Paul Haggis In Talks With Universal For Spy Film Franchise

Paul Haggis In Talks With Universal For Spy Film Franchise

http://thefilmstage.com/2011/06/25/paul-haggis-in-talks-with-universal-for-spy-film-franchise/?utm_source=wordtwit&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wordtwit

After his Russell Crowe actioner The Next Three Days somewhat underperformed at the box office late last year, Paul Haggis seems to be mostly sticking to writing at the moment, with one script for Michael Mann having been completed, in addition to a remake of a Spanish film being in the pipeline (although he may also direct). 24 Frames says that he’s in talks for another screenwriting project at Universal, one that would take him into the world of espionage.

That movie will be a film adaptation of the Gabriel Allon series of books, which have been penned by author Daniel Silva. The character of Allon is a former Mossad agent who “avenged the murder of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics earlier in his career,” but has retired to a life of art restoration. He’s still active, with him being asked to help out with the occasional assignment, many of which deal with “terrorists with ties to radical Islamic groups.”

The development of the project is still very early, and therefore we don’t yet know about Haggis directing in addition to writing — that is, if a deal even goes through. The plan on Universal’s part is to turn this into a franchise, a decision that’s said to be partially influenced by the success of the Bourne series, one that they will try to keep fresh by semi-rebooting it with Jeremy Renner in the lead. The main role is described as being a “meaty” one for an actor in their late 30′s or early 40′s, but no potential candidates have been mentioned as of now.

There are currently ten books in the series, with an eleventh to be published next month — they have plenty of room to make a franchise in a different medium. It hasn’t been revealed what this would be based off of, but there’s speculation that it could be an adaptation of the first novel in the series, The Kill Artist, or a combination of several installments. I could see them making the first book the main basis of the first movie – to set up the character and his history – while also taking a plotline from a later novel, in an attempt to mix things up a bit.

It’s a shame that something like this – a book series with a potentially interesting lead who goes on politically-tinged adventures – would get the movie treatment by Paul Haggis. While I don’t think that he’s the stunningly bad screenwriter that some others make him out to be, I feel that his work is somewhat lacking in the storytelling and (ahem) subtlety department. Just like with the Michael Mann film, his involvement in anything immediately makes me less interested in that project. If he can just stick strictly to the novels – which I admittedly have not read and thus have no knowledge of – then there might be some more hope to have in this whole thing.

Is Paul Haggis someone you want to adapt this series? Have you read any of the books, and do you think they could work as films?

I met with a producer friend of mine the other night and he showed me something that seems to suggest Haggis will be directing again soon. Not sure that I can really say much more than this at the moment, but it certainly looks that way.

Will not watch.

Quote :

After his Russell Crowe actioner The Next Three Days somewhat underperformed at the box office late last year,

This is a good sign. Maybe he'll go away after a few more flops.

Actually I read one of Silva's Gabriel Allon books. It was a good read.

====The character would adapt well to the screen. He's pretty lethal. But there are no shortage of espionage books on shelves these days. Most would make good movies if done right.

I'd like to see a film version of The Cobra, the most recent Frederick Forsythe novel. It was a great read with a very unique plotline. ie What would happen if the U.S. government was able to take the gloves off and get carte blanche to destroy the cocaine cartels. Well that's what happens in the Cobra.
USA President gives clandestine approval for the USA to throw all its military and intelligence might against the cartels, in a bid to destroy supply.
Anyway I digress, the Allon books would be worth doing. Why not?

deleted due to pointless double post

danslittlefinger wrote:

Paul Haggis In Talks With Universal For Spy Film Franchise

It’s a shame that something like this – a book series with a potentially interesting lead who goes on politically-tinged adventures – would get the movie treatment by Paul Haggis.

Is Paul Haggis someone you want to adapt this series? Have you read any of the books, and do you think they could work as films?

Haggis' involvement in anything makes me less interested in seeing it or reading it. I realize this will fall on deaf ears because of the insular nature of Hollywood; they're in love with the smell of their own farts. I am tired of the type of writer/director that Haggis not only is, but represents; a constant whiner of how bad America is, and how much better and more tolerant and progressive the rest of the world is. I don't like some of what he did with Bond, but I am just a yokel that lives in "flyover country"/The Bible Belt, so what do I know?

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I am tired of the type of writer/director that Haggis not only is, but represents; a constant whiner of how bad America is, and how much better and more tolerant and progressive the rest of the world is.

Yep, that's our Haggfish. Ivory tower liberal.

Getting the sense that most people don't like Haggis.

Aston_Martini wrote:

Getting the sense that most people don't like Haggis.

That's putting it mildly.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Aston_Martini wrote:

Getting the sense that most people don't like Haggis.

That's putting it mildly.

