Who Should write Bond 25?

2

Comments

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    dalton wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    The thing is that yes it was played down to all most an after thought by the end which presents the question why was it even included?

    Mendes wanted this, he thought it was some fantastic thing that would make people go WOW! he actually referred to it as depth charge.

    Nothing in SPECTRE compares with M's death on that scale. The problem is though it's out there and if this era continues it's too tempting for future contributors not to use it again.

    It should have never happened it just undermines things. The next problem is the lame way they linked everything together.

    This could have been a masterstroke in the right hands but the ring nonsense with Q working it out on his lap top was utter rubbish. Why couldn't we have seen Bond discover this and peel back the mystery as the film unfolded.

    Scott was just one note and sneery, they could have tried to make the Max Denbigh character not so obvious and had him seem an ally to M and then pull the rug from underneath him to reveal his true intentions later in the film. You could have had the MI6 element all play out in London while Bond got on with his mission minus personal involvement. Nine Eyes being taken down could have been Team MI6.

    Discovering who was behind everything and confronting them would be Bond. No Q in the field.

    Pretty much agreed with everything.

    I think that they could have really built SPECTRE into a solid mystery film had not everything been so on-the-nose.

    First, and foremost, had they could have helped the big reveal of the film by not naming the film "SPECTRE" and simply alluded to the idea that Bond was chasing after a dark secret or mystery that had frightening global implications. They could have had two big reveals this way, the first being that the new villainous organization that was behind everything bad going in the world was indeed "SPECTRE" and then, the last big reveal could have been the identity of its leader, Blofeld.

    They could have built some mystery into whether or not such an organization exists while also setting up several people to be Blofeld. Since Blofeld takes up aliases in the novels, they could have revealed just about anybody to be Blofeld, which could have been part of the fun of the film. Instead, we know from the jump that we're dealing with SPECTRE and, by the virtue of that, we also know that the guy sitting at the end of the table, bathed in darkness, is a certain character.

    Now that would have just been too clever wouldn't it actually coming up with something thrilling? I agree sounds really good

    I actually posted in the what you would have done differently with SPECTRE thread, I'm not a script writer and I didn't want to change it radically but use what was there but to me this made a much better story than the mess we got see what you think?

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/529207/#Comment_529207
  • Posts: 1,631
    I agree with a lot of what you had there. I might take a crack at what I would change about the film, even though I did rather enjoy SPECTRE, there's still quite a bit I would have changed around.

    A couple of ways that they could have made the torture sequence more intense and more in lockstep with what they were trying to accomplish, would have been to first build up the Bond/Swann romance before reaching that scene and then instead of having Bond in the chair, they could have put Madeleine in the chair, with Bond helpless as he watches another woman that he can't protect. It would play into the promise that Bond made to Mr. White that he would protect Madeleine, and then also play into the heart-wrenching possibility that the one woman who would understand Bond not being able to recognize him and what they'd shared up to that point. It would have also made the escape a bit less ridiculous, as Bond could have helped a slightly incapacitated Swann out of the facility rather than Bond suffering no effects of the torture and going all Rambo on everything as he shot his way out of the facility.
  • Nic Pizzolatto or David Simon
  • TreefingersTreefingers Isthmus City, Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 191
    I'd like for it to be made by one single writer, someone good enough. There's just been too many cooks in the kitchen lately and we need something more streamlined and not another clusterf-ck, fresh blood preferably.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I'd like for it to be made by one single writer, someone good enough. There's just been too many cooks in the kitchen lately and we need something more streamlined and not another clusterf-ck, fresh blood preferably.

    It's so much more complex than this. While I endorse a singular vision on the page, it's not feasible for this to translate to screen without massive, unfiltered and inescapably detrimental input.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    Alex Garland.
  • TripAces wrote: »
    Alex Garland.

    Interesting, and probably the only realistic possibility that's been mentioned in here lately. Though, other than The Beach, everything he's written has been science fiction. He'd certainly be looked at as a solid choice after Ex Machina (especially if he gets Oscar nominated for it).
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited December 2015 Posts: 1,727
    No more than two writers please, this is a true & tested way of writing screenplays with two minds bouncing ideas of of each other.
    Recent Bonds have felt like they were written by committee, as pointed out by others here.

    William Monahan, Robert Towne perhaps...

