Sam Mendes to direct Bond 24?

1131416181942

Comments

  • Posts: 5,745
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Not about Bond 24 but Spielberg on directing a Bond film:

    "After Close Encounters, I told him that by now I had two Oscar nominations. And he asked ‘Did you win’? And I hadn’t. So that was that.”

    http://www.deadline.com/2013/03/in-mumbai-steven-spielberg-talks-kashmir-project-mlk-film-tintin-bond-report

    Hahahahahaha brilliant, Cubby, Brilliant.
  • Posts: 2,081
    I feel pretty much the same way as Brady... though I would like to rule out Aronofsky for my own peace of mind, and really... not being a religious person I don't want to be praying for months and months... :P
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Tuulia wrote:
    I feel pretty much the same way as Brady... though I would like to rule out Aronofsky for my own peace of mind, and really... not being a religious person I don't want to be praying for months and months... :P

    If Aronofsky did to Bond what he planned to do with Batman, we would all be getting our pitchforks and torches ready to charge his house.
  • Out of left field this one but if the producers wanted to develop Bond's back story and have a more human / personal emotive approach, how about Frank Darabont? Would need a 2nd unit for the big action pieces I would think.
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,081
    Tuulia wrote:
    I feel pretty much the same way as Brady... though I would like to rule out Aronofsky for my own peace of mind, and really... not being a religious person I don't want to be praying for months and months... :P

    If Aronofsky did to Bond what he planned to do with Batman, we would all be getting our pitchforks and torches ready to charge his house.

    Oh? I'm afraid I have no idea what he planned to do with Batman (I don't have much interest in Batman, anyway). But I can't quite imagine Barbara and Michael would even consider asking Daniel to work closely with him for such a long time, with tons of work, pressure, exhaustion and occasional differing opinions. For all I know they might be best buddies now, but like I said, it would be asking for trouble...

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I don't think Bond's backstory needs anymore exploring on film. I think SF conveyed all that we should know about his past. The focus should be about exploring his character and where it takes him.
  • doubleoego wrote:
    I don't think Bond's backstory needs anymore exploring on film. I think SF conveyed all that we should know about his past. The focus should be about exploring his character and where it takes him.

    Yeah, I think a lot of time people feel "exploring the character" equates to "digging into his backstory." I don't think that's going to be the case for Bond 24 since there's really nothing more to say about his backstory.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited March 2013 Posts: 28,694
    Tuulia wrote:
    Tuulia wrote:
    I feel pretty much the same way as Brady... though I would like to rule out Aronofsky for my own peace of mind, and really... not being a religious person I don't want to be praying for months and months... :P

    If Aronofsky did to Bond what he planned to do with Batman, we would all be getting our pitchforks and torches ready to charge his house.

    Oh? I'm afraid I have no idea what he planned to do with Batman (I don't have much interest in Batman, anyway). But I can't quite imagine Barbara and Michael would even consider asking Daniel to work closely with him for such a long time, with tons of work, pressure, exhaustion and occasional differing opinions. For all I know they might be best buddies now, but like I said, it would be asking for trouble...

    Does Dan know Aronofsky?

    Anyway, to answer the Batman question, Aronofsky was working on adapting Frank Millers comic masterpiece Batman: Year One into a film, but Bruce Wayne (the billionaire) would be poor and Alfred (his butler and guardian) was to be a black mechanic. I am sure there is more information available on the failed project, but my Batman loving heart couldn't take reading what else he had planned for my favorite comic book hero.

    So, pretty much he planned on making Batman in his own vision to the point that he wasn't even Batman anymore. I shutter to think what he would do with Bond. He is probably a big proponent of the codename theory... :-S
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,081
    Tuulia wrote:
    Tuulia wrote:
    I feel pretty much the same way as Brady... though I would like to rule out Aronofsky for my own peace of mind, and really... not being a religious person I don't want to be praying for months and months... :P

    If Aronofsky did to Bond what he planned to do with Batman, we would all be getting our pitchforks and torches ready to charge his house.

    Oh? I'm afraid I have no idea what he planned to do with Batman (I don't have much interest in Batman, anyway). But I can't quite imagine Barbara and Michael would even consider asking Daniel to work closely with him for such a long time, with tons of work, pressure, exhaustion and occasional differing opinions. For all I know they might be best buddies now, but like I said, it would be asking for trouble...

    Does Dan know Aronofsky?

    Anyway, to answer the Batman question, Aronofsky was working on adapting Frank Millers comic masterpiece Batman: Year One into a film, but Bruce Wayne (the billionaire) would be poor and Alfred (his butler and guardian) was to be a black mechanic. I am sure there is more information available on the failed project, but my Batman loving heart couldn't take reading what else he had planned for my favorite comic book hero.

