I love Nolan’s movies and I think a bond movie would be great. I also think his movies are maybe not for everyone. So mixed feelings right there. I’m sure he can make a great 60s Bond but I’m for a now days setting
It should be whatever Nolan wants it to be. He's earned that trust imo. 60s, 50s, 40s, it doesn't matter. As long as he has creative control, it will be good. Likely better than 80% of Bond movies.
Nolan just made a film set in the 40s about the man who led the creation of the nuclear bomb and you had people excited from all demographics. Something tells me Bond, James Bond in the 60s won’t be a hinderance or liability.
Sure! And we did make that point...it's not that the film wouldn't be successful or highly regarded...it's just would that be the best move for the character. Bond isn't strictly a product of the 60s and bringing him back there could potentially reinforce that idea. I agree, Oppenheimer showed people would be down for a period piece...people being down and it being what's bast for the character are two separate things.
@@FilmSpeak Yeah but I don't see why it can't be what's best for the character. They can always steer clear of most of the antiquated and needless stuff that are depicted in the old content and still make it feel like a story about a spy in the 60s. This is not the best example (cause the movie sucks) but Kingsman did that with their latest entry without being controversial.
@@FilmSpeak There is no "best" - it's all subjective. A 60's period piece with the cold-war and secret government CIA type technologies and such that we know was goin on back then could bring some very interesting combinations of 60s time, but with secret high-tech tools that the general public didn't know existed back then, but Bond would use. With the high-stakes tension of such a post World War era, it would be a pretty riveting portrayal of drama in those times, especially with what strikingly impactful vibes we know Nolan can paint in such a setting in Oppenheimer and Dunkirk.
I hope he learns that it's possible to not have blaring music through out the whole movie. I won't watch another Nolan Movie until he learns to allow quiet moments in his movies. Oppenheimer is supposed to be a period piece about scientists working on a project together. Yet he chooses loud soundtrack that makes it seem like it's supposed to be a Transformer movie
Honestly it would be a smart way to make Bond relevant today. Nothing more relevant than Nolan right now when it comes to film. I strongly disagree that going back in time would be a bad move, I think it would be a great idea.
I agree that Nolan would get people excited about Bond but idk if setting it in the 60s is the move...idk I don't hate it because I think Nolan is the guy who could make a 60s Bond work...but the idea in general is a bit regressive.
@@FilmSpeak it isnt, you guys are conflagrating the period the films came out with their setting, making a period bond movie now wouldnt mean making a film like if the one they made in the 60ps, it would be a totally modern take, but in a period setting, its clear to see.
@@FilmSpeak On the contrary, it could be the exact opposite. Something completely fresh, cuz it would be done by Nolan, in the context of today's filmmaking and world. And we all know how Nolan always brings something mindblowingly new and refreshing to the table with each and every film he does.
Bond is relevant the way he was. If they modernize him he isn't James Bond. Most Bond fans hated the last James Bond. We already had a black female 007, and people didnt love it.
Yeah, and remember we all clamored for J.J. Abrams to direct Star Wars after we'd seen what he'd done with Star Trek, since that seemed like the better fit for his talents, and boy the phrase "be careful what you wish for" as never been more applicable.
@@FilmSpeakSame here. Also, to your friend’s point about it feeling antiquated and alienating younger viewers if they set it in the 50s-70s: are we forgetting that one of the most popular franchises of the past decade is Stranger Things, which opened the floodgates for period nostalgia? Younger audiences absolutely love seeing those times.
@@alexman378Stranger Things was set in the ‘80s, so all that tells is that younger audiences would accept ‘80s nostalgia, whereas there’s been other period films like The Man From UNCLE which have tanked.
@@samuelbarber6177 Man From UNCLE also came out a couple months before Spectre and since it didn’t have a ton of marketing, people will choose the popular IP over the unknown one. Also, you’re forgetting that Nolan is himself a brand. You think if anyone else released an Oppenheimer biopic, it would collect nearly a billion at the box office?
Why would producers gave him full control ? Film making is a team work not a one man buisness. James Bond is a child of broccoli family, film directors are teachers who groom that child for every decade. Director's are supposed to help that child improve not get complete control over that child.
Speaking from someone who enjoyed No Time To Die at the time, but upon reflection not really caring to rewatch it anytime soon, I think Nolan is the perfect choice to reboot the franchise and it needs it. Now that Bond has essentially been deconstructed in the Craig Era, I think it’s time for something different but a little bit more traditional at the same time.
But Nolan doesn’t do traditional Bond. He does the gritty grounded realism. The Craig Bonds are the ones he should’ve directed. After Craig, fans are going to want to see a return to the slightly more fantastical elements of Bond and Nolan can’t do that.
@@Linklex7 I think Nolan can pull it off. You have to remember that inception is a pretty fantastical film, but Nolan grounded the film to where you could get invested in the concept. You believed in the concept so much even though the movie wasn’t realistic. But I hear what you’re saying 🙂
Nolan's Batman is far from gritty, fight scenes were really weird in dark knight, so i believe he could do cinematic bond film with less gritty, just don't let him touch the script, Nolan's film's work best when his brother write script. Also, i still like No Time To Die, it was perfect end to Craig's bond.
I disagree that Bond would not sell if it's a period piece. As a huge fan of the movies and original books, I'm sad that we never got accurate adaptations.
Yes if it is perioidic, and doesn't try to murmur a franchise commericalise product. But an ode to the authenticity of James Bond of the time, with an auteurs touch. Something for older adults,
The best way to reboot Bond after the Craig era is to go back in time and make period Bond films, set in the time they were written, and adapt Ian Flemings novels faithfully.
Nolan is so, so good that anything else wouldn't matter if he directs. I blindly trust in his abilities and capabilities to create "The James Bond to end all James Bond".
It feels counterintuitive to not want Nolan to do Bond because it wouldnt create new Bond fans. If he makes 2-3 good Bond films and then he's done, I don't think that leaves them in any worse of a spot than they are now. If nothing else they would have a couple mkre hits under thier belt and a more positive public image of Bond than i think the last 2 of the Craig Era have left. The Craig films already have the feel of a "modern" Bond. If we had a throwback Nolan trilogy, the next set could more easily distiguish itself as modern again with more of a separation. As you mentioned, I feel like a Nolan version of Bond would feel pretty similar tonally to something like Skyfall.
After Craig fans want a bond that’s a bit more fantastical. Nolan can’t do that. By his own admission he doesn’t know how to do fantastical. It would basically just be another Craig film
@@Linklex7no it wouldn’t be another Craig film, it would be similar to a Timothy Dalton film who Nolan named as the best bond or closest to the source material, please do your research
Couldn’t be more wrong. Not only only would the series derive huge benefit by returning to original time, place and setting, but also a huge audience would turn out to watch it. You’re putting way too much importance on woke crap and what’s pc etc, which seems large on social media but is a tiny minority in the real world. Bring on Nolan’s adaptions
Fully agree, the guy on the right is straight up Waffling, Nolan literally made Oppenheimer which did $900m in box office impressive for a period piece, and regardless Nolan will still be able to make such a period piece so cool and relevant and I trust his casting too
Their minds are too infested with twitter loud mouths crying about the period not aligning with todays standards. Just because it is set there, doesn't mean it should cover all aspects of the period. And it's a Bond film, not a period piece based on actual events. And also, we will enjoy that regardless of the setting.
Have you seen older bond film's ? Nolan copied many scenes from older bond film's from skyhook scene from Thunderball, joker shoes was copied from Rosa klebb shoes, Fox character is completely copied from older Q. Skyfall isn't copy from dark knight. Sam Mendes already clarified that he never said he copied it.
