How about Kathryn Bigelow to direct "Bond 24"?

 
I just read that director Sam Mendes has officially declared that he's not returning to do "Bond 24," the next entry in the James Bond series.  This is a disappointment to fans of the series, who felt that he brought something unique to "Skyfall" (2012) that helped distinguish it as a superior James Bond film.  Christopher Nolan is a name often suggested by fans to helm the next Bond movie.  While I completely agree that he would make a great Bond movie, I think he would make a film that might be too similar to "Skyfall," if the tone of his "Dark Knight" trilogy of films is any indication.  While that is not a bad idea at all to have another film similar to "Skyfall," I think the next Bond movie should continue to forge new paths for the series and not just imitate what came immediately before.  I have a suggestion for someone who I think would also do a fantastic job and also bring a different perspective on the series.  Kathryn Bigelow.

I realize Bigelow might be a controversial suggestion given the acrimony from political reactionaries surrounding her latest film "Zero Dark Thirty" (2012) and its depiction of torture.  Perhaps Bigelow might be considered too risky to be associated with the Bond series.  After all, it is a series that has always appealed to the widest demographic of moviegoers.  But, in the last few years, producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson have made conscientious choices that demonstrate the extent that they are willing to take risks with the series.  I hope the political controversy surrounding "Zero Dark Thirty" does not dissuade them from putting her on their short list of "Bond 24" directorial candidates.  In fact, I suspect, given the way "Skyfall" was overlooked at Oscar-time, that they would welcome working with a filmmaker who evokes a strong reaction from a certain segment of the public in order to continue sending a clear message to Hollywood that they intend to keep pushing the envelope with Bond.  Hiring Kathryn Bigelow would be another significant step by Broccoli and Wilson in their continuing, largely successful, efforts to bring legitimacy to Bond.

There are a variety of reasons why I think Bigelow would do a great job directing "Bond 24."  She's an Oscar-winning filmmaker with an acumen for films with action and suspense.  She's a visually-oriented storyteller who will ensure that "Bond 24" will continue the trend set by "Skyfall" of creating a film that will be absolutely stunning to look at.  As reflected in the Oscar-nominations for actors Jessica Chastain (in "Zero Dark Thirty") and Jeremy Renner (for "The Hurt Locker"), she has sensitivity when it comes to directing actors and is the rare action filmmaker who knows how to emphasize story and character in her films.  Her work on "Zero Dark Thirty" proves that she has immense confidence in knowing how to direct a large-scale, epic movie involving international locations and multiple elements, which is one of the trademark characteristics of a Bond movie.  There's no doubt that she would be an effective ringleader in a three-ring Bond circus.

 
Even though "Zero Dark Thirty" became subject to wide debate about its factual accuracy, no one can doubt the earthy manner in which Bigelow portrayed the intelligence community in her film.  She brought a unique perspective to a milieu and subject matter we've seen portrayed in countless other films and TV shows.  And her interview with the New York Times, where she continually gave credit to key members of her crew for the artistic excellence of "Zero Dark Thirty," instead of focusing only on herself like other directors would, suggests that she is a very generous and effective leader on a film set.  This is an important quality for anyone directing a Bond movie to have as they must skillfully guide the path of a major film involving hundreds of cast and crew members through a lengthy shooting and post-production schedule lasting up to a year.  This also suggests that Bigelow would be able to build a strong, diplomatic relationship with Bond producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson where she would be able to work with them to bring her own unique vision to "Bond 24," while at the same time acknowledge the iconic elements that define a Bond movie. 

Bigelow also appears to have a strong relationship with Sony Pictures' co-chair Amy Pascal, who came to her defense when "Zero Dark Thirty" (which was distributed by Sony) was criticized by some reactionaries as purportedly advocating torture.  This is important, as Sony Pictures is co-financing and distributing "Bond 24," and it's helpful that whoever is directing this film is someone that Amy Pascal has great faith in.  Also, even though Bigelow has directed many films whose central characters are strong-willed men like Harrison Ford and Liam Neeson in "K-19: The Widowmaker" (2002), and is by no means a filmmaker who shows preferential treatment to women, she demonstrated in films like "Strange Days" (1995) and "Zero Dark Thirty" that she knows how to create good parts for women in her films.  After the disappointingly small roles that Eve Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) and Severine (Berenice Marlohe) played in "Skyfall," it would be nice to know that there's a filmmaker at the helm of "Bond 24" who won't pay short shrift to the Bond Girls the way Sam Mendes did in "Skyfall."  (Also, Ralph Fiennes--the new "M" in the Bond series, worked with Bigelow on "Strange Days," and that may help establish a strong working rapport between the two to ensure that the new "M" remains a vital element in the new film.)

