Sam Mendes Wants to return for Bond 24

245

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, you must not have seen 'Munich' or 'Saving Private Ryan.'
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, you must not have seen 'Munich' or 'Saving Private Ryan.'

    I have seen them, of course. Two great films don't make a legend, also considering that film is a team effort where direction is but a fragment of the things that make or break a film.
  • Creasy47 wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, you must not have seen 'Munich' or 'Saving Private Ryan.'

    I have seen them, of course. Two great films don't make a legend, also considering that film is a team effort where direction is but a fragment of the things that make or break a film.

    Jaws
    Close Encounters of the Third Kind
    Raiders of the Lost Ark
    The Colour Purple
    Schindler's List
    Saving Private Ryan
    Munich
    Lincoln

    To these films that are considered by most to be "great" I would also add as very good:

    ET
    Jurassic Park
    A.I.
    Minority Report
    Catch Me if You Can
    War of the Worlds



  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, you must not have seen 'Munich' or 'Saving Private Ryan.'

    I have seen them, of course. Two great films don't make a legend, also considering that film is a team effort where direction is but a fragment of the things that make or break a film.

    Jaws
    Close Encounters of the Third Kind
    Raiders of the Lost Ark
    The Colour Purple
    Schindler's List
    Saving Private Ryan
    Munich
    Lincoln

    Pretty much all of these, too. He's made too many near perfect works to be considered a 'fool' because of his other projects.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Nobody is going to change my mind. I just don't hold him to the genius level, that's all. And I do find many of his actions to be foolish, especially of late. Sue me.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    Nobody is going to change my mind. I just don't hold him to the genius level, that's all. And I do find many of his actions to be foolish, especially of late. Sue me.

    I don't hold him to the level of 'genius,' either, but I give a load of credit to the man who oversaw my favorite film of all time, alongside many other incredibly wonderful movies.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited January 2013 Posts: 28,694
    Creasy47 wrote:
    Nobody is going to change my mind. I just don't hold him to the genius level, that's all. And I do find many of his actions to be foolish, especially of late. Sue me.

    I don't hold him to the level of 'genius,' either, but I give a load of credit to the man who oversaw my favorite film of all time, alongside many other incredibly wonderful movies.

    Fair enough. In time, things could change for me, but at this point I am not riddled with excessive joy over him. It is the actors that truly make his films what they are, not his directorial style as I have yet seen.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    I, too, am not 'riddled with excessive joy,' I think I just hold the man to a higher degree because of 'Munich,' and some of his other films are phenomenal. He has had a few misses lately, and of course, there are other directors whose work I tend to enjoy more overall - like Nolan :P
  • Posts: 1,407
    Lincoln was a true return to form. I'm not sure how anyone can't classify Mr. Spielberg as anything less than "legend".

    But in a recent interview, he stated that he was done doing any action in his films (apart from Tintin I would assume). I just don't think he would be interested in a Bond film anymore these days.

    Mendes, take all the time in the world if you come back. I hope you do
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I'm not a huge fan of the 2nd half of his c.v, too much Oscar bait for my taste but Jaws, Raiders & Close Encounters show Speilberg's genius, no better blockbuster director out there, although I question is ability in his blockbusters from 2000 onwards. I do like Catch Me If You Can and Munich though, heard good things about Lincoln so hopefully I'll like that.

    As for Bond I would be very surprised if he did one now Cubby dropped the ball on that one, FYEO directed by Speilberg would have been something but apparently he wasn't ready yet though. Funny that considering Raiders bests any Bond film.
  • Germanlady wrote:
    Obviously he won't do it

    Other projects announced include the National return of Skyfall director Sam Mendes, who began his career in theatre before moving into film.

    The Oscar-winning director will direct a production of Shakespeare's King Lear, starring Simon Russell Beale, that will open next January.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21266738


    Confirms my thoughts and I can understand him. Making a follow up to your OWN incredibly successful film can be quite scary. But it will be for all who follow him now. Nolan had the guts and energy to do it with Batman, but it took him 4 years to do it and we wouldn't want that, would we?

