in, promotes 3D as a cinematic marvel and helps Michael Bay's projects by giving him some money to help production along. If that isn't the definition of a fool I don't know what is.

    Can't agree there. The man took a few bucks right after graduation and made Duel. The things he did with his cameras and afterwards with editing are nothing short of genius. A film like E.T. is more than just cute family entertainment. There's amazing film grammar behind it. Yes, Spielberg has frequently brought innovative technical marvels to the table but they too display genius. I could never disagree with a list which includes Welles, Hitchcock and Nolan, but for me Spielberg is as much part of that list as the rest of the bunch. Calling him a fool is particularly strange in my opinion.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I think a compelling story can be told without the weight of being shackled to some personal situation. Honestly, this whole personal angle didn't start until LTK, although an argument could be made for OHMSS. However, I feel this is where Logan's really going to have to do something special because great stories don't have to be personal. A solid action thriller that delivers on tension, compelling drama and great action is what we need. There are plenty of novelists who can write excellent spy fiction; I'm sure a competent screen writer like Logan with the overseeing eye of Mendes can produce something special.
  • I'd love to see his return. He brought a visual flair that Bond hasn't seen in decades.
  • Posts: 115
    Strelik wrote:
    hoppimike wrote:
    Martin Campbell, please! ^_^
    I hope Campbell returns later for Bond 25 or Bond 26. I'm very curious to see what Mendes and Logan might accomplish with Bond 24. The stage is now set with all the staple characters in position (M, Q, Monepenny, etc). More importantly, Mendes and Logan won't be forced to graft their ideas onto a pre-existing script by Purvis and Wade, but can craft the story from scratch.

    Campell will hit the 70 this year and hasn't done a descent movie since Casino. I don't think he's up to such a task.

  • Posts: 1,407
    Campbell won't come back. Even if he is a great director. I've said it once and ill say it again, Green Lantern was NOT his fault. He just shot and directed the script
  • Posts: 1,817
    Leave Campbell for the introduction on the new actor in Bond 26. He has proven to be a master in that!
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,351
    Nothing will make Campbell return now. He did Casino Royale because it was the book. If it wasn't GoldenEye would've been his only one.
  • edited February 2013 Posts: 4,619
    Hiring Martin Campbell after Sam Mendes would be a huge step back, no matter how great Casino Royale was.

    Up until about a month ago I was wishing we would get a new director for Bond 24 just to keeep things fresh, but now I think getting Sam Mendes back would be the best thing for Bond 24.

    If he agrees to direct the next movie, I'm hoping he will push things further and experiment a bit, after delivering his dream Bond movie.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I think since they've managed to secure Mendes' services the likelihood of going back to Campbell is unlikely, yes he did a great job of CR and I haven't seen Green Lantern (life is too short) but I do remember wasting my money on Edge of Darkness which was incredibly serviceable and nothing particularly memorable.

    I think you are looking at Boyle or Hooper or maybe they'll let an American direct finally,
    I can't imagine it happening but a Fincher led Bond film would be something I'd campaign for more than a Nolan one personally.

    Mendes is fine with me as long as he's delivering a different vibe to Skyfall.


  • Posts: 6,601
    I Fincher directed a Bond movie, it would never be made. It took him 1 year to do the non action Tattoo.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited February 2013 Posts: 28,694
    Germanlady wrote:
    I Fincher directed a Bond movie, it would never be made. It took him 1 year to do the non action Tattoo.
    Bond films aren't his style anyway.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Germanlady wrote:
    I Fincher directed a Bond movie, it would never be made. It took him 1 year to do the non action Tattoo.
    Bond films aren't his style anyway.

    He is moving into a more blockbuster arena though with signing on for 20,000 Leagues remake, just a thought, if DC grew the beard again like in Golden Compass what do we think of him for Captain Nemo?

    I'm not saying yeah definitely but just a thought, I'm aware Fincher would likely never do a Bond but I'd love to see the result if he did. Personally I'd rather he finished The Millennium Trilogy with DC as Blomvist than Leagues but he seems to be moving towards more commercial material these days and I fear he won't return to finish the series. He's got allot on his plate what with House of Cards, I can't believe I'm the only one to have noticed this series on the forum although that is how it seems, did no one catch this terrific series? He directed the first 2 episodes and then left it to the likes of James Foley (Glengarry Glenross).

    I don't want to lose him to blockbusters like Nolan, I'm not knocking his big budget films but I prefer the more intimate films from his C.V

Sign In or Register to comment.