    So, pretty much he planned on making Batman in his own vision to the point that he wasn't even Batman anymore. I shutter to think what he would do with Bond. He is probably a big proponent of the codename theory... :-S

    :)) at that last comment. Thanks for the info on planned Batman butchering, sounds pretty weird.

    I don't know to what extent Daniel knows Aronofsky, but I suppose some, at least. Everything peaceful I assume, and Rachel and Aronofsky presumably remain friends, which is good especially since they have a small kid.
    But still, no point in pushing personal relationships unnecessarily, which I think a Bond movie very well might do.
  • Posts: 194
    Wasn't the black mechanic role from another point in Batman's timeline? I always read that Marlon Waynes was going to play Robin. The Robin joyriding in the batmoblie sequence in Forever was originally pushed for Returns but Burton shot it down IIRC. Though I have the screenplay for Batman 2 (which was ditched in favor of Returns) it did have Robin (as did the first Batman screenplay) but none of those traces. Batman 2 was an interesting read, but I'm glad it wasn't made/
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Not about Bond 24 but Spielberg on directing a Bond film:

    Spielberg said he twice offered to direct a 007 pic, but was turned down by producer Albert ‘Cubby’ Broccoli. “I spoke to him after making Jaws, which was a huge hit, but Cubby said I wasn’t experienced enough and they’d call me if they did a Bond film on water. After Close Encounters, I told him that by now I had two Oscar nominations. And he asked ‘Did you win’? And I hadn’t. So that was that.”

    http://www.deadline.com/2013/03/in-mumbai-steven-spielberg-talks-kashmir-project-mlk-film-tintin-bond-report

    I know Cubby is seen as some kind of god and yes we have a lot to thank him for but when I see comments like this from him I have to wonder if he really knew potential when he saw it, no lets get John (Generic) Glen to direct 5 films in a row instead.


  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited March 2013 Posts: 13,350
    Shardlake wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Not about Bond 24 but Spielberg on directing a Bond film:

    Spielberg said he twice offered to direct a 007 pic, but was turned down by producer Albert ‘Cubby’ Broccoli. “I spoke to him after making Jaws, which was a huge hit, but Cubby said I wasn’t experienced enough and they’d call me if they did a Bond film on water. After Close Encounters, I told him that by now I had two Oscar nominations. And he asked ‘Did you win’? And I hadn’t. So that was that.”

    http://www.deadline.com/2013/03/in-mumbai-steven-spielberg-talks-kashmir-project-mlk-film-tintin-bond-report

    I know Cubby is seen as some kind of god and yes we have a lot to thank him for but when I see comments like this from him I have to wonder if he really knew potential when he saw it, no lets get John (Generic) Glen to direct 5 films in a row instead.

    He had the same kind of attitude towards Lazenby. Just like with Spielberg I wonder did he know potential when he saw it? He made some great choices for Bond but also some bad ones, I would say.
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 11,119
    doubleoego wrote:
    I don't think Bond's backstory needs anymore exploring on film. I think SF conveyed all that we should know about his past. The focus should be about exploring his character and where it takes him.

    Yeah, I think a lot of time people feel "exploring the character" equates to "digging into his backstory." I don't think that's going to be the case for Bond 24 since there's really nothing more to say about his backstory.

    Aren't we not digging a bit too deep in this first bit of Bond 24 news? I mean, in 'Casino Royale' and 'Skyfall' we're digging deep into Bond's character too.

    I think every Bond film has a certain kind of 'theme' apart from the Bond character. 'Skyfall' in essence was about 'M', MI6 and modern espionage in today's society on the whole.

    Bond 24 might very well be a movie about a diabolic, but very realistic villain's scheme. A movie that is finally about Bond trying to save a real world that is in real danger (a la 'Octopussy' or 'Thunderball'), about SPECTRE and/or Blofeld. No true revenge plans, but simply a scheme in which the villain is playing out countries for fools, basically ending up with just a lot of money on the Swiss SPECTRE bank account.

    Something like that :-).

    I think Tom Hooper, David Fincher, Joe Wright, Christopher Nolan, Darren Arnonofsky and Martin McDonagh would be great directors to explore such a story; a Blofeld/SPECTRE plot, penned by John Logan.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Not about Bond 24 but Spielberg on directing a Bond film:

    Spielberg said he twice offered to direct a 007 pic, but was turned down by producer Albert ‘Cubby’ Broccoli. “I spoke to him after making Jaws, which was a huge hit, but Cubby said I wasn’t experienced enough and they’d call me if they did a Bond film on water. After Close Encounters, I told him that by now I had two Oscar nominations. And he asked ‘Did you win’? And I hadn’t. So that was that.”

    http://www.deadline.com/2013/03/in-mumbai-steven-spielberg-talks-kashmir-project-mlk-film-tintin-bond-report

    I know Cubby is seen as some kind of god and yes we have a lot to thank him for but when I see comments like this from him I have to wonder if he really knew potential when he saw it, no lets get John (Generic) Glen to direct 5 films in a row instead.