    Mendes directed Richard III at the Old Vic and produced The Hollow Crown for TV whilst prepping Skyfall. Why can’t he do the same with King Lear and Penny Dreadful with Bond 24?

    I don’t expect Bond 24 to go into production until the Autumn of 2014, Garry Barber has already said to investor that it may take until then.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Starting production in Autumn would be the same thing as starting in Fall 14, because no way, you get it out in November and I doubt, they want to make it a summer film, even though some will say, it has een done before.

    I hope for this fall for as long, as they confirm, its otherwise ;) They have been set to do it before, and why would they being stopped now?
  • I mean they will start filming in Autumn/Fall 2014 for an October/November 2015 release. Barber has already hinted to MGM investors that they should expect this.
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 6,601
    Sorry, I mistook Autumn for spring. Silly me. We have read it both ways and I wait till we get a confirmation of either one until I am sure about anything. It was vague, what he said, it seemed more clear, what they reported about the Fall 13 start, with the script being worked on etc etc. We just

    BTW - Daniel himself said in a french promotional interview, that he expects it to start this year. So, as involved as he is in the whole process, I tend to believe him for now. But he has no crystall ball either, so things might change.
    We just have to wait and see.
  • With all the fuss they made about the long gestation of the script for Skyfall and how the time improved it no-end, I’ve taken this early start from Logan to show that they are attempting to learn from that and get a good 18 mouths of work put in before it is locked at the start of pre-production, sometime in the Summer of 2014.
  • Shardlake wrote:
    I'm not a huge fan of the 2nd half of his c.v, too much Oscar bait for my taste but Jaws, Raiders & Close Encounters show Speilberg's genius, no better blockbuster director out there, although I question is ability in his blockbusters from 2000 onwards. I do like Catch Me If You Can and Munich though, heard good things about Lincoln so hopefully I'll like that.

    This!
    Sorry, for shortly going off topic again but I completely agree! :-)

    As for Mendes, I'd be interested in having him back but as long as we get a good replacement... I am not too worried. And even though it's not as big a deal for me as for others around here, I'd like to see a more classic approach, meaning unrelated pre-title sequence, M stays at office, Bond get's job, ends up with a girl.

    Then again, I don't know if such a massive return to the formula could actually hurt Bond 24. I can see the reviews know: "Bond once again returning to the same old boring formula" - "A step back from skyfall" etc.
    I am not saying have M die again, let Bond fall in love and let Bond's dad surprisingly show up and be killed by the villain.... but I don't think going completely formulaic is the way to go.

    Then again, if they still manage to make a serious, character-driven effort within the formula, I am all for it!
  • If that isn't the definition of a fool I don't know what is.
    Well go and search for a mirror :)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    At this point I don't even care anymore. I'll just wait to see what eventually happens but with Craig doing two more and with 3 year gaps i think it's a silly waste of a great resource but whatever.
  • Posts: 6,601
    doubleoego wrote:
    At this point I don't even care anymore. I'll just wait to see what eventually happens but with Craig doing two more and with 3 year gaps i think it's a silly waste of a great resource but whatever.

    Right, Sam can do 25 if he needs a break. No need whatsoever to wait for him.

  • edited January 2013 Posts: 34
    I'd like a more traditional film myself. Gunbarrel at the start, M staying in the office, Bond gets a straight forward (not personal) mission, etc. We haven't had one for a while now.

    Exactly...enough with the drab character building. Bond films have started to become humorless, dull, and Bourne knockoffs. Where Bond films should be now is where a franchise like 'Red' is going.... Check out the trailer for 'Red2' and see if you can honestly disagree....



    THIS is the franchise I look forward to now....maybe EON needs to take notes.


  • Then again, I don't know if such a massive return to the formula could actually hurt Bond 24. I can see the reviews know: "Bond once again returning to the same old boring formula" - "A step back from skyfall" etc.
    I am not saying have M die again, let Bond fall in love and let Bond's dad surprisingly show up and be killed by the villain.... but I don't think going completely formulaic is the way to go.

