Bond 24 and Bond 25 to tell a two-part story

If that was the case, then it sounds like the right way to have done the film.

And people claim Purvis and Wade are horrible despite having the sense to do something like that. Paul Haggis was the worst thing about QOS.

Well, I have no clue how Purvis and Wade were gonna do QOS. That was just a calculated guess from Craig's remarks. I'm very interested in learning what the original draft was like. From what I understand, nothing of their work ever made it to the final product. All that's known is that it carries the same premise Wilson pitched. Then there's the draft Haggis wrote that included Bond searching for Vesper's baby. What. The. Fuck? Glad EON rejected that.

Forster threw out P&W's script when he was brought on board, and demanded that Haggis write a completely new one. Problem was, he couldn't complete it before the writer's strike, and so production on QoS began with only a bare-bones treatment, written by Haggis, to go by. That's when they brought in that Zetumer guy, during filming, to write new material because they were basically coming up with scenes and dialogue as they went along. Even in that article that was posted around here about Forster still defending his work on QoS, he still says that they didn't really have a script and that the story and scenes were mostly formulated around locations and action sequences.

It would indeed be interesting to read P&W's original Bond 22 script (although I can't imagine that it'd be any good). Hell, even Campbell demanded rewrites of their work on Casino Royale because their original script didn't take the source material and reboot seriously enough and there were too many goofy jokes (so says Campbell).

Python wrote:

Then there's the draft Haggis wrote that included Bond searching for Vesper's baby. What. The. Fuck?

It's a ham-fisted approach to writing, guided by a single underlying prinicple: that the hero always goes back to save the kid. Because kids are innocent, the hero cannot ever leave them behind.

Also, it's a rip-off of a Wilber Smith novel, Golden Fox - a South American KGB operative seduces the daughter of a powerful South African family, fathers a child with her, then abducts the newborn and holds him hostage to force the child's mother into spying on South African nuclear and biological weapons programmes.

dr. strangelove wrote:

Forster threw out P&W's script when he was brought on board, and demanded that Haggis write a completely new one. Problem was, he couldn't complete it before the writer's strike, and so production on QoS began with only a bare-bones treatment, written by Haggis, to go by.

Actually, I believe Haggis completed his script with hours to spare before the WGA stike action began. It boggles the mind as to why EON and Forster didn't recruit a British script doctor to work on it during the one hundred days of strike; the WGA has no power to black-list writers outside America.

dr. strangelove wrote:

That's when they brought in that Zetumer guy, during filming, to write new material because they were basically coming up with scenes and dialogue as they went along. Even in that article that was posted around here about Forster still defending his work on QoS, he still says that they didn't really have a script and that the story and scenes were mostly formulated around locations and action sequences.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Zetumer was hired to perform the same job as Haggis did for CASINO ROYALE. It don't think it ever got to the point where they were writing and rewriting stuff on the day it was due to be shot, as so many around here liked to imply at the time.

dr. strangelove wrote:

It would indeed be interesting to read P&W's original Bond 22 script (although I can't imagine that it'd be any good). Hell, even Campbell demanded rewrites of their work on Casino Royale because their original script didn't take the source material and reboot seriously enough and there were too many goofy jokes (so says Campbell).

Do you have an article that supports that?

It has always been my understanding that Paul Haggis was brought on-board because he didn't really like Purvis and Wade's original ending, with the final action sequence going through several revisions. They couldn't find anything that really fit in with the rest of the film, and it was Paul Haggis who suggested the sinking house sequence. That's what got him the screenwriting credit, because he was considered to have done enough work on it.

Shortly before production of SKYFALL began, someone - either here or on CBn - posted a review of the CASINO ROYALE script, and noted that there was a distinct change in the writing of the layout. Sometimes, the script referred to Bond as "Bond", whilst other times it refers to him as "James". The conclusion was that the former was written by P&W, and the latter by Haggis. Assuming that is true, then Haggis' input was primarily limited to the finale, the shower scene, and some of the interactions between Bond, Mathis and Vesper in the casino (which might explain how Bond started to suspect Mathis of betraying him with no real explanation). That doesn't take into account any lines Haggis might have changed without altering the format of the script itself, though.

