It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
We are moving on to discussing Topic #4: The Directors :ar!
(hard choosing an emoticon for that one!)
Yes, it is time to praise or slam or just say "Meh..." for the many directors of Bond films. Who were the directors of Bond films? Eleven gentlemen have helmed Bond films over the years~
Terence Young (DN, FRWL, TB)
Guy Hamilton (GF, DAF, LALD, TMWTGG)
Lewis Gilbert (YOLT, TSWLM, MR)
Peter Hunt (OHMSS)
John Glen (FYEO, OP, AVTAK, TLD, LTK)
Martin Campbell (GE, CR)
Roger Spottiswoode (TND)
Michael Apted (TWINE)
Lee Tamahori (DAD)
Marc Forster (QOS)
Sam Mendes (SF)
Rather than go by era, I'd like to discuss any director you'd like. So here are my tips for this topic (but please do add your own thoughts in any way about directors):
* Favorite director(s) and why (brief is fine; lengthy reasoning is fine, too)
* Talk about the change in look or tone of films when a new director took over
(e.g., Campbell after Glen)
* Would the kind of direction that Young gave us, starting off this series, work with today's films? Think of Dr. No, From Russia with Love; those two in particular are not much like a lot of today's action/spy films. Thunderball did bring spectacle, more action, and more flash. Films today are so action heavy, with spectacular stunts, CGI, heady martial arts fighting, quick cuts, etc. Could a Bond film be directed similar to DN and FRWL these days and be successful? Personally, I think yes, if well done. But it is against the current and recent trends.
* Four directors - Hamilton, Gilbert, Glen, and Campbell - worked with two different Bond actors during their tenure as director. How did their films reflect the difference in actors? Were the films directed the same way, same tone? Look at Glen, for example - going from AVTAK and TLD, then LTK. Do you see differences in direction?
* Peter Hunt directed one film, but several (or many) Bond fans now consider that one a classic. How would you critique his direction of the film?
* Who loves the direction of QOS? There are scenes I like very much indeed, but it is an erratic film for me in terms of direction.
* Anybody care to find good points about Tamahori and DAD? Just asking ...
Any other way you'd care to discuss the directors of Bond films, is fine. Let's begin talking about Bond directors.
:-bd
Guy Hamilton - Goldfinger is my favorite film of the Connery era, even though many think it's overrated and dull. Diamonds Are Forever is my least favorite film of the Connery era; fun and action-packed, but a bit too over-the-top and cheesy at times. Live and Let Die is my second-favorite of Moore's movies - I thought it was very original and funny. I think The Man with the Golden Gun is underrated and a bit better than Diamonds Are Forever, but admittedly it has plenty of flaws. I rank Hamilton's films as GF > LALD >TMWTGG > DAF. I don't dislike any, but there's definitely a good side/meh side split between the pairs of two for me.
Lewis Gilbert - I love You Only Live Twice; it's one of my favorites from the Connery era and gets unfairly forgotten among films like FRWL and TB. The Spy Who Loved Me is my favorite film of the Moore era - it's iconic, fun, action-packed, and totally re-watchable. Moonraker was by a long shot my least favorite of Gilbert's films; too over-the-top, silly, and un-Bond-like. Still, it had a few things I liked like Jaws, the PTS, and in general the first half of the movie. Ranking Gilbert's films = TSWLM > YOLT > MR. MR is the only one I dislike; both TSWLM and YOLT were epic and loads of fun for me.
Peter Hunt - Like George Lazenby, Hunt's one big chance was On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and he nailed it. Everyone that knows me knows that OHMSS is one of my all-time favorite Bond films, and will likely always have a Top 5 space reserved for it. It has my favorite soundtrack, Bond girl, and Bond villain in the series. It's just a very unique film that is never afraid to stand out from the rest, and be just as if not more entertaining than the rest of the best. Well done, Mr. Hunt, well done.
