SPECTRE (2015) - UK Oct 23rd , US Nov 6th

The thought of Mendes returning is subsequent to the prospect of a back-to-back director for the first time in 25 years. Bond has been in desperate need of consistency these past two decades. This also pretty much guarantees that Bond 24 will be superior to SKYFALL, with all the Brosnan-era hangovers finally gone (Arnold, Dench, P&W) and Mendes being more solid in his direction now with more Bond experience.

The question that I'm still dying to have answered is whether or not there's any truth to the rumors of Mendes and Logan being secured for Bond 25, as well.

The price was right.


I'm hoping Newman and Deakins return, too.

Loomis wrote:

Let's hope that in 2015 we'll once again have a good STAR WARS film and a good Bond film in the same year.

You do know they hired JJ Abrams for that, right? The only way EPISODE VII is going to be stand any chance of being good is if it revolves around a race of sentient lens flares.

While I'm unhappy about the three year wait itself and the overall effect of delays on Craig's tenure (we'll now probably only end up with four Craig films when, if not for delays, we could have gotten six), I'm nevertheless very happy to have Mendes returning, as not only did he do a decent job with Skyfall, but it also increases the chances of Newman scoring the next film. A good Bond, a good male M, a potentially good music score, a good director and surely more of a "Bond on a mission" vibe (as the trademark "it's personal" angles are now surely fully exhausted if not just plain tiresome) should make for a much better film than we'd have gotten had EON went for a 2014 release with a couldn't-care-less director-for-hire working to the tiresome sound of Arnold.

So yeah, it's all good. Though whether I'll survive the subsequent Idris Elba era is another matter.

I dunno about the Elba thing ... friend of mine works with Michael Fassbender's uncle, who says he's been asked and will be stepping in when Craig's done.

Interesting inside information, BI.

James Fassbonder would meet my approval.

My concern is that everyone involved is just going to see the success of Skyfall and attempt to replicate it rather than create something new. By all means, aim to build upon its success, but don't just create a base imitation.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

I dunno about the Elba thing ... friend of mine works with Michael Fassbender's uncle, who says he's been asked and will be stepping in when Craig's done.  

Nice! Mike seems to be the most logical choice. I want either him or a friend of mine who is an actor and pretty much lives Bond's life. He's a bit of a name here in Australia, and I suppose in the UK as well, given the success of Home and Away over there, and he can look the part too!

Not to mention that I'm kind of over Craig, to be honest...

FieldsMan wrote:

I want either him or a friend of mine who is an actor and pretty much lives Bond's life. He's a bit of a name here in Australia, and I suppose in the UK as well, given the success of Home and Away over there, and he can look the part too!

Alf Stewart as Bond?

It could work.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

My concern is that everyone involved is just going to see the success of Skyfall and attempt to replicate it rather than create something new. By all means, aim to build upon its success, but don't just create a base imitation.

I'm sure they'll at least try something new while at the same time keep the things that worked in previous films. That's what SKYFALL did, and Wilson has been known to dismiss the notion "if it ain't broke, don't fix".

I doubt Mendes is interested in repeating himself.

Mendes seems to know how to handle the modern Bond film. I have faith that he'll produce another fun and engaging adventure.

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

The only way EPISODE VII is going to be stand any chance of being good is if it revolves around a race of sentient lens flares.

Man, I wish I'd been the one to come up with that.

Does anyone know if there are Abrams drinking games, where you take a swallow after each flare?

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

My concern is that everyone involved is just going to see the success of Skyfall and attempt to replicate it rather than create something new. By all means, aim to build upon its success, but don't just create a base imitation.

I get the impression Mendes isn't interested in Xeroxing Skyfall.

It's definitely a concern... look at the 1980's. Pretty much the same writing team, creative team and director. Not that all the films suffer from it, I enjoy them, but they are kind of bland. None of the 80's films stand out to me visually. They all look and feel the same. The look and feel of Goldeneye was refreshing after the past 5 films... it was something different. It stood out from the 80's films.

