328 replies to this topic

[Colonel Moon]

Maybe Peter Howitt. He made spy-comdey Johny English so now he could do a real spy movie. And don't tell me that film was bad, it's not his fault, scriptwriters are responsible for that.

[db5]

I know wy theres souch a long waiting untill the next Bond film. Its just so everyone will forget how bad the previous one was. I cant understand why they cant find a good script and how Wilson and Brocoli alowe the movie to be the way they are, wonder what Cubby would say.
when it comes to directing I think Martin Scorsece would do a fantastic film.:mad:

[OllieKew]

I reckon that Tony Scott would be an excellant choice. For those of you who don't know he is the younger brother of Ridley Scott (English...yay!) and his most recognised films have been:

Top Gun
True Romance
Enemy of the State
Crimson Tide
Spy Game

To my knowledge he has only done one bad film: Days of Thunder.
Looking at the last 3 on the list surely this is the guy to give us (with the right script of course) a taut, tension-filled thriller. Which, lets face it, is what we need after the effects-heavy, laser guns from outer space, electric-battle-armour-wearing mess that was the 2nd half of Die Another Day.

[Spy76]

Phillip Noyce for director!
he's done a good job in The Saint.



Jason Isaacs for 007 in Bond 22.!!!!

[ChandlerBing]

Ah, I knew I was one of 5 people who likee The Saint. You must be one of the other five! Actually, Noyce would be perfect for Bond, but a director is only as good as the script he is given, and vice versa. A lot of terrific scripts have been turned into rubbish by hack directors over the years, and a lot of damned good directors have gotten their mitts on some real pieces of rubbish over the years as well.

Moderators note: please find other words apart from swear words for use in your posts.

[FYEO007FAN]

I would support Eon's decision to choose another different director for Bond 21. It has been interesting to see the different visual and narrative approaches to the Brosnan films by the differing directors. But, if they decided to choose one of the four directors who have helmed the Brosnan pictures, I would support the hiring of Michael Apted
or Martin Campbell. "GoldenEye" and "The World is not Enough" were both excellent Bond pictures. I think their visual and narrative designs were superior to Roger Spottiswode's and definately superior to Lee Tamahori's. "GoldenEye" and "The World is not Enough" had a visual and narrative style than nicely synthesized the classic Bondian approach with a hip style that appeals to the casual fans of today. Tamahori and Spottiswode used too much of today's styles in their visual approach. Tamahori, his editor, and cinematographer insulted "Die Another Day" with their Matrix kung fu visual design. Spottiswode used a bit too many cuts in his actions sequences. This created a sense of visual chaos that was distinctly not of Bond. Though I know this will probably not happen, but I may as well just say articuate it. I wish that maybe they would give the job to John Glen. I know that his approach is
definately not with current trends. He probably wouldn't do it, either. But perhaps he could take his approach and just mesh it with modern styles. That would similar to Michael Apted and Martin Campbell but would probably be better. Does anyone else wish they could see Glen return to the director's chair for Bond 21?

[rubixcub]

Originally posted by Colonel Moon
Maybe Peter Howitt. He made spy-comdey Johny English so now he could do a real spy movie. And don't tell me that film was bad, it's not his fault, scriptwriters are responsible for that.

Yes, but it was written by the same guys who write Bond now.

I have no idea about Howitt, didn't see the film.

Dave

[Loomis]

Originally posted by FYEO007FAN

Though I know this will probably not happen, but I may as well just say articuate it. I wish that maybe they would give the job to John Glen. I know that his approach is
definately not with current trends. He probably wouldn't do it, either. But perhaps he could take his approach and just mesh it with modern styles. That would similar to Michael Apted and Martin Campbell but would probably be better. Does anyone else wish they could see Glen return to the director's chair for Bond 21?

Definitely. I have enormous respect for Glen. As an editor and second unit director, as well as a "main" director, his contribution to the Bond series has been awesome, and he proved himself a talented and extremely versatile director with FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, OCTOPUSSY, A VIEW TO A KILL, THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS and LICENCE TO KILL (he directed more Bond films than anyone else, and all of the 1980s films). I'd love to see him return, especially as he almost got to work with Brosnan on TLD.

