ROTTEN TOMATOES: Four Directors Up for the Next "Bond" Flick?

Four Directors Up for the Next "Bond" Flick?

by Scott Weinberg | May 21, 2007

Curious to know who'll be directing the next James Bond flick? Join the club. One source has a short list of potential helmers, all of whom would be pretty ... distinctive.

Here's who Latino Review mentions as possible "Bond 22" directors:

--Marc Forster ("Monster's Ball," "Finding Neverland," and "Stranger Than Fiction")

--Tony Scott ("Man on Fire," "Top Gun," and "Crimson Tide" -- among many others)

--Alex Proyas ("Dark City," "I, Robot," and "The Crow")

--Jonathan Mostow ("Breakdown," "U-571," and "Terminator 3")

Our source seems to think that Mr. Forster is among the front-runners for the job, which is a little odd considering he's the only one who's never directed an action scene. (Good director, tho.) Personally I'd love to see what a Tony Scott 007 flick would look like.

We'll let you know when the Bondmakers decide on the director they choose to follow "Casino Royale."

Source: Latino Review

Related Items

Celeb:	Marc Forster
	Alex Proyas
	Tony Scott
	Jonathan Mostow
Movie:	Top Gun
	Casino Royale
	Finding Neverland
	I, Robot
	Man on Fire
	Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
	Monster's Ball
	U-571
	Dark City
	Breakdown
	Crimson Tide
	The Crow
	Stranger Than Fiction

(1-20 of 33 posts) | Reply

Sputnik99 writes:
on May 21 2007 11:30 PM

[b]I'm no Ebert & Roeper, but...[/b]
Scott's the only choice, IMO. Here's why:

Forster: No action experience
Proyas: Too dark and creepy (I like Crow, though)
Mostow: Too much of a "Made for TV" feel to his movies

Scott has the right balance of experience for a fast-paced, action-packed Bond thriller. Too bad fans can't vote on it.

(Reply to this)

lavatory love machine writes:
on May 22 2007 12:02 AM

scott is too flashy for bond's elegant style, too many quick cuts in the action

mostow is standard hollywood competent but nothing else (the closest one to martin campbell)

proyas is great but maybe too dark for bond, and this is not a franchise to experiment with

forster is a chamaleon and a very clever director, he would be my choice among these four

ut I would love to see peter weir directing bond

(Reply to this)

optic_85 writes:
on May 22 2007 12:17 AM

[b]Hmmmmm[/b]
I say 'no' to Scott. I love the guy, but he's to stylized for a franchise like this. It wouldn't feel like a Bond movie. It was just feel like...well, a Tony Scott flick. Personally, I would love to see Luc Besson do a bond film.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 22 2007 12:29 AM

I don't know if Tony Scott has what it takes to continue the series in the style of Casino Royale.. which is really what I'd hoped they be aiming for. This is why Forster is probably my favourite out of those listed, since I think he'll bring a level of seriousness and believability the others can't.

Proyas is a case of too much style over substance. Mostow films just don't feel right, and since he was unable capture the feel of the Terminator series properly, he shouldn't get his hands on Bond. Mr Scott has become a little too experimental in his recent years and his editing can be very frustrating. I just don't think it's suited for the classy and less ADHD orientated feel of the new Bond series.

(Reply to this)

bamb0o-stick writes:
on May 22 2007 02:55 AM

Paul Greengrass would be my pick, since he's already directed two Bourne movies and Casino Royale had similar qualities between the two titles. I for one actually loved the car chase scene in the Bourne Supremacy, and you can never have enough chase scenes in a Bond flick.

(Reply to this)

BrokebackYoda writes:
on May 22 2007 06:19 AM

Wow...Paul Greengrass would be a good one. And Marc Forster would be good. Tony Scott's James Bond movie would just be another one of his movies...except with Bond. Like...1,000 different cuts in one minute, all of which are overexposed.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 22 2007 06:25 AM

In reply to this comment (#866306)
He would be good, but perhaps that'd be too much of an admission by the Bond people that the Bourne films have stolen their coveted throne in the "internation super spy" genre.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 22 2007 06:26 AM

[b]why not use the guy who did Casino Royale??[/b]
...for continuity's sake

(Reply to this)

MadmanCody writes:
on May 22 2007 08:55 AM

this list sounds like a joke, i won't see the next bond movie if any one of those guys directs it, especially not the hack director of the crow and i, robot. and the only tony scott film that i consider "great" is probably true romance.

