Mendes In Talks To Return To Bond For 2014 Production

13»

Comments

  • If they honestly feel that a 2015 release will help them produce a better product, then by all means they should go for it. I'd rather wait a year for them to perfect the script, casting, crew, etc. than for them to rush it and put out something that is less than their best effort. Will it be disappointing having to wait an extra year? Sure, but if we have another film that is the quality of Casino Royale or Skyfall, then it is well worth it. Even if it means shortening Craig's tenure by one film.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Come on people, calm down. You are having a heated debate about a potential release date if they move shooting back or forth X number of months?
  • Posts: 11,119
    I am sorry if I get carried away. Really sorry about my tone as well. It is not my intention to sound like a frikkin' dictator :\">. Apparently, it sounds like that. My sincere apoligies.

    It's just....that I do strongly agree with certain posts....that I feel the need to discuss it properly. Not to win the discussion....or to sound patronizing. It's just that there is something to say for my arguments as well I think.

    I just find it...a bit weird that I am basically -correct me if I'm wrong- the only one that doesn't mind to see a new Bond film in 2015 or even 2016. Rushed productions almost never result in a good film. That's a fact no? With some exceptions on this simple fact, I do think it helped most Bond films to have a proper, longer production process.

    That's all. I am patient enough to wait. Most of the posters in here simply want to have a new Bond film ASAP.

    Aah well, I might be wrong. Sorry then hehe :-).
  • Posts: 12,497
    Perhaps once the movie is out to buy? We may get a statement from Eon about the next movie?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,347
    By the Summer I'm sure we'll hear something. For now, we play the waiting game.
  • Posts: 12,497
    Samuel001 wrote:
    By the Summer I'm sure we'll hear something. For now, we play the waiting game.

    Yep, i can do that. Will just look forward to buying the Dvd's of Everything or nothing and Skyfall in the meantime! :-bd
  • Posts: 6,601
    Samuel001 wrote:
    By the Summer I'm sure we'll hear something. For now, we play the waiting game.

    This seems like the proper thing to do.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,138
    There's no mention of any 2015 release dates right? Just that Bond 24 may go into production in 2014? If that's the case I hope to God shooting starts in early 2014 for an autumn 2014 release date.
    I'm not convinced that a 2 year cycle spells poor product. I think having the right people in place who know how to do their jobs can ensure we don't get duds like DAD. Additionally, the script is the jumping off point and once that's in place, it's a matter of logistics but thankfully the script is already being worked on and has been worked on for at least 5 or 6 months already. The way it seems to me is, Mendes' schedule and availability is the sole cause for any potential delay. Ideally it would be fantastic for him to return but if it means waiting an extra 12 months for Bond 24's release then EoN better start lead sourcing and making some cold/warm calls because Mendes isn't the only director out there that can deliver the goods. Keep the momentum going and strike while the iron is hot. To paraphrase Brad Allen, there are plenty of warm rolls in the bakery and EoN shouldn't have to press their nose against the window. Either Mendes can have Bond ready for late 2014 or get someone else to do it.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,347
    That's what I gather the 2014 start means. He knows he's the top choice but if he can't even make that, they'll hire someone else for the November start, later this year. He's been offered some leeway, hopefully enough to say yes.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Samuel001 wrote:
    That's what I gather the 2014 start means. He knows he's the top choice but if he can't even make that, they'll hire someone else for the November start, later this year. He's been offered some leeway, hopefully enough to say yes.

    I think that Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli will do everything in their power to get Sam Mendes back on board for Bond 24. Even if that means a release in late 2015, early 2016.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited January 2013 Posts: 11,138
    I find a 2015 release to be pushing it and a 2016 release to be a colossal error in judgement. Craig is a golden goose that needs to be put to work and not mothballed. Mendes is a great director and SF is a great film but IMO SF is tonally picking up from what Campbell started. I don't want a situation where the length of Craig's tenure is compromised just because the director needs to catch his breath (I understand and appreciate where Mendes is coming from), however, this is business and the show must go on. If Mendes can't do it, then he should be replaced with a worthy and capable director worth his salt.
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 6,601
    Samuel001 wrote:
    That's what I gather the 2014 start means. He knows he's the top choice but if he can't even make that, they'll hire someone else for the November start, later this year. He's been offered some leeway, hopefully enough to say yes.