I think Bond is a period piece precisely because he is contemporary. Watching old Bond movies is like opening a time capsule and peering into a bygone era. Every movie has been set in the modern (contemporary) times and I think it should stay that way.
I think the issue no one's mentioned is if Nolan does adaptations, then the first film will have to be Casino Royale. One of the best, most respected and popular Bond films, and made less than 20 years ago, with the last actor to play Bond. To start off the franchise with this would seem pointless, even with Nolan doing it. The film is also a fairly close adaptation. The other big problem with faithful adaptations is a lot of the novels is Bond's inner monologue thoughts, including on food, drink, brands. Would that also be incorporated in as a voice-over (Tarantino wanted to do when he was aiming to do CR)? And in a surprising amount of the novels Bond doesn't get the girl, he's more unlucky in love than you'd imagine. Finally, if you're keeping it faithful you need to remember Bond of the books isn't particularly charming or witty. A lot of that was invented for the films. Novel Bond is something of a curmudgeon, and often rude to women and men.
Totally down for a faithful adaptation to Bond from the novels. Most audiences will not love that but with good writing, it'll eventually win them over.
I think Nolan would ruin James Bond's career. He already showed his capability for that in Tenet, by casting Kenneth Branagh and Elizabeth Debicki as archetypes. There is only one good reason to look back; and that's to gain insight into the future. Attractive as it seems, I think retrospection shows a failure of nerve
At this point in his career, Christopher Nolan and Bond don't feel compatible. If Nolan made a Nolan movie, it wouldn't be true to what the Bond franchise is, and if Nolan made a Bond movie, it would feel like the movie is holding him back from the high-concept ideas and intricate stroytelling he's great at. I think if it's happening, it will turn out to be a weird compromise that no one's gonna really be satisfied with. To make a more personal point, I'm a huge Christopher Nolan fan, and a casual Bond fan, and right now, this seems way too similar to James Cameron doing Avatar movies for the rest of his life, and I fear that might happen with Nolan too. I am so saddened by the fact that we lost James Cameron to Avatar, a series which I find painfully mediocre knowing what he can do and I don't want the template of the Bond franchise to shackle Nolan and limit his more creative ideas (while I fully respect and appreciate those templates and their legacy)
Give Nolan full control and he will deliver. He has always has as proven by every movie he has created. Nolan, in my opinion, is the greatest director of all time. I discovered him via a single copy of Memoir at a video store I worked at when it was a new release. We only had the one copy because he wasn't really known at the time.The dude on the right does not speak for all of us. When you can write like Nolan your speculation will matter. And the only people that think Bond is antiquated are the fools of cancel culture.
Not against Nolan doing bond.. but I feel like we already got a nolanish bond in skyfall... Mendes even has gone on record saying skyfall was heavily influenced by The Dark Knight.
I just don't want "Joan\Jane Bond." Besides that I'm ok with pretty much anything. Although Bond is just Batman with guns, no mask, and a better accent.
I would be surprised if MGM and the Broccoli family caves to it being set in the 60’s. They have always stayed with Bond being current to the times. Tarantino wanted to do that with Casino Royale and I think I remember correctly that that was one of the major components they didn’t like about his pitch.
Personally, I think this is all just a baseless rumor. But for the sake of argument as to whether or not a period-set Bond film(s) would be good for the franchise as a whole this discussion really needed to address the fact that 11 years from now the character of James Bond becomes public domain. By spending the interim retreating into the past EON would effectively be throwing up their hands and saying: "We don't know how to make Bond work in the 21st century ".
I think a period Bond could work really well for a reason not mentioned in this video- half of Fleming's Bond books came out in the 50s, not the 60s, and the 50s is an era that has NOT been explored by the films. A 50s Bond could bring something new that we haven't seen before. I also disagree with the idea that Bond has to stay in the present to be relevant, and Christopher Nolan's last film shows that perfectly. Oppenheimer's story and fears are just as relevant today as they were in his era, and a period Bond could be relevant today in a similar way.
Chris Nolan doesn’t do anything he doesn’t want to. If he approached Eon about James Bond as his first move after the monumental success of Oppenheimer, then I’m sure he’s been sitting on a pretty good idea for a while.
Bond is the alpha male and modern culture has killed the alpha male or made him into a villian. Therefore, you can't have a modern Bond unless he becomes something like Batman or Jason Bourne who isn't "smooth with the ladies" but just doing his job/the right thing and ladies are crossing his path naturally.
0:14: 🎥 There are rumors of a potential Christopher Nolan James Bond movie. 3:21: 🎥 There is a deal being negotiated for Christopher Nolan to direct and write two Bond films, with Amazon and Eon pushing for him and Nolan wanting creative freedom. 6:43: 🎥 The appeal of the James Bond franchise lies in its ability to constantly reinvent itself with every era, while the character remains the same at its core. 19:22: 💭 Some fans are on board with the idea of a time period Bond film because they want Bond to go back to a time where he can be politically incorrect. 9:38: 🎥 The Bond films are known for reflecting the technology and culture of their time, so a modern Bond film would need to incorporate contemporary technology and societal trends. 12:35: 🎥 The TH-camr discusses the possibility of a contemporary adaptation of the James Bond novel 'Moonraker' and the relevance of its themes. 15:46: 🎥 The speaker discusses the perception of a character and the potential impact of a new direction in a film franchise. 22:27: 🎥 The speaker discusses the dedicated fan base of director Christopher Nolan and questions whether his upcoming film will attract new fans or just appeal to his existing fan base. 25:02: 🎥 Christopher Nolan may direct two to three Bond films and become an executive producer. Recap by Tammy AI
I would do two films. One is to use Thomas Doherty the Connery look-a-like for a one off. Like it was a missing Connery film. The second movie would be more modern with Henry Cavill. That could be called Property of a Lady, Risico, or The Hildebrand Rarity. Nolan stated that he like Timothy Dalton the best but love on Her Majesty's Secret Service as his best film. Aiden Quinn looks more like Dalton.
Before watching the video: I actually don’t want Christopher Nolan to direct a Bond film. There are two main reasons for this. Firstly I want James Bond to return to the fun it used to have like in the Pierce Brosnan era and I think Christopher Nolan is much more likely to give us a gritty Bond film that’s more real possibly a bit like Sam Mendes. The 2nd reason is he’ll almost definitely want complete creative control something the producers won’t want to give him and there are always other writers on Bond films. After watching the video: Ok my case needs a little refinement but I still don’t want him for Bond. Maybe he wouldn’t be that gritty, maybe he wouldn’t be like Sam Mendes but the James Bond franchise used to have certain elements of fun in some action scenes that I’ve never seen proof Nolan could do. Scenes like the Pre-title sequence, car chase and motorbike chase in Tomorrow Never Dies, the Thames chase and Mine sequence in The World is not enough and skiing sequences across the franchise. Don’t get me wrong Nolan is great at action but there is a certain quality to these action sequences in Bond films that I’ve never seen direct proof Nolan could capture and that is a detail that I’m really hoping returns to the franchise.
The guy you interviewed is really uninteresting. His only points is "now is better". "Old man bad". It's fine to have differing points, but that guy is just rigid and stale in his arguments.
It'd be great if this is timed with the IO interactive video game to. Like Batman with Dark Knight then Arkham Asylum, a nice golden era for the character in two major types of entertainment.