    Then again, if they still manage to make a serious, character-driven effort within the formula, I am all for it!

    I think that if there was a "return to formula" for Bond 24 I don't think that reviews would necessarily say it was a step back. One of the great things about the current era is how the films are evolving; a "return to formula" now wouldn't seem boring as we're not going through the motions with every film like we did in the past.


  • Then again, I don't know if such a massive return to the formula could actually hurt Bond 24. I can see the reviews know: "Bond once again returning to the same old boring formula" - "A step back from skyfall" etc.
    I am not saying have M die again, let Bond fall in love and let Bond's dad surprisingly show up and be killed by the villain.... but I don't think going completely formulaic is the way to go.

    Then again, if they still manage to make a serious, character-driven effort within the formula, I am all for it!

    I think that if there was a "return to formula" for Bond 24 I don't think that reviews would necessarily say it was a step back. One of the great things about the current era is how the films are evolving; a "return to formula" now wouldn't seem boring as we're not going through the motions with every film like we did in the past.

    Interesting view! Maybe I am too pessimistic.
    I just have a feeling that CR and Skyfall have been such a success (with the casual audience), because they were different. It wasn't the classical, been there done that approach.
    Though I know, there are also many who want to return exactly to that.

    I for one, I am all for a more classic Bond movie, however it should still be handeled as well, interessting and exciting as Skyfall. Maybe better! There could definately be improvement in the plot category.

    And btw I agree. I rather have 2 more Craig movies (24 with a different director, 25 maybe again Mendes) than one Mendes/Craig movie.

  • edited January 2013 Posts: 6,601
    They have set up the way for the traditional Bond at the end and I am very sure, that is what it will be - BUT traditional in a Craig way, which again will be slightly different to what we know.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Germanlady wrote:
    They have set up the way for the traditional Bond at the end and I am very sure, that is what it will be - BUT traditional in a Craig way, which again will be slightly different to what we know.

    Agreed. Applying the traditional formula is fine and looks set to be the case for Bond 24, however, it's not going to be the, by the numbers, box ticking guff we got previously. The formula will be tweaked and given a greater sense of depth and class. I see it more in the mold of FRWL than say the likes of GF but obviously updated to fit within contemporary times. This is where I feel and I don't say this lightly, where a director like Nolan would be able to pull it off.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,862
    Germanlady wrote:
    They have set up the way for the traditional Bond at the end and I am very sure, that is what it will be - BUT traditional in a Craig way, which again will be slightly different to what we know.