I'm getting the sense that people here don't like most of the people involved with the Bond films at all. Broccoli, Arnold, Purvis & Wade, Haggis...they've all received a fairly universal slagging. Sure, they're not perfect, but there seems to be something close to hatred for them on this site.

I'm sure had there been internet forums in the 1970s/80s, then Cubby, Moore, Glen, etc. would've also been crucified by a good share of fans. More importantly though, what else is there to do in a four-year gap between films?

GeneralGogol wrote:

I'm sure had there been internet forums in the 1970s/80s, then Cubby, Moore, Glen, etc. would've also been crucified by a good share of fans. More importantly though, what else is there to do in a four-year gap between films?

I don't know. Enjoy them? Most people here seem to be pretty happy being fucking miserable with what they've got at the moment. I came here because I like Bond films. I'm starting to wonder if I'm the only one.

Aston_Martini wrote:

GeneralGogol wrote:

I'm sure had there been internet forums in the 1970s/80s, then Cubby, Moore, Glen, etc. would've also been crucified by a good share of fans. More importantly though, what else is there to do in a four-year gap between films?

I don't know. Enjoy them? Most people here seem to be pretty happy being fucking miserable with what they've got at the moment. I came here because I like Bond films. I'm starting to wonder if I'm the only one.

You're not. Most of us like Bond films, just very few of us like the more recent ones.

Sharky wrote:

Aston_Martini wrote:

GeneralGogol wrote:

I'm sure had there been internet forums in the 1970s/80s, then Cubby, Moore, Glen, etc. would've also been crucified by a good share of fans. More importantly though, what else is there to do in a four-year gap between films?

I don't know. Enjoy them? Most people here seem to be pretty happy being fucking miserable with what they've got at the moment. I came here because I like Bond films. I'm starting to wonder if I'm the only one.

You're not. Most of us like Bond films, just very few of us like the more recent ones.

Yeah, I'm getting the sense of that! Personally, I liked Casino Royale. I wasn't as impressed by Quantum, but it has grown on me. I like Daniel's Bond and what he's doing with the character. I guess I don't really give a fuck about the politics.

Babs = poision. Haggfish is pretty demented but really he is symtomatic of the broader Babs rot.

Babs is the supervillain. All of the polluting of the franchise flows from Babs.

A fish rots from the head down.

Aston_Martini wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Aston_Martini wrote:

GeneralGogol wrote:

I'm sure had there been internet forums in the 1970s/80s, then Cubby, Moore, Glen, etc. would've also been crucified by a good share of fans. More importantly though, what else is there to do in a four-year gap between films?

I don't know. Enjoy them? Most people here seem to be pretty happy being fucking miserable with what they've got at the moment. I came here because I like Bond films. I'm starting to wonder if I'm the only one.

You're not. Most of us like Bond films, just very few of us like the more recent ones.

Yeah, I'm getting the sense of that! Personally, I liked Casino Royale. I wasn't as impressed by Quantum, but it has grown on me. I like Daniel's Bond and what he's doing with the character. I guess I don't really give a fuck about the politics.

If you have friends who feel as you do, by all means bring them aboard to balance things out a bit.

Personally, I love CR and am ambivalent about QOS, but fear the worst for B23. I won't condemn the Bond series to perdition, however, unless my direst predictions come true.

Yep CR is a good solid movie and very Bondian in many respects. Doesn't mean though, that it isn't tainted with Bab's subversive touches, because it is.

QoS is a Bond abomination though. That said its still watchable. Forster isn't an entirely incompetent film maker.

Because I am a rabid Bond fan I will watch both films regularly, but I do reserve the right to rank them a solid 21st and 22nd in my Bond film rankings. Somethings got to be 21 and 22 and these two films and their problems settle in very nicely at the botom, vis a vis what came before.
In my not so humble opinion of course

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Aston_Martini wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Aston_Martini wrote:

GeneralGogol wrote:

I'm sure had there been internet forums in the 1970s/80s, then Cubby, Moore, Glen, etc. would've also been crucified by a good share of fans. More importantly though, what else is there to do in a four-year gap between films?

I don't know. Enjoy them? Most people here seem to be pretty happy being fucking miserable with what they've got at the moment. I came here because I like Bond films. I'm starting to wonder if I'm the only one.

You're not. Most of us like Bond films, just very few of us like the more recent ones.

Yeah, I'm getting the sense of that! Personally, I liked Casino Royale. I wasn't as impressed by Quantum, but it has grown on me. I like Daniel's Bond and what he's doing with the character. I guess I don't really give a fuck about the politics.

If you have friends who feel as you do, by all means bring them aboard to balance things out a bit.

Personally, I love CR and am ambivalent about QOS, but fear the worst for B23. I won't condemn the Bond series to perdition, however, unless my direst predictions come true.