Amazon wants a 2020s Bond But Nolan would only make a 60s Bond and it would be fucking amazing but the world has too much hierarchical thinking of Bond and opinions on what it should be that no matter how good the film (hint TDKR) not enough people will allow themselves to enjoy enough to be a The Dark Knight/Inception mega-hit, it a disaster like TDKR which is a prefect film that people don't appreciate unfortunately
I am a young bond fan and my first movie was Skyfall. Going back would be a great idea for my generation. We have modern bond films already with Craig. We need that Connery swagger back in cinema
Nolan is one of my favorite directors…he just doesn’t do fight choreography very well…that’s his only weakness..if he does end up helming any bond movies…he should really think about getting the fight/stunt choreographer who did the two raid movies and gangs of London…that would be a match made in heaven
I am late to the party but something I think would be interesting would be a Bond not set in the 1960’s, but rather the 1950’s when the books started to come out. I also think a split from the franchise we know would be best with a new adaptation of Dr. No or Goldfinger by Nolan i’m the 1950’s along with other movies being made at the same time following the usual contemporary formula. This would be that Bond Nolan movie likely with a Tom Hardy as Bond followed by a contemporary Bond with some like an Aaron Taylor Johnson. The most similar thing to this we have was when they had Batman stuff in the DCEU, Batman stuff with Pattinsons “The Batman” and the Joker with the Joker series all at the same time. People understood they were all different because their styles are so different. This is what would be a good way to get around putting the Bond series into a corner of period pieces and it would give us the Nolan movies we and he wants and keep the series contemporary.
It won’t ruin Christopher Nolan. People said that about tenet then Oppenheimer came out and everyone loved it. And I agree he will have to write in the lines for which the creators pose on him but he also (maybe to a lesser extent) had to stay between the lines for the dark knight trilogy and people say that is the best superhero trilogy ever made.
He has made james bond films , not the ones that people are accustomed to , if you look at The dark knight Trilogy , inception and Tenet , those are james bond type films all the elements are there . I would love to see him go back to making films like The prestige, Insomnia , Momento etc.
I think the period piece angle would be intriguing. It would give the world a structural limits that the latest Bond films generally lack. These days, Bond can do anything and the villains have nearly unlimited technological power. I like the idea of a Bond film that creates built-in limits on those elements and I actually think it would ground the film on the people and story. Maybe the Bond aficionados would say that's not the point of a Bond film, but it's a Bond film I'd be interested in seeing.
Unlike the sixties, we live in an era oversaturated with franchises that flaunt their tech-“Mission Impossible”, “Kingsmen”, the MCU, the DCU. So constantly trying to outdo that with mere spectacle and concept might be the arms race Nolan is trying to escape. He might want to focus on the tactical, investigative, resourceful appeal of Bond using what’s around him to its fullest; impressing his comrades, instead of US.
I think the biggest thing that’s being missed every time this topic comes up (going back to the 50’s/60’s) is that Bond movies are almost always funded by product placement, in some cases almost entirely. You cannot flog the newest Aston, Heineken, Wilkinsons sword razors, DPD etc etc etc in the period settings. So I think, as much as people want this, EON can’t afford to let this happen.
5:03 I think you need to see a Bond movie in period settings first before you knock it. No one has done it yet so you have nothing to base your skepticism on. Tbh, I don’t think anyone even wants to see another “modern” take of Bond. There’re many other movies that do the “modern Bond” better than the actual Bond movies nowadays lol. I’m thinking Atomic Blonde vibes and I’m all for it 🔥
If he ever does direct, write ✍️, and produce a James Bond film, I really hope that Christopher Nolan casts… Henry Cavill as 007 Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Bond’s brother/ Sidekick Idris Elba and David Dastmalchian as the Villains Emily Blunt as Female Bond/ Bond’s love interest Lashana Lynch as Nomi (reprising her role from No Time To Die) Naomie Harris as MoneyPenny (reprising her role from Skyfall, Spectre, and No Time To Die) Ben Whisaw as Q (reprising his role from Skyfall, Spectre, and No Time To Die) Tom Hardy with Robert Downey Jr Margot Robbie as Female Bond/ 007’s brother’s love interest and Cillian Murphy Olivia Rodrigo or Ed Sheeran & Taylor Swift should write and perform an original theme music Hans Zimmer compose the soundtrack Executive Producers: Zack Snyder Produced By: Christopher McQuarrie p.g.a., Christopher Nolan p.g.a. Emma Thomas p.g.a., Written By: Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Christopher McQuarrie & Christopher Nolan Directed By: Christopher Nolan I also wish that film was 3hrs long like Oppenheimer, and get $2B Box Office film. Production Company: New Line Cinema, Syncopy, Inc. Legendary Pictures, Eon Productions Distributed By: Universal Pictures & Warner Bros. Pictures
Someone else was saying that CN will never end up doing a Bond film because those who control Bond wouldn't cede enough control to make it interesting to CN.
I kinda feel the same way, but Interstellar actually clicks for me because there's an actual moving plot underneath the "did I just blow your mind?" veneer. Tenet just feels tedious and has a very complicated plot that accomplishes very little. I think a lot of sci fi writers fall into the pitfall of making the stakes too high. Whether you're saving a single person or saving the world, the viewer is probably going to feel about the same amount of tension. But we can connect more easily to personal stories, and plus, they feel more believable. By lowering the stakes and making the story more personal, you can actually make the viewer more invested than by choosing the most hyperbolic scenario like "if we don't destroy X, all life in the universe will cease to exist" I can't even comprehend that. I'm not concerned about hypothetical space crabs on a moon near alpha centari. I just want to know that the characters I know are going to be okay.
There are enough movies for kids. Christopher Nolan rebooting Moonraker as a period piece would be brilliant! That book has one of the best female characters in all of Fleming's works.
What about doing a five movies series with each in a different decade, 1960 1970 1980 1990 2010. That could be cool. Then they could use a different actor for each.
I would definitely be interested in seeing Christopher Nolan do a period piece bond movie... But I also don't necessarily want to see him focus the rest of his career on another franchise. It would be more exciting to see him crank out another original masterpiece, rather than existing IP
When Daniel Craig was announced that he was the new James Bond, I was skeptical, because he wasn't a Roger Moore like alike or a Sean Connery male idol, and Casino Royale wasn't a Goldfinger movie, and my sister didn't even want to see Casino Royale, but I saw the movie, & I told her to see it because it was awesome. Daniel Craig was a great Bond, but his contribution to it's success was at most 50%, w/c isn't. The real secret of Casino Royale was the plot, the story. There wasn't much gadgets in the movie and it could've been a 60's or set in the 70's or what ever and it would still be a hit. So you could set it in the 50s or 60s but with a very good story & director, it would sell and with Christopher Nolan to direct it, we couldn't go wrong
Tarantino wanted to make a 60's set Bond film. There are other rumours linking Nolan to Star Wars, but I can't see that one myself. He's always said he wanted to make a Bond.
Nolan should have made James Bond movies for a while now, think about it, Casino Royale is somewhat influenced by Batman Begins which had been released a year earlier, Quantum of Solace came the same year as The Dark Knight, Skyfall came the same year as The Dark Knight Rises , Nolan and his style or way of approaching cinema belong to Bond, I don't understand how EON Productions didn't hire him sooner, but I understand that we still wouldn't have had the gems that Nolan has given us over the years. But this would make me happy as a young Nolan and Bond fan. It's curious that this video was uploaded on the Bond day, so, happy 007 day, cause I rewatched From Russia with Love and Goldfinger, I'm 19 years old and I became a Bond fan after Cars 2, Finn McMissile is the closest we could ever get to Michael Caine playing James Bond.
I wouldn't want a bond set in the 60s. First of all, what makes Bond Movies (even the bad ones) good, is that they are time capsules of the era they are made in. You could see what some relevant things in the world were e.g. in the 80s just by watching the Bond movies from the 80s. Second of all, we had Bond in the 60s. If I want Bond in the 60s I watch Connery (or Lazenby), if I want a 90s Bond I watch Brosnan... I want to look back on Bond26 in 20-30 years and say yeah that was what the 20s were like.