    He had the same kind of attitude towards Lazenby. Just like with Spielberg I wonder did he know potential when he saw it? He made some great choices for Bond but also some bad ones, I would say.

    Completely agree with you on here. 'Cubby' is always considered the godfather of Bond, and he is in many ways. But he indeed made some rather weird decisions. I do think Barbara and Michael are approaching Bond differently, allthough they won't admit it. It would be kind of weird to 'complain' about 'Cubby' on his grave.

    But I believe 'Cubby' could not have done something like 'Skyfall'. There were some talks back in 1986 to adopt a Casino Royalé-like story, in which Bond was re-introduced. That was considered way too risky by 'Cubby', thus they slightly altered 'The Living Daylights' story, which originally was also meant for Roger Moore.

    It's quite obvious that Barbara and Michael are willing to take more risks. And in today's cinema market that's inevitable. That's why we have 'Skyfall'. In a similar way like 'Cubby' and Harry introduced us to Bond, Michael and Barbara are doing more or less the same since 'Casino Royale' and 'Skyfall'.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Digging into Bond's character is something that can be continuous. It's what keeps the character interesting and dynamic, instead of the one note persona he'd been for decades. It's how Fleming usually wrote Bond and giving the cinematic character some literary touches only adds depth and takes nothing away. Logan imo is making the right move to continue to explore this man and where Bond is able to go.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Ludovico wrote:
    doubleoego wrote:
    RC7 wrote:
    Well my vote goes to the master, Mr. Stanley Kubrick. Given some of the suggestions on here, I'd wager that reanimating his corpse is no stumbling block for some users.


    :-D

    If we can bring his spirit back, then Kubrick could be in the list. So no need to go as far as reanimating his corpse. Let's remain realistic.

    Isn't Spielberg working on turning another abandoned Kubrick project (Napoleon) into a TV series or something? QI looked awful and totally unlike anything Kubrick would ever have made.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Shardlake wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Not about Bond 24 but Spielberg on directing a Bond film:

    Spielberg said he twice offered to direct a 007 pic, but was turned down by producer Albert ‘Cubby’ Broccoli. “I spoke to him after making Jaws, which was a huge hit, but Cubby said I wasn’t experienced enough and they’d call me if they did a Bond film on water. After Close Encounters, I told him that by now I had two Oscar nominations. And he asked ‘Did you win’? And I hadn’t. So that was that.”

    http://www.deadline.com/2013/03/in-mumbai-steven-spielberg-talks-kashmir-project-mlk-film-tintin-bond-report

    I know Cubby is seen as some kind of god and yes we have a lot to thank him for but when I see comments like this from him I have to wonder if he really knew potential when he saw it, no lets get John (Generic) Glen to direct 5 films in a row instead.

    He had the same kind of attitude towards Lazenby. Just like with Spielberg I wonder did he know potential when he saw it? He made some great choices for Bond but also some bad ones, I would say.

    Completely agree with you on here. 'Cubby' is always considered the godfather of Bond, and he is in many ways. But he indeed made some rather weird decisions. I do think Barbara and Michael are approaching Bond differently, allthough they won't admit it. It would be kind of weird to 'complain' about 'Cubby' on his grave.

    Indeed. Much like they'd never say a bad word about Connery. I suppose both are to be expected, though.
  • Posts: 9,738
    http://www.latinospost.com/articles/14178/20130312/james-bond-24-movie-news-update-kathryn-bigelow-martin-campbell.htm

    not that either will do it but still interesting to see who is rumored and who isnt
  • Posts: 11,425
    I wonder if an American might not be on the cards this time. For me SF was stylistically quite different from CR and QoS. I know EON wanted to keep Mendes on but now he's committed elsewhere I think they need to accept that the next film will most likely feel slightly different too. I used to hate the way the only consistent thing about the Brosnan films was how awful they were. Now, although I don't universally like the Craig films, at least the films are different in an interesting way. I doubt Kathryn Bigelow would do Bond, but it's an interesting idea. I actually think Babs might be quite interested by the idea of having the first woman director in the series as well.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Getafix wrote:
    I wonder if an American might not be on the cards this time. For me SF was stylistically quite different from CR and QoS. I know EON wanted to keep Mendes on but now he's committed elsewhere I think they need to accept that the next film will most likely feel slightly different too. I used to hate the way the only consistent thing about the Brosnan films was how awful they were. Now, although I don't universally like the Craig films, at least the films are different in an interesting way. I doubt Kathryn Bigelow would do Bond, but it's an interesting idea. I actually think Babs might be quite interested by the idea of having the first woman director in the series as well.