John Glen - For Your Eyes Only was exactly what the series needed after MR - a solid, down-to-earth, basic Bond film. Octopussy was a bit too silly for my liking at times, but still had several decent scenes. A View to a Kill is probably my least favorite Bond film; I just don't see many redeeming qualities about it, outside of Christopher Walken of course. The Living Daylights was fresh and entertaining, and a great intro for Timothy Dalton. Licence to Kill is my favorite of Glen's movies - bold, violent, gritty, and original. Ranking of Glen's films = LTK > TLD > FYEO > OP > AVTAK. Two hits, two misses (FYEO in the middle for me), but Glen deserves credit for all the good he did.
Martin Campbell - Oh, yes, my overall favorite of the Bond directors. GoldenEye was so much fun - action-packed, thrilling, and epic. Brosnan and the rest of the crew did really well, and GE has held up as one of my favorites in the series. And of course, Casino Royale, my all-time favorite Bond film, comes next. Just an all-around amazing movie - I could rant forever about how much I love CR, but I'll just say it 2-ups GE and provides a better reboot than I ever could have imagined for the franchise. CR > GE. Campbell delivered two great Bond films; I wouldn't mind seeing him do one more one day.
Roger Spottiswoode - I've always considered Tomorrow Never Dies to be one of the weakest Bond films, and while I stand by that, I do think it still has some redeeming qualities. Brosnan is solid, the Bond girl is great, and the action sequences are all pretty good, particularly the car and motorcycle chases. Not much else to say here; TND is a decent Bond film, but still pale in comparison to GE.
Michael Apted - I would probably say The World is Not Enough is the most underrated Bond film. I consider it to be handily the second-best Brosnan film after GE, and while it has its flaws, I really like it for what it is. Brosnan puts on a good performance, and it's equipped with several great scenes (like the PTS and the ski scene). Definitely an underrated Bond flick, albeit not one of the all-time bests.
Lee Tamahori - DAD is considered by most people to be the worst Bond film (at least among the fans on this site), and a complete disaster. I agree it's one of the worst, but maybe just slightly underrated. The PTS through the first half or so of the film is decent, but it definitely falls apart badly in the second half. It has some of the weakest Bond girls and villains in the series. Not as bad as some say, but far from great too.
Marc Forster - I love Forster's Finding Neverland, and I also enjoyed his World War Z. I lot of people slam him as the worst Bond director, but I've always loved Quantum of Solace; like TWINE it's one of the series' most underrated films. There's several scenes I liked in the movie, such as the car chase PTS, the opera scene, and the explosive finale at the hotel. I think Forster is a solid movie director, and QoS, while weaker than it's prequel and sequel, is still a fine Bond film.
Sam Mendes - Skyfall is my second-favorite Bond film, just behind the brilliant CR. Craig has been blessed so far with Bond films in my opinion, though he certainly contributes a lot as to why they're so good. SF was both original and a nice culmination of sorts for the franchise's 50th anniversary. It has action, suspense, and heart - a very well-done Bond film. I can't wait to see what Mendes does with Bond 24, and possibly 25.
So ranking the directors (at the moment) overall for me I guess would go:
1. Martin Campbell
2. Sam Mendes
3. Peter Hunt
4. Guy Hamilton
5. John Glen
6. Terrence Young
7. Lewis Gilbert
8. Marc Forster
9. Michael Apted
10. Roger Spottiswoode
11. Lee Tamahori
I'll be posting more of my own thoughts much later today. Just briefly, some of the Bond films that I feel are most well directed are: DN, FRWL, TSWLM, FYEO, GE, CR, and SF.
Again, any discussion of directors and direction is fine; you don't have to rank the directors but may if you'd like, of course.
Terrance Young is the original and had a lot to do with the cinematic Bond image. He was instrumental in shaping Connery's persona.
He was not avaliable for GF and EON went with Guy Hamilton who did a great job. Sadly, with his third and final film TB, Young has shown a displeasure with the film. Epic and large in scope he was unhappy with the underwater scenes and felt that they slowed the action down.