I dont know if i would like bond going back to the 60s in general but i believe that Nolan knows what he is doing. I think no one would have expected that a movie about the father of the atomic bomb that is basically about how this one person handles the stress of being responsible for so many deaths etc would perform so well. Yet it did.
I love Bond and Nolan and would probably like whatever baby they make; But I would be hesitant on him Producing going forward. I don't know what happened with Zach Snyder and DC but i recall Nolan being involved with that to some extent and it didn't really work. I believe Nolan would be much more interested and invested in Bond that the DC super hero stuff post Rises, but it would worry me. There is an art to directing and having that vision but there is also a different art to producing that is very different from directing, That said, I wasn't a fan of No Time To Die. It felt classically saccharine with him dying and all of that. I feel like Peter Griffen when describing the God Father. It insists upon itself.
The only hang up I have with Nolan doing Bond is that whatever filmmaker has to continue that iteration of the character afterwards is going to have a hell of a time navigating that web. Nolan has a very distinct style. To set up the character in that tone then pass it off to someone else seems like they’re setting them up for failure. It’d be like the Pearce Brosnan era all over again where the character started off strong then got worse with each film
Godzilla, James Bond, and Batman our Three Series that Could be a Period Piece in Todays World, i'mean Godzilla Minus-One is almost Obvious, Bond and Nolan could be a Retro-Movie because he already did with Oppenheimer, and Batman: the Animated Series and the Will of Not be Caped Crusader is set in both a 50s and 90s Movie.
I like Nolan, but I don't know. Sam Mendes who directed Skyfall and Spectre was inspired by Nolan, so I fear it'd be to too similar. I don't know if that's what Bond needs, I want Bond 26 to bring in new fans. Also if it's a period piece, I want a 2 parter, maybe trilogy, but not 4-6 films. I'm not sure if a Bond period piece since they do product placements. Also I like how each film is really a period piece. It's really cool to see old Vegas in Diamonds are Forever. Even seeing the older cell phones in Casino Royale.
If Nolan does I want him to make it a period piece. I’m not a massive Bond fan but I enjoyed Connery and Craig’s films so either of those time frames work for me
I think you guys are really missing what would be so smart about going back in time with Bond. It could allow Nolan to do what the X-Men movies did when they initially went back in time and were actually good for a while. People have a small baseline of knowledge about the history at the time, and it could be interesting to see how Bond fits into that world. It could make him interesting in a way that does not force him to rely on relevance to the times. It can make Bond timeless because a period film made by people not from that time will bring out an interesting blend of the time it is set in and the time it is made in. Trust me, after a few movies of it, people will think it was fun and then want to get back to the usual Bond theatrics like people wanted more comic accurate Batman after Nolan's gritty version. I also would love to get more historical movies by Nolan, but that is just because I love history and Nolan and would love to get the two together.
Mr Christopher Nolan will be a good director for James Bond. He did a great job with Batman and Oppenheimer. He just needs to be given some free reign regarding creativity. I. would love to work with Mr Nolan.
Sam Mendes (two 007 movies) was interviewed some years ago and reportedly stated that Daniel Craig's movie career was going to be ruined - 5 episodes with the same narrative, final couple were co produced by Craig, along with him having a net worth of $100m+ - those facts speak for themselves. I've got nothing to go on - apart from reviews of the recent Batman franchise (with Christian Bale in the lead role, along with Michael Caine, Tom Hardy and so many others) and 007 is equally relevant to other fictional characters like Rambo, Wick, McCall and so on. If anything, directing a feature could see Nolan being mentioned alongside John Glen (5), Lewis Gilbert (3), Guy Hamilton (4), Martin Campbell (2) - including others, certainly not forgetting the first, Terence Young, who has a trio under his belt/resumè - Broccoli and Wilson should consider enlisting his services and get back on track!.
I don't really care about who directs the next Bond film, but I would appreciate a fresh, new take on it. No use doing what's done before. I personally do not want to know more about Bond's childhood. He should remain a man of mystery.
Most of the books were published in THE 1950s, not the 60s. Most Agatha Christie adaptations are period pieces. The ones that were updated to whatever present day, tend to be looked down on my her fans. I liked how the 2006 CASINO ROYALE started out with the first half of the film being a brand new contemporary story, and then, halfway in, they ADAPTED THE NOVEL. When I walked out of the theatre, I was actually hoping they'd continue doing that, with the next film being an updated adaptation of LIVE AND LET DIE (the only one of the books I read twice). But then they threw that potential away. I would much prefer adaptations to "new" films that contained random references to earlier stories as "Easter eggs". I'm really fed up with that crap. Back in 1962, EON made a deliberate decision to create their own version of Bond that had little to do with Ian Fleming's character. After this many decades, it would be wonderful to see someone actually adapt his writing to the screen AS HE WROTE IT. We've had so few films in the series ever did that. There's reasons why my favorites include FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. (That one contained references to at least 7 different Fleming stories... similar to the Basil Rathbone film THE SPIDER WOMAN, funny enough.) THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS and LICENSE TO KILL are also among my top faves, simply because Timothy Dalton was playing Fleming's version of the character. And, I feel, he was way better at it than Daniel Craig ever was.
Do YOU think Christopher Nolan should direct Bond 26? 🍸Should James Bond go back to the 60s? Comment below! 💥
No and no. As much as I’d like the ideas, I don’t think either of them would be that good for the franchise.
I love Nolan’s movies and I think a bond movie would be great. I also think his movies are maybe not for everyone. So mixed feelings right there. I’m sure he can make a great 60s Bond but I’m for a now days setting
It should be whatever Nolan wants it to be. He's earned that trust imo. 60s, 50s, 40s, it doesn't matter. As long as he has creative control, it will be good. Likely better than 80% of Bond movies.
Oh, and the younger generations barely even care about movies, let alone the Bond franchise. Please don't cater to an audience that isn't there.
Anyone who is willing to step into the modernized Bond conversation is a fool.
Nolan just made a film set in the 40s about the man who led the creation of the nuclear bomb and you had people excited from all demographics. Something tells me Bond, James Bond in the 60s won’t be a hinderance or liability.
Sure! And we did make that point...it's not that the film wouldn't be successful or highly regarded...it's just would that be the best move for the character. Bond isn't strictly a product of the 60s and bringing him back there could potentially reinforce that idea. I agree, Oppenheimer showed people would be down for a period piece...people being down and it being what's bast for the character are two separate things.
But that was about an actual historical event. James Bond is a fictional character. You are comparing apples and oranges.
@@FilmSpeak Yeah but I don't see why it can't be what's best for the character. They can always steer clear of most of the antiquated and needless stuff that are depicted in the old content and still make it feel like a story about a spy in the 60s. This is not the best example (cause the movie sucks) but Kingsman did that with their latest entry without being controversial.
@@FilmSpeak There is no "best" - it's all subjective. A 60's period piece with the cold-war and secret government CIA type technologies and such that we know was goin on back then could bring some very interesting combinations of 60s time, but with secret high-tech tools that the general public didn't know existed back then, but Bond would use. With the high-stakes tension of such a post World War era, it would be a pretty riveting portrayal of drama in those times, especially with what strikingly impactful vibes we know Nolan can paint in such a setting in Oppenheimer and Dunkirk.
I hope he learns that it's possible to not have blaring music through out the whole movie. I won't watch another Nolan Movie until he learns to allow quiet moments in his movies. Oppenheimer is supposed to be a period piece about scientists working on a project together. Yet he chooses loud soundtrack that makes it seem like it's supposed to be a Transformer movie
Christopher Nolan's direction is superb. Interstellar had me inhaling own tears after the credits start rolling.
He truly is one of the greats!
