Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

New Bond Film: Skyfall


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
383 replies to this topic

#1 of 384 OFFLINE   Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer



  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted June 19 2009 - 08:37 PM

Morgan, Purvis and Wade to
work on Bond, James Bond


LOS ANGELES, June 12 – Producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli of EON Productions Ltd and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures have today announced that Peter Morgan (Frost/Nixon, The Queen), Neal Purvis and Robert Wade (Quantum of Solace, Casino Royale) will be the screenwriters of the 23rd James Bond adventure.

Daniel Craig will reprise his role as Ian Fleming’s James Bond 007 in the film, which will be a MGM release of an EON production. Bond 23 is the latest installment in the longest-running franchise in motion picture history and will be produced by Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli. A date for the start of production is yet to be confirmed.

“Peter, Neal and Robert are extraordinarily talented and we’re looking forward to working with the three of them,” commented Wilson and Broccoli.

Peter Morgan is the award-winning writer of such films as The Last King of Scotland, The Queen and Frost/Nixon, which was based on his play. He has also scripted the upcoming The Special Relationship for HBO and Hereafter for DreamWorks. He will turn his attention to Bond 23 on completion of these duties. Morgan is represented by UTA (US) and Independent Talent Group (UK).

Since 1991 Neal Purvis and Robert Wade have collaborated on a diverse range of projects including The Italian Job, Johnny English and the past four Bond films. They recently adapted John Le Carre’s The Mission Song and are also working on the upcoming sequel The Brazilian Job. Purvis and Wade are represented by Endeavor (US), Casarotto Ramsay & Associates (UK).

more here
Bond begins anew with scribe trio - Entertainment News, Gotham, Media - Variety

#2 of 384 OFFLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer



  • 5,342 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted June 19 2009 - 09:37 PM

Why is this bad news??
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#3 of 384 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 22,173 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 19 2009 - 11:21 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino
Why is this bad news??
Got me but I'm sure it has something to do with Casino Royale.

#4 of 384 OFFLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator



  • 24,844 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted June 19 2009 - 11:49 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino
Why is this bad news??
That it's actually going to be made.Posted Image

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#5 of 384 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,288 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted June 20 2009 - 03:32 AM

I have yet to come across a Purvis and Wade Bond picture that I haven't enjoyed. True, The World Is Not Enough doesn't hold up spectacularly well on repeat viewings and Die Another Day is entertaining but riddiculous. But whatever Richard might say, Casino Royale was one of the best Bond films ever, and Quantum of Solace was great "minor" Bond.

Peter Morgan's an interesting choice to replace Paul Haggis on polish duties, though. Nothing in his filmography of very internalized melodramas seems to point to the Bond franchise. It should be interesting.

#6 of 384 OFFLINE   DavidJ

DavidJ

    Screenwriter



  • 2,585 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 23 2001
  • Real Name:David

Posted June 20 2009 - 05:50 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Lenhardt
I have yet to come across a Purvis and Wade Bond picture that I haven't enjoyed. True, The World Is Not Enough doesn't hold up spectacularly well on repeat viewings and Die Another Day is entertaining but riddiculous. But whatever Richard might say, Casino Royale was one of the best Bond films ever, and Quantum of Solace was great "minor" Bond.

Peter Morgan's an interesting choice to replace Paul Haggis on polish duties, though. Nothing in his filmography of very internalized melodramas seems to point to the Bond franchise. It should be interesting.

Dang it, Adam. You always seem to just beat me to the post and after I read your posts I don't really have much to add. Posted Image

I really like the mix of writers that they have on this one. As much as I liked the last two, I thought that going forward they needed to add back some of the lighter, fun elements that have been associated with the franchise. Those associated with the franchise seem to agree. Purvis and Wade are a good choice in that respect and the inertia of the "first two" films should keep them from swinging too far to the ridiculous.

I love the choice of Morgan for polish duties as he'll keep it grounded. I'd hate to see them throw away the character development of the first two movies and that shouldn't happen with Morgan. A specialist in "internalized melodramas" seems a perfect choice to me.

#7 of 384 OFFLINE   Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter



  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted June 20 2009 - 06:55 AM

I've enjoyed most of the (Bond) movies Purvis and Wade have been involved with, but I wouldn't credit them with any of that. Sometimes it's more in spite of them.
"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#8 of 384 OFFLINE   Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer



  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted June 20 2009 - 07:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino
Why is this bad news??
I suppose a new Bond film is good news, but it's bad news that Purvis and Wade are writing the screenplay. The quality of their work is consistent dreck, but they know how to give the producers what they want. The producers don't need Purvis and Wade. Haggis could have written better scripts for the last two films without them. Peter Morgan can certainly write better scripts without them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zack Gibbs
I've enjoyed most of the (Bond) movies Purvis and Wade have been involved with, but I wouldn't credit them with any of that. Sometimes it's more in spite of them.
Astute observation.
Bad writing has plagued the series for a long time. Eon knows that good writing isn't important so long the script creates an event. A Bond film is an event, and they will make just as much money with bad writing as with good.

#9 of 384 OFFLINE   Sam Favate

Sam Favate

    Producer



  • 4,897 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2004
  • Real Name:Sam Favate

Posted June 20 2009 - 07:51 AM

Hey, mods, can we change the title of this thread, as I doubt most of us would say the item posted is "bad news"? Maybe just call it "Bond 23"?