  • Posts: 4,325
    How about MGW and Jez Butterworth?
  • Posts: 1,631
    I get the feeling that Wilson has been away from writing the Bond films for so long that his return to writing them might not be what those of us who liked his writing during the Moore and Dalton years would hope it would be.

    As for Butterworth, I think EON should adopt the policy that any of the writers who worked on SPECTRE should not be invited back for Bond 25.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    Alex Garland.

    Interesting, and probably the only realistic possibility that's been mentioned in here lately. Though, other than The Beach, everything he's written has been science fiction. He'd certainly be looked at as a solid choice after Ex Machina (especially if he gets Oscar nominated for it).

    There is the potential for science fiction coming into play a little more with Bond--not at MR levels, of course. But we've already seen limited sci-fi in both SF and SP. I thought Ex Machina was brilliant, and Garland conceived Nathan's estate in a very Dr. No sort of way.
  • Posts: 9,767
    in watching the first 30 minutes of Mission Impossible Rogue Nation I am again extremely upset Cruise got Mcquarrie before EON did. As Christopher Mcquarrie Wrote and Direct the best action film of 2015 (Yes better then Avengers age of ultron Ant Man Spectre and Star Wars)


    Heck I would be ok if Mcquarrie just wrote the story for Bond 25.
  • TreefingersTreefingers Isthmus City, Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 191
    I have not read a P&W script but what is so bad about them that they always needed their work to be polished and reworked? is it micromanagement/perfectionism from Michael and Barbara, perhaps?

    It can't be them, they wouldn't have been even called back so many times.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I have not read a P&W script but what is so bad about them that they always needed their work to be polished and reworked? is it micromanagement/perfectionism from Michael and Barbara, perhaps?

    It can't be them, they wouldn't have been even called back so many times.

    Scripts are always reworked and polished, most often while the movie is in production. A script isn't written, everyone agrees it's amazing, and then they go and make it. Blaming any one or two individuals is difficult because there are a billion reasons why a script may or may not work. I always find it slightly disingenuous when armchair critics say things like 'the script was shit', because you don't watch a script. Bond, like other big movies is always something that is constantly in flux. They don't and can't operate like an independent might, where they craft a screenplay that is then adhered to pretty faithfully.
  • Risico007 wrote: »
    in watching the first 30 minutes of Mission Impossible Rogue Nation I am again extremely upset Cruise got Mcquarrie before EON did. As Christopher Mcquarrie Wrote and Direct the best action film of 2015 (Yes better then Avengers age of ultron Ant Man Spectre and Star Wars)


    Heck I would be ok if Mcquarrie just wrote the story for Bond 25.

    You're "extremely upset" over it? Jesus. Well here's some good news for you - it's well known that Cruise essentially ghost-directs these movies and is in charge of every aspect of the production, so just hiring McQuarrie for a Bond movie would probably not produce the desired effect.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    in watching the first 30 minutes of Mission Impossible Rogue Nation I am again extremely upset Cruise got Mcquarrie before EON did. As Christopher Mcquarrie Wrote and Direct the best action film of 2015 (Yes better then Avengers age of ultron Ant Man Spectre and Star Wars)


    Heck I would be ok if Mcquarrie just wrote the story for Bond 25.

    You're "extremely upset" over it? Jesus. Well here's some good news for you - it's well known that Cruise essentially ghost-directs these movies and is in charge of every aspect of the production, so just hiring McQuarrie for a Bond movie would probably not produce the desired effect.

    This is very true.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I have not read a P&W script but what is so bad about them that they always needed their work to be polished and reworked? is it micromanagement/perfectionism from Michael and Barbara, perhaps?

    It can't be them, they wouldn't have been even called back so many times.

    They are at the very least tapped out. That's being nice :D
  • Posts: 2,894
    To be honest why not let MGW write it on his own? All of his 80's screenplays are far better than anything we've had since CR.
    Or was it always Maibaum who was the important voice in licking all those scripts into shape?

    They seem to have worked pretty closely together, judging from what Maibaum says in his interviews.
    JNO wrote: »
    No more P&W, please.
    Bring Haggis back and give him enough time, for Christ´s sake. He's more than able to deliver a good one.

    He's never really proven that. His work on CR consisted of just polishing P&W's draft, and his drafts for QoS were hardly inspiring (nor was his brainwave about Bond meeting his and Vesper's lovechild). From what I've read about P&W's unused script for the film, it sounds more interesting than the final product.
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Having let my feelings on SPECTRE settle I say get rid of them, once I found out they were responsible for the Oberhauser nonsense and not Logan.

