1 reply to this topic

[cbc007]

There's a thread somewhere about turning points in the series, and, for me, one of those was the decision to hand over the director's reins to a new, established director for each movie. For each of Brosnan's movies I think the character development, and style of the films, whilst remaining within the 'formula', has been affected by this choice with varying degrees of success. Tamahori's vision of a Bond movie is certainly the biggest move away from the traditional style, and is better for it. Really, I wondered if anyone preferred the old school 'Bond family' approach, or the new one. (I'm for the current scheme). And, who would you like to see put their stamp on the series.
I'm sure this topic has been discussed before, but I'm new in these parts so forgive any repetition.

[Turn]

You've given the thread a different sort of slant with the Bond family approach, cbc007, so I don't think this is repetitious. It can go either way. All the Brosnan movies are somewhat different due to four different directors, and I kind of like that. The family approach can go stale, as it did with Guy Hamilton, although John Glen's tenure was overall pretty good. But who knows how successful it could be in this new era.

As far as directors putting their stamp on the series, I don't welcome the idea of a name brand director, a Tarantino or John Woo, helming a Bond film. There's too much to be lost in conforming a Bond film to their standards, making it a Quentin Tarantino film or John Woo film rather than a James Bond film. It's a common suggestion on other forums for people who are more movie fans than Bond fanatics.