To me comparing Mendes to Nolan is comparing apples to oranges. Dont get me wrong, Mendes is good (obviously) but Nolan is incredible.
Then again EON probably feels they know best and to a degree that might be true. However giving control to Nolan is like giving Ken Block the keys to your car, only awesome things can happen )
Best,
Stefan
R. ClemensKeeping The British End Up!Posts: 16MI6 Agent
We could safely say however that the fantasy a faction of the Bond fandom has about Christopher Nolan at the helm is that it's simply a fantasy that won't come by. Nolan will want full control, and Eon won't give it to him, so it's a no go, methinks.
I dont know why people keep repeating this line that Eon wouldn't allow Nolan full control. Every movie he has put out is pure gold, you do not have to like the script or story. However the visual experience is fantastic and makes you feel part of the film.
I mean, the first 15 min of The Dark Knight was some of the best film ever. If you had a pulse it was beating hard.
Nolan would make the best PTS of all time IMO. -{
Best,
Stefan
That's a matter of cinematography, not the entirety of the film, however. His films might look good and all, but I happen to be one of those who has never been impressed by his films. Sure, I could sing the praises of Batman Begins and tell you it was an outstanding film in every way, but Nolan's way of handling action isn't on par with, let's just say, what a solid action film director would pull off. There are plenty of cinematographers, in my honest opinion, who could blow Nolan out of the water.
I think I happen to be in the minority who has never liked The Dark Knight, let alone its successor. Nolan is great about showcasing the conflicts and anxiety of the human mind and make sensational psychological thrillers, but that certainly isn't for Bond. And it never should be, where a non-linear story attempts to go back and forth like a combination puzzle. For thrillers that combine decent action, Pierre Morel did a better job for an adrenaline-driven high octane pulse-bumping spirit out of 2008's Taken.
We could safely say however that the fantasy a faction of the Bond fandom has about Christopher Nolan at the helm is that it's simply a fantasy that won't come by. Nolan will want full control, and Eon won't give it to him, so it's a no go, methinks.
I dont know why people keep repeating this line that Eon wouldn't allow Nolan full control. Every movie he has put out is pure gold, you do not have to like the script or story. However the visual experience is fantastic and makes you feel part of the film.
I mean, the first 15 min of The Dark Knight was some of the best film ever. If you had a pulse it was beating hard.
Nolan would make the best PTS of all time IMO. -{
Best,
Stefan
That's a matter of cinematography, not the entirety of the film, however. His films might look good and all, but I happen to be one of those who has never been impressed by his films. Sure, I could sing the praises of Batman Begins and tell you it was an outstanding film in every way, but Nolan's way of handling action isn't on par with, let's just say, what a solid action film director would pull off. There are plenty of cinematographers, in my honest opinion, who could blow Nolan out of the water.
I think I happen to be in the minority who has never liked The Dark Knight, let alone its successor. Nolan is great about showcasing the conflicts and anxiety of the human mind and make sensational psychological thrillers, but that certainly isn't for Bond. And it never should be, where a non-linear story attempts to go back and forth like a combination puzzle. For thrillers that combine decent action, Pierre Morel did a better job for an adrenaline-driven high octane pulse-bumping spirit out of 2008's Taken.
Just my two cents.
Nolan's films have cinematography that is second to none in current mainstream cinema. Have you seen Dunkirk? The cinematography in that film is stunning. It's a lock for the oscar. The cinematography in Inception was also brilliant and won the oscar. Wally Pfister and Nolan are a lethal combination
R. ClemensKeeping The British End Up!Posts: 16MI6 Agent
I dont know why people keep repeating this line that Eon wouldn't allow Nolan full control. Every movie he has put out is pure gold, you do not have to like the script or story. However the visual experience is fantastic and makes you feel part of the film.
I mean, the first 15 min of The Dark Knight was some of the best film ever. If you had a pulse it was beating hard.
Nolan would make the best PTS of all time IMO. -{
Best,
Stefan
That's a matter of cinematography, not the entirety of the film, however. His films might look good and all, but I happen to be one of those who has never been impressed by his films. Sure, I could sing the praises of Batman Begins and tell you it was an outstanding film in every way, but Nolan's way of handling action isn't on par with, let's just say, what a solid action film director would pull off. There are plenty of cinematographers, in my honest opinion, who could blow Nolan out of the water.
