›

EoN sells up - Amazon MGM to produce 007 going forwards (Denis Villeneuve to Direct)

1…110111112113115

Comments

  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited June 30 Posts: 2,011
    SomethingThatAteHim wrote: »
    I keep hoping for a production problem with Dune…such that he ends up making Bond first

    Would there be any benefit to letting TC age a bit more for the role in Messiah? Or is the timeline pretty fast-moving? I haven't read the books. Hoping there's silver lining to a Dune delay, and agree, would prefer Bond first.
  • SomethingThatAteHimSomethingThatAteHim
    Posts: 604
    LucknFate wrote: »
    SomethingThatAteHim wrote: »
    I keep hoping for a production problem with Dune…such that he ends up making Bond first

    Would there be any benefit to letting TC age a bit more for the role in Messiah? Or is the timeline pretty fast-moving? I haven't read the books. Hoping there's silver lining to a Dune delay, and agree, would prefer Bond first.

    I couldn’t tell you, I’m not a Dune guy. I’m eager for Villeneuve to get out of the sci-fi sandbox and get back to his thriller roots.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 30 Posts: 6,046
    In the books, Paul Atreides is about 15 at the beginning of Dune and around 17 or 18 by the end. In Dune Messiah, he's roughly 27, as the story takes place 12 years later. Since Timothée Chalamet is already 30, he’s close enough in age that they won’t need to age him up too drastically. They might use some subtle makeup or styling to make him look a bit older than he did in the first two films, but Paul is still relatively young in Messiah, so it probably won’t be a major concern.

    As for Bond, we’ll get it when we get it. I’m a fan of Villeneuve’s Dune films and excited for both projects, there’s no need to rush one just to fast-track the other, though patience has never exactly been this site’s strong suit.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 9,117
    If Villeneuve can convince deakins to comeback it would be a huge win.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited June 30 Posts: 5,088
    SomethingThatAteHim wrote: »
    I keep hoping for a production problem with Dune…such that he ends up making Bond first

    I think there's a sick side to many of us (even Dune fans) who hope that to happen. Perhaps he could pull a Bryan Signer who left X-Men 3 for Superman Returns (even if that was a mixed bag for both).
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,213
    No. He needs to complete Dune III and then move on. Let the artist create and complete, and then focus on the next project. Production problems or jumping ship benefit no one. I don't want a Bond based on a director's failure.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 18,432
    Yes the script is in development while he’s making Dune; jumping straight to it will mean a curtailed process.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,756
    I’m sure he can manage. For example, when Nolan was filming THE PRESTIGE, he was still able to devote time to develop the script for THE DARK KNIGHT.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 1 Posts: 18,432
    Well exactly, that’s the situation now, but folks are hoping for Dune to fall apart so he can get to Bond early, which would be like Nolan jumping to making Dark Knight when the script was still being written instead of shooting Prestige.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,433
    Villeneuve doesn't strike me as a very loose director. Dune is obviously a different animal than a Bond film, but for the type of set pieces he creates, you need a lot of planning and a script.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,756
    Unlike the last four years, we now have a strong indication of when the movie will be out. I think it’s best we remain patient and hope they actually pull this off. It’s the most important Bond film in awhile, it’s best not to rush it.
  • MalloryMallory
    Posts: 2,296
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    If Villeneuve can convince deakins to comeback it would be a huge win.

    As much as I would like that, Deakins is basically retired now (unofficially). His last work was in 2022 and he seems these days to enjoy doing his podcast and book tours/speeches.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 9,117
    mtm wrote: »
    Well exactly, that’s the situation now, but folks are hoping for Dune to fall apart so he can get to Bond early, which would be like Nolan jumping to making Dark Knight when the script was still being written instead of shooting Prestige.

    But The Prestige is nothing like the same scale of Dune: Messiah. I just find it hard to believe he's going to be able to complete both movies in the space of 3 years, and that's if nothing goes wrong along the way.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,754
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Unlike the last four years, we now have a strong indication of when the movie will be out. I think it’s best we remain patient and hope they actually pull this off. It’s the most important Bond film in awhile, it’s best not to rush it.

    I agree with this.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 14,202
    I would rather a less prestigious director*, someone who would make a Bond film, not an [insert directors name here] film. But i'm happy for my misgivings to be proven unwarranted. Though the recent article on the main page, about using Moonraker, and bringing the story into the modern world, makes me want it to happen so much. The best Bond novel, and it is just sitting there, waiting for a worthy adaption.

    * 'journyman' gets thrown around a lot, and i'm not going to use that term, as it sounds like an insult. But that is more the kind of director I would rather for Bond.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,820
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    I would rather a less prestigious director*, someone who would make a Bond film, not an [insert directors name here] film. But i'm happy for my misgivings to be proven unwarranted. Though the recent article on the main page, about using Moonraker, and bringing the story into the modern world, makes me want it to happen so much. The best Bond novel, and it is just sitting there, waiting for a worthy adaption.

    * 'journyman' gets thrown around a lot, and i'm not going to use that term, as it sounds like an insult. But that is more the kind of director I would rather for Bond.

