In the 90s, GE was one of the best 007 films. Today. it looks like a bottom 1/2 or bottom 1/3 film.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
In the 90s, GE was one of the best 007 films. Today. it looks like a bottom 1/2 or bottom 1/3 film.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
I agree. GE IMO is a classic Bond film. It is formulaic, but it works - as opposed to TND which is just too OTT.
In the 90s, GE was one of the best 007 films. Today. it looks like a bottom 1/2 or bottom 1/3 film.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
I admit I liked GE a lot when I first saw it, but there were quite a few things in it I wasn't keen on. However, since then my pinion has only improved, and the movie is now in the top 5 for sure. So it has aged extremely well!
In the 90s, GE was one of the best 007 films. Today. it looks like a bottom 1/2 or bottom 1/3 film.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
I agree. GE IMO is a classic Bond film. It is formulaic, but it works - as opposed to TND which is just too OTT.
My only problem with GE is the Trevalyn story.
But wasn't the Oberhauser story in SP copied (with modifications making it more personal) from the Trevelyan story in GE?
He had one great film, one really good film, and two sub par films
Brosnan had no great or good films. Mediocrity was the best that was achieved during his era.
We will have to differ here. All Brosnan films are at the top for me.
All 4 at the top is a bit much, but yeah, I like all the Brosnan 007s as well. {[]
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
I agree. GE IMO is a classic Bond film. It is formulaic, but it works - as opposed to TND which is just too OTT.
My only problem with GE is the Trevalyn story.
But wasn't the Oberhauser story in SP copied (with modifications making it more personal) from the Trevelyan story in GE?
Since the Oberhauser story features in the book 'Octopussy' in 1966 doesn't Trevalyans story come from it as well?
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
I don't think anything went wrong - other than the roger Moore effect. I think the producers looked back to the excesses of Moonraker and the age / credibility of sir rog in his 50s and wished they'd made a change before avtak. They missed their chance then but didn't with pierce (and if Craig wanted to do a 6th I think they'd do it again). Pierce was popular and successful but the series needed to change
In the 90s, GE was one of the best 007 films. Today. it looks like a bottom 1/2 or bottom 1/3 film.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
All Bond films are great - the point here, as you have identified it as well, is how they are stacked against each other. Of those who rate GE "very" high, it is possible that they grew up watching Bond films in the 90s.
On my recent viewing of GE, I found Onatopp to be Austinpoweresque esp. when she is shooting. Watching Natalya was tedious ) .... Until a few years back, I rated GE very high. But recent viewing changed my opinion of it as a film with some great to good parts mixed with avg. parts .... However, I will try to watch it again (have it on BR) and see if I am able to re-connect with it
All Bond films are great - the point here, as you have identified it as well, is how they are stacked against each other. Of those who rate GE "very" high, it is possible that they grew up watching Bond films in the 90s.
Well said +1 -{
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
I love Brosnan as Bond, and not just because he was my introduction to the character, but because he's like a refined version of Moore's Bond. He's suave, tough, knows how to deliver a good one-liner, and even has the chops to play touching emotion. And he helped reestablish the character. He might not be my favourite Bond (he ranks fourth after Craig, early Connery, and Dalton) but that doesn't mean he was bad in the role. I would have loved to have seen him do one more film and really cement himself in the role like Connery and Moore.
His movies too, are great (although the schizophrenic nature of TWINE and the silliness of DAD are troublesome). However, unlike the other actors who played Bond, Brosnan's films don't have that unique, stand-out quality of some of their films. Connery has Goldfinger, and Moore has Live and Let Die and The Spy Who Loved Me. Goldeneye comes close but it's missing something. Maybe its that timelessness, because it firmly entrenches itself in the 90s. Still, it's one of my favourites, and definitely his best film.
IP, I get the impression that you like all the 007 actors, interesting.
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
I love Brosnan as Bond, and not just because he was my introduction to the character, but because he's like a refined version of Moore's Bond. He's suave, tough, knows how to deliver a good one-liner, and even has the chops to play touching emotion. And he helped reestablish the character. He might not be my favourite Bond (he ranks fourth after Craig, early Connery, and Dalton) but that doesn't mean he was bad in the role. I would have loved to have seen him do one more film and really cement himself in the role like Connery and Moore.
His movies too, are great (although the schizophrenic nature of TWINE and the silliness of DAD are troublesome). However, unlike the other actors who played Bond, Brosnan's films don't have that unique, stand-out quality of some of their films. Connery has Goldfinger, and Moore has Live and Let Die and The Spy Who Loved Me. Goldeneye comes close but it's missing something. Maybe its that timelessness, because it firmly entrenches itself in the 90s. Still, it's one of my favourites, and definitely his best film.
