RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News



Message


Deviation -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (29/10/2012 2:15:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r


quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

Oh and...

quote:

Hey, have you seen the new episode of Community, guys?

Jeff and Britta flirt, Abed makes pop culture references and Annie does something cute!

IT'S SO DIFFERENT AND UNIQUE TO ALL THE OTHER EPISODES.



I responded to this in my previous post. And you've never seen a single episode of Community! I have watched every single Bond film before stating my opinion on the franchise. There's a difference here.


It was a moronic response, because the comparison is totally valid and what you said can be said about the Bond series.

Oh and I don't believe you for one second that you've seen all the Bond series. Not. For. One. Second.




FoxDhoj -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (29/10/2012 3:18:08 AM)

Bit shakey about Nolan or Boyle helming the next one. Keep any Bourne affiliates away - unfortunately that includes Paul Greengrass, and Tony Gilroy (thank god - Bourne Legacy was awful now I think about it). David Fincher could work but I'm worried he would make this way too dark. My mind just keeps coming back to Mendes, and more to the point, Deakins - because I just got back and thought it was the best Bond this side of maybe the early 80's, in my honest opinion (of the Bond's I've seen of course - and bearing in mind my nostalgia is more Connery than Moore/Daltry...and for the record, I think Craig was the perfect choice and NOT Robbie effing Williams).

Whoever mentioned the Coens is right, they really would not work with this. Neither would PT Anderson or anyone of that ilk. Someone like Alfonso Cuaron or Alejandro Inarritu could be an interesting choice, but I really can't tell from here. Please not Marc Forster - I'm sure EVERYONE would agree. Soderbergh perhaps? Kathryn Bigelow - or is she too American for this kinda thing? Tomas Alfredson maybe? Though he's done British for good with Tinker Tailor I'm sure, plus he's a very stylistic and particular auteur. Just gonna shoot some names out: Anton Corbijn, John Hillcoat, Ron Howard, Michael Winterbottom? Scorsese? I'm just throwing names at the keyboard now, I do apologise.

Nolan and Boyle are the ones that probably 'make sense' if the studios are being greedy, but look at their recent records and they're becoming a little too Hollywood when Mendes has just shaken off the memory of a Pierce Brosnan-style Bond (despite them still being a guilty pleasure, there's nothing that outstanding about those films really? Right?). Nolan in particular would be at the perfect position to jump onto this, but I'm sure people are hesitant - off the back of a franchise he just dominated, he could have dollar sign eyes and still be high from the praise, and I'm not sure he listens to the criticisms. I'm also unsure somebody young could helm these films as Mendes just upped the bar completely, and it would be dreadful if someone like Duncan Jones stepped in and it was an Alien 3 moment for him. Although look what that did to Fincher's career. If Fincher was an option, maybe he could squeeze his second of the Millennium Trilogy in there and keep up a good track record with Daniel Craig? This franchise is so hot right now, and I'm wondering why Mendes is bowing out after such an excellent job.




Wild about Wilder -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (29/10/2012 10:47:46 AM)

As much as I'd like to see it probably wont be Nolan for the next 2 now as he likes to have so much control over the script beforehand.




Nicky C -> Cool. Why not? (29/10/2012 11:35:13 AM)

I, for one, really liked that QoS started where Casino Royale ended. I like the idea of each Bond having their own arc as well as their own style. I think it's cool. Been watching a LOT of Bond on SKY 007 HD and it's clear to see that, while the Bonds themselves have all been unique and different, some of the stories have suffered from 'Identikit' plotlines. There's been a lot of recycling in the last 50 years so I look forward to anything fresh.




Ramsay7 -> PURVIS AND WADE - SERIOUSLY??? (29/10/2012 11:49:52 AM)

Why on earth are you hoping those clowns will be involved again? Left to their own devices they wrote some of the worst Bond films ever! Die Another Day and The World Is Not Enough - utter rubbish. They needed Haggis and Fleming to help them with Casino Royale and Logan must be the reason that Skyfall was so good. Get those idiots as far away from Bond as possible.




musht -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (29/10/2012 11:57:17 AM)



quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

Hey, have you seen the new episode of Community, guys?

Jeff and Britta flirt, Abed makes pop culture references and Annie does something cute!

IT'S SO DIFFERENT AND UNIQUE TO ALL THE OTHER EPISODES.




I was reading the Bond bating like this [sm=happy07.gif] and then I read the this and I was like [sm=893Grumpy-thumb.gif]




Dannybohy -> RE: RE: (29/10/2012 11:59:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

Oh fuck Nolan. For god's sake, does nobody know any other directors anymore?