    I think that Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli will do everything in their power to get Sam Mendes back on board for Bond 24. Even if that means a release in late 2015, early 2016.

    And I tell you, they are not going to do that. I am just as convinced of that as you are - based on how we read the signs and based on our own logic.

    By that logic I repeat, no way a 14 start gives you a 14 movie. Not gonna happen. Its either end of 13, like November for a 14 release or a later start which will give the film a years delay.
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 6,601
    doubleoego wrote:
    I find a 2015 release to be pushing it and a 2016 release to be a colossal error in judgement. Craig is a golden goose that needs to be put to work and not mothballed. Mendes is a great director and SF is a great film but IMO SF is tonally picking up from what Campbell started. I don't want a situation where the length of Craig's tenure is compromised just because the director needs to catch his breath (I understand and appreciate where Mendes is coming from), however, this is business and the show must go on. If Mendes can't do it, then he should be replaced with a worthy and capable director worth his salt.

    Absolutely...
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited January 2013 Posts: 13,347
    Germanlady wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    That's what I gather the 2014 start means. He knows he's the top choice but if he can't even make that, they'll hire someone else for the November start, later this year. He's been offered some leeway, hopefully enough to say yes.

    I think that Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli will do everything in their power to get Sam Mendes back on board for Bond 24. Even if that means a release in late 2015, early 2016.

    And I tell you, they are not going to do that. I am just as convinced of that as you are - based on how we read the signs and based on our own logic.

    By that logic I repeat, no way a 14 start gives you a 14 movie. Not gonna happen. Its either end of 13, like November for a 14 release or a later start which will give the film a years delay.

    A January 2014 start of production still means a November 2014 release. It has many, many (scratch that, every) time in the past, why would that change now? What makes you think differently?

    Skyfall had the added benefit of MGM's bankruptcy mess, which meant an earlier start than normal as they were ready to go. It was an exception, not the rule.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I think expecting Lightening to strike twice with Mendes might be a bit presumptuous on EON's part, if he's not willing to fit in with the schedule then I feel they should look else where and let him return when he is if that is what he wants

    The series has never stuck around for other directors to be ready before so why now, yes SF was huge and I'm one of it's biggest fans but for a new start with Craig with a new boss I think another director is better, I don't want them giving him all the reasons to return, he won't be making the same type of film as SF, that film is a one off we won't be getting that kind of shifts in the Bond world again for sometime.

    Mendes made the Bond film he wanted to make if it had been a traditional entry and not the film we got he wouldn't have signed on, I think it's pretty likely the next film will be somewhat of a throwback with a contemporary spin, we won't be getting the emotional weight of SF with the next 2. I certainly hope they won't be going for that kind of thing again just because of the billion dollar + gross. If the plot allows allot of drama fine but I'm looking for that fun tone that a good percentage of SF was.

    If he's not ready look elsewhere, I'm not so bothered about when it's releases although I was quite looking forward to another film 2014, I'm more worried and what length EON will go to get Mendes back.
  • Posts: 2,081
    doubleoego wrote:
    I find a 2015 release to be pushing it and a 2016 release to be a colossal error in judgement. Craig is a golden goose that needs to be put to work and not mothballed. Mendes is a great director and SF is a great film but IMO SF is tonally picking up from what Campbell started. I don't want a situation where the length of Craig's tenure is compromised just because the director needs to catch his breath (I understand and appreciate where Mendes is coming from), however, this is business and the show must go on. If Mendes can't do it, then he should be replaced with a worthy and capable director worth his salt.

    I agree.

  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited January 2013 Posts: 4,314
    Second week of December 2014 is oke, if needed January 2015. If be a world wide release January wil deliever the same as November atleast.