Honestly it would be a smart way to make Bond relevant today. Nothing more relevant than Nolan right now when it comes to film. I strongly disagree that going back in time would be a bad move, I think it would be a great idea.
I agree that Nolan would get people excited about Bond but idk if setting it in the 60s is the move...idk I don't hate it because I think Nolan is the guy who could make a 60s Bond work...but the idea in general is a bit regressive.
Last Rat Standing.
He’ll be a great bond director.
Film Theory is right. I believed in him and my faith is rewarded.
@@FilmSpeak it isnt, you guys are conflagrating the period the films came out with their setting, making a period bond movie now wouldnt mean making a film like if the one they made in the 60ps, it would be a totally modern take, but in a period setting, its clear to see.
@@FilmSpeak On the contrary, it could be the exact opposite. Something completely fresh, cuz it would be done by Nolan, in the context of today's filmmaking and world. And we all know how Nolan always brings something mindblowingly new and refreshing to the table with each and every film he does.
Bond is relevant the way he was. If they modernize him he isn't James Bond. Most Bond fans hated the last James Bond. We already had a black female 007, and people didnt love it.
Don’t forget that we all clamored for his Directing talent to direct Bond films since after we all saw Inception.
Yeah, and remember we all clamored for J.J. Abrams to direct Star Wars after we'd seen what he'd done with Star Trek, since that seemed like the better fit for his talents, and boy the phrase "be careful what you wish for" as never been more applicable.
The only way he’ll take it and fans will accept it, is if he has 100%, completely full creative control. Let’s see if they give it to him.
I hope it happens!
@@FilmSpeakSame here. Also, to your friend’s point about it feeling antiquated and alienating younger viewers if they set it in the 50s-70s: are we forgetting that one of the most popular franchises of the past decade is Stranger Things, which opened the floodgates for period nostalgia? Younger audiences absolutely love seeing those times.
@@alexman378Stranger Things was set in the ‘80s, so all that tells is that younger audiences would accept ‘80s nostalgia, whereas there’s been other period films like The Man From UNCLE which have tanked.
@@samuelbarber6177 Man From UNCLE also came out a couple months before Spectre and since it didn’t have a ton of marketing, people will choose the popular IP over the unknown one.
Also, you’re forgetting that Nolan is himself a brand. You think if anyone else released an Oppenheimer biopic, it would collect nearly a billion at the box office?
Why would producers gave him full control ? Film making is a team work not a one man buisness. James Bond is a child of broccoli family, film directors are teachers who groom that child for every decade. Director's are supposed to help that child improve not get complete control over that child.
Speaking from someone who enjoyed No Time To Die at the time, but upon reflection not really caring to rewatch it anytime soon, I think Nolan is the perfect choice to reboot the franchise and it needs it. Now that Bond has essentially been deconstructed in the Craig Era, I think it’s time for something different but a little bit more traditional at the same time.
But Nolan doesn’t do traditional Bond. He does the gritty grounded realism. The Craig Bonds are the ones he should’ve directed. After Craig, fans are going to want to see a return to the slightly more fantastical elements of Bond and Nolan can’t do that.
@@Linklex7 I think Nolan can pull it off. You have to remember that inception is a pretty fantastical film, but Nolan grounded the film to where you could get invested in the concept. You believed in the concept so much even though the movie wasn’t realistic. But I hear what you’re saying 🙂
Nolan's Batman is far from gritty, fight scenes were really weird in dark knight, so i believe he could do cinematic bond film with less gritty, just don't let him touch the script, Nolan's film's work best when his brother write script.
Also, i still like No Time To Die, it was perfect end to Craig's bond.
I really hope it’s a period piece, that sounds really exiting to me
I disagree that Bond would not sell if it's a period piece. As a huge fan of the movies and original books, I'm sad that we never got accurate adaptations.
I don't Mind if Nolan made his own Spy Movie, but if he did made his own Bond then i don't mind for a Period Piece. He has done it with Oppenheimer.
He's already made a bunch of his own spy movies lol
Tenet?
Have you not seen Tenet? That’s his James Bond.
Yes if it is perioidic, and doesn't try to murmur a franchise commericalise product. But an ode to the authenticity of James Bond of the time, with an auteurs touch. Something for older adults,
I've been saying for a while that Bond should be in a period setting. It's the only way to set it apart from the recent films.
exactly i think its an amazing idea. it wouldn't be going backward, it would be going "forward", meaning something new and refreshing.
@soulpath1 Yep. He's shown he can do period pieces with The Prestige and Oppenheimer as well as Bond style movies like Inception and Tenet.
His idea for a 1960's James Bond is awesome!
The best way to reboot Bond after the Craig era is to go back in time and make period Bond films, set in the time they were written, and adapt Ian Flemings novels faithfully.
Nolan is so, so good that anything else wouldn't matter if he directs. I blindly trust in his abilities and capabilities to create "The James Bond to end all James Bond".
It feels counterintuitive to not want Nolan to do Bond because it wouldnt create new Bond fans. If he makes 2-3 good Bond films and then he's done, I don't think that leaves them in any worse of a spot than they are now. If nothing else they would have a couple mkre hits under thier belt and a more positive public image of Bond than i think the last 2 of the Craig Era have left. The Craig films already have the feel of a "modern" Bond. If we had a throwback Nolan trilogy, the next set could more easily distiguish itself as modern again with more of a separation. As you mentioned, I feel like a Nolan version of Bond would feel pretty similar tonally to something like Skyfall.
After Craig fans want a bond that’s a bit more fantastical. Nolan can’t do that. By his own admission he doesn’t know how to do fantastical. It would basically just be another Craig film
@@Linklex7no it wouldn’t be another Craig film, it would be similar to a Timothy Dalton film who Nolan named as the best bond or closest to the source material, please do your research
Couldn’t be more wrong. Not only only would the series derive huge benefit by returning to original time, place and setting, but also a huge audience would turn out to watch it. You’re putting way too much importance on woke crap and what’s pc etc, which seems large on social media but is a tiny minority in the real world. Bring on Nolan’s adaptions
Fully agree, the guy on the right is straight up Waffling, Nolan literally made Oppenheimer which did $900m in box office impressive for a period piece, and regardless Nolan will still be able to make such a period piece so cool and relevant and I trust his casting too
So you want a period bond Film so you don’t get black people in it lmao. Damn makes sense why all advocating for it.
Hearing the arguments against setting Bond as a period piece from this guy makes me glad someone like Nolan is in charge, and not him.
Their minds are too infested with twitter loud mouths crying about the period not aligning with todays standards. Just because it is set there, doesn't mean it should cover all aspects of the period. And it's a Bond film, not a period piece based on actual events. And also, we will enjoy that regardless of the setting.
Don’t forget that SkyFall is beat to beat a copy of TDK.
Well that's just not true...
@@FilmSpeak Bro, what are you talking about? Sam Mendes himself admitted to this.
Have you seen older bond film's ? Nolan copied many scenes from older bond film's from skyhook scene from Thunderball, joker shoes was copied from Rosa klebb shoes, Fox character is completely copied from older Q.
Skyfall isn't copy from dark knight.
Sam Mendes already clarified that he never said he copied it.
I think Bond is a period piece precisely because he is contemporary. Watching old Bond movies is like opening a time capsule and peering into a bygone era. Every movie has been set in the modern (contemporary) times and I think it should stay that way.
If tenet is a preview for Nolan’s bond, it will suck. Tenet was unbelievably confusing
If he does a 60s Bond, it should probably be a one-off which I don't think they're looking for. I do like the retro futurist aesthetic for Bond.
Maybe you could do a small Bond anthology run
It being a period piece is what exited me the most
The 60s are incredibly similar to now - and I think tacking out the tech will make a more interesting film.