Nodded my way through reading this, although TWINE! Hey!
IP, I get the impression that you like all the 007 actors, interesting.
Of course I do. Each of them brought their unique touch to the role: Connery established the character, Moore added more sophistication and humour, Dalton gave us the most Flemmingish portrayal of the character, Brosnan brought emotional depth to the character, and Craig brought more brutality. Are any of them perfect? No. Connery's perfomance in YOLT and DAF are abysmal, Moore played the role too lightly, Dalton and Craig were too dark, and Brosnan overplayed the quip-happy superhero at times. And Lazenby couldn't act (although he did a pretty good job for someone who'd never done it before!).
My point is that each of the actors has their merits and their downfalls. What it reall comes down to is which actor or era you are in the mood to watch.
IP, I get the impression that you like all the 007 actors, interesting.
Of course I do. Each of them brought their unique touch to the role: Connery established the character, Moore added more sophistication and humour, Dalton gave us the most Flemmingish portrayal of the character, Brosnan brought emotional depth to the character, and Craig brought more brutality. Are any of them perfect? No. Connery's perfomance in YOLT and DAF are abysmal, Moore played the role too lightly, Dalton and Craig were too dark, and Brosnan overplayed the quip-happy superhero at times. And Lazenby couldn't act (although he did a pretty good job for someone who'd never done it before!).
My point is that each of the actors has their merits and their downfalls. What it reall comes down to is which actor or era you are in the mood to watch.
In the 90s, GE was one of the best 007 films. Today. it looks like a bottom 1/2 or bottom 1/3 film.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
All Bond films are great - the point here, as you have identified it as well, is how they are stacked against each other. Of those who rate GE "very" high, it is possible that they grew up watching Bond films in the 90s.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
All Bond films are great - the point here, as you have identified it as well, is how they are stacked against each other. Of those who rate GE "very" high, it is possible that they grew up watching Bond films in the 90s.
Not me, I loved it and am 1976 vintage -{
Nice! .... Note that the discussion is about rankings. I love all 24 Bond films -{
Without PB breathing life into the franchise the Bond we know today would not exist, he deserves respect for breathing life into the character and franchise Imho.
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
All Bond films are great - the point here, as you have identified it as well, is how they are stacked against each other. Of those who rate GE "very" high, it is possible that they grew up watching Bond films in the 90s.
Without PB breathing life into the franchise the Bond we know today would not exist, he deserves respect for breathing life into the character and franchise Imho.
Agree 100% {[] .
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
After a long hiatus and the disappointing performance of TLD, EON was taking no chances and they picked PB becuase he was a safe, slam dunk casting as Bond. He delivered too. The first teaser trailer for GE would not have worked nearly as well with anyone except Brosnan. Brosnan had never actually played Bond before, but he was so architypical of the public's perception of Bond that he was universally accepted as if he had been Bond all along. For EON and the franchise, it was the right actor at the right time.
After a long hiatus and the disappointing performance of TLD, EON was taking no chances and they picked PB becuase he was a safe, slam dunk casting as Bond. He delivered too. The first teaser trailer for GE would not have worked nearly as well with anyone except Brosnan. Brosnan had never actually played Bond before, but he was so architypical of the public's perception of Bond that he was universally accepted as if he had been Bond all along. For EON and the franchise, it was the right actor at the right time.
IIRC, Dalton was contracted to do the 3rd film. Due to issues including legal, the projects got delayed. Dalton laid out a few conditions as well which were not accepted by the producers. The result was the new Bond.
Yes, it nearly did happen. As we know, Timothy Dalton made two Bond movies and was all set for a third, but then complex legal wrangles halted pre-production on Bond 17. After waiting patiently for five years for MGM/UA to sort out the various legal battles, in the spring of 1994 Dalton announced he was leaving the role of 007.
“Bond removes his parachute harness and turns to find the decidedly unpleasant barrel of a pistol thrust against his temple. Mi Wai tells him to keep his hands in sight as she speaks rapidly into a small hand held radio. In a few moments Bond hears the distinctive beat of a helicopter… Mi Wai prods Bond forward… he sees the insignia of the Chinese Red Army on the side of the helicopter”.
The above extract, at first glance, looks like something out of Colonel Sun but comes from the screen treatment that nearly became the basis for the third Tim Dalton Bond movie in 1990/91 – had it gone ahead. In fact, not many fans realize how advanced the plans were for Bond 17 in 1989-90. Moreover, all the evidence suggests that Dalton’s third Bond movie would have placed Fleming’s ‘blunt instrument’ (as grittily played by Dalton) in a much more ambitious and visionary story which had an element of sci-fi at its heart.