I hope I am not being patronizing or condescending by calling attention to her gender, but I think having Kathryn Bigelow at the helm of "Bond 24" would also go a long way to help silence any of Bond's naysayers who continually characterize the series as sexist and misogynist.  Anyone who has watched the series as a whole realizes that there are a variety of different portrayals of women on-screen in the Bond series, and so it doesn't deserve that unfair label that persists to this day.  (Especially because there is already a strong female presence behind-the-scenes on the Bond series with producer Barbara Broccoli carrying on the family tradition set by her father Albert R. "Cubby" Broccoli.)  Since there was some criticism that "Skyfall" killed off Judi Dench's "M" and replaced her with a younger male (Ralph Fiennes' Mallory) who is now in-charge of MI-6, which was perceived as a patriarchal reassertion of authority in the series, I think Bigelow's participation would help to quiet any critics who feel the Bond series lost a strong female presence with the death of Dench's character in the last film.  With Kathryn Bigelow on board, Bond would still be taking direction from a woman.  But instead of it being a fictional female character on-screen playing Bond's boss, we would have a talented and authoritative woman in real-life directing the actions and activities of Daniel Craig's James Bond, and all the other characters, in "Bond 24." 

Isolation and Solitude in "Zero Dark Thirty"

I just returned from seeing "Zero Dark Thirty" (2012) in the theaters.  I was amazed at how crowded the movie theater was for a Sunday morning screening.  Clearly, this movie has become an "event," especially in Washington, DC.  I don't know if I have anything particularly original to add to the ongoing dialogue about the movie, but I agree it is an injustice that Kathryn Bigelow was snubbed by not receiving a Best Director Oscar nomination for this film.  (Especially since the movie received nominations in most other major categories.)  Bigelow directs this movie in such an assured, confident manner that she never has to over-dramatize the events being depicted.  As such, the movie has a low-key, laid-back quality that was awe-inspiring and which gave it credibility.  Throughout the movie there are moments and events that another director would have over-played and wrung out every ounce of unnecessary pathos.  But Bigelow avoids this and so the movie has a very clear-minded, almost detached perspective that was intelligent and refreshing.  I do not have first-hand knowledge as to whether the events depicted in the movie are accurate, but Bigelow has an amazing attention to detail that lends credibility to her endeavor.  Screenwriter Mark Boal also does an amazing job spinning this tale with dozens of characters without the audience getting confused or losing their place in the story.  By the time the movie reaches its inevitable conclusion at that infamous compound in Pakistan, you are on the edge of your seat even though you know the outcome of the story.

With regards to the vitriol that both Bigelow and the movie have endured concerning the treatment of torture in the story, I do believe that Bigelow was sincere and correct when she stated in interviews that she wants to leave the audience enough room to draw their own conclusions on the topic.  The movie does not, as Naomi Wolf suggested, glorify or condone torture.  (I realize that this is something open to debate and I am fine with people disagreeing with me so long as the comments and discussion, if any, remain civil.)  Torture is portrayed in the movie as ugly and unpleasant as one has imagined it to be.  If Bigelow made this movie and did not include those scenes, she would have been criticized for having white-washed the subject matter.  I think it is admirable that Bigelow assumed the audience was intelligent enough to interpret the movie without heavy-handedly beating them over the head with a scene that explicitly stated to them, in case they didn't realize it, that torture is unpleasant and horrifying and potentially dehumanizes all who are involved with it.  In my personal opinion, I also do not believe that Bigelow's depiction of torture in these scenes explicitly, or implicitly, state that these techniques directly led to the discovery of Bin Laden in Pakistan.  In those scenes, some useful information is obtained, but I believe the movie makes a point of underscoring how what came out of this endeavor was also not 100% effective.  The movie makes it clear that the discovery of Bin Laden's hideout came about from other methods of intelligence gathering.  So for Naomi Wolf and others like her to suggest that the movie is meant to justify, or serve as an apology, for the use of torture is way off base.  Additionally, for Wolf to draw analogies between Kathryn Bigelow and Leni Riefenstahl is irresponsible and also shows Wolf's limited knowledge and understanding of history.  Riefenstahl's films utilized brilliantly composed and edited images in a conscious effort to glorify the abhorrent National Socialist Party of Germany.  Bigelow's film has no such purpose in-mind and I would argue that her movie remains largely apolitical.