    The Kite Runner get a release in January 2008 in The Netherlands with 65 screens and before the total conclusion of TDK, The Kite Runner stand above that movie. The Kite Runner 7,1 million and bit and TDK 7,2 million and a bit. And keep in mind TDK get more screens.

    Avatar who get a world wide release in December 2009 get only 2 weeks in December and the rest in January/February. In The Netherlands the movie stay 6 weeks on number 1 in 2010 til the week of 4 February 2010 and also did it very well after those weeks. Total 8 weeks on number 1. Skyfall beats Avatar this year with a total of more then 25 million already and Avatar did total 23,5. And keep in mind Avatar is partly from Fox, the owner of the movie who also deside when it going to be released on DVD/BD and Bond documentry owners. Fox is partner from MGM and Sony.

    Worried for The Hobbit 2, the first movie of the three under performe, oke it stil be the second movie of 2012 but Skyfall wins. And remember MGM owns The Hobbit franchise too (Besides Warner and Newline), so there can deside to release the Hobbit 2 in November 2014.

    2014 or January 2015 is the way to go, it will look like we have wait 3 years on Skyfall and 3 years on Bond 24 because it is 6 years since QOS in 2014 and 8 years since CR since Lechiefe said his thing about time.. After that Bond 25 in 2017. If DC quite then the new Bond should be 5 years later in 2022, if not then another extra movie in 2019.

    There already late for my feeling and in specialy if you since QOS the feeling there already have wrote things and idea's who mabey already started in the 4 years wait between DAD and CR. 12 years time to deliever 4 movies.

    Gustav_Graves, Don't vergot Skyfall's succes thanks to the mouth on mouth talk because of Adele her song with Bond theme and the name of the movie. The succes of Bond 24 should not be based on the singer this time, that time should focus on the flashbacks in the maintitle where i hoped with intstumental track.
  • Posts: 11,119
    doubleoego wrote:
    I find a 2015 release to be pushing it and a 2016 release to be a colossal error in judgement. Craig is a golden goose that needs to be put to work and not mothballed. Mendes is a great director and SF is a great film but IMO SF is tonally picking up from what Campbell started. I don't want a situation where the length of Craig's tenure is compromised just because the director needs to catch his breath (I understand and appreciate where Mendes is coming from), however, this is business and the show must go on. If Mendes can't do it, then he should be replaced with a worthy and capable director worth his salt.

    Craig being mothballed.....when the release date is pushed to minimum November 2015? You must be joking :-P. If there is one Bond actor who was so involved behind the scenes, co-working on the screenplay, actually suggesting directors and Bond theme singers to come on board, then it is Craig. Daniel Craig. He has such a wunderful relationship with Barbara and Michael and he always want to have a perfect finished product.

    So it is important to notice that Craig's involvement in a Bond production already starts very early, during the most early stages of pre-production. That has been a tad different with previous Bond actors. Actually, I can recall that Cubby and Harry were not allowing all these suggestions from actors.

    What I personally want, is a good continuation in style and atmosphere compared to Casino Royale and Skyfall. Perhaps bringing back a revived QUANTUM, SPECTRE style, with a revived, more psychotic arch nemesis Blofeld in it.

    From my side the Bond producers have my blessings for moving Bond 24 to a November 2015 release. Because it takes time to produce a Bond film that is as good, as perfect as Casino Royale and Skyfall. And I believe that can be done. But with plentiful preparation time.
  • Posts: 6,601
    See, I still don't approve and only repeat that as often as you do your opinion and I am not alone as little as you aren't either. But what's the use? I think, we already decided to wait and see. Everything else is useless talkie talkie at this point.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Germanlady wrote:
    See, I still don't approve and only repeat that as often as you do your opinion and I am not alone as little as you aren't either. But what's the use? I think, we already decided to wait and see. Everything else is useless talkie talkie at this point.

