Bond 25 (and Beyond) directors you consider. This can be directors, second Unit Director or D.O.P.

1356711

Comments

  • Brad Bird could be good if they want a somewhat lighter, more "classic" Bond feel...
  • Posts: 11,119
    Yes, and the last three Brosnan films are considered high quality espionage thrillers a la 'Skyfall'? With all due respect, Brosnan's last three delivered because of the fact that it was Bond, not because it also was a very good standalone film.
  • DJCLE84DJCLE84 formerly HASEROT ---has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,235
    Yes, and the last three Brosnan films are considered high quality espionage thrillers a la 'Skyfall'? With all due respect, Brosnan's last three delivered because of the fact that it was Bond, not because it also was a very good standalone film.

    there was more wrong with those films than the 2 year gap...

    by your logic DAD should've been a top notch thriller then, as they had 3 years to work on that mess.. :))

    its not the length of time, but more who is writing it... Logan was brought on pretty late in the game to rewrite the script to Skyfall - he didn't work on it for 3 years.
  • edited March 2013 Posts: 2,638
    I agree, @Gustav_Graves, that Barbara and Michael would like to repeat SkyFall's success again and the way to go someway of achieving that is to have a damned good script knocked into shape and locked down. If the picture has a lousy script then it will suck regardless whoever is behind the camera shouting "action".

    I honestly don't see Sam Mendes as a "big name" director, certainly not in the same league as James Cameron, Steven Spielberg or Peter Jackson. To be honest I think the general public would be hard pressed to name a Sam Mendes movie apart from American Beauty. Rumour has it the real reason why he agreed to direct SF was because he needed a major hit on his hands after a string of box office flops with Revolutionary Road struggling to break even on its $35 million budget and Away We Go disappearing into oblivion.

    Now I'm sure that Mendes' name had something to do with the good critical buzz which resulted in people going to see what all the fuss was about, but I honestly think a large number of those very same people would have gone to see SF regardless, even if Taylor Hackford had directed it. One thing I will agree on is that Mendes' name is a heavyweight favourite with the critics and that did help boost positive press coverage which did go someway of assisting SF up the chart - but then so did Adele's hit song.

    For me, it's what Logan has written for Bond 24 which will be more important than who is directing it. If they have the script right then whoever directs the picture will be at a huge advantage.
  • DJCLE84DJCLE84 formerly HASEROT ---has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,235
    bondsum wrote:
    For me, it's what Logan has written for Bond 24 which will be more important than who is directing it. If they have the script right then whoever directs the picture will be at a huge advantage.

    so Uwe Boll it is then?? :))

    a talented director can do more with a poor script than a poor director can do with a good script.
  • Now that Sam Mendes is not returning for Bond 24 (I am really disappointed by this news) I think that BB and MGW need to get a quality director. I thought Joe Wright would be a great choice but I was also thinking about Andrew Niccol the other day as a possible director if Sam Mendes didn't return. He might not be as well known as certain directors but he has a very distinct visual style that I think could fit into the Bond universe. Plus his film IN TIME featured cinematography by the great Roger Deakins. Plus Gattaca is a forgotten classic....
  • Posts: 2,638
    Not sure I agree with that, @haserot. So what you're saying is that you can still enjoy a movie so long as it's well directed (eg, looks good) even though the script is absolutely terrible? I'd say it's the complete opposite. If the story is excellent you'll be too immersed in the plot to notice how the movie is framed.

    Besides, I'm not suggesting anyone as terrible as Uwe Boll. I'd be quite happy with Rupert Wyatt who's not a big name but a very accomplished director.
  • DJCLE84DJCLE84 formerly HASEROT ---has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,235
    bondsum wrote:
    Not sure I agree with that, @haserot. So what you're saying is that you can still enjoy a movie so long as it's well directed (eg, looks good) even though the script is absolutely terrible? I'd say it's the complete opposite. If the story is excellent you'll be too immersed in the plot to notice how the movie is framed.

    Besides, I'm not suggesting anyone as terrible as Uwe Boll. I'd be quite happy with Rupert Wyatt who's not a big name but a very accomplished director.

    i use the extreme to make a point obviously... but a director who knows what he/she is doing can take a poor or below average script and craft it into a workable story on camera, to at least salvage what they can and make it work... but you can have the best script in the world, but if the director can't get good performances out of his actors, chooses poor shots, edits the film to hell - it can ruin a solid script.. i'll use QOS as an example of how a director's choice of shots and editing can ruin an experience - look no further than the frustrating action sequences..

    the truth is, a good film doesn't hinge on any one aspect, but the collaboration of efforts from multiple individuals.. it's a team effort.. but the director is a vital cog to make the machine work well..

    lets put it this way.. i would trust a below average script in the hands of a director like Scorsese, more than i would a well written script in the hands of a director like Michael Bay... it's easier to butcher a masterpiece than create something from very little

  • Posts: 194
    bondsum wrote:
    Not sure I agree with that, @haserot. So what you're saying is that you can still enjoy a movie so long as it's well directed (eg, looks good) even though the script is absolutely terrible? I'd say it's the complete opposite. If the story is excellent you'll be too immersed in the plot to notice how the movie is framed.