I think the issue no one's mentioned is if Nolan does adaptations, then the first film will have to be Casino Royale. One of the best, most respected and popular Bond films, and made less than 20 years ago, with the last actor to play Bond. To start off the franchise with this would seem pointless, even with Nolan doing it. The film is also a fairly close adaptation.
The other big problem with faithful adaptations is a lot of the novels is Bond's inner monologue thoughts, including on food, drink, brands. Would that also be incorporated in as a voice-over (Tarantino wanted to do when he was aiming to do CR)? And in a surprising amount of the novels Bond doesn't get the girl, he's more unlucky in love than you'd imagine. Finally, if you're keeping it faithful you need to remember Bond of the books isn't particularly charming or witty. A lot of that was invented for the films. Novel Bond is something of a curmudgeon, and often rude to women and men.
Totally down for a faithful adaptation to Bond from the novels. Most audiences will not love that but with good writing, it'll eventually win them over.
I have concept Nolan directing, Jamie Dornan as James Bond, and Hans Zimmer
Hahaha that would be awesome
I think Nolan would ruin James Bond's career. He already showed his capability for that in Tenet, by casting Kenneth Branagh and Elizabeth Debicki as archetypes. There is only one good reason to look back; and that's to gain insight into the future. Attractive as it seems, I think retrospection shows a failure of nerve
At this point in his career, Christopher Nolan and Bond don't feel compatible. If Nolan made a Nolan movie, it wouldn't be true to what the Bond franchise is, and if Nolan made a Bond movie, it would feel like the movie is holding him back from the high-concept ideas and intricate stroytelling he's great at. I think if it's happening, it will turn out to be a weird compromise that no one's gonna really be satisfied with.
To make a more personal point, I'm a huge Christopher Nolan fan, and a casual Bond fan, and right now, this seems way too similar to James Cameron doing Avatar movies for the rest of his life, and I fear that might happen with Nolan too. I am so saddened by the fact that we lost James Cameron to Avatar, a series which I find painfully mediocre knowing what he can do and I don't want the template of the Bond franchise to shackle Nolan and limit his more creative ideas (while I fully respect and appreciate those templates and their legacy)
Love the videos, man. Keep it up!!!
Thank you dude!
Give Nolan full control and he will deliver. He has always has as proven by every movie he has created. Nolan, in my opinion, is the greatest director of all time. I discovered him via a single copy of Memoir at a video store I worked at when it was a new release. We only had the one copy because he wasn't really known at the time.The dude on the right does not speak for all of us. When you can write like Nolan your speculation will matter. And the only people that think Bond is antiquated are the fools of cancel culture.
I want a Nolan Western or Horror film.
they also said that batman would ruin nolan, but it only made him one of the biggest directors of all time
Not against Nolan doing bond.. but I feel like we already got a nolanish bond in skyfall... Mendes even has gone on record saying skyfall was heavily influenced by The Dark Knight.
I just don't want "Joan\Jane Bond." Besides that I'm ok with pretty much anything. Although Bond is just Batman with guns, no mask, and a better accent.
I would be surprised if MGM and the Broccoli family caves to it being set in the 60’s. They have always stayed with Bond being current to the times. Tarantino wanted to do that with Casino Royale and I think I remember correctly that that was one of the major components they didn’t like about his pitch.
Personally, I think this is all just a baseless rumor. But for the sake of argument as to whether or not a period-set Bond film(s) would be good for the franchise as a whole this discussion really needed to address the fact that 11 years from now the character of James Bond becomes public domain. By spending the interim retreating into the past EON would effectively be throwing up their hands and saying: "We don't know how to make Bond work in the 21st century ".
I think a period Bond could work really well for a reason not mentioned in this video- half of Fleming's Bond books came out in the 50s, not the 60s, and the 50s is an era that has NOT been explored by the films. A 50s Bond could bring something new that we haven't seen before. I also disagree with the idea that Bond has to stay in the present to be relevant, and Christopher Nolan's last film shows that perfectly. Oppenheimer's story and fears are just as relevant today as they were in his era, and a period Bond could be relevant today in a similar way.
If you do Moonraker it basically is a blend of Bond and Oppenheimer.
I think unintentionally inspired someone to give Brad Bird a shot at being a James Bond Director with your Incredibles suggestion
Just please do not let him be in control of the sound mix. I like to hear what the actors are saying.
the dude handled batman to near perfection he can handle bond.
Chris Nolan doesn’t do anything he doesn’t want to. If he approached Eon about James Bond as his first move after the monumental success of Oppenheimer, then I’m sure he’s been sitting on a pretty good idea for a while.
Bond is the alpha male and modern culture has killed the alpha male or made him into a villian. Therefore, you can't have a modern Bond unless he becomes something like Batman or Jason Bourne who isn't "smooth with the ladies" but just doing his job/the right thing and ladies are crossing his path naturally.
0:14: 🎥 There are rumors of a potential Christopher Nolan James Bond movie.
3:21: 🎥 There is a deal being negotiated for Christopher Nolan to direct and write two Bond films, with Amazon and Eon pushing for him and Nolan wanting creative freedom.
6:43: 🎥 The appeal of the James Bond franchise lies in its ability to constantly reinvent itself with every era, while the character remains the same at its core.
19:22: 💭 Some fans are on board with the idea of a time period Bond film because they want Bond to go back to a time where he can be politically incorrect.
9:38: 🎥 The Bond films are known for reflecting the technology and culture of their time, so a modern Bond film would need to incorporate contemporary technology and societal trends.
12:35: 🎥 The TH-camr discusses the possibility of a contemporary adaptation of the James Bond novel 'Moonraker' and the relevance of its themes.
15:46: 🎥 The speaker discusses the perception of a character and the potential impact of a new direction in a film franchise.
22:27: 🎥 The speaker discusses the dedicated fan base of director Christopher Nolan and questions whether his upcoming film will attract new fans or just appeal to his existing fan base.
25:02: 🎥 Christopher Nolan may direct two to three Bond films and become an executive producer.
Recap by Tammy AI
I would do two films. One is to use Thomas Doherty the Connery look-a-like for a one off. Like it was a missing Connery film. The second movie would be more modern with Henry Cavill. That could be called Property of a Lady, Risico, or The Hildebrand Rarity. Nolan stated that he like Timothy Dalton the best but love on Her Majesty's Secret Service as his best film. Aiden Quinn looks more like Dalton.
Didn’t know I would need this video so much, I really didn’t know! Thank you, Griffin! Greetings from Switzerland!
Before watching the video: I actually don’t want Christopher Nolan to direct a Bond film. There are two main reasons for this. Firstly I want James Bond to return to the fun it used to have like in the Pierce Brosnan era and I think Christopher Nolan is much more likely to give us a gritty Bond film that’s more real possibly a bit like Sam Mendes. The 2nd reason is he’ll almost definitely want complete creative control something the producers won’t want to give him and there are always other writers on Bond films.
After watching the video: Ok my case needs a little refinement but I still don’t want him for Bond. Maybe he wouldn’t be that gritty, maybe he wouldn’t be like Sam Mendes but the James Bond franchise used to have certain elements of fun in some action scenes that I’ve never seen proof Nolan could do. Scenes like the Pre-title sequence, car chase and motorbike chase in Tomorrow Never Dies, the Thames chase and Mine sequence in The World is not enough and skiing sequences across the franchise. Don’t get me wrong Nolan is great at action but there is a certain quality to these action sequences in Bond films that I’ve never seen direct proof Nolan could capture and that is a detail that I’m really hoping returns to the franchise.
The guy you interviewed is really uninteresting. His only points is "now is better". "Old man bad".
It's fine to have differing points, but that guy is just rigid and stale in his arguments.