In fact, you've given me the idea for another thread, FYEO007FAN.

[Martin Mystery]

Martin Campbell. Nuff said.

[Blox]

How about Wolfgang Petersen?

[Bond_Bishop]

John McTiernan (or what), first of all he is American, Die Hard was very good movies. But I don't want the Bond movies to be Americanised.

Martin Campbell is perfect. Goldeneye was really good, Martin will be very good as director again.

[Loomis]

John McTiernan (or what), first of all he is American, Die Hard was very good movies. But I don't want the Bond movies to be Americanised.

I don't think an American director would automatically mean that a Bond film would be "Americanised" (although you could argue that the series has for many years been Americanised, anyway). Is there any kind of particularly "British" atmosphere about the likes of TOP GUN, BLACK RAIN, PREDATOR 2, and TRUE ROMANCE? I don't see any myself, but those films were directed by Brits.

Don't forget that there has already been a Bond film directed by an American, NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN, which was helmed by Irvin Kershner (THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK). But you'd be very hard pushed indeed to tell the director's nationality from watching the film, or to detect any kind of inappropriate American sensibility. I mean, it's not as though Bond munches on hamburgers and has dialogue such as: "This Largo dude is like tooootally not most excellent."

In McTiernan's case, I think he would have the utmost respect for Bond's roots and the series' heritage, and would not attempt to give a Bond flick an especially American flavour.

To my mind, hiring an American to write the Bond novels seems a much more radical move than employing one to direct a Bond film. If it was okay for Raymond Benson to be contracted as the Bond author by Glidrose (and it most definitely was okay, in my book), why the big deal about getting an American to direct (just) one of the movies? If it didn't work out, they could always go back to employing UK and Commonwealth directors only, as ever.

[Doubleshot]

Many seem keen on Martin Campbell returning back to the director's chair, but you're assuming that Martin Campbell's second Bond film would be a repeat critical or commercial success. Guy Hamilton directed GOLDFINGER, the Bond film which is cultly considered to the best of them all. When Guy Hamilton was invited back to direct more 007 adventures, he turned out DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER, LIVE AND LET DIE, and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. I enjoy all three of those films, but I notice one, two, or all three of Hamilton's second run making the bottom of many fans' lists. Let's take another second-time Bond director, Lewis Gilbert - responsible for MOONRAKER, his third Bond film; also responsible for YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, his first. Gilbert's only real critically accaimed Bond film is THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, and, personally - no thanks. And what about John Glen? Even the most loving Bond fan can point out his weak entries, whether they think his weakness as a director are more evident in OCTOPUSSY and A VIEW TO A KILL or THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS and LICENCE TO KILL.

If Brosnan's Bond is so "delicate" (one nudge removing his films from perfection), I don't think you want Campbell's return to directing for EON to be another DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER. Just some food for thought.

[Loomis]

Many seem keen on Martin Campbell returning back to the director's chair, but you're assuming that Martin Campbell's second Bond film would be a repeat critical or commercial success. Guy Hamilton directed GOLDFINGER, the Bond film which is cultly considered to the best of them all. When Guy Hamilton was invited back to direct more 007 adventures, he turned out DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER, LIVE AND LET DIE, and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. I enjoy all three of those films, but I notice one, two, or all three of Hamilton's second run making the bottom of many fans' lists. Let's take another second-time Bond director, Lewis Gilbert - responsible for MOONRAKER, his third Bond film; also responsible for YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, his first. Gilbert's only real critically accaimed Bond film is THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, and, personally - no thanks. And what about John Glen? Even the most loving Bond fan can point out his weak entries, whether they think his weakness as a director are more evident in OCTOPUSSY and A VIEW TO A KILL or THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS and LICENCE TO KILL.

Well put. I'm not sure quite what Campbell has to offer that other directors don't. His post-GOLDENEYE films haven't been very good. There's no real reason to suppose that he wouldn't do a decent job if he returned to the Bond franchise, but equally there's no guarantee of another GOLDENEYE from him.