    Besides, I'm not suggesting anyone as terrible as Uwe Boll. I'd be quite happy with Rupert Wyatt who's not a big name but a very accomplished director.

    Personally, I thought The Dark Knight Rises was an exercise of this theory.
  • Posts: 11,119
    bondsum wrote:
    I agree, @Gustav_Graves, that Barbara and Michael would like to repeat SkyFall's success again and the way to go someway of achieving that is to have a damned good script knocked into shape and locked down. If the picture has a lousy script then it will suck regardless whoever is behind the camera shouting "action".

    I honestly don't see Sam Mendes as a "big name" director, certainly not in the same league as James Cameron, Steven Spielberg or Peter Jackson. To be honest I think the general public would be hard pressed to name a Sam Mendes movie apart from American Beauty. Rumour has it the real reason why he agreed to direct SF was because he needed a major hit on his hands after a string of box office flops with Revolutionary Road struggling to break even on its $35 million budget and Away We Go disappearing into oblivion.

    Now I'm sure that Mendes' name had something to do with the good critical buzz which resulted in people going to see what all the fuss was about, but I honestly think a large number of those very same people would have gone to see SF regardless, even if Taylor Hackford had directed it. One thing I will agree on is that Mendes' name is a heavyweight favourite with the critics and that did help boost positive press coverage which did go someway of assisting SF up the chart - but then so did Adele's hit song.

    For me, it's what Logan has written for Bond 24 which will be more important than who is directing it. If they have the script right then whoever directs the picture will be at a huge advantage.

    Perhaps you're right, but other advantages did show up when Sam Mendes was officially announced as director of 'Skyfall'. Maybe Mendes is not that of a big name among fans and ordinary cinema go-ers. But actors and crew love to work with him. Javier Bardem said 'yes' to 'Skyfall' because A) the screenplay was written with him in mind and B) he'd love to work together with Sam Mendes, regardless of being it a Bond film or not. Then alongside Mendes, crewmembers like Roger Deakins and Thomas Newman signed up. And also Ralph Fiennes was asked by Sam Mendes to join.

    So Mendes is indeed a big name within inner acting and cinem circles. They still adore him and he will always be remembered of that Oscar winning director who did 'American Beauty'. This greatly helped 'Skyfall'.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Germany
    Posts: 744
    I'd go for Danny Boyle or Matthew Vaughn, and try to bring back Mendes for Bond 25.
    If we go to three-years-gaps, it will mean Bond 24 in 2015 and Bond 25 in 2018, which by then probaly will be Craig's last Bond movie. And: we had to wait 4 years for CR, and it was great movie. Then we "only" had a two year gap for QOS and then 4 years for SF, and it was well worth to wait... Which does not mean I doN#t want Bond movies every second year, but we need a well-crafted and polished script, an able director and a good cast aside Craig, Fiennes, Harrs and Whishaw...
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Germany
    Posts: 744
    TheHotMess wrote:
    George Lucas should direct Bond 24. BEFORE anyone gets on my case he's made some good movies other than Star Wars. So dont worry about seeing something like this in a Bond movie :

    *Star wars type music plays in the background*
    M : "Bond! It is your destiny!" (Echo effect)

    starwars-vader-nooo.jpg
  • Posts: 646
    Is this true?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.
    Posts: 31,232
    @jolearon, it's already been confirmed in a separate thread. I would enjoy seeing Nolan do 'Bond 24', or Michael Mann, though I'm sure people would hate that Bond film.
  • Posts: 2,163
    jolearon wrote:
    Is this true?

    Yes, well, at least for Bond 24. He may com back in the future if he feels like it, or if Mike and Babz get desperate and give him an offer he can't refuse.
  • As much as I'd love to have Christopher Nolan, I think he'll be too busy for Bond 24, especially if the Justice League rumors are true. I do think it's time to start considering non-commonwealth/American directors, because frankly the "rule" is getting a little ridiculous. Here are my choices:

    -Tom Hooper (Who has expressed interest a couple of times)
    - David Fincher
    -Darren Aronofsky
    -Joe Wright
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Germany
    Posts: 744
    As much as I'd love to have Christopher Nolan, I think he'll be too busy for Bond 24, especially if the Justice League rumors are true. I do think it's time to start considering non-commonwealth/American directors, because frankly the "rule" is getting a little ridiculous. Here are my choices:

    -Tom Hooper (Who has expressed interest a couple of times)
    - David Fincher
    -Darren Aronofsky
    -Joe Wright