    That doesn't really make sense. If it's traditional then it'll be like the old films with a larger than life villain, a henchmen who remains loyal no matter what, three Bond girls, a sacrificial lamb...the Bond formula.
    Traditional Theme, Logo, Single Shot and Blood: The traditional James Bond theme (or a variation) is played as the logo (the inside of a gun barrel) bounces across the screen. The view centers in on Bond walking. Bond then shifts his pose and shoots into view. Blood drips down the screen.
    The Pre-Credits Sequence: Bond's life (or the life of a pivitol character) is threatened by hook or crook and 007 pulls off a fantastic stunt to save himself. This scene introduces key characters in the movie and sets up the story.
    Opening Credits: Lots of silhouettes of nubile women prancing around.
    Movie Theme Song: This happens during the opening credits. The theme song scored just for this movie is played. It almost always has the movie title in its lyrics. Occasionally, it is played in other parts of the movie considering the mood of the music.
    Briefing of mission: Bond walks into the office of MI-6 and flirts with Moneypenny. Bond walks into M's office. Gets briefed of situation. He may also get briefed by M outside of this office (You Only Live Twice, Man With The Golden Gun, Licence To Kill, Tomorrow Never Dies, for example)
    Toyland: Q gives Bond any special gizmos needed for the assignment. Lots of prop jokes.
    After the Bad Guy: Bond goes to the exotic location of where he tries to contact the enemy. Sometime before next step, he may get a Martini that is "shaken not stirred".
    Fight with Bad Guy's Henchman: Here is where the stunt men earn their pay. Lots of fights where Bond just barely wins. Makes easy transition into next step.
    Meet Bond Girl: James comes into the circle of his female companion for the rest of the movie. The irony of all Bond movies is that Bond cannot complete the mission without the assistance of this lady!
    Enemy Spots Bond: Bond breaks a MAJOR rule of modern field agent training and flaunts his presence in unsecured environments. Usually makes some stupid reference to what the villain does, playing dumb. The Bad Guy and crew discovers Bond's presence following to next step.
    Fallen Comrade: This can happen anywhere in the film from beginning right to the end. Someone in Bond's assistance will die at the hand of the Bad Guy's forces. It affects Bond emotionally usually to a point of avenging.
    Chase Scene: Bond is in some exotic vehicle or location in a chase. Whether he is chasing or being chased or if the Bond Girl is with him or the bad guy's henchmen (never the Bad Guy) alternate from movie to movie. Lots of vehicle stunts with theme music.
    Bad Guy's Headquarters Found: Bond finds HQ of the Bad Guy and infiltrates it.
    Battle Armies: The large group assisting Bond gets into a huge battle royale with the forces of the Bad Guy. Most of the Bad Guy's forces buy it.
    Bond and Company Captured: Bad Guy and crew capture Bond and Bond Girl inside the HQ. Instead of killing them right off, they are placed in some isolated situation where they will die if they didn't do anything creative. Just before they are left to die, the Bad Guy explains his twisted reasoning of his own existence and actions. Occasionally, this happens before the Battle Armies step.
    Bond Saves Self and Bond Girl: Using a gizmo given by Q, he escapes and starts to screw up the Bad Guy's plans of destruction.
    Final Combat: Bond gets the advantage and a final combat with the Bad Guy ensues. Bond wins.
    Destruction of Bad Guy's HQ: Bad Guy defeated, usually dead, the whole of the Bad Guy's HQ goes up in a huge explosion.
    Secondary Combat: A minor, almost comical, fight ensues with the Bad Guy's Henchman. Bond wins. Henchman is under their own accord now. Sometimes occurs before Final Combat.
    Talking the High Road: Bond and Bond Girl are retrieved in some exotic and unusual manner. They never get out under their own effort.
    Bond has the Bond Girl: This sometimes happens before the previous step usually with comical relief for the audience.
    Ending Credits: Boring black and white text scrolls up the screen.
    Coming Soon: The end of the credits has in the text "James Bond will return in ..." to start the promotion of the next movie.
    http://users.nac.net/delliott/007/bond formula.htm

    If it's traditional in a Daniel Craig way then it's NOT a traditional Bond film. It's just another Daniel Craig Bond film. Messing around to much with the Bond films is a risk. You alienate your loyal audience. As evidenced by the CraigNotBond movement. But you also gain new fans...potentially. If Daniel Craig is to make a traditional Bond film, I wonder if he will be as accepted for it. Connery, Moore and Brosnan were the only truly accpeted formulatic Bonds imo. Lazenby didn't give himself a chance, and Dalton whilst awesome amongst many fans, was too Fleming for the general audience. I fear Daniel Craig may fall in the same catergory.
    Film audiences are very fickle, they'll love Skyfall, and see it multiple times, but if Bond 24 doesn't deliver, they'll bail on it in masses.
    Sam Mendes is an obvious choice to helm Bond 24, and though he has commitments to theatre according to reports from members here, he should / could be available.
    I'd welcome him back.
  • doubleoego wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    They have set up the way for the traditional Bond at the end and I am very sure, that is what it will be - BUT traditional in a Craig way, which again will be slightly different to what we know.

