And always has been part of it. DAF only exists as it does because of United Artists insisting it had to be Connery. The Bond of the 80’s was a series of increasingly smaller budget thrillers because MGM were trying bully Broccoli into doing what they wanted. Eon, if anything, are on safer grounds than they’ve ever been with “We outlasted 2 studios, and it was us who gave them any worth at all” on their CV
5 Likes
This article written by John Logan is one of the most hilarious self-promoting and unnecessary pieces I have read in a long time - and this is saying a lot since we’re living in an age of unnecessary stupidity during which people voice their opinions as if they have the right to be wrong all the time and still be proud of it.
You could (and should) give this article a new headline and it would be immediately accurate: “John Logan thinks he co-created all the films he is credited on and needs to remind the world that he did it and therefore has the authority he does not have to say anything worth reading”.
You don´t believe me? Just look at every title he mentions and how he introduces them: “when we created”, “when we suggested”, “I wrote” - and of course, it´s always stuff the big name directors were attached to (me and Sam and Marty and so on). He somehow forgets the “when Stuart and I created Star Trek: NEMESIS and ruined the chances of the franchise to go on”.
Reality check: Logan is one of those in-jokes within the industry, a kind of parasite who attaches himself to big-name directors by sucking up so completely that he is extremely easy to work with (and therefore called in again and again by big ego directors who need their yes men on call 24 hours a day).
But somehow Logan has managed to persuade himself that he actually co-created all of these films when he actually did not. He was re-written, polished or thrown out when he did not really hit the mark. Only the complicated and often highly unfair rules of credit giving enabled him to put his names on posters and awards.
He is one of the biggest self-promoters in the business which needs to be since he actually is not successful whenever he tries to create something just by himself.
When was the last time Logan had a big success?
Exactly. But he seems to have a friend at the NYT.
So, wow, the deal with Amazon gives him the chills. Probably because he was not called back to write for any Bond films at all.
And no, he did NOT write SKYFALL. And he did NOT write SPECTRE. He was brought in by Mendes to polish SKYFALL (with ideas by Mendes and Bardem, not originating with himself) and when he delivered a script for SPECTRE Mendes noticed what a disaster it was and went back to P&W begging them to start from scratch).
So, Logan… no.
Kermode-like rant ending here.
4 Likes
And here’s already Amazon´s trailer for a reboot, combining the Bond universe into one film:
4 Likes
I refer to this books opinion on this
Anyone bothered by the re-casting of actors in a work of fiction should get out more
2 Likes
Thank you for this!
I’ve never gotten past him being Oscar nominated for ‘Gladiator’, which is an absolute insult to the entire heritage sector.
1 Like
I doubt the Bonds were ever so ringfenced. Wasn’t it United Artists who insisted on Connery coming back and that all the money was spent on him rather than plot / class / sets / rest of the cast, and someone-or-other encouraging the nudging of Mr Dalt-Ton out the door, more or less? The MGM roster of artistes to cross-promote other grotty entertainment product may explain several casting decisions.
Those emails the North Koreans got hold of about how Sony was tinkering with Spectre tended to show considerable interference. And appalling spelling.
Everything’s a compromise. The $ determines. They’re just $300 million watch and beer adverts, anyway.
4 Likes
The beer mostly paying for the bling no doubt.
1 Like
Wait a gosh darn minute!
Are you saying these weren’t made purely for artistic vision!?!?
4 Likes
John Logan wrote all those ads.
3 Likes
…I do kind of like the newest Heineken ad. It’s weird but I get a chuckle out of Daniel throwing his arms out when the band starts to play the Bond theme, as if to say, “ C’mon, guys.”
And I like what Logan seemed to add to Skyfall. Some of the better scenes and dialogue exchanges seem to come from him. Spectre yeah, it seems like his stuff was mostly jettisoned (though I think the Day of the Dead stuff was his, which arguably is the best bit in the film). All valid points though!
Why so?
Sam Mendes repeatedly noted Logan’s contributions as being particularly impactful on the script. At 11:52 of the video below he touches on Logan’s work, while later in the video he mentions that when dialogue needed tweaking it went to John:
A specific scene that springs to mind (short though it is) is the word association sequence (I don’t feel like digging but I believe it’s mentioned on the audio commentary that Logan put that scene together and Mendes loved its use in the teaser trailer). In the article in the NYT it seems like he also pitched and helped write the more interesting aspects of Silva’s introduction, as well, though the video above shows that the original scene John had written involved Bond being knocked out on Severine’s yacht and then awakening with the villain in front of him. The intro as a long take oner appears to have been Mendes’ idea (collaboration at its finest). I don’t have a copy of Some Kind of Hero (waiting for a NTTD edition) but if somebody does have a copy they can check to see what they were able to dig up as far as Logan’s contributions go. That being said his dialogue style is fairly easy to pick up on (watch the dialogue rhythms of Penny Dreadful and then the dialogue exchanges between Bond and Severine or M and Bond, and you’ll note the similarities). Mendes frequently heaped praise on Logan throughout the press tour and afterwards, though, and I’d be surprised if getting P&W back for Spectre didn’t include some apologies for the way their work was somewhat dismissed.