I guess that's just it, Ed. I'd rather remain positive and hopeful that it will be a great Bond movie, than slagging it off before it's even had a chance. Okay, Quantum wasn't great, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Bond 23 will follow that downward curve. I understand that a lot of people here seem to think Bond's gone too left wing and been feminized by Broccoli, but I didn't really pick up on that too much as he was fucking that girl for information or killing some traitor in cold blood. Seemed pretty ruthless and un PC if you ask me. Okay, Bond in the movies isn't Bond from the books. You might complain that Broccoli has done that, but look at Roger Moore in something like For Your Eyes Only. That's as close to Fleming's Bond as he ever got, and whilst I have a lot of time for Moore, you can't say his Bond was exactly ripped right from the pages of Fleming either. The fact is that Craig's Bond might not be Fleming's Bond, but then neither was Moore or Brosnan, and I'd take Craig's portrayal of Bond over either of them any day. I suppose what I'm saying is that rather than slag off the whole production team and blaming them for what Bond has become, can't we just embrace the good shit; Y'know, where he shags hot women and kills bad guys? Or has Broccoli/Wilson/David Arnold & Haggis made that impossible?

A_M,

My primary problems with QOS were not Bond's abstinence or his pacifism, they were with his anti-American and anti-Western attitudes on foreign policy. Also the film was shot through with politics far more than any Bond film in history. This was a very bad idea.

Who was to blame? Babs? Haggfish? Forster? Craig? We cannot know for certain, but with Babs putting Bond in a dress, and the hiring of Mendes and Harris I fear the dire innovations of QOS will become staples in B23. Again, I hope I'm wrong.

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

A_M,

My primary problems with QOS were not Bond's abstinence or his pacifism, they were with his anti-American and anti-Western attitudes on foreign policy. Also the film was shot through with politics far more than any Bond film in history. This was a very bad idea.

Who was to blame? Babs? Haggfish? Forster? Craig? We cannot know for certain, but with Babs putting Bond in a dress, and the hiring of Mendes and Harris I fear the dire innovations of QOS will become staples in B23. Again, I hope I'm wrong.

Yeah, I'd agree. The politics were a bit anti-American in Quantum, but I didn't get the sense that Bond himself is. I really don't see how Bond was anti-American or anti-Western in the film. Did I miss something he specifically says or does? Anyway, I think the political stuff was there as a kind of a reflection of the times, though. All Bond films are stuck in their eras. We'll look back on this era and say "yeah, that's the time when everybody blamed corporate America for everything." I don't see it as a massive problem. Look at 24 Season 2 when Jack was up against a shadowy corporate organization, much like Quantum. Did it make Jack un-American? No. Did the PC thing curb his ability to act? No. He cut some bloke's head off in ep.2. Point is, it has been particularly fashionable to have some kind of faceless corporate organization being the bad guy for a while now. A lot of people wanted the return of a SPECTRE like organization and I suppose Quantum is that. It fits in with the modern world idea of what an organization like that might be. Fuck, I can name a whole bunch of thrillers where the CIA or NSA are somehow betraying American standards and abusing their power. And that's when they're the main bad guys. In Quantum you had, what, one CIA agent who was trying to broker some kind of deal. Hardly makes America the bad guys. I know Broccoli hasn't got many supporters here. I suppose it's because she's a liberal woman and not a lot of right wing guys like them. Is she fucking up the franchise? Well, I don't like the idea of Craig in a dress, but I don't see that happening in Bond 23. Arnold isn't exactly John Barry, but he's not the fucking antichrist either. Craig's doing a good job, and whatever his politics, he's very popular Bond and his acting is probably the best we've had from a Bond. Mendes is an odd choice, I suppose, but I liked American Beauty and Road. Not actioners, but well shot. It's the second unit who does the action anyway, so he won't even have much to do with that. Harris is a good actress and I just don't see what all the fuss is about. So, she's a black woman. So what? Controversial, sure, but whatever. I wanted Felix to be a blond Texan, but I guess it doesn't really matter at the end of the day. Look at Mathis. He's not even French, but I was happy with the casting. I might be wrong and Bond 23 might turn into some kind of radical left wing shit fest. However, until that happens, I'm not gonna get myself worked up into a big tizzy over what might happen in over a year from now. I'd rather hope for the best than expect the worst.

Aston_Martini wrote:

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

A_M,

My primary problems with QOS were not Bond's abstinence or his pacifism, they were with his anti-American and anti-Western attitudes on foreign policy. Also the film was shot through with politics far more than any Bond film in history. This was a very bad idea.

Who was to blame? Babs? Haggfish? Forster? Craig? We cannot know for certain, but with Babs putting Bond in a dress, and the hiring of Mendes and Harris I fear the dire innovations of QOS will become staples in B23. Again, I hope I'm wrong.