Chris Nolan high concept original > Bond movie
It'd be great if this is timed with the IO interactive video game to. Like Batman with Dark Knight then Arkham Asylum, a nice golden era for the character in two major types of entertainment.
the Last thing i Hope for Nolan is, he put Iko Uwais as the MC in his Movie, Pencak Silat and Mind-Bending Story could he fit that?
I think I’d rather Nolan keep making Nolan movies and someone else do the next Bond.
Amazon wants a 2020s Bond
But Nolan would only make a 60s Bond and it would be fucking amazing but the world has too much hierarchical thinking of Bond and opinions on what it should be that no matter how good the film (hint TDKR) not enough people will allow themselves to enjoy enough to be a The Dark Knight/Inception mega-hit, it a disaster like TDKR which is a prefect film that people don't appreciate unfortunately
How would that work with Universal?
I am so happy that the Dark Knight trilogy.
I agree Nolan should do film
Nolan stated Her Majesty's Secret Service is his nr 1 Bond film. The Snow part of Inception, he stated, is directly referenced by that too.
Nolan’s favorite Bond film is ‘The Spy Who Loved Me.’ That’s a good sign. Definitely has one of the best songs.
I am a young bond fan and my first movie was Skyfall. Going back would be a great idea for my generation. We have modern bond films already with Craig. We need that Connery swagger back in cinema
Oh Nolan is directing batman? This is gonna end his career. Boom.
Nolan is one of my favorite directors…he just doesn’t do fight choreography very well…that’s his only weakness..if he does end up helming any bond movies…he should really think about getting the fight/stunt choreographer who did the two raid movies and gangs of London…that would be a match made in heaven
Griifin just made me want a Christopher Nolan Star Wars movie.
I am late to the party but something I think would be interesting would be a Bond not set in the 1960’s, but rather the 1950’s when the books started to come out. I also think a split from the franchise we know would be best with a new adaptation of Dr. No or Goldfinger by Nolan i’m the 1950’s along with other movies being made at the same time following the usual contemporary formula. This would be that Bond Nolan movie likely with a Tom Hardy as Bond followed by a contemporary Bond with some like an Aaron Taylor Johnson.
The most similar thing to this we have was when they had Batman stuff in the DCEU, Batman stuff with Pattinsons “The Batman” and the Joker with the Joker series all at the same time. People understood they were all different because their styles are so different.
This is what would be a good way to get around putting the Bond series into a corner of period pieces and it would give us the Nolan movies we and he wants and keep the series contemporary.
It won’t ruin Christopher Nolan. People said that about tenet then Oppenheimer came out and everyone loved it. And I agree he will have to write in the lines for which the creators pose on him but he also (maybe to a lesser extent) had to stay between the lines for the dark knight trilogy and people say that is the best superhero trilogy ever made.
Actually this year he was asked whether he’d ever make a Star Wars film and he refused to answer.
I'll watch any Bond without Daniel Craig
He has made james bond films , not the ones that people are accustomed to , if you look at The dark knight Trilogy , inception and Tenet , those are james bond type films all the elements are there . I would love to see him go back to making films like The prestige, Insomnia , Momento etc.
True. A Bond movie would ruin Nolan the same way a Batman movie would ruin Nolan
I think the period piece angle would be intriguing. It would give the world a structural limits that the latest Bond films generally lack. These days, Bond can do anything and the villains have nearly unlimited technological power. I like the idea of a Bond film that creates built-in limits on those elements and I actually think it would ground the film on the people and story. Maybe the Bond aficionados would say that's not the point of a Bond film, but it's a Bond film I'd be interested in seeing.
Get Nolan to direct and Henry Cavill to star and I’m there.
Unlike the sixties, we live in an era oversaturated with franchises that flaunt their tech-“Mission Impossible”, “Kingsmen”, the MCU, the DCU. So constantly trying to outdo that with mere spectacle and concept might be the arms race Nolan is trying to escape. He might want to focus on the tactical, investigative, resourceful appeal of Bond using what’s around him to its fullest; impressing his comrades, instead of US.
I think the biggest thing that’s being missed every time this topic comes up (going back to the 50’s/60’s) is that Bond movies are almost always funded by product placement, in some cases almost entirely. You cannot flog the newest Aston, Heineken, Wilkinsons sword razors, DPD etc etc etc in the period settings. So I think, as much as people want this, EON can’t afford to let this happen.
Nolan would make a great Bond film. But even if it's mediocre, it wouldn't ruin his career. All the greats have made a few forgettable films.
5:03 I think you need to see a Bond movie in period settings first before you knock it. No one has done it yet so you have nothing to base your skepticism on. Tbh, I don’t think anyone even wants to see another “modern” take of Bond. There’re many other movies that do the “modern Bond” better than the actual Bond movies nowadays lol. I’m thinking Atomic Blonde vibes and I’m all for it 🔥
If he ever does direct, write ✍️, and produce a James Bond film, I really hope that Christopher Nolan casts…
Henry Cavill as 007
Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Bond’s brother/ Sidekick
Idris Elba and David Dastmalchian as the Villains
Emily Blunt as Female Bond/ Bond’s love interest
Lashana Lynch as Nomi (reprising her role from No Time To Die)
Naomie Harris as MoneyPenny (reprising her role from Skyfall, Spectre, and No Time To Die)
Ben Whisaw as Q (reprising his role from Skyfall, Spectre, and No Time To Die)
Tom Hardy
with Robert Downey Jr
Margot Robbie as Female Bond/ 007’s brother’s love interest
and Cillian Murphy
Olivia Rodrigo or Ed Sheeran & Taylor Swift should write and perform an original theme music
Hans Zimmer compose the soundtrack
Executive Producers: Zack Snyder
Produced By: Christopher McQuarrie p.g.a., Christopher Nolan p.g.a.
Emma Thomas p.g.a.,
Written By: Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Christopher McQuarrie & Christopher Nolan
Directed By: Christopher Nolan
I also wish that film was 3hrs long like Oppenheimer, and get $2B Box Office film.
Production Company: New Line Cinema, Syncopy, Inc. Legendary Pictures, Eon Productions
Distributed By: Universal Pictures & Warner Bros. Pictures
Someone else was saying that CN will never end up doing a Bond film because those who control Bond wouldn't cede enough control to make it interesting to CN.
I kinda feel the same way, but Interstellar actually clicks for me because there's an actual moving plot underneath the "did I just blow your mind?" veneer.
Tenet just feels tedious and has a very complicated plot that accomplishes very little.
I think a lot of sci fi writers fall into the pitfall of making the stakes too high. Whether you're saving a single person or saving the world, the viewer is probably going to feel about the same amount of tension. But we can connect more easily to personal stories, and plus, they feel more believable. By lowering the stakes and making the story more personal, you can actually make the viewer more invested than by choosing the most hyperbolic scenario like "if we don't destroy X, all life in the universe will cease to exist"
I can't even comprehend that. I'm not concerned about hypothetical space crabs on a moon near alpha centari. I just want to know that the characters I know are going to be okay.
Strangely enough, Tarantino also wanted to do a period piece take on Bond with Casino Royale.
A Christopher Nolan X Idris Elba Bond film would genuinely be incredible.
Hopefully he got apart in Batman: Caped Crusader.
There are enough movies for kids. Christopher Nolan rebooting Moonraker as a period piece would be brilliant! That book has one of the best female characters in all of Fleming's works.
What about doing a five movies series with each in a different decade, 1960 1970 1980 1990 2010. That could be cool. Then they could use a different actor for each.
I would definitely be interested in seeing Christopher Nolan do a period piece bond movie... But I also don't necessarily want to see him focus the rest of his career on another franchise. It would be more exciting to see him crank out another original masterpiece, rather than existing IP
If he directs James Bond just keep the strong independent women out of it and for God’s sake don’t let Phoebe Waller Bridge anywhere near the script!