Luckily, I think Mendes isn't going to be as complacent as John Glenn was, I don't think he's interested in making a carbon copy of Skyfall.

A good example of the same team returning for a second consecutive film is FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, which had similarities to DR. NO but felt different enough to stand on its own. I kind of hope we get something like that with BOND 24.

Yes! That's a very good example of what I am looking for. I'm hopeful that Mendes and crew will take that path and do something a bit different as opposed to the example I mentioned.

Moore wrote:

Yes! That's a very good example of what I am looking for. I'm hopeful that Mendes and crew will take that path and do something a bit different as opposed to the example I mentioned.

As long as they have more invested in the story this time as they did last with movie in the characters. In SF the characters were decent and the story was ridiculous imho.

FieldsMan wrote:

Blunt Instrument wrote:

I dunno about the Elba thing ... friend of mine works with Michael Fassbender's uncle, who says he's been asked and will be stepping in when Craig's done.  

Nice! Mike seems to be the most logical choice. I want either him or a friend of mine who is an actor and pretty much lives Bond's life. He's a bit of a name here in Australia, and I suppose in the UK as well, given the success of Home and Away over there, and he can look the part too!

Not to mention that I'm kind of over Craig, to be honest...

 
Said friend is a Jaguar/Aston mechanic and also found out through others in the same field of employment working on Skyfall (and told me way before I heard it anywhere else) about the DB5 being kitted out with its gadgetry again, and about its destruction.

Fassbender had some very Bondesque moments in X-Men : First Class :) .

dr. strangelove wrote:

The thought of Mendes returning is subsequent to the prospect of a back-to-back director for the first time in 25 years. Bond has been in desperate need of consistency these past two decades. This also pretty much guarantees that Bond 24 will be superior to SKYFALL, with all the Brosnan-era hangovers finally gone (Arnold, Dench, P&W) and Mendes being more solid in his direction now with more Bond experience.

The question that I'm still dying to have answered is whether or not there's any truth to the rumors of Mendes and Logan being secured for Bond 25, as well.

Logan scripting Bond 25 isn't a rumor. Gary Barber, the CEO of MGM, announced it during an investor call in November. He said Logan was working on the story for both Bond 24 and Bond 25.

Moore wrote:

It's definitely a concern... look at the 1980's. Pretty much the same writing team, creative team and director. Not that all the films suffer from it, I enjoy them, but they are kind of bland. None of the 80's films stand out to me visually. They all look and feel the same. The look and feel of Goldeneye was refreshing after the past 5 films... it was something different. It stood out from the 80's films.

Luckily, I think Mendes isn't going to be as complacent as John Glenn was, I don't think he's interested in making a carbon copy of Skyfall.

John Logan and Sam Mandes are playing on an entirely different ballfield than John Glenn and Dick Maibaum were.

And SKYFALL was made with an obvious affection that was absent from many of the 1980s films, when the production process was a lot like mass-production. Re-reading the novels, I got the impression that the writers just dipped into a library of unused Fleming material, things that I think really would be handled with a lot more care in the hands of Mendes. I think that affection is what made SKYFALL such an excellent film, and I have to admit that my hopes were fairly low when he was first announced, because every director claims that Bond was so influential on their careers, but none of them had been able to back that up with a film that demonstrated it - until Mendes came along.

Mendes and Logan are smart. They're capable of far more intellectually heavy material than James Bond but the difference between them and, say, Marc Forster, is that they know what James Bond is and what it isn't.

That's certainly an issue, but I think that if Forster had been given a fair shot at making a film properly, the end result would have been considerably better. Maybe not a fantastic film, but certainly a more consistent one.

I don't think Forster was given a chance to prove whether he knew his Bond or not. Any problems QOS had lie in the script and in EON's desire to make a quick buck instead of a great film.