Guy Hamilton did a good job with GF and following the lackluster box office of OHMSS, the producers decided to call on Hamilton who had helmed the brightest jewel in their crown. His lighthearted approach to DAF paved the way for the first two Moore films which he directed.
Peter Hunt, the editor since DN had been promised YOLT but the producers decided to go with Lewis Gilbert
Gilbert refused the job at first but after further egging on from Cubby decided to take it. He has shown genius in handling the large and outrageous sets that appear in YOLT and TSWLM as well as MR.
Peter Hunt was given OHMSS and he did a damned good job with a film that combined the elements of human interest, character development, and loads of action. The ski chases are fast paced and full of thrills. Hunt's background as an editor served him well. Unfortunately he was never handed the keys to another film. OHMSS is the most polished of the films that came out in the 60's.
It seemed that early on the producers gave the directors quite a bit of leeway on the respective films. This would not be the case in later years...
to be continued....
Glen finished out the Roger Moore era by directing Moore's final three and then he urshed in the Dalton years. His work took us from the tongue in cheek to the more serious Bonds. FYEO and OP are two of the best Moore films. And Dalton's films rank near the top.
Martin Campbell knocked it out of the park with GE and then for some reason declined TND. He returned for CR which ranks as the best Bond film on many lists. (perhaps he just likes directing new actors in their initial film, I dunno)
Now we come to an interesting period. Roger Spottiswood, Michael Apted, and that pariah, Lee Tamohori . These directors finished up the Brosnan years and it is interesting to note that there was something about the films that one cannot put the finger on. Was it the fact the Babs and MGW kept such a tight leash on them? Each of the films have a very general look and feel about them. It seems as if the same man directed all three. The names are interchangable as TWINE could easily have been the title for DAD and TND as well. Maybe some will disagree with me but a director puts his own stamp on a film. You get that feeling with GE and most of Glen's films but the final three Brosnan movies just all look and feel the same. It was as if EON ran an ad in Craigs List for a director and they just signed on these three nimcompoops. (sorry if that word is too strong but nevertheless...)
My feelings regarding Marc Forster I just feel that QoS is such a mishmash of WTH. I rank him with the men who did the final three Brosnan films. Maybe he too had a short leash, and could not insist on rewrites of certain scenes. Earlier directors were given this leeway.
Sam Mendes is an academy award winning director. Landing him must have been a real coup. I think he did an outstanding job with the latest film, SF and word is out that he will helm Bond 24. This is a good thing as the films need that continuity. Maybe that is what was lacking during the Brosnan age. .
I'm also a fan of Glen's films. I often find criticism of the 80s Bonds lacking in good arguments (except when dealing with AVTAK. ;-))
My least favourite Bond director is either Tamahori or Apted.
When Die Another Day was being promoted, I remember thinking it looked like a big (and big budget) spectacular action adventure and fun. Then I went to see DAD with a friend. I was happy with the entire first part of the film, with Bond captured, tortured, then being traded across the bridge, and his meeting with M after his release. That was all fine, had some serious edge, and was well acted and nicely filmed, I thought. I was just settling in for what I took to be an interesting movie, when Bond then walked into the hotel soaking wet and back to quipping like Moore at his peak. It was totally wrong. The film just went schizophrenic. It became clear that Tamohori did not know what kind of film to make; there was hardly any consistency of feeling or connectedness to the first part of the film. The tone was so erratic, it seemed shipshod and uncaring. Like he gave up and said, Let's just have lots of anniversary references and throw in even more quips (fans love those, right?), and let's just "have fun" with it, Halle (smirk, smirk). Sigh ...
My friend and I were just rather gobsmacked and left the theater quite unhappy. Pierce still looked great and I liked his portrayal of Bond fine (minus some of the quips he had to endure saying and dealing with from others). But the film lost its way early enough. The Cuba scenes almost righted the sinking ship ... but as soon as Jinx arrived, it kept sinking the rest of the way. I have many issues with DAD as a film, but not Brosnan's own performance in general. However, the movie was a mess. I do not think any of the Originals I know consider it to be a good film. My personal friends mostly enjoyed it, but the friend I saw the film with was a much younger but serious enough Bond fan. First thing he said was that he hated the invisible car. I said that was the least of the film's problems.
So with Tamahori - we had someone who had shown talent in other films, was perhaps mainly an unknown factor to many western hemisphere fans like me, someone who was given this huge anniversary Bond film and a big budget ... but who lost his way with DAD. I don't know how else to put it. He just got swamped, over his head, was given too much leeway for crazy ideas - granted, I do not know how much sway Barbara and Michael had in this particular film. I think they let him run amok. He is the poorest director of all the Bond films, in my opinion. But I also get the sense that no one was reigning him in, trying to check his excesses. I do place blame heavily on Barbara and Michael was not seeing what was happening to that film and for not stepping in.
DAD was a bad hash of things, like throwing different food at a wall and seeing what stuck. Try that and maybe one or two things stick ... but you still have a sorry mess at the end, all over the wall and the floor, everything. I can see that the actors may not have known, while they were actually in the middle of filming DAD, how this was coming across or how it would end up. There they were filming these big scenes, on exciting locations, sometimes glamorous sets, etc. But honestly, I wonder how they felt when they saw it in a theater for themselves (thinking of the main actors).
DAD: It made good box office, it was quite the spectacle, but it was a bad Bond film ... and I think all (surely all or nearly all) longtime Bond fans were heavily disappointed in this film. :o3
Biggest letdown in Bond history? Yes. Although Moonraker comes close for me, as a real low point, too.
Goldeneye was wonderful, it sparkled, and it all fit together beautifully. Lovely film, well paced, and fun. Campbell did an outstanding job (as he certainly would again, with Casino Royale).
Tomorrow Never Dies was fun and a good Bond film, in my opinion , perhaps a bit much in the action dept. on the stealth boat at the end and Brosnan really starting gunning people down in this one. I remember reading somewhere that Judi did not particularly enjoy working with Spottiswoode. But I found the film to be quite well made and a good Bond film. So I rate it not in the top, but perhaps upper middle of the films for direction.
TWINE was a mixed bag, at times exciting and good, at times melodramatic, and I hated M getting kidnapped. I am not happy with the unevenness of this film, so no, Apted, I do not rank you highly.
DAD - see other post. It was a mess.
Casino Royale - just so strong, different, refreshing, stark, brutal, yet simmering with genuine heart and romance. I feel it was very well directed. Beautifully shot and very fine acting throughout. One of the very best directed Bond films.
QOS - another mixed bag of direction, but some scenes were very lovely and memorable and the ending was pretty much perfect for me. So ... if he had cut out the shaky cam, had given us longer shots of the lovely locations, and just did not move on like in such a headlong rush ... I would rate Forster higher. He showed some talent.
Skyfall - a lovely and genuinely stirring film, so gorgeously shot and with great acting all around; it flowed seamlessly for me. A very well directed film, in my opinion. Mendes rates highly with this one.
Terrance Young The original director and of his three films, FRWL ranks as the masterpiece. Sure TB is larger than life, polished and pure spectacle but FRWL has more gravitas and Young did so much with so little.
Guy Hamilton Of his four films, his first GF stands out as the gem. Hamilton brought a bit of wit and a different brand of sophistication to the series. LALD comes close with the witty tone in some areas and the stark reality (Rosie's death) in others. Like GF this one combined the elements quite good but GF remains his true Piece de Resistance. DAF is just too campy with over the top acting, bad editing, plot holes, inconsistencies, crappy FX and the main offense: taking the menacing Blofeld (Bond's number 1 adversary) and turning him into first a flamboyant homosexual ( I understand that Grey was imitating Noel Coward even down to the cigarette holder) then a disgusting Drag Queen. He make Rosa Klebb look like Britney Spears.
Lewis Gilbert Of his three films, TSWLM stands alone. This is truly his top effort and it is head over shoulders superior to his other two films, YOLT and the disappointing MR.
John Glen with his five films, I have to give the nod to LTK as his best Bond. All five of his films are top notch.
Martin Campbell of his two films we can all agree that CR stands out as his masterpiece. More serious and more original than GE. GE owes a lot to the Moore era and previous Bonds but CR stands alone as an instant classic.
Thank you sir!! Word of mouth is always vital and it is great to keep hearing from readers and fellow Bond fans the world over.
There is a difference between "borrowing" and "stealing", your honour. It's given better justice in the book where all is explained.
But it wasn't the yellow Rolls Royce.
I'm one of the Originals, but also a Bond girl, literally in a sense. So you can call me "M'am," Mark. ;;)
Here are the Bond films I consider true masterpieces:
Terence Young - Yes, most definitely From Russia With Love. It's great Bond film that holds up well. It has heady atmosphere, gritty performances, and it does not lack for tension or pace. Excellent villains and lovely Bond girl. It is a quieter film, it reeks of the Cold War, it has presence, suspense, and is very enjoyable for me. It is one I always recommend. It also has my favorite performance by Connery.
Guy Hamilton - Goldfinger. It is not a perfect film for me, but I do consider it a classic and it brought about some very iconic Bond elements - that bombastic and oh so memorable theme song; Shirley painted gold; Oddjob and his killer hat; the laser scene ... it sent Bond into the stratosphere and made it a solid part of our culture.
Lewis Gilbert - The Spy Who Loved Me. A sparkling, wonderful, adventurous and fun ride. This film is one of my favorites and Roger Moore brought everything together to give us his Bond at last, in full. Wonderful story, great theme song, and not a bad score. A great PTS, new iconic villain, an amazing underwater car, and gorgeous, exotic locations (the pyramids!). It has a well rounded feeling to it and every bit of it shines of high quality. A great Bond film that is still very enjoyable.
John Glen - For Your Eyes Only. So close to TSWLM as a favorite. I think it is an excellent Bond film. It got Bond back down to earth, literally, and gave Moore some excellent more serious scenes as well as fun. I think it was very well filmed, good pace and editing, gorgeous locations, a warmly memorable ally (Colombo), a great Bond girl, a thrilling climb up St. Cyrils, and a very good script overall. I also love the entire ending. :)
Martin Campbell - Goldeneye, an excellent Bond film, one I consider it now a classic. And at the perfect time. But even more so, as a true masterpiece, is the stunning Casino Royale. I would put that up against any film, not just Bond films. I am really impressed one director could make two such high quality, really top of the list, Bond films, and so many years apart. I could run out of superlatives here (see my previous reviews for both of these fine Bond films to get more detailed critique from me).
Sam Mendes - Skyfall. I do not know what Bond 24 or 25 will give us. But for me, Skyfall is a masterpiece of a Bond film. So very beautifully directed, this film - right from the PTS to the final scene in M's new office. It flowed, never lagged, it was well paced, with great acting from an outstanding cast (how important is a director for that?), a good story, incredibly gorgeous cinematography, a sizzling Bond girl, a memorable villain who was not over the top yet truly great (what a great intro scene, too; and that was up to Mendes). Mendes tied everything together so well. He brought back two iconic characters (Moneypenny and Q), and gave the longstanding M a fitting and great ending while introducing the new M. I do think that many directors could not have balanced this as well as Mendes - having all four of those key developments happening in the same film. Skyfall is a near flawless film for me, actually. Pick at plot points, okay, but that is minor for me. It is such a great Bond film.
Terence Young-DN and FRWL
Guy Hamilton-GF
Peter Hunt-OHMSS
John Glen-FYEO
Martin Campbell-CR
Sam Mendes-SF
Thanks for chiming in with your "masterpieces" comments.
Sometimes maybe I do, because when you look at all of the films in this series, most of them have had decent or good direction. It is a solid series of enjoyable films with a now iconic character I greatly enjoy. A few Bond directors (see our personal choices in above posts) were truly outstanding. When a film comes along that is really different or uneven in tone - say Moonraker or LTK or DAD or (in a good way, different) Casino Royale - it makes the director more noticeable. Even so, a director is often (usually?) pushed by producers. Depending upon the producers, but they do hold power over the film, too, not just the director. For DAD, I honestly feel that Barbara and Michael just left the playing field to go walkabout or something. b-( They let Tamahori do anything, it seems. Throwing a big budget into a film certainly does not ensure that quality ends up on the screen - or good storytelling. Huge box office bombs are testament to that. A director is a crucial role. DAD made good box office on the strength of the popularity of the series at that time, not because it was a good film. And I think we are lucky that Bond was so established by the time Moonraker landed and Moore had achieved re-entry, that the series could carry on. I feel it nearly derailed me as a fan. I was highly relieved and thrilled with For Your Eyes Only.
If I could personally choose a role to work in the film industry, my first choice would be screenwriter (I love to write), but the second would be director. B-) Putting all the elements together, having a vision for the entire film (yes, "the big picture"), being able to encourage and enhance actors' performances, to control the flow of work and have the crew work together harmoniously under your own guidance, to be involved in the editing and to work with a superb cinematographer ... what an immense job - but I think it must be so satisfying when it comes together to make a very good film. If I could have another shot at a long-term career, I would love to try that route.
Let's spend another day or two on directors. I feel sure that other members, and other Originals, have thoughts about the films they feel were best directed and those that were so flawed and poorly directed.
I'm starting my 4 day holiday, so I'll be hit and miss here a bit. Have fun, everybody!
:-bd
Terrence Young : DN, FRWL, TB I suspect that too few fans of the Bond series really give Terrence Young his proper due. Each of his 3 entries into the canon has been criticized as being too slow-moving by viewers more accustomed to the modern pace of action-adventure film-making. When considered in the context of his time, Young’s films actually move at a fairly brisk pace; in fact, they can be considered cutting edge film-making by the standards of the early to mid sixties. Additionally, we must acknowledge the impact that Young’s direction had on Sean Connery’s portrayal of James Bond. When Connery was first cast as the nascent series’ lead character, many insiders doubted that the former truck driver would be able to depict the sophistication that Ian Fleming had made an integral part of Bond’s personality. Those who were on hand to witness the beginning have made it abundantly clear in interviews given decades after the fact: director Young had a strong hand in forming the persona that Connery delivered to the public in the shape of his Bond. The phrase, “Terrence Young WAS James Bond” has been used in this context and it should be acknowledged by us when considering the impact of the series’ various directors. Without Young’s guiding hand early in the series’ development, Connery’s performance may not have been as assured as we know it to be today and the character of James Bond may not have been as hugely popular as was the case in the first few installments of the series. Graded on a scale of 1 to 5 for each film, I’ll give Young 14 points in 3 films: 5 for DN, 5 for FRWL and 4 for TB. A very strong showing to be sure. Call it an A-minus in letter grades -- or perhaps just a solid A in terms of his importance to the series as a whole.