    I yield to no one in my hatred of Blofeld being Bond's pseudo-foster-brother, but we don't know how much responsibility Mendes had for the idea, and we do know that P&W weren't necessarily wedded to Blofeld being Oberhauser, since in their Oct. 17 draft (summary here--it's in French so use Google translate) the villain is called Stockmann instead.
  • Posts: 315
    No Moffat or Gattis, please.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited January 2016 Posts: 4,116
    Why not Horowitz? Or Ellis?

    I don't want P&W to be allowed to even buy tickets to B25 let alone write it.
  • Posts: 9,767
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    in watching the first 30 minutes of Mission Impossible Rogue Nation I am again extremely upset Cruise got Mcquarrie before EON did. As Christopher Mcquarrie Wrote and Direct the best action film of 2015 (Yes better then Avengers age of ultron Ant Man Spectre and Star Wars)


    Heck I would be ok if Mcquarrie just wrote the story for Bond 25.

    You're "extremely upset" over it? Jesus. Well here's some good news for you - it's well known that Cruise essentially ghost-directs these movies and is in charge of every aspect of the production, so just hiring McQuarrie for a Bond movie would probably not produce the desired effect.

    Did cruise also over see the writing of the brilliant Usual Suspects (also Written by Mcquarrie)

  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Why not Horowitz? Or Ellis?

    I don't want P&W to be allowed to even buy tickets to B25 let alone write it.

    If Trigger Mortis means anything, Horowitz would write a perfect Bond movie script.

    Moffat? Meh... I'd rather him not, even though I like Doctor Who a lot. Gattis I don't know, but he wouldn't be my first choice.

    Logan, P&W should definitely go away.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Cruise produces all North American films and US foreign policy by telepathy.

    He also controls the weather and plans to make all men shorter than him except Woody Allen.

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,026
    Walecs wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    Why not Horowitz? Or Ellis?

    I don't want P&W to be allowed to even buy tickets to B25 let alone write it.

    If Trigger Mortis means anything, Horowitz would write a perfect Bond movie script.

    Moffat? Meh... I'd rather him not, even though I like Doctor Who a lot. Gattis I don't know, but he wouldn't be my first choice.

    Logan, P&W should definitely go away.

    Gatiss might give us a period Bond piece - where James relives the best bits of the Fleming novels but at the end he wakes up in the present day to Mallory giving out about him drinking too much.
  • Posts: 2,491
    Aaron Sorkin? Pls?

    I don't know how these things go, but if "we" (meaning Bond) could have gotten Mendes (oscar winner) and Deakins (maybe the best cinematographer), why wouldn't they try to get Sorkin? I think he can write a great Bond script with right amount of comedy and action.

    P.S. Good thread. Screenwriters are always underappreciated and IMHO they're more important than directors
  • Posts: 9,767
    dragonsky wrote: »
    Aaron Sorkin? Pls?

    I don't know how these things go, but if "we" (meaning Bond) could have gotten Mendes (oscar winner) and Deakins (maybe the best cinematographer), why wouldn't they try to get Sorkin? I think he can write a great Bond script with right amount of comedy and action.

    P.S. Good thread. Screenwriters are always underappreciated and IMHO they're more important than directors

    thank you. the reason I did this is because even though there is a chance Logan Purvis and Wade will all be back after the script fiascos of Spectre I highly doubt any writers appart from maybe Jez will be back.

    personally I would think Jez Butterworth and ___________ (insert a second writerhere like Mcquarrie or Glroy I hope) seems the most likely but really we don't know and since writers are usually announced before directors I think this should be our first line of speculation... then directors then locations and cast etc.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,949
    A Sorkin screenplay would have more dialogue and fewer action sequences. And people thought SF was wordy!
  • Posts: 7,653
    echo wrote: »
    A Sorkin screenplay would have more dialogue and fewer action sequences. And people thought SF was wordy!

    Wordy is not always worthy, I find Sorkins words far better constructed than the average last two 007 Mendes outings.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,949
    It would be a weird assignment for Sorkin. You just know Babs and MGW would bring back P&W to work on the action sequences, and they'd bring all of their good and bad writing habits (shoehorning in Fleming) to it as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.