Who Should Direct Bond 23?
Colonel Shatner
Chavtastic Bristol, BritainPosts: 574MI6 Agent
While Quantum of Solace garnered more mixed reviews and Marc Foster has been called into question over he artistic decisions concerining the Bourne style action scenes, who do you think could do a good job with Bond 23?
My top choices are Ridley Scott, Roger Spottiswoode, and Alfonso Cuarón.
My top choices are Ridley Scott, Roger Spottiswoode, and Alfonso Cuarón.
'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...'
Comments
He's shown he can do it all with Y Tu Mama Tambien (Drama/Comedy), Harry Potter (Fantasy) and Children of Men (Action).
There's also that jaw dropping action scene near the end of children of Men thats like the anti-Marc Foster scene..basically just one long take and all the action plays out in front of the camera. Its a tremendous bit of filmmaking.
He's also a very innovative and edgy director so he would keep things fresh and interesting. Would be a really great choice.
Really good director
He would be a good shout if Bond 23 was a FRWL style thriller (which is what I hope).
And, as above, I'd have no quibble with that choice either. Loved what he did with CR and Goldeneye.
a) Ridley Scott, or
b) Ridley Scott.
Failing that, (c) Ridley Scott.
It's hopefully non controversial to assert that the particular dynamic between EON and Bond means that an 'Auteur' type of Director is likely to struggle within the parameters of a Bond film as they are unlikely to be afforded enough room to fully develop their vision.
If an 'Auteur' like Nolan was to be allowed the room then he would be a great choice. If not I would be happy to get Campbell back on board as he is 'a safe pair of hands', has worked effectively with the Babs & Michael show, and has delivered the goods twice.
Michael Mann,
- Christofer Nolan
- Sam Mendes
- Peter Weir
- Mike Newell
- Alfonso Cuaron
- Fernando Meirilles
7. LALD 8. TWINE 9. Skyfall 10. AVTAK 11. CR 12. TLD 13. YOLT
14. TMWTGG 15. Moonraker 16. TSWLM 17. Thunderball 18. FRWL
19. Dr. No 20. DAF 21. LTK 22. DAD 23. QoS 24. Spectre 25. NTTD
Kevin Reynolds, known more for his period pieces with action and romance, could have the stones to do a good Bond film. He knows where to put people, and he knows how to get good pictures.
I was originally going to suggest Frank Marshall because I liked his work on directing Congo but hot damn if he didn't produce the Bourne movies. I never knew that until just now. I'm not sure I'm ready for that bridge.
Karyn Kusama. Seriously. If you take ego out of the equation for the movie Æon Flux and just look at the straight-up cinematography, costume design and originality, you have something really remarkable.
Here's my NO list:
•Michael Bay
•David "I directed nothing but Playboy videos until I directed Inspector Gadget and dropped off the face of the earth" Kellogg
•Roland Emmerich
•Uwe Boll (he's done enough damage)
Cuarón and Mexico go hand in hand. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but just expect it if you have him doing a Bond film. He couldn't even resist using the Tenochtitlan symbol in Prisoner of Azkaban.
One I'll add to the discourse, for your review, is Tom Tykwer. His latest movie ("The International") reads like a Bond epic, and his stylistic instincts and intrepid filmmaking would be a breath of fresh air. Anyone who saw "Run Lola Run" or "Heaven" knows he can direct pacy movies with a pulse. I would love that.
My guess is that Bond 23 will return the series to its 1960s-inspired roots, meaning we'll get that sense of sweep, wonder, and breezy fun that was basically short-handed in most of the Bond films after. He also seems to understand how to evoke villainy. Sergi Lopez's captain, for instance, is exactly the sort of mannered brute that makes for a good James Bond villain.
Other directors for consideration include Roger Donaldson, whose "The Bank Job" was one of the few period movies I've seen that actually seem to be taking place in the time period, Peter Weir, Paul Verhoeven (don't laugh, his "Black Book" was pretty solid, and its lead would make a good Bond "girl"), John McTiernan (assuming he's not in jail) and, a longshot, Niki Caro, who could bring out the emotions if a second unit could direct the action scenes . . . in fact, given that Barbara Broccoli was the driving force behind Daniel Craig's hire, I wouldn't mind also seeing a woman director take a commanding presence to see if she could understand better the elements that make Bond movies meaningfully sexy.
Shane Black did better than I expected with "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang," which had a faux Ian Fleming motif going on, so he might be someone to consider . . . perhaps, perhaps not . . . .
I'm not opposed to Nolan, though I find his actual directing style rather plain and his fight staging/editing almost as incomprehensible as Forster's. He's aided mostly by the subject matter, but he does co-write decent scripts and get good performances. Martin Campbell is slightly better than that, especially now that he's returned to more traditional directing techniques, but I think it's too early to bring him back. I wouldn't lobby for Ridley Scott, whose reliances on the shaky cam and staccato editing, while not as manic as Forster's, is still trite. Tarantino might be tempted to turn Bond into a trashy 70s redux with a silicone-based brigade of plain but Amazonian women whose bare feet would become the slavish focus.
What we need is someone who is both capable of the large vision a Bond film requires as well as is an actor's director--one who sees the opportunity to evoke strong performances rather than simply take us through the formulaic motions. That's tough since so many of the American directors, in particular, seem to be more focused on physical explosions than emotional ones, and the latest wave of young British directors just love the closeup and unabashedly spastic camera.
But if you look at del Toro's list of projects I wonder if he will find time to film bond until Craig hangs up his tux for good.
Doubtful that this would happen, but that would be a great idea. If not, I'd love to see the producers pull out all the stops to get Chris Nolan, he has expressed interest.
Still, Nolan would be an amazing choice. I love his realist style, and as a rabid and obsessive Batman fan, he's already got my vote...the way he turned something gothic into a dark but modern story is amazing.
YEAH!
I thought Nolan's Batman Begins had slightly more confusing and laboured action scenese than Quantum of Solace to be honest.
But you may also have a lot of interesting candid conversations between the characters, not to mention a lot of voyeuristic cinematography. You can expect to see a lot of dirty, weather-worn scenery. Most importantly, you would get a splash of shocking, stark violence erupt out of nowhere. (But honestly, I'd prefer to not hear 007 talking about what McDonald's across the globe call their food.)
I certainly hope they can resist the temptation to go overboard with that kind of thing (again
Oops...that last one is mine... :v
Re: potential directors...it's the same old paradox: the industry's leading action film directors won't willingly submit to Eon's yolk round their necks. Maybe that's changing, though...Marc Forster, though not an action director, claims to have been given relatively free reign to make the picture he wanted to make.
Either Tony or Ridley Scott would do a fine job. I would've loved to have seen John Frankenheimer take a crack at one...or William Friedkin, in his prime.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM