You can never be too sure at what point rumour becomes reality in the movie blogging business but this evening the rumours are rife that the next James Bond movie has a director and his name is Mendes, Sam Mendes. This surprising revelation can distract us from the accompanying news that the film’s production date is uncertain due to the sale of MGM. So what we have is the promise of the 23rd Bond movie, with Daniel Craig, with Sam Mendes (not forgetting Judi Dench).
Sam Mendes is a surprise, not because he’s a bad director because he isn’t, far from it. His films, though, don’t necessarily deliver the action punch that Bond fans may demand. I know they want wit, innuendo, fast cars, South of France chunks and an expensive suit, but they also want action. Action that surpasses the parkour of Casino Royale or the whatever it was that happened in Quantum of Solace. Mendes knows how to put a good film together but not necessarily with an explosive beginning, middle and end. But maybe this is what the franchise needs?
Jarhead is the title that comes to mind most naturally when thinking of Mendes and action. Oddly for a war movie, but very satisfyingly for every other aspect of this fine film, action is something that takes place just out of sight of its characters. Jarhead tells the tale of marines waiting and wanting to do their bit in Desert Storm and yet their biggest threat comes from friendly fire and boredom. But the lack of a fight doesn’t matter for this film. Instead we get the horrific, deadly beauty of a desert lit up by raining oil and oil fires, of people and animals caught in this blackness and heat, and soldiers so desperate for the climax of action they shoot frustrated bullets into the sky. But Mendes captures on the edges the reality of what faces these soldiers with the burnt out convoys and life smothered in oil – or hot sticky molasses as it was on set.
Whereas Jarhead hinted at action in the wings, Away We Go was all about character and the challenges we face just going through life, finding a place, bringing children into the world. In this film we see what Sam Mendes can do with all the right tools. Maggie Gyllenhaal will make you howl with laughter with her LN , who brings out the best and worst in pregnant lovers Burt and Verona, but Melanie Lynskey will tear your heart out with her pole dance, so soon after her miscarriage.
Away We Go was one of the finest films of 2009, for a whole host of reasons that don’t necessarily fit in with what one expects from a James Bond movie. But, then again, maybe that’s what matters. Maybe it’s time for Bond to go off on another tangent. A different kind of action, dictated to by characterisation and imagination rather than expectation. I was sceptical when I heard the rumour but, after reflection, I think I’d like to see what Sam Mendes can do with Bond.
I haven’t seen Away We Go yet, although it’s on the list. Not sure I agree with you, Kate. Putting a non-action director in charge of something like Bond leads to – well, the sub-Bourne jittervision of Quantum Of Solace. Poor Marc Lawrence was stuck with a duff script and a mass of studio interference, leading to a film that was a mess in just about every definition of the word. I worry that Sam Mendes will find himself in the same boat. I love Jarhead, but it’s not an action movie. If anything, I like it because it’s the least war-like war film out there. Let’s face it, one of the story arcs centred around a character that was unable to fire his weapon in battle!
I have to disagree with you on Casino Royale, too. Martin Campbell knows how to do Bond right, and he’s rescued the franchise twice now, with Goldeneye and Daniel Craig’s debut. The trick is to relax and let Bond be Bond, and let the world change around him. Lord knows, it’s not like we’re not in a strife-ridden world now. I’d love to see him take on a renegade Saudi prince in the next one, ending up in a rappelling gunfight around the Burj Dubai. There HAS to be action in Bond, and trying to give Bond a character was one of the reasons QoS belly-flopped so badly. Bond does not have a character. He’s a moral vacuum, the Queen’s Bastard, a hitman for the Crown. One the whole, I’d rather see what Christopher Nolan could do with it.
Interesting. I’d not thought of that but you’re right – the character in these movies isn’t Bond, it’s Action. The talk about Spider-Man overnight shows that directors can have very little control in these massive franchises. Personally, I was rather tired of Bond until I saw that opening sequence of Casino Royale and that caught my immediate attention. Hwever, I do think these franchises need a kick up the bum on a regular basis, but I was very surprised to hear the name of Sam Mendes. How about Sam Raimi?!
You must see Away We Go – it’s a corker. I can lend it to you
Sam Raimi is a nice idea! It would be a very comic-book Bond, though. And you’re right – once a project gets to a certain size, it’s difficult for a director to have any control at all.
I’ll take you up in your kind offer – next time we meet.