I think I happen to be in the minority who has never liked The Dark Knight, let alone its successor. Nolan is great about showcasing the conflicts and anxiety of the human mind and make sensational psychological thrillers, but that certainly isn't for Bond. And it never should be, where a non-linear story attempts to go back and forth like a combination puzzle. For thrillers that combine decent action, Pierre Morel did a better job for an adrenaline-driven high octane pulse-bumping spirit out of 2008's Taken.
Just my two cents.
Nolan's films have cinematography that is second to none in current mainstream cinema. Have you seen Dunkirk? The cinematography in that film is stunning. It's a lock for the oscar. The cinematography in Inception was also brilliant and won the oscar. Wally Pfister and Nolan are a lethal combination
No, I haven't seen Dunkirk, so can't speak for it. But, a friend of mine went to see it and told me it contained no difference in comparison to Nolan's previous efforts. But, I've seen Inception, and conceptually, it's beyond fascinating. I mean that as a compliment. But, I would stand by my statement that his way of handling action really isn't engaging and focuses more on atmosphere than the action. Pretty much whatever Mendes attempted with his Bond outings. So, I won't vouch for Nolan doing Bond, if at all. He handles psychological thrillers very well, but action isn't what he excels at. He might, but I get the feeling he doesn't want to.
Nolan's films have cinematography that is second to none in current mainstream cinema. Have you seen Dunkirk? The cinematography in that film is stunning. It's a lock for the oscar. The cinematography in Inception was also brilliant and won the oscar. Wally Pfister and Nolan are a lethal combination
The Dunkirk cinematographer wasn't Pfister, though - it was the guy who shot Spectre. Proving no one is a sure thing.
We could safely say however that the fantasy a faction of the Bond fandom has about Christopher Nolan at the helm is that it's simply a fantasy that won't come by. Nolan will want full control, and Eon won't give it to him, so it's a no go, methinks.
I dont know why people keep repeating this line that Eon wouldn't allow Nolan full control. Every movie he has put out is pure gold, you do not have to like the script or story. However the visual experience is fantastic and makes you feel part of the film.
I mean, the first 15 min of The Dark Knight was some of the best film ever. If you had a pulse it was beating hard.
Nolan would make the best PTS of all time IMO. -{
Best,
Stefan
The Bond franchise is the totality of EON's existence. They're terrified that if they turn over artistic control to any director, including Nolan, he will do something to irreparably damage the franchise. Unfortunately great art is never accomplished without taking chances but EON has never been about great art.
Ironically, EON took the most chances in the first few movies, but at that point it had little to lose.
We could safely say however that the fantasy a faction of the Bond fandom has about Christopher Nolan at the helm is that it's simply a fantasy that won't come by. Nolan will want full control, and Eon won't give it to him, so it's a no go, methinks.
I dont know why people keep repeating this line that Eon wouldn't allow Nolan full control. Every movie he has put out is pure gold, you do not have to like the script or story. However the visual experience is fantastic and makes you feel part of the film.
I mean, the first 15 min of The Dark Knight was some of the best film ever. If you had a pulse it was beating hard.
Nolan would make the best PTS of all time IMO. -{
Best,
Stefan
The Bond franchise is the totality of EON's existence. They're terrified that if they turn over artistic control to any director, including Nolan, he will do something to irreparably damage the franchise. Unfortunately great art is never accomplished without taking chances but EON has never been about great art.
They took bold risks in terms of tone and casting with CR
Ironically, EON took the most chances in the first few movies, but at that point it had little to lose.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I have read that Nolan would only consider doing a Bond if he could introduce a new actor. I'd be surprised if Eon don't take him up on this but agree that he'd want more control than most ( a bit like JJ Abrams with SW TFA) and would most likely want Tom Hardy as Bond. I'm not against this but would be concerned at TH potentially debuting as Bond aged 45 in 2022 (60th anniversary - an opportunity that Eon will not want to miss). Unless Nolan or Hardy or both were committed to at least three quick-fire two-year-cycle releases then I'd be against this idea - a Bond actor should ideally star in a minimum of three films imho.