When Daniel Craig was announced that he was the new James Bond, I was skeptical, because he wasn't a Roger
Moore like alike or a Sean Connery male idol, and Casino Royale wasn't a Goldfinger movie, and my sister didn't
even want to see Casino Royale, but I saw the movie, & I told her to see it because it was awesome. Daniel Craig
was a great Bond, but his contribution to it's success was at most 50%, w/c isn't. The real secret of Casino Royale
was the plot, the story. There wasn't much gadgets in the movie and it could've been a 60's or set in the 70's or
what ever and it would still be a hit. So you could set it in the 50s or 60s but with a very good story & director, it
would sell and with Christopher Nolan to direct it, we couldn't go wrong
Tarantino wanted to make a 60's set Bond film. There are other rumours linking Nolan to Star Wars, but I can't see that one myself. He's always said he wanted to make a Bond.
I feel like parts of his batman films and tenet are james bond
Nolan should have made James Bond movies for a while now, think about it, Casino Royale is somewhat influenced by Batman Begins which had been released a year earlier, Quantum of Solace came the same year as The Dark Knight, Skyfall came the same year as The Dark Knight Rises , Nolan and his style or way of approaching cinema belong to Bond, I don't understand how EON Productions didn't hire him sooner, but I understand that we still wouldn't have had the gems that Nolan has given us over the years. But this would make me happy as a young Nolan and Bond fan.
It's curious that this video was uploaded on the Bond day, so, happy 007 day, cause I rewatched From Russia with Love and Goldfinger, I'm 19 years old and I became a Bond fan after Cars 2, Finn McMissile is the closest we could ever get to Michael Caine playing James Bond.
yeah lol begins influenced royale and dark knight influenced skyfall. its crazy.
See wat he did for batman?
Yeah! It was perfect. It was also in a modern setting.
I wouldn't want a bond set in the 60s. First of all, what makes Bond Movies (even the bad ones) good, is that they are time capsules of the era they are made in. You could see what some relevant things in the world were e.g. in the 80s just by watching the Bond movies from the 80s. Second of all, we had Bond in the 60s. If I want Bond in the 60s I watch Connery (or Lazenby), if I want a 90s Bond I watch Brosnan... I want to look back on Bond26 in 20-30 years and say yeah that was what the 20s were like.
I dont know if i would like bond going back to the 60s in general but i believe that Nolan knows what he is doing. I think no one would have expected that a movie about the father of the atomic bomb that is basically about how this one person handles the stress of being responsible for so many deaths etc would perform so well. Yet it did.
I love Bond and Nolan and would probably like whatever baby they make; But I would be hesitant on him Producing going forward. I don't know what happened with Zach Snyder and DC but i recall Nolan being involved with that to some extent and it didn't really work. I believe Nolan would be much more interested and invested in Bond that the DC super hero stuff post Rises, but it would worry me. There is an art to directing and having that vision but there is also a different art to producing that is very different from directing,
That said, I wasn't a fan of No Time To Die. It felt classically saccharine with him dying and all of that. I feel like Peter Griffen when describing the God Father. It insists upon itself.
The only hang up I have with Nolan doing Bond is that whatever filmmaker has to continue that iteration of the character afterwards is going to have a hell of a time navigating that web. Nolan has a very distinct style. To set up the character in that tone then pass it off to someone else seems like they’re setting them up for failure. It’d be like the Pearce Brosnan era all over again where the character started off strong then got worse with each film
Godzilla, James Bond, and Batman our Three Series that Could be a Period Piece in Todays World, i'mean Godzilla Minus-One is almost Obvious, Bond and Nolan could be a Retro-Movie because he already did with Oppenheimer, and Batman: the Animated Series and the Will of Not be Caped Crusader is set in both a 50s and 90s Movie.
That was basically the case I was making but only if he helms it.
I like Nolan, but I don't know. Sam Mendes who directed Skyfall and Spectre was inspired by Nolan, so I fear it'd be to too similar. I don't know if that's what Bond needs, I want Bond 26 to bring in new fans. Also if it's a period piece, I want a 2 parter, maybe trilogy, but not 4-6 films. I'm not sure if a Bond period piece since they do product placements. Also I like how each film is really a period piece. It's really cool to see old Vegas in Diamonds are Forever. Even seeing the older cell phones in Casino Royale.
If Nolan does I want him to make it a period piece. I’m not a massive Bond fan but I enjoyed Connery and Craig’s films so either of those time frames work for me
I think a 60’s set Bond would do well. That was my favourite part about The Man From UNCLE
I think you guys are really missing what would be so smart about going back in time with Bond. It could allow Nolan to do what the X-Men movies did when they initially went back in time and were actually good for a while. People have a small baseline of knowledge about the history at the time, and it could be interesting to see how Bond fits into that world. It could make him interesting in a way that does not force him to rely on relevance to the times. It can make Bond timeless because a period film made by people not from that time will bring out an interesting blend of the time it is set in and the time it is made in. Trust me, after a few movies of it, people will think it was fun and then want to get back to the usual Bond theatrics like people wanted more comic accurate Batman after Nolan's gritty version. I also would love to get more historical movies by Nolan, but that is just because I love history and Nolan and would love to get the two together.
Mr Christopher Nolan will be a good director for James Bond. He did a great job with Batman and Oppenheimer. He just needs to be given some free reign regarding creativity. I. would love to work with Mr Nolan.
Sam Mendes (two 007 movies) was interviewed some years ago and reportedly stated that Daniel Craig's movie career was going to be ruined - 5 episodes with the same narrative, final couple were co produced by Craig, along with him having a net worth of $100m+ - those facts speak for themselves.
I've got nothing to go on - apart from reviews of the recent Batman franchise (with Christian Bale in the lead role, along with Michael Caine, Tom Hardy and so many others) and 007 is equally relevant to other fictional characters like Rambo, Wick, McCall and so on.
If anything, directing a feature could see Nolan being mentioned alongside John Glen (5), Lewis Gilbert (3), Guy Hamilton (4), Martin Campbell (2) - including others, certainly not forgetting the first, Terence Young, who has a trio under his belt/resumè - Broccoli and Wilson should consider enlisting his services and get back on track!.
I don't really care about who directs the next Bond film, but I would appreciate a fresh, new take on it. No use doing what's done before. I personally do not want to know more about Bond's childhood. He should remain a man of mystery.
Most of the books were published in THE 1950s, not the 60s.
Most Agatha Christie adaptations are period pieces. The ones that were updated to whatever present day, tend to be looked down on my her fans.
I liked how the 2006 CASINO ROYALE started out with the first half of the film being a brand new contemporary story, and then, halfway in, they ADAPTED THE NOVEL. When I walked out of the theatre, I was actually hoping they'd continue doing that, with the next film being an updated adaptation of LIVE AND LET DIE (the only one of the books I read twice). But then they threw that potential away. I would much prefer adaptations to "new" films that contained random references to earlier stories as "Easter eggs". I'm really fed up with that crap.
Back in 1962, EON made a deliberate decision to create their own version of Bond that had little to do with Ian Fleming's character. After this many decades, it would be wonderful to see someone actually adapt his writing to the screen AS HE WROTE IT. We've had so few films in the series ever did that. There's reasons why my favorites include FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE, and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. (That one contained references to at least 7 different Fleming stories... similar to the Basil Rathbone film THE SPIDER WOMAN, funny enough.) THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS and LICENSE TO KILL are also among my top faves, simply because Timothy Dalton was playing Fleming's version of the character. And, I feel, he was way better at it than Daniel Craig ever was.