(Reply to this)

Vitamin M writes:
on May 22 2007 09:14 AM

In reply to this comment (#866310)
[b]Good don't watch it.[/b]
good I didn't want to hear you complaining at the theater when I'm watching the next Bond anyway.

(Reply to this)

FireflyFan4evr writes:
on May 22 2007 09:17 AM

In reply to this comment (#866310)
How can you even consider Alex Proyas a "hack"? Have you seen Dark City?

(Reply to this)

unbreakable_samurai writes:
on May 22 2007 09:40 AM

I don't really care about Mostow, but I'm a fan of the other three, so I'm happy with this short list. Scott or Proyas would be great interesting choices, Foster would be an interesting choice too, but I don't want to see him do Bond as much.

(Reply to this)

eastern2western writes:
on May 22 2007 09:49 AM

[b]hey[/b]
how about john woo? He made mission II and movie is basically a james bond ripoff with more action and gadgets.

(Reply to this)

Holly Jolly writes:
on May 22 2007 11:06 AM

John Woo and Tony Scoot would be HORRIBLE choices. They are too stylized. They would take the limelight off of Bond.

Marc Foster is by far the best choice. He's a good director who has directed very DIFFERENT pieces of work and fitted into several different styles of storytelling.

Why does he have to have experience with action? Sam Raimi and Christopher Nolan had no action movie experience yet they made the best comic book movies of the past 5 years.

All these movies have huge budgets, they hire the right stunt and cg directors. The director over anything needs to know human emotion...things John Woo knows nothing about.

(Reply to this)

samarama writes:
on May 22 2007 12:29 PM

I say no to both Woo and Tony Scott.

Come on, guys. The reason "Casino Royale" was better than practically any other Bond movie was in the writing and making Bond a more human character. The secret wasn't in the action, but in the story itself. That is largely thanks to Paul Haggis, one of the best writers working.

Therefore, the franchise needs someone who is good with character, emotion and drama, not necessarily explosions, stunts and gadgets. If a director knows how to tell a satisfying story, the action and fireworks can be brought in by stunt coordinators, choreographers , etc. That's all icing on the cake. But the cake itself has to be good, and I don't think Scott or Woo really are all the greatest bakers. Scott is full of empty flash, though "Deja Vu" wasn't bad. If he can tone down the jittery editing and just focus on the story, he'd be alright.

I'm all for Forster, Greengrass, Proyas or Mostow. Forster, Greengrass and Proyas are three of the best working directors, in my opinion. All three are amazing visionaries that craft great stories that work without having to throw in empty pizazz to make up for their weaknesses.

(Reply to this)

okuonuora writes:
on May 22 2007 01:13 PM

In reply to this comment (#866310)
You are as stupid as you look.

(Reply to this)

Mr. Kong writes:
on May 22 2007 01:13 PM

[b]My thoughts[/b]
Marc Forster: Why not. He makes some good drama, which James Bond could use. Score: 8

Tony Scott: He'd make good action, but not much else. Score: 6.5

Alex Proyas: I don't know about him... he seems like a science fiction type of guy, and I don't think James Bond should go sci-fi. But he has made some good movies. Score: 7.75

Jonathan Mostow: Haven't seen anything by him except for a half of T3, which was pretty good, and his other stuff looks fine. Score: 8

But really, I think they should just keep Martin Campbell.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on May 22 2007 02:41 PM

Is it any coincidence that Goldeneye and Casino Royale, the best Bond movies of late, were both directed by Martin Campbell? Give that guy whatever he wants, and have him direct the next one. He is apparently the best at it.

(Reply to this)

Reeven writes:
on May 22 2007 02:47 PM

Why not just stick with Martin Campbell?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

(Reply to this)

ajmueller writes:
on May 22 2007 05:25 PM

I would definitely go with Forster. That guy's made some solid films. Tony Scott would ruin it.

(Reply to this)