With all that in mind, I think the stage is set for a less famous director for B25 and think the names being rumoured are probably accurate. It is a shame that Craig and Mendes apparently fell out as we could do worse than have Mendes back.
I might be remembering it wrong, but didn't Nolan say he would only direct Bond if he could start something new, not just continuing someone else's story? That doesn't have to mean a new actor. I think it does mean he won't do Bond25, since that one will probably continue the Blofeld story. But if someone else does Bond26 as a standalone story, Nolan could do the next one and have his own story.
I'm also not sure Nolan would insist on Tom Hardy. While Hardy had been in many of Nolan's movies, Nolan has worked with several leading men and will do so in the future too.
Number24, I agree with your points about Nolan and Hardy. James Bond Radio made a great point about Hardy - they said he's now perhaps too famous to start playing Bond but Eon may feel that at this point (post 2019) they will need a name after Craig's success (perhaps a shorter term big name then afterwards reverting to a less well known actor for Bond 8 in the distant future).
Nolan's films have cinematography that is second to none in current mainstream cinema. Have you seen Dunkirk? The cinematography in that film is stunning. It's a lock for the oscar. The cinematography in Inception was also brilliant and won the oscar. Wally Pfister and Nolan are a lethal combination
The Dunkirk cinematographer wasn't Pfister, though - it was the guy who shot Spectre. Proving no one is a sure thing.
Yes Van Hoytema did Dunkirk and I disagree. I think Spectre is shot magnificently.
That's a matter of cinematography, not the entirety of the film, however. His films might look good and all, but I happen to be one of those who has never been impressed by his films. Sure, I could sing the praises of Batman Begins and tell you it was an outstanding film in every way, but Nolan's way of handling action isn't on par with, let's just say, what a solid action film director would pull off. There are plenty of cinematographers, in my honest opinion, who could blow Nolan out of the water.
I think I happen to be in the minority who has never liked The Dark Knight, let alone its successor. Nolan is great about showcasing the conflicts and anxiety of the human mind and make sensational psychological thrillers, but that certainly isn't for Bond. And it never should be, where a non-linear story attempts to go back and forth like a combination puzzle. For thrillers that combine decent action, Pierre Morel did a better job for an adrenaline-driven high octane pulse-bumping spirit out of 2008's Taken.
Just my two cents.
Nolan's films have cinematography that is second to none in current mainstream cinema. Have you seen Dunkirk? The cinematography in that film is stunning. It's a lock for the oscar. The cinematography in Inception was also brilliant and won the oscar. Wally Pfister and Nolan are a lethal combination
No, I haven't seen Dunkirk, so can't speak for it. But, a friend of mine went to see it and told me it contained no difference in comparison to Nolan's previous efforts. But, I've seen Inception, and conceptually, it's beyond fascinating. I mean that as a compliment. But, I would stand by my statement that his way of handling action really isn't engaging and focuses more on atmosphere than the action. Pretty much whatever Mendes attempted with his Bond outings. So, I won't vouch for Nolan doing Bond, if at all. He handles psychological thrillers very well, but action isn't what he excels at. He might, but I get the feeling he doesn't want to.
You should see it. The framing, colouring and camera angles are incredible. Also the dogfights sequences in the film are very exciting and I would argue are evidence that he can handle action scenes quite well
Dunkirk is beautifully shot. I was fortunate to have seen it in IMAX 70 and while the IMAX theatre I saw it in wasn't quite the BFI IMAX in London it was still a very impressive visual and sound experience. SPECTRE might disappoint in many areas but cinematography is not one. There may be writers, actors and directors who feel they are too good for Bond, but not Cinematographers. The Bond films seem to draw great DP's like flies to honey. From Ted Moore to Roger Deakins and Hoyte Van Hoytema, Bond films are like a who's who of DP's.
Here's an interesting name that just popped into my head... how about Tom Ford?
All else aside, Ford is still a (relatively) novice director. I'm not sure he would have the experience to helm such a mammoth production, despite how many more experienced people he might have to support him.
R. ClemensKeeping The British End Up!Posts: 16MI6 Agent
I'm all for Paul McGuigan. The very best episodes of Sherlock were directed by him.