    Hmmm, it's a very interesting anddd logical choice too. I wouldn't be too surprised if she will be picked. It means again an Oscar winning director for Bond......that's some kind of continuity ;-). In all honest, I think 'Skyfall' and 'Casino Royale' feel very similar in style and tone....both very Fleming-esque films.
  • Posts: 194
    Getafix wrote:
    I wonder if an American might not be on the cards this time. For me SF was stylistically quite different from CR and QoS. I know EON wanted to keep Mendes on but now he's committed elsewhere I think they need to accept that the next film will most likely feel slightly different too. I used to hate the way the only consistent thing about the Brosnan films was how awful they were. Now, although I don't universally like the Craig films, at least the films are different in an interesting way. I doubt Kathryn Bigelow would do Bond, but it's an interesting idea. I actually think Babs might be quite interested by the idea of having the first woman director in the series as well.

    Oooh, Bigelow is an interesting pick. I wouldn't mind EON pondering that over.
  • StrelikStrelik Spectre Island
    edited March 2013 Posts: 108
    Hmm...

    Previously, I was hoping that Tom Hooper would be chosen as the director for Bond 24, but this interview makes me a bit worried. I thought Skyfall was appropriately witty: Not too much, not too little. If Hooper wants less seriousness and more wit, we might slide back into Pierce Brosnan-era territory.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    So i logged in and saw that it was 72 new posts in this thread and i thought "Oh my god, we got some good news now" But no.. ;)
  • If Tom Hooper wants the job...he better be more convincing than that interview.
  • Posts: 4,400
    Barbara Broccoli: my lifelong affair with James Bond
    123520177__393173c.jpg
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/arts/film/article3711894.ece

    May be some clues about B24 if anyone could open this up? Damn Times.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited March 2013 Posts: 13,350
    Damn, that's a shame. I'm sure there's something in there.

    I can't believe you now have to subscribe to read articles. X(
  • Posts: 4,400
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Damn, that's a shame. I'm sure there's something in there.

    I can't believe you now have to subscribe to read articles. X(
    yeah it really does suck.

    Making the case for Campbell's return; he recently directed this advert:


    The actual product looks like dogshit but the ad is pretty good, far from excellent but still pretty good. The think that actually slows it down is the reliance on the actual product itself. The bit with the girl jumping and doing stunts at the start before we see the ipad rip-off is fantastic.
  • Posts: 1,407
    I'm not a fan of Hooper so no thanks. Campbell returning would be a dream but I just don't think he wants to. Which is perfectly fine as his two Bond films rank among the very best.

    I love the Sherlock Holmes films so Guy Ritchie would be fine with me. But I think we need to think outside the box (just like Mendes was outside the box). I asked this a couple of times but never got an answer. Remember when Roger Mitchell was in negotiations to direct Quantum of Solace? I've never seen any of his films, would he be a good choice if EON decided to contact him again?
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,081
    bondbat007 wrote:
    I'm not a fan of Hooper so no thanks. Campbell returning would be a dream but I just don't think he wants to. Which is perfectly fine as his two Bond films rank among the very best.

    I love the Sherlock Holmes films so Guy Ritchie would be fine with me. But I think we need to think outside the box (just like Mendes was outside the box). I asked this a couple of times but never got an answer. Remember when Roger Mitchell was in negotiations to direct Quantum of Solace? I've never seen any of his films, would he be a good choice if EON decided to contact him again?

    Roger Mitchell? Hmm. I think I've only seen a few... Buddha of Suburbia (tv series) was so long ago I don't really remember enough to even comment, but I do remember liking it then. The three movies I've seen were Notting Hill (syrupy ending, but otherwise quite fun from what I remember). And the two he did with Daniel, Mother and Enduring Love, both interesting (I'd recommend them), and definitely nothing whatsoever like the light-hearted Notting Hill. But Bond? It's hard to say, it's so different. But like you said, Sam was hardly an obvious choice, either, and did a great job, so who knows. A non-obvious director might produce more interesting results, or then it might really go wrong... and an obvious choice might be safe, but boring - or not boring. Mitchell can do interesting, even disturbing character stuff, and also comedy. I have no idea about action, and I'd need to see more of what he's done, anyway. But if he's been in negotiations to do Bond before, well... He'd certainly be an interesting choice.

  • Posts: 1,407
    Thanks @Tuulia. I'll have to check out some of his films.

    Well it seems for the last two films we've had "interesting" directors and one turned out well and one turned out bad so it'll be interesting to see what EON is thinking
Sign In or Register to comment.