#10 of 384 OFFLINE   Joe Karlosi

Joe Karlosi

    Producer



  • 6,001 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 05 2003

Posted June 20 2009 - 09:38 AM

Doesn't sound like bad news to me. I liked CASINO ROYALE (not QUANTUM OF SOLACE, though). But then again, I can watch and appreciate any Bond movie.

#11 of 384 OFFLINE   Ray H

Ray H

    Producer



  • 3,481 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 13 2002
  • Real Name:Ray
  • LocationNJ

Posted June 20 2009 - 10:12 AM

Morgan's an interesting pick as a writer, but it hardly ever matters. The Bond franchise has a long history of picking filmmakers that aren't typically known for making action movies and it's typically hit or miss.
"Here's looking at you, kid."

 


#12 of 384 OFFLINE   Ron-P

Ron-P

    Producer



  • 6,283 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000
  • Real Name:Ron

Posted June 20 2009 - 02:13 PM

Not bad news to me either, actually, quite good news. Looking very forward to this as the last two have been some of, if not, the best Bond films todate.
You have all the weapons you need...Now fight!


#13 of 384 OFFLINE   Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Producer



  • 5,640 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted June 20 2009 - 03:14 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Favate
Hey, mods, can we change the title of this thread, as I doubt most of us would say the item posted is "bad news"? Maybe just call it "Bond 23"?

Why? The OP thinks it is bad news that two writers he has a low opinion of are going to be involved, yet again, in the new Bond flick. He seems to be a big Bond fan and thinks the last two outings have a lot of problems as Bond films. I agree with some of his points regarding "Casino Royale" and other points I don't. People can disagree with his conclusion that these two writers are "bad news" for the series, but he obviously feels differently and started this thread with that conclusion in mind.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#14 of 384 OFFLINE   Josh Dial

Josh Dial

    Screenwriter



  • 2,593 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2000

Posted June 20 2009 - 04:19 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
Why? The OP thinks it is bad news that two writers he has a low opinion of are going to be involved, yet again, in the new Bond flick. He seems to be a big Bond fan and thinks the last two outings have a lot of problems as Bond films. I agree with some of his points regarding "Casino Royale" and other points I don't. People can disagree with his conclusion that these two writers are "bad news" for the series, but he obviously feels differently and started this thread with that conclusion in mind.

Maybe because given the amount of members this forum has, and its place at the top of similar-type forums, the owners and mods like to keep the number of threads to a minimum. While it's fine for a thread-starter to voice an opinion, I think the community is better served with a neutral thread title--otherwise it's a slippery slope towards "good news for Bond 23," "More bad new for Bond," and "OMG Can U blieve the new bond newz?"

#15 of 384 OFFLINE   Sam Favate

Sam Favate

    Producer



  • 4,897 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2004
  • Real Name:Sam Favate

Posted June 21 2009 - 03:02 AM

Since this is the first thread on Bond 23 and is likely to be around a while, I think it only fair not to saddle the production and the film with such an unfortunate title to the thread. Given the immense blockbuster status of the last two films, it hardly seems a stretch to say most people won't consider this "bad news."

#16 of 384 OFFLINE   Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter



  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted June 21 2009 - 03:40 AM

Then just start a new Bond thread and let this one die. The moderators wont do anything about it unless you bug them.
"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#17 of 384 OFFLINE   Brent M

Brent M

    Producer



  • 4,486 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2001

Posted June 21 2009 - 04:28 AM

The title of this thread is just stupid, not to mention very misleading. I clicked on it expecting to read that either the film wasn't being made or Craig would not be reprising his role. It should be called "news about Bond 23" or something to that effect.
"If you're good at something, never do it for free."

#18 of 384 OFFLINE   Jason Hughes

Jason Hughes

    Supporting Actor



  • 882 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 17 1998

Posted June 21 2009 - 11:13 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent M
The title of this thread is just stupid, not to mention very misleading. I clicked on it expecting to read that either the film wasn't being made or Craig would not be reprising his role. It should be called "news about Bond 23" or something to that effect.

Amen. Stupid is putting it mildly...
Government in action = Government inaction

#19 of 384 OFFLINE   Ron-P

Ron-P

    Producer



  • 6,283 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000
  • Real Name:Ron

Posted June 21 2009 - 11:44 AM

Just PM the OP, he should be able to go into the edit feature, advanced, and change the title himself.
You have all the weapons you need...Now fight!


#20 of 384 OFFLINE   Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer



  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted June 22 2009 - 06:22 AM

Okay, I adjusted the thread title because some of you are expressing distress and anxiety, and I want everybody to be happy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent M
The title of this thread is just stupid,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Hughes
Amen. Stupid is putting it mildly...
Some people have very strong feelings about the Bond films. Some people feel so strongly about Bond films they think it gives them license to insult other people personally instead of discussing / debating the film.

The involvement of Neal Purvis and Robert Wade in the next Bond film is bad news. Really bad news. Hence the original title of the thread. If the mods want to change it to Bond 23, it's okay with me. Changing the title of the thread won't change the fact that the involvement of Purvis and Wade as screenwriters in the next Bond is bad news. Really bad news. Or, the thread title could be changed to Stop! Or My M. Will Shoot! Again! which would give everyone an accurate idea of what to expect from the next Bond script by Purvis and Wade.


Back to Movies (Theatrical)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow