CommanderBond.net

From CBn's [dark], on the main page...

Why Michell Moved On From Bond

'We couldn't find a way of making us all happy with the script.'

from http://www.moviehole.net/news/20070301_why...nubbed_007.html

Interesting. I don't know whether this is good or bad news. It's probably neither, actually. Who knows what Michell was demanding of the screenplay?

This thread titles wrong as what Mitchell actually sais is that he couldn't agree with the producers (or writers) where the script should go, which means its not actually written. This seems likely as the last time a director meddled with a script he put very Crap material in it (we all shudder as we remeber the CGI tsunami)

He says they went through various drafts.

Yeah its just professional Bond-haters moviehole trying to stir up trouble (this is the same site that claimed all early reviewers of CR were on Sony's payroll). Even if there is truth to it, I'd certainly put my faith in the judgment of the Casino Royale writers and producers rather than Roger Michell.

Yeah, I find Moviehole to be about as reliable as a paper umbrella.

You mean the people who gave us Die Another Day?

I think a LOT of the credit for Casino Royale goes to Ian Fleming and Paul Haggis.

I hope so, otherwise I'd think it very unprofessional and rude of Michell to be making negative public comments about a project he isn't involved with any longer and which hasn't even been made by anyone yet. He's entitled to his views on the BOND 22 script, of course, but it would be uncalled-for at this particular point in time to air them other than in private.

Second! (Sorry, I was in a proceedural meeting today). Eon have never run aground when they've stayed true to large chunks of Fleming's material.

I suspect Roger Michel's statements are more about self-preservation than anything else. Filmmakers are always attached and then un-attached from projects - it's the nature of the business. Bond is definitely hotter than it's been for awhile (from an employment point-of-view) and no doubt this director just wants to find a different way of saying that he didn't want to be, or was no longer wanted on, the project.

You are correct, DLibrasnow, that is exactly who I meant.

I'd put my faith in the writers and producers of THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, even though I hate THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. Because they've just given us CASINO ROYALE.

And Daniel Craig. And Martin Campbell (who would've known?).

What hurt TWINE and DAD, IMO, is bad dialogue (Haggis prevented that with CR), bad direction (well, at least in Apted's case), and a lead actor at his weakest in one instance and most disinterested in the other (unlike Craig, who was quite the opposite of both). Oh, and lazy reliance on bad CGI.

Bond 22 is in good hands if a capable, engaged director takes the helm and if a script/dialogue polisher is on board, presuming that Craig and P&W stay at the top of their game (which I think they will).

Anyway, I doubt the veracity of this Michell quote, but even if it's true, there's no reason to panic, as (1) maybe Michell's ideas for Bond are actually the bad ones and not whatever was in that script, and (2) whatever is written at this point is probably a very rough draft.

Maybe the success of his recent Venus had Michell thinking twice about doing something more commercial like Bond. Which is okay with me as he seems more comfortable doing female-friendly dramas. His plus was having worked with Craig before, but then again if the material is right Craig could probably work with anybody.

From CBn's [dark], on the main page...

Why Michell Moved On From Bond

'We couldn't find a way of making us all happy with the script.'