Yeah, I'd agree. The politics were a bit anti-American in Quantum, but I didn't get the sense that Bond himself is. I really don't see how Bond was anti-American or anti-Western in the film. Did I miss something he specifically says or does?

It's the Bolivian bar scene with Leiter.

A_M,

I didn't have a problem with Quantum per se, it was with all the post-colonial bullshit we heard: "I wonder what this place would be like if nobody cared about Coke or communism?," the crack about "broken crockery," and Green's idiotic remark about Marxists "giving resources to the people." I'm watching QOS this coming weekend and will doubtless strike several more similar statements that blight the film. At any rate, it's tedious, it's trite, and it doesn't belong in Bond films. We shall see if it's a one-off.

But there's a larger point to be made. Specifically, if all of us just shrug our shoulders at various Babsian insults to the Bond series and say we're not going to worry about them, we will effectively be encouraging the slow, steady erosion and ultimate destruction of Bond. As Babs' type are wont to say, silence is complicity.

Sharky wrote:

Aston_Martini wrote:

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

A_M,

My primary problems with QOS were not Bond's abstinence or his pacifism, they were with his anti-American and anti-Western attitudes on foreign policy. Also the film was shot through with politics far more than any Bond film in history. This was a very bad idea.

Who was to blame? Babs? Haggfish? Forster? Craig? We cannot know for certain, but with Babs putting Bond in a dress, and the hiring of Mendes and Harris I fear the dire innovations of QOS will become staples in B23. Again, I hope I'm wrong.

Yeah, I'd agree. The politics were a bit anti-American in Quantum, but I didn't get the sense that Bond himself is. I really don't see how Bond was anti-American or anti-Western in the film. Did I miss something he specifically says or does?

It's the Bolivian bar scene with Leiter.

Oh, right. Something about how the CIA have carved up South America and Felix responds: "coming from a Brit, I take that as a compliment." That's it, right? It's a passing comment. Two buddies ribbing each other. Plus, it's the truth. The CIA have had plenty of involvement in South America, just as the Brits were pretty good at the divide and rule. I don't think that means Bond is anti-America. He's just teasing his mate. I've got American friends and I tease them a fair bit of the time and they give it right back. Doesn't mean we don't like each other or that I hate America. Does it have a place in Bond films? Well, I don't see why not. Especially given the story. Look, I'm not defending Quantum. It was a messy, fuck up of a Bond movie, but I don't think it had much to do with politics. I'd say its biggest shortcomings were in the massive narrative holes. Still, plenty of Bond films with narratives like a piece of Swiss. Like I said, I don't really care about the politics, but the films aren't just right or left wing. When GoldenEye came out there was a shift towards PC. That's just a cultural thing. It happened. So, like it or loathe it, it's reflected in the films.It's not like Bond has become a feminist. He still sleeps around to get information and leaves women at the drop of a hat. Is he now too PC? I don't see how. He still does whatever the hell he wants. He kills in cold blood, disobeys orders. M might be slightly more feminist with her whole "mother" thing going on, but the old M was something of a father figure, and I never had any issue with that. And besides, far from going "You're absolutely right, mummy" he tells her she's wrong and does what he wants to do. Hardly a PC feminist. Anyway, I don't wanna bang on about this. I just am fairly surprised by the amount of hatred here in discussions. Disagree, sure, but actively hate? It just makes me feel uncomfortable knowing that people are just gonna spout this negative shit.

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

A_M,

I didn't have a problem with Quantum per se, it was with all the post-colonial bullshit we heard: "I wonder what this place would be like if nobody cared about Coke or communism?," the crack about "broken crockery," and Green's idiotic remark about Marxists "giving resources to the people." I'm watching QOS this coming weekend and will doubtless strike several more similar statements that blight the film. At any rate, it's tedious, it's trite, and it doesn't belong in Bond films. We shall see if it's a one-off.

But there's a larger point to be made. Specifically, if all of us just shrug our shoulders at various Babsian insults to the Bond series and say we're not going to worry about them, we will effectively be encouraging the slow, steady erosion and ultimate destruction of Bond. As Babs' type are wont to say, silence is complicity.

Yeah, fair enough Ed. I guess I didn't examine it that closely. Besides, I guess I try to see through the shit and look at the stuff I wanna see. Perhaps that's being blinkered, but it keeps me happy. It means I can keep a positive attitude about Bond. I hope he doesn't end up wearing a dress in Bond 23, literally or figuratively.

Speaking of Bond and politics, I wonder if the "Arab Spring" will feature in Bond 23. Perhaps we'll see Bond conducting a covert operaiton in Libya in the PTS (though they could make it a nameless Arab state in the same way a nameless South American state was used in OP's PTS).