    In normal circumstances, I'd rather have a journeyman too. But I'd rather have a prestigious director to counterbalance Amazon.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,756
    I think a precedent had been set that we’ll never see reversed. Going back to no-name directors would be like casting the new M, Q, and Moneypenny with unknown actors. At this point people expect Bond to be filled with big names that get a lot of PR. The days of Cubby hiring the cheapest people for the job is long past us.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 2,189
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    I think a precedent had been set that we’ll never see reversed. Going back to no-name directors would be like casting the new M, Q, and Moneypenny with unknown actors. At this point people expect Bond to be filled with big names that get a lot of PR. The days of Cubby hiring the cheapest people for the job is long past us.

    True. They can't improve their game unless they sign A-list talent.
  • cooperman2cooperman2 Uk
    Posts: 408
    Terrance Young, Guy Hamilton, Lewis Gilbert, Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell, Desmond Llewellyn. Were any of these great people still with us I'm
    Sure they would be thrilled to be called the "cheapest people available". Cheap they may have been, bloody great Bond films they did make.
  • FourDotFourDot
    Posts: 251
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    Terrance Young, Guy Hamilton, Lewis Gilbert, Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell, Desmond Llewellyn. Were any of these great people still with us I'm
    Sure they would be thrilled to be called the "cheapest people available". Cheap they may have been, bloody great Bond films they did make.

    Yes they made great Bond films but in a completely different market. For most of the Cubby run they were the only game in town for what we now consider "franchise" filmmaking in the true sense - in many senses Bond established the concept as we know it.

    But when the market changed the Cubby model didn't hold up, and then they found a new model and a new precedent for not only making the films viable but making them massively successful and culturally central once again.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 5,540
    To be fair I think we take for granted just how much the filmmaking quality alone has improved if we’re talking about A-list talent behind the camera. I like many of Hamilton’s Bond movies, but they include some pretty jarring technical mistakes and, honestly, some bad filmmaking at points. Glen’s Bond films aren’t exactly the most polished of the series in this sense either.

    As for actors, it was definitely a different time. Hell, until the 80s it wasn’t uncommon to reuse minor supporting actors for different roles. For obvious reasons you couldn’t do that in the same way now.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,433
    I personally think a strategy we speculated about for years is still on the table. Most of us thought it would be with Christopher Nolan, but the strategy is to get a really unknown actor up and running by having the horses pulling the marketing cart for the first film be the brand and the director.
    So the first one will be "THE NEW BOND. BY DENIS VILLENEUVE! with some guy you've never heard of." and from then on it'll be "GUY YOU HAVE NOW DEFINITELY HEARD OF returns as JAMES BOND! Directed by some guy we like, who gets it done on budget."

    Chances are Amazon just want the biggest director they can get, the biggest actor they can get and the biggest writers they can get. But I still think the above approach is in play.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 5,540
    Maybe, and I guess with film and Bond fans the director’s name can be quite exciting. But I think for the average person it’s not as big a deal. Hell, just going with Nolan, I know people who went to see Oppenheimer and didn’t recognise Nolan’s name/associate it directly with his films. It sounds weird to us (I thought it was odd actually) but it’s not as uncommon as we might think. And ultimately they’re not giving these directors final cuts which would turn away a lot of big names.

    For Bond the brand is so strong that they can go with a relative unknown as the lead. That said I think the actor’s fame depends on who they get/think best, so I don’t think it’s a specific strategy.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 2,189
    FourDot wrote: »
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    Terrance Young, Guy Hamilton, Lewis Gilbert, Bernard Lee, Lois Maxwell, Desmond Llewellyn. Were any of these great people still with us I'm
    Sure they would be thrilled to be called the "cheapest people available". Cheap they may have been, bloody great Bond films they did make.

    Yes they made great Bond films but in a completely different market. For most of the Cubby run they were the only game in town for what we now consider "franchise" filmmaking in the true sense - in many senses Bond established the concept as we know it.

    But when the market changed the Cubby model didn't hold up, and then they found a new model and a new precedent for not only making the films viable but making them massively successful and culturally central once again.

    To be fair the Cubby model is what Marvel does now. It works until it stops working.

    But if you want better movies you need better talent.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,754
    Slightly off-topic. But since it's looking more likely that Zimmer would score Bond 26, his F1 score is a reminder of how good this man can be, when he's got time on his hands. His score for F1 is sooooo good!
  • RyanRyan Canada
    Posts: 738
    I would welcome a Zimmer/Mazzaro/Marr return for Bond 26. Considering the limited time Zimmer had for No Time To Die, I felt like the score still had a lot of shining moments and good themes. Excellent use of the title theme too. Having him involved from the get-go could only yield even better results.
  • SomethingThatAteHimSomethingThatAteHim
    Posts: 604
    I wouldn’t be opposed to Zimmer returning, I quite liked NTTD’s score as well. I’d obviously hope he’d come up with something very different though and hopefully the theme won’t just be three chords repeating and will have more melody to it.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,754
    I like NTTD's score too. But I knew the score would have been better, if they told him earlier. I suspect Villeneuve has already told Zimmer he's scoring Bond 26.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,816
    I think Zimmer could do a fantastic job with Bond again, he did great with what limited time he had on NTTD. Looking at his previous work he doesn't mind working for the same franchise multiple times, Batman and Dune

    His Bond theme was powerful in NTTD and I loved Not What I Expected, one of my favourite cues in all of Bond.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 9,117
    If Villeneuves Bond can somehow find a tone that is lighter than Quantum of Solace or Skyfall I will be happy. I know his sensibilities, so I'm keeping my expectations modest. I hope that someone involved will have the sense to drill it into him that this film needs to be a triumphant return.
Sign In or Register to comment.