Personally, I want a fresh director next time round. While I often push for McTiernan, I am aware that his nationality renders him an unrealistic choice. Stephen Frears (who was slated to direct JINX) and Phillip Noyce are probably my two top picks right now, both of them veteran filmmakers with excellent CVs who have recently been on terrific form (Frears with DIRTY PRETTY THINGS and Noyce with THE QUIET AMERICAN). While both seem reasonably realistic candidates, I feel that Frears is rather more likely than Noyce to be interested in doing BOND 21, for a number of reasons.

With the right script, either of those guys would be more than capable of giving Brosnan his GOLDFINGER/SPY WHO LOVED ME/LIVING DAYLIGHTS, a Bond series classic he and we deserve.

[Bond_Bishop]

Well maybe it could be good with McTiernan on Bond 21. Right, Loomis, you have right. The current Bond movies is a lot Americanised. Sorry I you thought I was rude or anything. And the movie could be a lot "British" if the most of the teams is from GB.

Edited by Bond_Bishop, 03 January 2004 - 10:40 PM.

[Kronsteen]

I would love to see Martin Campbell again. I think he's the only director during the Brosnan era who has been really good.

Martin Campbell could direct good action and create great scenes with typical Bond feeling.

[Loomis]

Well maybe it could be good with McTiernan on Bond 21. Right, Loomis, you have right. The current Bond movies is a lot Americanised. Sorry I you thought I was rude or anything

Hey, no need whatsoever for apologies. You weren't rude in the slightest. And I do see where you're coming from, but I don't see that there's a logical reason that an American director would ruin things, any more than there's an automatic reason why an Irish or Australian director would spoil the Bond franchise. Depends entirely on the director. BTW, I'm not American myself, or particularly pushing for American directors - I just feel that Eon's unwritten but very firm policy of only hiring UK/Commonwealth directors unfairly closes the door to plenty of talented filmmakers.

[Agent 76]

Ridley Scott .

[B007GLE]

How about an experienced and successful director who is also (I think) on the MGM Board:

Francis Ford Coppola

[Agent 76]

why not Coppola, maybe he'd do a good job.

[philipwhitfield]

Personally I'd like to see the return of Michael Apted. I mean this man actually got Pierce Brosnan to act!! Who'd have thought it???

[Colonel Moon]

I also would like to see Michael Apted. He did a great job in The World Is Not Enough. I think it's Brosnans best Bond (GoldenEye - is overrated).

[Colonel Moon]

sorry for double post delet it

Edited by Colonel Moon, 13 February 2004 - 10:26 PM.

[Kingdom Come]

Exception of Lee Tamahori, I wouldn't like to see any of the other suggestions take on Bond 21 or 22. I'd like to see David Fincher in the running and yes, I know how much of a stylist he is, but he and the Bond producers could agree after a while.

How about;

Michael Bay?
Tony Scott?
Brian De Palma?
Anthony Minghella?
Steven Frears?
John Carpenter?

[Agent 76]

John Glen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[M_Balje]

Sometimes when i surft on the internet i found an for us new kind of english directers.
Found New Option: Gillies MacKinnon http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0533564/
Born in Scotland on 08 January 1948.
He directing together with Vic armstrong one episode of

[Agent 76]

don't know his work , but who knows maybe he would do a nice work....

[hoodman22]

why not Coppola, maybe he'd do a good job.

keep dreaming buddy

[JimmyBond]

I voted other. All one has to do is look at my signature to find otu who I want

[Evil Doctor Cheese]

I'm sick of bad looking James Bond films.

Wouldn't it be great if Eon let the reigns on Bond slacken for a bit and have a visually inventive, cutting edge Bond. It's a better way to spend your Gegillion bucks budget than on another explosion! Show us something we haven't seen. I've seen some great visually inventive films with real style recently (Kill Bill 2 being the best example) and none of them had huge bangs in! Tone down the action, tone down the budget and bring in a visual director like Tarantino or Fincher or Jean Pierre Jeunet or John Cameron Mitchel or Spike Jonze or an unknown British director like Gareth Jennings (soon to be directing the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), have bit of respect for Bond's character, turn in a great looking thriller!

I'd pay a crap load to watch that, and I'd buy the DVDs, and it'd be a modern classic, and you wouldn't have to see the unsold video's for