I have wondered for awhile if the criticism that has been mounted against "Zero Dark Thirty" would have been as strong or vitriolic if it were directed by a man.  (I hesitate to say that because the last thing I would want to do is to say something that might be condescending to Kathryn Bigelow.)  I have felt at times that the liberal-leaning critics of the movie are particularly outraged because a woman directed the movie.  Perhaps they operated under the expectation and assumption that a woman would make a movie that explicitly, and unequivocally, stated that torture is bad and that would be clearly sympathetic to a liberal viewpoint by portraying the CIA and the U.S. military personnel in an unquestioningly negative light.  The fact that Bigelow defied that party line and attempted to give the CIA and the U.S. military their due may have been seen by the liberal intelligentsia as a "betrayal," and that may explain why they have come out in full force against Bigelow and the movie.  One reason I have gotten this impression is because Naomi Wolf's article/open letter in The Guardian begins with her reminding Bigelow that "many young women in film were inspired as they watched you become the first woman ever to win an Oscar for directing" before she launches into her attack upon Bigelow for making "Zero Dark Thirty" by rhetorically asking her "(w)hat led to this amoral compromising of your film-making?".  (For the record, I am middle-of-the-road when it comes to politics, so I am no Fox News-type Neo-Con by any stretch of the imagination.)  I have a feeling that if Martin Scorsese had directed the movie, the scenes of torture would have been noted by critics, and there might have been a spirited debate about it in scholarly journals, but I don't think it would have risen to the level of controversy that it has.  This double-standard that I believe Bigelow may have been subjected to could help to explain why she was snubbed by the Oscars.  At the very least, whether or not gender had anything to do with her Oscar snub (and I acknowledge that it's entirely possible that my theory is incorrect and that gender was not a factor in this situation), I do believe that Bigelow angered liberals because her movie did not conform to the expectation that Hollywood filmmakers always express a clearly left-leaning viewpoint.  The fact that actors David Clennon (who?), Ed Asner, and Martin Sheen have all come out condemning the movie also suggests the extent to which the movie defied the expectations of even those who are from the entertainment industry.

I also feel that Bigelow could have been snubbed in the Best Director category because she comes across as a very humble individual in all of her interviews promoting the film.  In an interview with the New York Times, Bigelow was eager to highlight the contributions her crew members made to the movie, rather than simply touting herself.  It was refreshing to see a major filmmaker acknowledge the collaborative nature of the medium, rather than hog the spotlight.  However, it's possible that this may have undermined Bigelow's chances for a nomination because it may have allowed Oscar voters to take her immense contribution to the movie for granted.  In this respect, I disagree with critics who feel that the Maya character played by Jessica Chastain in the movie is supposed to be an extension of Bigelow's own personality.  As portrayed by Chastain, Maya remains a cold, at times off-putting cipher throughout the movie.  Maya is clearly intelligent and has determination, traits which Bigelow conveys in all of her interviews, but you never sense a warm or humane quality from Maya.  (In contrast, Bigelow conveys an inherent decency and humanity in all of her interviews which makes it clear why she is an effective leader on a film set.)  Maya is quick to contradict and chastise her superiors and her colleagues, eager to have her contributions recognized by everyone, and does not appear to possess an ounce of humility or empathy.  Diplomacy is clearly not her strong suit.

