This may be a heretical thought, but we at the Guardian have always found James Bond films a tiny bit boring. Even the successful, "exciting" ones, like Skyfall or Casino Royale. We may be in the minority though: Skyfall, the 23rd in the hoary old series, became by far its most lucrative. In fact, it's currently the ninth highest grossing film of all time, ahead of Jurassic Park, the first Hobbit film and The Dark Knight Rises.
Still, the question arises: where does it go next. Having classed up the joint by hiring Sam Mendes as director for Skyfall, and persuading him to return for Bond 24 (presumably by sending lorryloads of cash over after he claimed not to want to) alongside Daniel Craig, series producers Eon were no doubt metaphorically cackling and rubbing their hands with glee – the sneers of John Cleese notwithstanding.
Now, however, it looks like Bond 24 has a crisis of identity already. According to reports, writer John Logan's effort was greeted with quiet dismay and – irony of ironies – Logan has been replaced by Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, the very writers who were jettisoned when Logan was brought in by Mendes to polish up Skyfall. The suggestion is the script needs more "punch" – and we're thinking that means more of the action-gag combo that 007 pioneered back in the day.
So where do you think the Bond franchise should go? More action, or more "character"? Less gadgets, or less emoting? Let us know in the comments below.