    It's true yes. It's good to agree on certain disagreements at times ;-). I'm just a bit too 'nerdy' at times in this forum, too passionate hehe.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited January 2013 Posts: 11,138
    Craig being mothballed.....when the release date is pushed to minimum November 2015? You must be joking :-P.

    Maybe you should try reading my post again. I said a 2015 release was pushing it and that a 2016 release, which you brought up, is for me, akin to mothballing him. My reasoning for this being, Bond's popularity is at an all time high since the golden era of the 60s and SF's success is something that shouldn't lose momentum. Notice I said SF's success as opposed to a Bond film in general. Bond films will always make money but a billion dollars or thereabouts consistently?? Not likely. Daniel Craig imo should have 4 Bond films under his belt by now and the 4 year gap between QoS to SF still staggers me. I'm not thrilled at the idea of waiting for a Bond film every 3 years or if we get your wish for a 2016 release for Bond 24, that's another 4 year gap since SF. Craig isn't getting any younger and as I mentioned in my post before, he's a golden goose. He should be utilised as realistically often as possible and as I said, if time is delayed to see Craig on screen just because the director needs a break, then get someone else to direct. It's not rocket science. SF has blasted open the door for Bond to attract serious talent that Bond may have never been able to attract before. SF has changed the landscape and that's in no small part thanks to what CR started.
    If there is one Bond actor who was so involved behind the scenes, co-working on the screenplay, actually suggesting directors and Bond theme singers to come on board, then it is Craig. Daniel Craig. He has such a wunderful relationship with Barbara and Michael and he always want to have a perfect finished product.

    It's a pity then that reasoning and influence wasn't applied during the writer's strike to a more sensible effect, which left us with a severely unsatisfactory finished product in QoS.
    I think many people here would have been happy to wait for the strike to be over first instead of cobbling the movie together with a bare bones script. That's a 3 year gap that actually makes sense.
    Honestly, all the behind the scenes stuff Craig does with EoN is great but it means jack-crap if he's hardly actually in front of the camera and on screen. Craig is a great talent, most people know this but if he's only going to show up every 4 years in a Bond film, that's just not productive at all. The first thing EoN did once SF wrapped was, to secure and lock in Logan to write up Bond 24 and possibly Bond 25. Logan's been working on the script for almost 6 months already. Purvis and Wade are gone, EoN have their in-house crew, Bond movies have been great long before Mendes showed up and with the monumental success of SF, EoN are smart enough to vaguely think about the future long term as opposed to short. You think Mendes is the only director capable of doing an excellent Bond movie today? Imo Campbell did a better job with CR but the point is, EoN have the right people in place for Bond 24 at least and can be ready to shoot by the latter part of this year and if Mendes is holding up progress on this possible shooting time because he wants to work on other stuff first or wants to rest up, then as I keep on saying, EoN should hire another director. They sure as Hell now especially have the clout and critical credibility to hire the best. Waiting until 2016 for the next Bond film is absurd. Craig is only contracted to do 2 more films, EoN have locked in a great writer, they have their crew, it's not impossible for Bond 24 and 25 to be released respectively in 2014 and 2016 without compromising quality. After that, then EoN can have a 6 year break for all I care but short changing Craig's output of Bond movies just because of 1 director's wish for a break is a joke to me.
    So it is important to notice that Craig's involvement in a Bond production already starts very early, during the most early stages of pre-production. That has been a tad different with previous Bond actors. Actually, I can recall that Cubby and Harry were not allowing all these suggestions from actors.

    I'm sure you know by now, I was and am already aware of this but I think it's important for you to also remember that Craig's involvement in the early stages of production doesn't mean much if his output of Bond movies comes every 4 years and even then, there's still no guarantee that early production on a film that for argument's sake takes 5 years to make will turn out great.



  • Posts: 6,601
    doubleoego wrote:
    After that, then EoN can have a 6 year break for all I care but short changing Craig's output of Bond movies just because of 1 director's wish for a break is a joke to me.

Sign In or Register to comment.