    Well, if Fincher is busy doing TGWPWF, he might be out of planning, but then the same thing will be true for Craig, but honestly, I do not thing that Fincher, who said, that he would prefer to shoot the remaining Millenium Trilogy back-to-back, would be available. As Craig's character does have less screen time in those two films (and in the books, the focus completeley shifts towards Salander being the protagonist and Blomkvist being more of a supporting), he might not be too busy with said movie, but then Fincher would be nevertheless.
    And Darren Aronofsky for Bond? This might lead us into an even more arty Bond movie than QOS. I like Black Swan and Requiem for a Dream, but they both are compleletly different from anything like a Bond movie. Tom Hooper? Why not.
  • Tom Hooper? Why not.

    see "Les Miserables"...

    as long as he can stay away from the weird camera angles/close ups...poor framing...etc etc...
  • GoldenballGoldenball United States
    Posts: 74
    This time Daniel Craig might enlist Matt Vaughn.
  • Posts: 646
    Here are a few of ENTVs pics for the next director.

  • Posts: 6,846
    wasn't Gilroy up for Quantum of Solace? or was he rumored for Skyfall?
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Germany
    Posts: 744
    Uwe Boll...
  • Posts: 1,817
    What about James Mangold? He did Walk the Line, 3:10 to Yuma and is making The Wolverine. So he could handle deep stories and action.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited July 2013 Posts: 2,977
    G.A. Aguilar http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1183872/ as second united director. He work as co second united directer on Die Another Day and second united director of The Departed,The Adjustment Bureau and as stunt coordinator with Sam Mendes on Revolutionary Road.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited February 2014 Posts: 2,977
    With discussion about Deankins leaving, i search to another one who mabey get a litle bit of both wishes.

    Barry Peterson. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0677021/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1
    Dop of The Lego movie, We're the Millers, 21 Jumpstreet, Zoolander, Hollywood Homicide and Jumper. My earlier sugestion for second united directer G.A. Aguilar work with him on 21 Jumpstreet.

    Idea i got from some footage of We're the millers some scene's be QOS in my opnion in cinematopgraphy and production design, whyle Jumper style be more like on the agression use of color from CR and dark/cold style of Skyfall. Another action movie he did be Hollywood Homicide more like TMND.

    Moving picture from We're the millers
    were_the_millers_pic01.gif

  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Posts: 2,977
    2 new sugestions for the cinematographer.

    Thomas Hardmeier. Yves Saint Laurent and Intersections



    The cinematographer of Safe House. Oliver Wood.

    Safe House. To heavy sometimes in action scene's and who should be happy Alexander Witt also don't work on QOS. Because one of the two editors of QOS be editor of Safe House work with Alexander Witt (CR/Skyfall) as second united directer. Iam talking about scene's who look to much the violence style of the QOS boat chase and mabey some of the car chase.

    This must be said, what Univeral learn from CR is that the movie get R-rating and my opnion is based on the view at home. But the music is good (Composer of the first Iron Man) and outside of the action scene's (like CR) the cinematography looks good with style's who look like CR but also on Bourne and Mi4.. South Africa Football stadion scene's looks amazing with a bit of Austria scene's from QOS and Airport scene from CR, but then with better music then CR. Stuard Baid and Alexander Witt work of course together on CR and Skyfall. With Deankis gone, mabey Oliver Wood shoud be consider.

    What there need composer, soundmixer/editor, second united directer and directer of photography who can bring some balance.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,031
    If only they can get Emmanuel Lubezki to be the cinematographer for Bond 24. His work for Cuarons movies is absolutely splendid but in my opinion he does really shine in Terrence Malicks movies. His work on To The Wonder is absolutely mesmerizing!
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,031
    It's such a shame that Steven Soderbergh has announced his departure from feature filmmaking. I have warmed up to the idea that he could possibly helm a Bond-film.
    We know for a fact that he is a Bondfan with OHMSS as his favourite, he has a very distinct style which sticks out. He can handle the sophisticated and slick part (as shown in the Oceans trilogy), he can handle action very well (as seen in "Haywire"). He has even made a comedy ("The Informer") a thriller ("Traffic") and a thoughtprovoking human drama in form of "Solaris".

    The fact that he is an American wouldn't be an issue IMO.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,119
    Yeah I respect and want Bond to keep his British voice but why completely rule out a qualified American director? I haven't heard one American gripe that oh my God a Brit directed Batman!!!
    Just saying :/
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,119
    ...and yes I do think it was preferable that a British director helm Skyfall given the anniversary plus a banner year for the UK .....and that British directors should probably be first choice as it were but I much rather have a British screenwriter to start with that voice than an American writer. Otherwise you get that Denver effect where obviously trying to sound British but umm you're not.
Sign In or Register to comment.