Casting Jessica Chastain was an unlikely risk that ultimately paid off.  Chastain has a high-pitched, at times squeaky, voice that normally does not convey gravitas, presence or authority.  Her co-star Jennifer Ehle, who has a supporting role as one of Maya's colleagues, possesses much more warmth and wit than does Chastain.  The earthy Ehle would have been a much more expected and conventional choice to play Maya instead of Chastain, as she would have evoked audience sympathy from the get-go.  But by casting the unsympathetic Chastain, I think Bigelow is expressing how the kind of person who would have devoted a decade of her life to the hunt for Bin Laden would also have to be an unconventional individual who thinks outside the box and is unconcerned with the niceties of life.  The scene where Maya briefs the Navy SEALs on the mission normally wouldn't work because Chastain's high-pitched voice does not make her come across as a natural leader, but Chastain nevertheless sells the scene by conveying Maya's unapologetic arrogance and determination that she is absolutely correct in her analysis and assessment of the situation.

At times, "Zero Dark Thirty" reminded me a great deal of "The Silence of the Lambs" (1991).  Both films involve talented young women working for a federal law enforcement/intelligence agency who are on the hunt for an elusive criminal in hiding.  In the case of "Lambs," Jodie Foster's Clarice Starling is on the hunt for the serial killer Buffalo Bill.  Unlike Maya, however, Foster's Clarice is a much more accessible, understandable character.  Clarice has moments of warmth and wit, remains exceedingly humble, is diplomatic at all times to her colleagues and superiors, and is simply a much more mature and self-aware character.  At the end of "The Silence of the Lambs," you get a feeling that Clarice is at the start of both a potentially brilliant career and hopefully fulfilling life.  In contrast, because Maya appears to have no life and no friends, she has nothing to look forward to once her mission has been accomplished.  Which is why the final shot, a close-up of Maya crying in the back of a C-130 flying her back to the United States from Pakistan, is so haunting.  Earlier, when the SEALs returned from the compound, hugged and patted one another on the back, and congratulated each other for a job well done, she was unable to share in that moment with them because her inherent nature prevented her from building a rapport with her colleagues.  In some respects, she is as isolated as Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) at the end of John Ford's "The Searchers" (1956).  Both characters spend a decade in a relentless, obsessive search for an individual whose whereabouts are unknown.  When the search is over, both characters find that their anti-social, almost narcissistic, nature prevents them from enjoying the fruits of their labor.  For Maya, there is no deep insight or revelation to be gleaned from this experience, now that Bin Laden is dead, because she has no one else to share the moment with in the world. 

Hollywood Reporter's Todd McCarthy reviews Kathryn Bigelow's "Zero Dark Thirty"

 
One of my favorite film critics is Todd McCarthy.  He used to write for Variety and now writes for the Hollywood Reporter.  His reviews are unlike any other.  He goes to the trouble of describing the movies he sees in such depth that his reviews should be peppered with the expression "Spoiler Alert!" throughout.  But I don't mind that because I always like to hear as much as I can about a movie before I see it.  I'm the rare person who doesn't feel like a movie or TV show has been ruined just because I know what is going to happen.  I also like McCarthy because, like me, he is a big Howard Hawks fan.  He wrote the excellent biography "Howard Hawks: The Grey Fox of Hollywood."  As such, because he clearly likes the kind of confident/assertive women that populated the Hawks filmography, McCarthy tends to emphasize writing about the portrayal of women in what are otherwise testosterone-driven action films in a way that is very insightful and engaging.

Todd McCarthy, back in his days with "Variety"

Mr. McCarthy has just posted his review of Kathryn Bigelow's "Zero Dark Thirty" (2012), a film about the hunt for Osama Bin Laden.  I have tremendous regard for Bigelow's work as a director.  I think that Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson should hire her to direct the next James Bond movie.  I had concerns and skepticism as to how this movie might turn out, but it sounds as if Bigelow has done an exemplary job here.  You can read McCarthy's review here.  As is his tendency, McCarthy takes time to provide an analysis of lead actress Jessica Chastain's character that intrigues me and makes me look forward to seeing "Zero Dark Thirty" even more.  That's McCarthy's gift--his level of detail never spoils a movie for a reader, and only serves to enhance your desire to see a film.