    Agreed. Applying the traditional formula is fine and looks set to be the case for Bond 24, however, it's not going to be the, by the numbers, box ticking guff we got previously. The formula will be tweaked and given a greater sense of depth and class. I see it more in the mold of FRWL than say the likes of GF but obviously updated to fit within contemporary times. This is where I feel and I don't say this lightly, where a director like Nolan would be able to pull it off.

    Sounds perfect, except that I am not completely convinced of Nolan for Bond. I am not saying no, but at the same time I am not too sure about him.

  • Posts: 6,601
    doubleoego wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    They have set up the way for the traditional Bond at the end and I am very sure, that is what it will be - BUT traditional in a Craig way, which again will be slightly different to what we know.

    Agreed. Applying the traditional formula is fine and looks set to be the case for Bond 24, however, it's not going to be the, by the numbers, box ticking guff we got previously. The formula will be tweaked and given a greater sense of depth and class. I see it more in the mold of FRWL than say the likes of GF but obviously updated to fit within contemporary times. This is where I feel and I don't say this lightly, where a director like Nolan would be able to pull it off.

    Sounds perfect, except that I am not completely convinced of Nolan for Bond. I am not saying no, but at the same time I am not too sure about him.

    I am all for a director, who will not make it a Nolans, Tarantinos or whoevers take on Bond, but it should always remain a Bond film BY....
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    doubleoego wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    They have set up the way for the traditional Bond at the end and I am very sure, that is what it will be - BUT traditional in a Craig way, which again will be slightly different to what we know.

    Agreed. Applying the traditional formula is fine and looks set to be the case for Bond 24, however, it's not going to be the, by the numbers, box ticking guff we got previously. The formula will be tweaked and given a greater sense of depth and class. I see it more in the mold of FRWL than say the likes of GF but obviously updated to fit within contemporary times. This is where I feel and I don't say this lightly, where a director like Nolan would be able to pull it off.

    Sounds perfect, except that I am not completely convinced of Nolan for Bond. I am not saying no, but at the same time I am not too sure about him.

    Neither am I which is why I said, I don't make such comments lightly but looking at Nolan's skill as a director and where the Bond series is heading, infusing the traditions of old into a contemporary setting but still giving it that blockbuster edge without compromising on strong character and story, I do feel that Nolan as a director can handle such a task that is so easy to mess up. I particularly look at Nolan's blockbuster movies and the one thing they all have in common are, the fact that they're obviously blockbusters but simultaneously, they're strong character and story driven pieces of art and that's the balance Bond really needs, especially if we're going to see more traditional Bond outings.
    Batman and Bourne are somewhat gone and Bond shouldn't use that as an excuse to backslide into, "dumb-arse" territory.
  • Beat me to it @thelordflashheart. Although personally I'd put Catch Me If You Can and ET on the great list.

    Spielberg is imo, definetly one of the best and most influential directors of all time and although I don't think it'll happen I'd still like him to do a Bond flick today. The man basically invented the sume's not as good as he was in the 70s/80s imo but he still makes some very good films. Tin Tin and Indiana Jones 4 weren't great but were good fun and I haven't seen War Horse or Lincoln but from the sounds of things they're good films too.

    I'm not sure why anyone would call him a fool. Dreamworks funded some Micheal Bay movies. Micheal Bay movies make money. If anything he's being smart. The film industry is a buissness like any other.

    He likes 3D. Well 3D done right (for films like Avatar) can look pretty good and not every film he's done lately has been 3D has it? I doubt he'd do Bond in 3D.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The Chris Nolan case is like an updated version of the Spielberg saga. Chris Nolan is one of the few Director's in Hollywood who can sell a film purely on his name alone. Basically the modern day equivalent of Spielberg in his prime. I would bet good money Nolan will not get a sniff at the franchise in the next 15 years, if at all. They are making some bold decisions, but I think this is an unnecessary step too far. As the great Sir Alex Ferguson says, 'no one is bigger than the club'. I fear Nolan's star shines too brightly.

    What EON need to do, is what WB had the foresight to do with Nolan, and BB. Give a director with potential a shot. The building blocks are there, they just need the vision.
Sign In or Register to comment.