Guy Hamilton: GF, DAF, LALD, TMWTGG Guy Hamilton hit the ball out of the park with his first entry in the Bond canon…and never really reached that same level of satisfaction with his subsequent offerings. Timing could well be a part of his initial success: the public was ready to rabidly embrace the Beatles and Batman with a fervency that defies explanation at around that same point. It could just be that in the post-Kennedy era the American mind-set required colorful, larger-than-life heroes in a way that has never since been duplicated. It could also be that the Bond brain trust was really starting to click on all cylinders but they weren’t yet successful enough --and overconfident enough 0-- to coast their way through a film. One way or the other, Goldfinger the film takes one of Fleming’s most imaginative novels and improves on it in several ways -- by acknowledging one of the weaknesses in Fleming’s original, the time that would be involved in moving all that gold, and eliminating that point by establishing a different goal for the villain’s plot: by irradiating the US gold stockpile, he will increase the value of his own hoard considerably. Pussy Galore is rendered more sympathetic by making her defection from Goldfinger’s side the manner in which his plot is foiled (in the book, her switching of sides is much more a matter of battlefield convenience.) I’m not sure how many of these improvements can actually be credited to Hamilton rather than the series’ main script-writer, Richard Maibaum, but clearly the lighter tone of this film -- a precedent-setting, and highly successful, shift in moods -- can be attributed to Hamilton. When the Eon team decided that a camp style was likely to be the most popular direction for the Bond series to take in the ‘70s, Hamilton was the obvious choice to set Bond firmly in that direction. On the scale of a 1 to 5, I can’t give Hamilton better than 13 over the course of 4 films: 5 for GF, 2 for DAF, 4 for LALD and 2 for TMWTGG. Let’s say it’s a B-minus (although it really should be a C-plus but Goldfinger was just too awesome)…
Lewis Gilbert: YOLT, TSWLM, MR Gilbert is clear the Eon team’s go-to guy for big, BIG sets and sprawling spectacles. The budget for the construction of SPECTRE’s volcano base in YOLT equaled the entire production budget of Dr. No…and I doubt the money spent on the sets for MR will ever be matched in the Bond series again. As far as my own opinion of his efforts, Gilbert has been all over the map: mediocre in YOLT and weak in MR, he still brought in one of Roger Moore’s best efforts with TSWLM. Call it 10 for 3: 3 for YOLT, 5 for TSWLM and 2 for MR. C-minus for Mr. Gilbert
Peter Hunt: OHMSS 5 for 1. Hunt turned in an exceptional job despite having an inexperienced lead actor, and got the boot unfairly in my opinion. He took the blame for a big drop in box office revues, when the overwhelmingly negative critical response to Lazenby’s performance on and off the screen, coupled with the big downer of the leading lady’s assassination in the film’s closing moments, were the real villains here. I think Hunt deserved better from the folks at Eon but nobody ever said the movie business was always going to be fair. I’ll give Hunt a full A grade here, and Eon needs to do some extra credit work to make up for their treatment of a loyal soldier in this campaign…
John Glen: FYEO, OP, AVTAK, TLD, LTK Glen is a solid, workman-like director. His films generally score around the midrange when overall fan reaction is considered, but personally, I’d rate him far better than average just in terms of the overall quality of his output. FYEO performs that admirable task of bringing Bond back to earth after the excesses of MR, OP is an enjoyable romp from start to finish, and TLD is one of my favorites of the entire Bond series. LTK was crippled by a writers’ strike that prevented Richard Maibaum from polishing the script to his usual brilliance, and AVTAK…well, I’m already on records as assessing this as my guilty pleasure of the Bond series. Let’s rank these as 5 for FYEO, 4 for OP, 3 for AVTAK, 5 for TLD and 4 for LTK. A highly respectable 21 for 5. Solid B-level work.
The rest will be forthcoming soon. In the meanwhile, I wonder of a scripter-writers' discussion might be fruitful for a soon-to-be-scheduled discussion...
Terence Young - Each of his 3 entries into the canon has been criticized as being too slow-moving by viewers more accustomed to the modern pace of action-adventure film-making. When considered in the context of his time, Young’s films actually move at a fairly brisk pace. Yes, when looking at older films it seems that maybe some of today's audience - who are fed a different look and far harder, faster, bigger action - would too easily dismiss these early films as not as good. Of course I disagree with that. I like the tone and pace of these stories and I realize that technology continues to give us more in filmmaking; yet these were well crafted films and enjoyable just as they are. Especially, for me, FRWL.