An outline treatment by Michael G. Wilson and Alfonse Ruggiero was completed in May, 1990, and, although it was not a full script, it contained a detailed outline story, with descriptions of locations, key characters and major plot concepts. As envisaged in 1990, Dalton’s third would-be Bond movie would have entailed the Bond series continuing to move in the notably realistic direction set out in Licence to Kill, but also brimming with ambitious hi-tech concepts.
Wilson and Ruggiero penned an outline which used robotic designs, microchips and advanced electronic apparatus to provide the film with a markedly scientific backdrop. At the beginning of the treatment there was an intriguing preface saying that the ‘robotic devices’ referred to in the outline were ‘complex and exotic machines designed for specific tasks’ and they would be designed ‘especially for the film for maximum and dramatic and visual impact’.
The opening sequence was set in a chemical weapons laboratory in Scotland, and involved technicians performing tests with robotic devices. Suddenly, one of the robotic machines would run amok and the building would explode. After a ‘bitter debate’ in the House of Commons, the Prime Minister would be seen being questioned by MPs about the explosion, and he would assure the House that the ‘full resources’ of the government were being used to investigate the incident.
Enter 007, who, in the treatment, is summoned to MI6’s HQ and to M’s office for the traditional briefing about his mission. There followed a storyline which took Bond to Hong Kong, Japan and mainland China, with the main villain being Sir Henry Lee Ching, described in the treatment as ‘a brilliant and handsome thirty year old British-Chinese entrepreneur’ who, in the traditional Bond sense, is a dab hand at science and electronic circuits, and is also nicely demented. Sir Henry has a habit of arranging ‘accidents’ at nuclear plants, and demonstrates this by having a robotic device run amok at a Chinese atomic plant in Nanking.
The main point to Wilson and Ruggiero’s treatment for Bond 17 was that Sir Henry wanted Britain to withdraw from Hong Kong (remember, this was 1990, some years before the UK actually did hand over the colony). With his expertise in electronics, Sir Henry threatened to unleash a computer virus that would paralyse every military and commercial unit in the world.
The climax of the treatment involved James Bond being led to Sir Henry’s base of operations through the sewer system under Hong Kong, with 007 gaining access to the building via a waste-pipe. There followed a classic confrontation between Bond and Sir Henry, with the latter eventually killed when 007 turns a welding torch in his face!
Whether this treatment for Dalton’s third Bond movie sowed some of the seeds for later ideas for the Pierce Brosnan films is difficult to say, but the 1990/91 Bond 17 treatment gives us an intriguing glimpse of the film that might have been.
As others have said Brosnan was let down by some pretty shoddy writing. I remember watching a TV interview with Brosnan about TND and he stated they were still writing and changing the script as they were making the film. If you watch him in The November Man or The Tailor Of Panama there's a darker, gritter, more sinister side to him. I don't know but he just wasn't allowed to express that side in his Bond films.
I always remember watching Diamonds Are Forever and Charles Grey as Blofeld and thinking he was about as sinister as a pantomine villian. However watch his performance as Mocata in The Devil Rides Out and boy what a scary scary character. What a different film DAF would have been if he was allowed to play Blofeld like he played Mocata!!
I suppose it's the Producers/Director who decide the tone of the film. I liked Brosnans Bond as they were the four films that I first took my two sons to watch at the cinema as they grew up and they have turned into huge Bond fans. Having said that it's probably my memory of spending special moments with my two lads and it just happened to be Brosnans Bond. A few years later it could have been Mat Damon's Jason Bourne.
As a sidenote it's interesting that most folk think that GE is Brosnans best film, and CR Craigs. Perhaps it just a coincidence that Martin Campbell directed both. If Craig is to do one more Bond film what about getting Campbell back to direct it......who knows I certainly don't I just love watching them, and I never tire of them.
Comments
Ehh I agree with alot of your post, BUT I have to disagree that GE hasnt aged well. I think it still is a fantastic film and was great to get Bond back to being Bond. Great Henchwoman. Great villain. Weird/loony side guy Boris. Big evil lair that gets blown up. What more could you want!
In fact I still think most people have GE in there top 10. Of course there are varied opinions, but rarely do I EVER see GE lower then 15. Not saying I never have, but looking at everyones rankings it is rare to see it lower then 10.
You've seen the bit where he has a fight on the sugarloaf, falls out of the van, and the assailant goes head first through a BA stewardesses mouth
Its product placement at its worse. But hey! Its Moonraker!
I agree. GE IMO is a classic Bond film. It is formulaic, but it works - as opposed to TND which is just too OTT.
My only problem with GE is the Trevalyn story.
"Better make that two."
We will have to differ here. All Brosnan films are at the top for me.
I admit I liked GE a lot when I first saw it, but there were quite a few things in it I wasn't keen on. However, since then my pinion has only improved, and the movie is now in the top 5 for sure. So it has aged extremely well!
But wasn't the Oberhauser story in SP copied (with modifications making it more personal) from the Trevelyan story in GE?
All 4 at the top is a bit much, but yeah, I like all the Brosnan 007s as well. {[]
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Since the Oberhauser story features in the book 'Octopussy' in 1966 doesn't Trevalyans story come from it as well?
Have you recently added TWINE to the top 10?
"Better make that two."
Looks like he has it at number 11. His top 10 is really his top 12.
All Bond films are great - the point here, as you have identified it as well, is how they are stacked against each other. Of those who rate GE "very" high, it is possible that they grew up watching Bond films in the 90s.
On my recent viewing of GE, I found Onatopp to be Austinpoweresque esp. when she is shooting. Watching Natalya was tedious
Well said +1 -{
His movies too, are great (although the schizophrenic nature of TWINE and the silliness of DAD are troublesome). However, unlike the other actors who played Bond, Brosnan's films don't have that unique, stand-out quality of some of their films. Connery has Goldfinger, and Moore has Live and Let Die and The Spy Who Loved Me. Goldeneye comes close but it's missing something. Maybe its that timelessness, because it firmly entrenches itself in the 90s. Still, it's one of my favourites, and definitely his best film.
8. TMwtGG 9. AVtaK 10. TSWLM 11. SF 12. LtK 13. TND 14. YOLT
15. NTtD 16. MR 17. LaLD 18. GF 19. SP 20. DN 21. TB
22. TWiNE 23. DAD 24. QoS 25. DaF
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Nodded my way through reading this, although TWINE! Hey!
"Better make that two."
Of course I do. Each of them brought their unique touch to the role: Connery established the character, Moore added more sophistication and humour, Dalton gave us the most Flemmingish portrayal of the character, Brosnan brought emotional depth to the character, and Craig brought more brutality. Are any of them perfect? No. Connery's perfomance in YOLT and DAF are abysmal, Moore played the role too lightly, Dalton and Craig were too dark, and Brosnan overplayed the quip-happy superhero at times. And Lazenby couldn't act (although he did a pretty good job for someone who'd never done it before!).
My point is that each of the actors has their merits and their downfalls. What it reall comes down to is which actor or era you are in the mood to watch.
8. TMwtGG 9. AVtaK 10. TSWLM 11. SF 12. LtK 13. TND 14. YOLT
15. NTtD 16. MR 17. LaLD 18. GF 19. SP 20. DN 21. TB
22. TWiNE 23. DAD 24. QoS 25. DaF
Couldn't agree more. They're all brilliant.
"Better make that two."
Not me, I loved it and am 1976 vintage -{
Nice! .... Note that the discussion is about rankings. I love all 24 Bond films -{
Sweet!!! {[]
Agree 100% {[] .
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Huh?
Pretty sure TLD was successful - it made $191m ($400m with inflation) and TLD is an all-round solid film.
It's LTK that struggled...
"Better make that two."
IIRC, Dalton was contracted to do the 3rd film. Due to issues including legal, the projects got delayed. Dalton laid out a few conditions as well which were not accepted by the producers. The result was the new Bond.
http://www.007.info/the-007-film-that-never-was-daltons-third-bond/
I always remember watching Diamonds Are Forever and Charles Grey as Blofeld and thinking he was about as sinister as a pantomine villian. However watch his performance as Mocata in The Devil Rides Out and boy what a scary scary character. What a different film DAF would have been if he was allowed to play Blofeld like he played Mocata!!
I suppose it's the Producers/Director who decide the tone of the film. I liked Brosnans Bond as they were the four films that I first took my two sons to watch at the cinema as they grew up and they have turned into huge Bond fans. Having said that it's probably my memory of spending special moments with my two lads and it just happened to be Brosnans Bond. A few years later it could have been Mat Damon's Jason Bourne.
As a sidenote it's interesting that most folk think that GE is Brosnans best film, and CR Craigs. Perhaps it just a coincidence that Martin Campbell directed both. If Craig is to do one more Bond film what about getting Campbell back to direct it......who knows I certainly don't I just love watching them, and I never tire of them.
"Do you expect me to talk? "No Mister Bond I expect you to die"
Yep, hence why TWINE is the best display of PB's acting ability out of his 4 films. It's well directed.
"Better make that two."