I think the last good, successfull movie Renny Harlin made was "The long kiss goodnight" in 1996. If you want a Nordic director I would say Susanne Bier and Morten Tyldum have far better chances, but I prefer them to be British.
Indeed. He's usually reliable. I think he would be great, although I do have a slight fear of the Auter with Bond. It's been a mixed bag so far but Boyle could be fantastic as long as he accepts that he's making a 'Bond film' As stated it's all down to the script. The other Danny is going to want a strong script this time for his last outing so I'm hopeful.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
I wonder what the new script/story by Hodges means? It's natural to think it's not a direct sequel to SPECTRE if it's a new direction as reported.
This could be the first Bond movie since Tomorrow Never Dies not written by Purvis & Wade.
suspect that there will not be much lamenting the absence of P&W
Yeah if it's true that P&W will not be involved then I can only see that as a good thing. They've probably exhausted themselves writing Bond script after Bond script the last two decades. A new writer with fresh ideas could mean taking Bond off of the auto-pilot that a lot of P&W's scripts were.
One has to wonder what Hodge came up with to get Boyle, who said he would never do another "big" film after The Beach much less a Bond film, stoked to do Bond 25, along with MGM, EON and Craig on board. If Boyle does direct Bond 25, I wonder if we will see French actor Vincent Cassel who has worked with Boyle previously cast as a villain? IMO, Cassel would be a great Bond villain. He's tall, can be very scary and charming with exotic looks and great at the physical stuff (has a martial arts background). Oh and Cassel used to be married to Monica Bellucci. They should also cast Rosario Dawson who was at one time involved with Boyle. That would make for an interesting set dynamic. )
Comments
Then again EON probably feels they know best and to a degree that might be true. However giving control to Nolan is like giving Ken Block the keys to your car, only awesome things can happen
Best,
Stefan
I think I happen to be in the minority who has never liked The Dark Knight, let alone its successor. Nolan is great about showcasing the conflicts and anxiety of the human mind and make sensational psychological thrillers, but that certainly isn't for Bond. And it never should be, where a non-linear story attempts to go back and forth like a combination puzzle. For thrillers that combine decent action, Pierre Morel did a better job for an adrenaline-driven high octane pulse-bumping spirit out of 2008's Taken.
Just my two cents.
Nolan's films have cinematography that is second to none in current mainstream cinema. Have you seen Dunkirk? The cinematography in that film is stunning. It's a lock for the oscar. The cinematography in Inception was also brilliant and won the oscar. Wally Pfister and Nolan are a lethal combination
The Dunkirk cinematographer wasn't Pfister, though - it was the guy who shot Spectre. Proving no one is a sure thing.
The Bond franchise is the totality of EON's existence. They're terrified that if they turn over artistic control to any director, including Nolan, he will do something to irreparably damage the franchise. Unfortunately great art is never accomplished without taking chances but EON has never been about great art.
Ironically, EON took the most chances in the first few movies, but at that point it had little to lose.
With all that in mind, I think the stage is set for a less famous director for B25 and think the names being rumoured are probably accurate. It is a shame that Craig and Mendes apparently fell out as we could do worse than have Mendes back.
I'm also not sure Nolan would insist on Tom Hardy. While Hardy had been in many of Nolan's movies, Nolan has worked with several leading men and will do so in the future too.
Yes Van Hoytema did Dunkirk and I disagree. I think Spectre is shot magnificently.
You should see it. The framing, colouring and camera angles are incredible. Also the dogfights sequences in the film are very exciting and I would argue are evidence that he can handle action scenes quite well
All else aside, Ford is still a (relatively) novice director. I'm not sure he would have the experience to helm such a mammoth production, despite how many more experienced people he might have to support him.
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/885347-martin-campbell-to-direct-treasure-of-ali-baba-the-40-thieves-movie
Twitter: @mybudgetbond1
Indeed. He's usually reliable. I think he would be great, although I do have a slight fear of the Auter with Bond. It's been a mixed bag so far but Boyle could be fantastic as long as he accepts that he's making a 'Bond film' As stated it's all down to the script. The other Danny is going to want a strong script this time for his last outing so I'm hopeful.
This could be the first Bond movie since Tomorrow Never Dies not written by Purvis & Wade.
suspect that there will not be much lamenting the absence of P&W