Skyfall director Sam Mendes turns down next Bond Film

Skyfall director Sam Mendes, 47, has confirmed he will not be directing the next Bond film. Skyfall became the highest grossing film in the franchise’s 50-year history and it was the first to break the $1 billion mark at the box office. Mendes has also been credited for bringing a rich depth and complexity to Daniel Craig’s Bond character. So it was no surprise that Mendes was approached by Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, part of the Bond producing team, with a generous offer to film the next 007 film. Although we look forward to the next installment, Mendes’ decision to decline the offer was due to other projects he has lined up this year that require his complete focus, including stage productions of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and King Lear. He hasn’t ruled out the idea of coming back to helm future Bond films, stating, “I feel very honored to have been part of the Bond family and very much hope I have a chance to work with them again sometime in the future.” ~E. Guevarra

Share this article:

Comments & Discussion

  1. the original N.I. /Nobody Important/ • March 7, 2013 @ 8:25 PM

    Good Riddance. I’m a massive Bond fan, and I considered SKYFALL one of the worst Bond films going. It had stunning cinematography, but the film itself had much to be desired.

  2. celery • March 8, 2013 @ 2:39 AM

    I think they should wait for him to be ready, he did a great job!

  3. the original N.I. /Nobody Important/ • March 8, 2013 @ 7:17 AM

    NO. He did not do a “great job”. There are serious lapses being glossed over in favour of praising the film’s otherwise fantastic drama and cinematography.

  4. the original N.I. /Nobody Important/ • March 8, 2013 @ 7:55 AM

    More to the point; I had these questions cycling through my head while watching the film (**some spoilers ahead).

    How could Bond be such a terrible shot in the train scene (he’s 007 for Christ’s sake)? Why did Bond abandon his Walther PPK in the Komodo dragon pit; it was coded to his palm prints (would you leave behind such an important piece of hardware – especially considering there were more henchmen awaiting you once you got out of the pit)? Why did Silva plan such elaborate schemes merely to resolve his “mommy issues”? What was the point of the Sniper in Shanghai, and why did Bond idly stand-by while he killed someone? Why did Bond take sexual advantage of a sex-trafficked woman, and why did he let her die when he knew help was enroute? How could Silva get a whole island to himself without arousing suspicion, and what was its strategic value? How could Bond be a disgruntled orphan coming from wealth; is he Bruce Wayne/batman? Why couldn’t M bare some of their organizations resources to set a better trap for Silva at the Scottish Manor? Why did M use a flashlight trying to escape Silva’s men in the dark? Whatever happened to the hard drive at the end of the film? Why is the film named Skyfall when it held absolutely NO emotional connection to Bond?

  5. Patrick • March 8, 2013 @ 11:07 AM

    Skyfall didn’t have much action going on compared to other Bond films, quite disappointed. It was also hinted in the movie that BOND is getting old – maybe Daniel Craig is? I wonder if they have someone else lined up.

  6. BM • March 8, 2013 @ 11:09 AM

    I agree with the original N.I. Didn’t like Skyfall at all. It did not at least to me feel like a James Bond movie. Surprised it did so well at the box office.

  7. the original N.I. /Nobody Important/ • March 8, 2013 @ 5:07 PM

    Daniel Craig is 45; he’s also signed-on for two more films. Roger Moore debuted as 007 at 46; he retired at 58. Jeremy Renner was 41 when they put him in the Bourne Legacy. Personally, I found Skyfall’s age angle somewhat pointless… especially when you consider Daniel Craig’s physical shape.

  8. Nobody Important • March 12, 2013 @ 3:50 PM

    It’s worth noting that Sam Mendes directed Skyfall, he did not write the script. So the praise for the cinematography belongs squarely on his shoulders and the critique about the plot on the writers. Some people are just sadly misinformed on here. Although the plot itself did have a number of glaring holes, so did all previous Bond films, they aren’t intended to be the best of the art form.

    It may be obvious to most, but for the rest: M wasn’t using the flashlight, the groundskeeper was. Skyfall had no emotional connection to Bond? Oops, you must have slept through a few parts. We can all forgive that as it happens to the best of us.

  9. the original N.I. /Nobody Important/ • March 14, 2013 @ 2:39 AM

    “all previous Bond films, they aren’t intended to be the best of the art form”
    Most previous bond films – regardless their outlandishness – came to a natural conclusion. Skyfall failed in that department. The bad-guy settled on suicide, he was stabbed in the back (quite un-Bond like), and no mention was made of the stolen harddrive.

    “It may be obvious to most, but for the rest: M wasn’t using the flashlight”
    in matters not who held the flashlight, M was with the groundskeeper. Her skillset in the field of espionage would warrant she advise him to turn it off.

    “So the praise for the cinematography belongs squarely on his shoulders”
    No, that credit is tips towards Roger Deakins.

    You may-have stolen my alias but your modus operandi remains the same. You have the grammatical skills of an English Professor mashed-in with the maturity of a twilight-deluded tween

  10. Nobody Important • March 14, 2013 @ 12:58 PM

    You’ll have to better define “natural conclusion”. I fail to see what qualifies you more than the actual rights holders to determine what is “un-Bond like” about how a Bond villain should be dispatched.

    From the end of the movie we can determine two things: Firstly, M was apparently fatally wounded in the attack on the house, so she might have been a little too preoccupied to notice the groundskeeper’s flashlight. Plus it may have been the only thing keeping two old people from falling through thin ice, kind of like your arguments typically do. Secondly, M was expecting Bond (according to his plan) to have killed everyone at the house, a feat he eventually pulled off anyway – meaning her faith in him was not entirely misplaced.

    M also had no little or no actual field skills, she not only admits this herself but could barely use a simple firearm effectively.

    English might not be your first language, but you seem to argue reasonably well in it. Your last sentence is missing a period, tween is slang (quotes advised) and professor does not need a capital ‘P’.

    Have yourself a great day.

  11. the original N.I. /Nobody Important/ • March 14, 2013 @ 6:04 PM

    Actually, English is not my first language, but thank you for your kind, Grammar-Nazi, comments.

    Secondly, I have no intention arguing a franchise I enjoy with a douchebag I despise. The film is flawed, so are you. Perhaps that’s why you’re so passionate defending it.

Join The Conversation:

Similar Articles

Trending Articles

Current Poll

  • Toy Story 4 opens next week. Which is your favorite toy?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

You Might Also Like

Close Menu