I think P&W get a lot of undeserved flak around here, mostly because they are forced to have their names on films that aren't necessarily theirs (which is the curse of writers everywhere). For instance, TWINE gets a lot of shit, but I believe the original draft concentrated on the mystery behind who was really responsible for everything before Michael Apted decided that the focus needed to be on Bond's relationship with Elektra, and so had his wife and Bruce Feirstein do a series of uncredited rewrites on it. Likewise, I remember that everyone used to credit "all the good bits of CR" to Haggis, but QOS demonstrated that Haggis has no understanding of Bond's character - see the bar scene where he discusses politics with Felix as proof - so I very much doubt that anything he wrote in CR was particularly clever. Like the shower scene and the pseudo-MacBeth stylings from Vesper.

dr. strangelove wrote:

Hell, even Campbell demanded rewrites of their work on Casino Royale because their original script didn't take the source material and reboot seriously enough and there were too many goofy jokes (so says Campbell).

Did they seriously get the rights to Casino Royale after 44 years just to use the title?

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Zetumer was hired to perform the same job as Haggis did for CASINO ROYALE. It don't think it ever got to the point where they were writing and rewriting stuff on the day it was due to be shot, as so many around here liked to imply at the time.

Craig indicated it got close. Before Zetumer could be brought on, and shooting was proceeding, Craig and Forster were doing the rewriting themselves, and it was apparently pretty frantic.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Likewise, I remember that everyone used to credit "all the good bits of CR" to Haggis, but QOS demonstrated that Haggis has no understanding of Bond's character - see the bar scene where he discusses politics with Felix as proof - so I very much doubt that anything he wrote in CR was particularly clever.

It's not clear that Haggis was responsible for the bar scene dialogue in QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

It would indeed be interesting to read P&W's original Bond 22 script (although I can't imagine that it'd be any good). Hell, even Campbell demanded rewrites of their work on Casino Royale because their original script didn't take the source material and reboot seriously enough and there were too many goofy jokes (so says Campbell).

Do you have an article that supports that?

Campbell talks about it on the DVD commentary.

Quote :

It has always been my understanding that Paul Haggis was brought on-board because he didn't really like Purvis and Wade's original ending, with the final action sequence going through several revisions. They couldn't find anything that really fit in with the rest of the film, and it was Paul Haggis who suggested the sinking house sequence. That's what got him the screenwriting credit, because he was considered to have done enough work on it.

Also on the DVD commentary (or perhaps it was a separate DVD extra, can't remember), Haggis talks a bit about what his contributions to the film were. Essentially, he was responsible for rewriting the dialogues scene between Bond and Vesper, most notably their meeting on the train, their scene in the shower, and the dinner the two share after Bond beats Le Chiffre in the casino. I don't recall him mentioning anything about the sinking house. To me, that sequence is unmistakeably P&W, but who knows.

Regarding QoS.....there was an article in EMPIRE magazine where Forster talked about the script, and how he completely threw out P&W's work only to have Haggis rewrite it. Various other interviews and articles from back then also mentioned the script being incomplete, and I believe an article in Total Film even stated that Haggis' script didn't even have an ending when it was submitted. And if I remember correctly, there was even an interview done with Haggis shortly before the film's release where he stated that what he submitted was barely a step above a treatment, but he wanted to submit it to the producers anyway and did so just a few hours before the deadline of the writer's strike. Also, as Harms pointed out, there were more than a couple instances where Craig and Forster talked about coming up with material on their own.

And then...there's also that rumor of Haggis being displeased with the final product because very little of what he did have n his treatment was used in the completed film. But then again, that was just a rumor at the time.

We know that Haggis' script didn't have the opera sequence, so it can't have been that close to the final product.

Harmsway wrote:

It's not clear that Haggis was responsible for the bar scene dialogue in QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

It's not the only horrible scene in the film. You can't tell me that Haggis somehow wrote none of the bad bits, given that he seems to have written the shower scene in CR.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

It's not clear that Haggis was responsible for the bar scene dialogue in QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

It's not the only horrible scene in the film. You can't tell me that Haggis somehow wrote none of the bad bits, given that he seems to have written the shower scene in CR.

