Future Bond Directors

It’s an old rumour.

It’s credibility hinges on Nolan already having stated that he loves the Bond films and would be interested.

With „Oppenheimer“ being a serious Oscar contender he would be the kind of director EON is courting for Bond.

In the end it will all be about how much control they would give him. Nolan certainly wants a lot of control.

I hope he will do it, not with ATJ, however, but with someone surprising.

1 Like

A small thing people keep forgetting is there’s a strike happening. Christopher Nolan is WGA. He’s not doing anything for now.

Otherwise I agree with @secretagentfan on the level of control he would want, especially given his producer is his wife and his writing partner, when he’s not doing it himself, is his brother.

1 Like

I wonder if the movie going public would see it as a Christopher Nolan movie, or a James Bond movie?

1 Like


And I think that would be a great thing for Bond.


As the custodian I really think Barbara should have the power in casting James Bond. As much as I’d find it a marketing slam dunk to have Nolan, I’d rather go with someone else if he decided to play hard ball. As I’ve said before it’s not just one movie but an era that is being launched. Once he’s gone the series continues onwards and other directors step in. But if all parties managed to come to an agreement, it certainly would help ensure Bond 26 was an almost guaranteed success.


I‘m sure EON will not allow anything they don’t want.

And Nolan is a professional. He would not throw tantrums to get what he wants if EON vetoed it.

I could imagine, however, considering the timing of Bond films these days, that Nolan could be brought in to do a trilogy. Then he could be given more influence.

A bit.


Once again the Bond series finds itself at a tipping point. Not only are we about to enter a new era with a new actor but this summer represents a huge shake up in cinema with previously dependable franchises coming up short. It’s a new world, but you can still depend on one man; Christopher Nolan.
Right now, if you have an critically acclaimed and director expressing interest in your franchise then you should probably do what you can to accommodate him.

Of course, Nolan isn’t someone you hire to just direct, he writes, directs and produces. As has been mentioned before EON traditionally keeps quite a tight grip on the production so one of them would have to change, and it would have to be EON. A new era would be the best time to embrace a new way of working. Barbara Broccoli has been spending more time on non- Bond projects, smaller dramas and theater. Now might be a good time to turn over more control to the director, especially when you have someone as dependable as Nolan.

Then of course you have the question of of whether Nolan does Bond 26, or 26, 27 & 28? There are advantages either way. I can see the appeal of the next era being more self contained and director driven. However if Nolan does have a long term plan then that would take care of the franchise for the next decade or so.

Over the years I’ve heard a lot of people, both fans and detractors, say that Nolan Bond would be the Dark Knight Trilogy crossed with the Craig era. Personally, I don’t think it would. I’ve no idea what it would be but Nolan doesn’t strike me as someone who would sign onto a film in order to repeat himself replicate someone else’s work.


I wonder how much enthusiasm would remain for Nolan if he were to come in and drastically alter the formula of these films, considering his role as both a writer and director. Given how often I read in discussions about the franchise that a Bond film MUST have certain things (things which are completely superfluous to the actual character of Bond himself) in order to be considered a true “BOND film”, I wonder where the give would be when it would come time to assess how Nolan succeeded or failed when he inevitably makes some changes to how these films are put together.


I imagine that the next era will be very much its own thing, changing things up considerably, just to avoid any „oh, it’s Craig 2.0“-criticism.


So the Craig era - they didn’t exactly try and hide the influence of The Dark Knight Trilogy on that run. In fact they stated it several times and started using the (surprisingly few) crew members from it that weren’t already EON go to. Hans Zimmer had a quite a funny story working with the orchestra on NTTD as he went to give a speech about this new adventure, then realised it was only new for him, as the orchestra he’s been using since The Lion King is staffed with musicians who have all got credits for every Bond film made in their professional lives.



Not too open the Nolan rumors again, but there was something I thought about. What if EON is planning a opening two-parter. Better planned of course a bit better than CR and QOS. The number one way to achieve this would be hiring a director for both parts right away. The only 2 times where the director came back for that are Terence Young for DN to FRWL and Sam Mendes for SF and SP. It did feel more natural, in terms of the storylines, even for SP, in the long run.

Some other people have had some interesting questions for the future of cinematic James Bond, behind the scenes.
I think the real question is, where does Bond go after EON. That day will come. I think it’s pretty safe to say EON will maintain the rights to cinematic Bond for a very long time until that day happens, and when it does, i hope they wisely choose their successor. That may be, but who will be running EON?
MGW is in his early 80s. Will he be continuing? Presumably BB is going to continue. Will Gregg Wilson be taking over from his dad? What will EoN do when the Bond novels become public domain in 10 years time, when anyone could make a James Bond film?

My thoughts.

I trust Amazon just slightly. At least, from a budget financial standpoint, MGM was known for their troubles. We know they are going to want a regular product, 2-3 years, at least. Clearly, Gregg Wilson is being planned to take over. He’s probably either helping with casting and writing. More than location scouting and photography, now. He’s also making cameo appearances like his dad. MGW is getting too old, especially if stepbrother Blofeld was his idea. Even Cubby said enough is enough, with old age. BB needs to grow beyond DC and Purvis and Wade. She needs to stop focusing on family soap opera dramas, that feel to artsy for Bond. What I’m saying is that Bond truly needs a reset in more ways than one. The Nolan brothers could be that answer. They could introduce characters like May and Charmian Bond, like in the style of their Dark Knight trilogy. I also imagine Nolan (or any director, now) wanting to reinvent Blofeld in particular. Or another classic villain. I’d go for Goldfinger or Trevelyan, as they’re a lot of real life Goldfingers in the world now, namely politicians and CEOs. Trevelyan could be a multi story arc where he slowly becomes evil.

I kind of wish that Amazon would buy Ian Fleming Publications, so that the books won’t be edited (hopefully). We could also have a regular novel every year, with a possible character spin-off, at the same time. As for the books going into the public domain, honestly, EON should use a continuation novel or two for a film basis. There’s quite a decent amount of great stories that aren’t Fleming, that could be set in the present day. Are we really going to get excited about another Purvis and Wade screenplay? EON doesn’t need a full time writer like them or Richard Maibaum. Always be pushing Bond forward. There’s many ways to do it. Sometimes, EON needs to step out of their comfort zone, with regular cast and crew members. There’s loyalty, and there’s too much faithfulness. BB needs to realize this like her father did with Roger Moore. At the end of the day, these are entertainment. But some people need to have their time to move on, just like Bond at the end of a adventure. Can’t be loyal to EON’s real life M forever!

Let me stop that silly argument right there.

Total nonsense and not worth a debate.


I really hope we don’t get a two-parter. I don’t mind multi-film arcs, but sequel-bating and world building have ruined 2 of the Craig era films. Make each film a stand alone event.


The two part thing is a (moronic) rumour that raises its ugly head any time a Bond movie isn’t being made. Much like code name theory.


Agreed. Then again, it would bring us two Bond films faster.

But the box office of M:I may have stopped this idea anyway.


Not that I think EON was thinking about doing the next two in a similar fashion, but if they were, the box office for M:I certainly would have had them rethinking that idea.


Fair enough. However, in it’s defense, MI7 had a lot of things going against it. That’s a shame, it was overall, a fun movie. A bit long, sure. But I don’t like to see movies that I like fail, financially, or critically. Same goes with MOST other movies, whether I see them or not. I didn’t even want The Flash to fail in spite of Ezra Miller (who I still don’t think should EVER work again). I’m watching movies for the entertainment, please. Succeed in that part filmmakers, and you’ve done your job. Bond directors (and authors) are no different.