Goldfinger - Goldfinger the film takes one of Fleming’s most imaginative novels and improves on it in several way -- I agree the changes improved the story. And Hamilton certainly had a variety of style/tone in his Bond films, didn't he?
Lewis Gilbert - The budget for the construction of SPECTRE’s volcano base in YOLT equaled the entire production budget of Dr. No… I did not realize that, but I easily believe it. He was "all over the map" yes; but how I love TSWLM. That one's a gem.
Peter Hunt - Actually, this film is pretty low on my list, but I am watching it again in the next two days. You said: ... overwhelmingly negative critical response to Lazenby’s performance on and off the screen, coupled with the big downer of the leading lady’s assassination in the film’s closing moments, were the real villains here.
I agree. Those were the two key elements I felt strongly about. I never bought Lazenby as Bond and that did hang heavily on the film, while I loved Diana Rigg's Tracy ... and it it just such a major downer to leave a theater on that note. Depressing.
John Glen - yes, he is called "workmanlike" a good deal, I think. Which is not a high accolade, is it? Sounds like average or almost, not quite, "meh." I rate him higher than that. And how I love FYEO - it is really a fine film from start to finish, with Moore's strongest performance. I also highly enjoy TLD. Both of those, in particular, seem well directed to me.
I know @Sandy is busy just now and out of town, but when she returns she does have some thoughts to add about directors. And Beatles will return with his continuation about directors. Anybody else care to chime in? I hope so. :-B
You know you have given some thought about directors of Bond films. You surely have directors you like, some you don't like or cannot stand. Just come on over, put your feet up, have a pint with us here (or a martini shaken, not stirred), and give us your two bits.
Bond directors ... for just a couple of more days.
Cheers! B-)
Terrence Young - The Man! Probably the single most important director in the history of the franchise because he translated Ian Fleming's vision from the books to the screen. His 3 films are amazing in my opinion, FRWL is my favourite, DN a great entry in spite of the limitations, and TB, although my least favourite of the bunch, is a strong, solid entry.
Guy Hamilton - When I look at the list of his films I realize they are not at all my favourite. GF is iconic although not one of my favourites, bu the others are simply not much to my taste.
Lewis Gilbert - Big, bigger! Loud, louder! Crazy, crazier! I have to confess I have a soft spot for YOLT (probably the Japanese setting does it for me) and TSWLM is a great piece of entertainment but MR? That one was simply too big, too loud and, I'm afraid to say, too crazy 8-}
Peter Hunt - OHMSS is amazing! Do I need to say more? My only complaint is that he should have direct more, especially DAF would have had a much different tone in my opinion if he had done it.
John Glen - as others have said, workmanlike. That's not necessarily a bad thing! I love FYEO, OP (my Bond guilty pleasure) and TLD. He got the job done and although no genius he did it well.
Martin Campbell - He's a director that's only great when director Bond films, isn't that strange? Two great entries, the man knowns what he's doing when it comes to Bond. When in doubt call him back.
Roger Spottiswoode - I actually like TND a lot, it's got an interesting story. However I don't particularly like his style of directing and the slow motion scenes at the end of the film always leave me cringing.
Michael Apted - TWINE is one of those films that manage to get lower in my appreciation every time I watch it. It had so much potential but in the end is like a cheap melodrama. Should I also review his wife's contribution? Didn't think so...
Lee Tamahori - This is a tough one... or maybe not. STAY AWAY FROM BOND!!!!!
Marc Forster - why, oh why did you cut the film like that? You are such a talented boy, after all. Still, QoS has a heart which is more than can be said about a lot of films. It's a personal favourite of mine despite some less than stellar options of dear Marc. No hard feelings, I still like you very much Marc!
Sam Mendes - Sam... oh Sam! I could listen to him talking all day long, such a sultry voice, such a sexy intellect :\"> ... but I digress. Let's see what he does with Bond 24 but SF is one of my favourite entries so if he keeps up with the good work we have here another Bond director extraordinaire.