I'm just saying we don't know *what* bits Haggis was responsible for and what he wasn't responsible for. Things changed substantially after he handed in his rushed script. Haggis might have written it, but he might not have. You can't make a call either way.

Sorry, but that sounds like an excuse to attack Purvis and Wade by proving that Haggis really isn't a bad writer.

Haggis wrote IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH, which was the typical Hollywood populist pseudo-political trash that is trendy these days. Haggsi also wrote QUANTUM OF SOLACE, which also contains the typical Hollywood populist pseudo-political trash that is trendy these days.

Coincidence?

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Sorry, but that sounds like an excuse to attack Purvis and Wade by proving that Haggis really isn't a bad writer.

If I had a history of attacking Purvis and Wade, maybe. But I tend to defend them more often than not.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

Haggis wrote IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH, which was the typical Hollywood populist pseudo-political trash that is trendy these days. Haggsi also wrote QUANTUM OF SOLACE, which also contains the typical Hollywood populist pseudo-political trash that is trendy these days.

Coincidence?

Overall, probably not. But Forster was also pretty politically minded. That scene might have been Forster and Zetumer's baby. It's possible.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Maybe it'll be a two-part story...told in three films.

Peter Jackson to direct then, surely? :D

A couple of notes about things referenced in this thread:

1.) Casino Royale script. I have a copy of a draft dated Dec. 13, 2005 (filming began in early 2006). The title page reads, "Screenplay by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade, second set of revisions by Paul Haggis. As noted, most of the time the character is listed as BOND but there are spots where he becomes JAMES.(both for dialogue and stage directions).

2) The World Is Not Enough Script. Dana Stevens' rewrite was uncredited but Bruce Feirstein got a credit. Feirstein filed an appeal with the WGA and his name was put on. The novelization by Raymond Benson said it was based on the screenplay by Neal Purvis and Robert Wade. The movie's credit says "Screenplay by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade and Bruce Feirstein, Story by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade.

Heh, it just occurred to me: Bond 24 may just feature "James Bond will return in [Bond 25 Title]" in the end credits. I've missed that. :)

Water / Quantum story. Done in 5 movies QOS/Bond 24/Bond 25 like FRWL/Thunderball/Yolt and in les CR and Skyfall. CR introduce Mr White and one of Quantum rules.

^ yep

MBalje wrote:

Water / Quantum story. Done in 5 movies

I definitely want to see more water-related villainy. Perhaps Quantum will try to sap our precious bodily fluids in the next film.

CJB wrote:

MBalje wrote:

Water / Quantum story. Done in 5 movies

I definitely want to see more water-related villainy. Perhaps Quantum will try to sap our precious bodily fluids in the next film.

It'll need to be down with the kids, though.

Villain: Come at me bro!
Bond: Didn't think I had it in me.

CJB wrote:

I definitely want to see more water-related villainy. Perhaps Quantum will try to sap our precious bodily fluids in the next film.

Yep, then I can sit through about eight ads for Evian during the interminable wait for the film to start, instead of suffering a pile of Sony ads.

FieldsMan wrote:

It'll need to be down with the kids, though.

Villain: Come at me bro!
Bond: Didn't think I had it in me.

Theme song by that fucker who did Gangnam Style.

Sounds interesting. Would love to see Blofeld.

Tom Hollander as the MI6 chaplain with a drinking problem.

"What do you know about fluoride, 007?"

"Well, Sir ..."

Craig denies it: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/25401/no-two-part-bond-film-says-craig

Quote :

"No, I don't know where that's come from. It's impossible to do a two parter, I heard that someone was talking about that we're doing a two-parter, but that's the first I've heard about it. We can only do them one at a time, they take six months to shoot. You can't write one movie thinking about the next. All we're trying to do is get the next one sorted out and it'll stand on its own and if I'm able I'll do another one after that."