Edit:
One more quick clip of Mendes discussing Logan’s work here starting at 28:47:
2 Likes
Thanks for giving this thorough answer!
To clear things up: I am not saying that Logan is an incapable writer. I am saying that he is not as good as he claims to be, nor does he himself create scenes such as Mendes is referring to… in a PR piece.
To burst anyone’s bubbles about writing for movies and television. Writers deliver first drafts, sometimes without prior input, most of the time with A LOT OF input from producers, studio executives, directors and actors (and their spouses).
An experienced writer will be able to combine all that input with his own ideas and manage to mix it so most involved will be happy.
For that talent is needed - but MOST OF ALL sheer dumb luck.
And if you want to have a career that will last many years you attach yourself to a name director, often swallow your pride and enable his vision rather than your own. Logan is very adept at that and famous for it.
But he is not as good as he is at making people think he is. And the particular Silva entry scene - well, there were interviews which clearly had Bardem positioned as the one who sculpted it.
Who is right? Everybody, of course. They are all contributing to it. PR fluff however never tells you the real story, only the narrative that needs to be established.
And for the Craig era the most important angle was: Bond is not just Action entertainment anymore, we attract OSCAR people. Whether it was Paul Haggis (nobody wants to mention him anymore) or John Logan - their names were the important selling point. And the Pawlowian reflex worked: oh, they must have been responsible for the good stuff.
Did anybody read every draft and attend every script conference in order to make an informed statement? No.
And forget about the myth of award-winning people being better at their job. They are not. Actors, writers, directors, producers and so on who never got awards are just as great if not better. And before you ask - I have won a prestigious award and I know other people were better. Heck, another script of mine in the same year was even better than the one I got the award for.
As for „Some kind of hero“, by the way: I enjoyed it a lot - but it also mainly relies on the PR statements.
1 Like
The actors spouse is often the most reasonable.
In my experience it’s the attaching yourself to the director or producer that protects you from the accounts 14 year old son’s cool idea. The line “no, no, that sounds great, but I’m only here at the behest of Jenny, so pitch it to her, and if she likes it I’ll add it” reduces the third parties.
“Jenny” is lead producer and very much not a yes woman. The idea of accountants 14 year old son is quickly and completely forgotten.
I have no doubt P&W have used BB’s name in exactly that context, the same as Logan used Mendes.
1 Like
Fabulous!
Fair enough! I’m obviously not in the industry (just a fan!) and clearly the whole enterprise of making a film is collaborative and filled with concessions, small victories, happy accidents, with undoubted influence coming from those particular voices that have most closely aligned themselves with the shot callers (like many lines of work I suppose). I was just making the point that at least according to what’s on record, which you are correct in pointing out is all part of the PR campaign, Logan’s efforts really helped sculpt the film into what we see today. Again, I see what you’re saying and it’s clear Logan at the time worked well with Sam Mendes (which led to Penny Dreadful) so there may have been some extra praise heaped on him (doesn’t make him a bad guy!). All the same, in the end it’s the overall collaborative effort that leads to what we get to complain about (also known as “the film”), I was just pointing out what had been thrown out there at the time, but who knows?
To try to steer things back a bit, I don’t share many of Logan’s concerns. I’m mostly just happy Bond is (hopefully) going to be on more stable footing once the deal goes through. We’ll see how the character gets handled as time goes on and as the current regime starts to retire. I’m not worried. I can’t imagine a scenario where they won’t have my money. I’m in it too deep!
4 Likes
Absolutely, well said!
I’d much rather Bond be in the hands of an actual studio who really knows how to produce original content. Amazon, for all the money and power that they command on a global scale, just doesn’t have that expertise. Their streaming service is middle-of-the-road when compared to others, and their original programming trails far behind that of their contemporaries. This isn’t really what I’d want for Bond once Barbara and Michael are no longer running things and Amazon begins to become more involved in the creative aspect of the films.
Ideally, Bond would have ended up at an actual movie studio who knows how to do these things, but if we were looking at Bond going to an outfit that is primarily known for their streaming service, there are better places for Bond to have ended up.
1 Like
I would assume that even when BB and MG hand over the reins, it’ll be to a creative team of their choosing under the Eon umbrella. The relationship with Amazon and Eon all stay the same. Meaning, Amazon won’t suddenly have more creative sway over the direction of the Bond series just because BB and MG move on. If I’m wrong, I’m pleased to be corrected.
5 Likes
We’re talking about this scenario for years now, MGM going belly up or just hoovered by some bigger fish. Also, streaming has been a concern for years now, even well before the pandemic*. It’s downright impossible something of this magnitude happens in the Bond-sphere without fans and professionals being concerned in some way or other. The future of the franchise has been speculated in multiple possible iterations - and not seldom has the argument been 007 had to come closer to Marvel and its highly successful output.
*Some years ago, NO TIME TO DIE didn’t yet have a name; I’m not even sure if Craig’s comeback had been announced yet, I suggested a streaming future for Bond, I just can’t find that post any more.
2 Likes