I want to have your babies. I also want a t-shirt with "Oh Fuck Nolan" on it, perhaps with a picture of Batman flipping the bird. :)




marlowe9 -> Exciting! (29/10/2012 11:52:33 PM)

First things first: Yep, this sadly means no Christopher Nolan while Craig is Bond. Anyone else think TDKR was a better Bond film than QoS? But Bond is doing fine without Nolan, as much as Craig and he are a perfect tonal fit.
This is exciting news! I was hoping the next two films would deal with Quantum and I can only imagine that'll be one of the major plotlines in Bonds 24 and 25. It'll be a nice ending to Craig's arc (the fact that he *has* an arc is awesome enough) if he chooses not to do 26. So Craig's five will be very directly comparable to Connery's five (Diamonds does not exist, *ahem*). Presumably a two-film arc entails more of the character-based and well-developed plotting we've enjoyed in Casino Royale and Skyfall (QoS is character-based, to its credit).
The faith shown in Logan suggests he's a big reason Skyfall is so awesome, but I'm cautious to be too optimistic because we shouldn't forget the contributions of Peter Morgan, Sam Mendes and, yes, Purvis and Wade. I guess B'n'W want Mendes back to direct? There's never been a perfectly successful back-to-back filming experiment (the Salkinds came close in the 70s; Zemeckis closest with BTTF), so I hope they shy away from that in favour of two directly connected but independently made films - even if that costs them more money.




marlowe9 -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 12:04:52 AM)

The Bond Director rules are: a) has to be a Commonwealth director, b) has to be name-under-the-title, c) has to understand Britishness, d) has to be a fan, etc. Unofficial rule e) has to be a hack at heart - the producers like to have control over the franchise! Although to B'n'W's credit they've picked arty choices for Craig so far and really let them put their stamp on Bond, which I think is how they're keeping things fresh. Forster was an exception to rule a) and Mendes is an almost-exception to rule b) because he's won an Oscar and is recognised by a large section of the audience for his work outside of Bond, so they could feasibly do a first and hire a *really* big name director for Bond. But if we assume Mendes won't return (I think he will; money speaks louder than words), remember the rules...


quote:

ORIGINAL: FoxDhoj

Bit shakey about Nolan or Boyle helming the next one. Keep any Bourne affiliates away - unfortunately that includes Paul Greengrass, and Tony Gilroy (thank god - Bourne Legacy was awful now I think about it). David Fincher could work
Whoever mentioned the Coens is right, they really would not work with this. Neither would PT Anderson or anyone of that ilk. Someone like Alfonso Cuaron or Alejandro Inarritu could be an interesting choice, but I really can't tell from here. Please not Marc Forster - I'm sure EVERYONE would agree. Soderbergh perhaps? Kathryn Bigelow - or is she too American for this kinda thing? Tomas Alfredson maybe? Though he's done British for good with Tinker Tailor I'm sure, plus he's a very stylistic and particular auteur. Just gonna shoot some names out: Anton Corbijn, John Hillcoat, Ron Howard, Michael Winterbottom? Scorsese? I'm just throwing names at the keyboard now, I do apologise.




Deviation -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 12:18:06 AM)

He has to be a Commonwealth director? If that's true then that's a shame because Kim Jee-Won would have been perfect for a Bond movie.

Also, the Marc Foster thing is a bit unfair, there were a bit of problems in QoS and they weren't just on him.




MonsterCat -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 1:28:58 AM)

Why does it have to be a commonwealth director? Is that actually a thing?

Paul Greengrass wouldn't do it at all, I think. He slated Bond in an interview around the time of Bourne Ultimatum's cinema release.




marlowe9 -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 9:07:57 AM)

I think being Commonwealth has a lot to do with rule c), understanding Britishness.

Haha Jee-Woon Kim's would be the first 18-cert Bond, right? [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

He has to be a Commonwealth director? If that's true then that's a shame because Kim Jee-Won would have been perfect for a Bond movie.

Also, the Marc Foster thing is a bit unfair, there were a bit of problems in QoS and they weren't just on him.





Dannybohy -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 3:33:59 PM)

I'm not a great Bond fan, not a hater either as I'm happy to watch each new movie just incase its actually a good movie. I kind of agree with Vader, that they are all pretty much the same, hence I would never watch any of them over again. I would sooner watch the Bourne Trilogy through again, than sit and watch more that one Bond movie. Except for Living Daylights, but only because its both a great movie and the best Bond movie, IMO of course.




rich -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 7:26:41 PM)

Back on topic away from that type of gibberish.... why a two parter? Really bad idea.




DancingClown -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 8:26:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat
Paul Greengrass wouldn't do it at all, I think. He slated Bond in an interview around the time of Bourne Ultimatum's cinema release.


And yet, oddly, he was seen at the Skyfall premiere.

On a side note am I the only one who likes Quantum of Solace?




manwihtheplan -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 10:17:38 PM)

Bond better watch his back. Disney will want James Bond next! Hurr Hoo.. Hurr Hooo..

That's my Darth Vader impression. Good innit? [:D]




Scruffybobby -> RE: Bond should take down Quantum for GOOD! (30/10/2012 10:53:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat
Paul Greengrass wouldn't do it at all, I think. He slated Bond in an interview around the time of Bourne Ultimatum's cinema release.


And yet, oddly, he was seen at the Skyfall premiere.

On a side note am I the only one who likes Quantum of Solace?


I liked it. And I would like to see the Quantum plot threads picked up. It would be a shame to build them up to discard them completely




Toby Dammit -> (31/10/2012 9:48:57 PM)

Could be interesting. Fleming himself used a story arc for On Her Majesty's Secret Service and You Only Lived Twice (and The Man With the Golden Gun to an extent), but Broccoli and Saltzman fudged that when they filmed them in the wrong order.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.046875