Peter Hunt query

Hi I'm new on this forum and a huge bond fan.One thing that i have never understood is why Peter Hunt was never asked back to either direct or edit another bond film after OHmss .His editing style on the first 5 films helped define bond from the normal film of the era with quick brilliant quick edits. In fact he ended up editing yolt after he was unhappy with how it was edited by someone else whilst takin g into account he was about to direct the next bond film .
«1

Comments

  • DutchfingerDutchfinger Holland With LovePosts: 1,240MI6 Agent
    Bolex wrote:
    Hi I'm new on this forum and a huge bond fan.One thing that i have never understood is why Peter Hunt was never asked back to either direct or edit another bond film after OHmss .His editing style on the first 5 films helped define bond from the normal film of the era with quick brilliant quick edits. In fact he ended up editing yolt after he was unhappy with how it was edited by someone else whilst takin g into account he was about to direct the next bond film .

    Welcome aboard and very good question! Look forward on getting some insights into this myself
    Better known as DutchBondFan on YouTube. My 007 movie reviews: Recapping 007
    YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 36,053Chief of Staff
    Hunt's relationship with Broccoli & Saltzman had suffered during the making of OHMSS. Added to that, the film had made a good deal less money than its predecessor and the idea to revitalise the series was for DAF to re-introduce the style of GF. Therefore Guy Hamilton was asked to direct, Shirley Bassey asked to sing the title song, Gert Frobe was to play the villain (this idea was dropped), US locations were to be featured... Oh, and Sean Connery was to play Bond!
  • DutchfingerDutchfinger Holland With LovePosts: 1,240MI6 Agent
    Barbel wrote:
    to revitalise the series was for DAF to re-introduce the style of GF

    And we all know how well that went :))
    Better known as DutchBondFan on YouTube. My 007 movie reviews: Recapping 007
    YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
  • Matt SMatt S Oh Cult Voodoo ShopPosts: 6,596MI6 Agent
    Barbel wrote:
    to revitalise the series was for DAF to re-introduce the style of GF

    And we all know how well that went :))

    I know you're being sarcastic, but it was a very successful move.
    Visit my blog, Bond Suits
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 36,053Chief of Staff
    Barbel wrote:
    to revitalise the series was for DAF to re-introduce the style of GF

    And we all know how well that went :))

    As Matt S says, it went very well. The picture made a bundle more money than its predecessor and Bond's future (openly being questioned at the time) was assured. Job done, as far as the producers & UA were concerned.
  • ChriscoopChriscoop Belize Posts: 10,449MI6 Agent
    It always surprises me how DAF gets such derision, sure it has its faults but I for one always get something positive from each and every bond film.
    It was either that.....or the priesthood
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 36,053Chief of Staff
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,238MI6 Agent
    Not that unusual to go for another director; it happened even after the success of GF, so by then Guy Hamilton and Lewis Gilbert had only done one. Hunt had taken responsibility for the artistic direction of OHMSS, and maybe a sweetener for Connery's return was to have a seasoned director whom he got on with. Hamilton fit that bill, Hunt didn't, and I think Connery is on record saying in passing that he didn't like the direction on OHMSS.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • DutchfingerDutchfinger Holland With LovePosts: 1,240MI6 Agent
    Matt S wrote:
    Barbel wrote:
    to revitalise the series was for DAF to re-introduce the style of GF

    And we all know how well that went :))

    I know you're being sarcastic, but it was a very successful move.

    So was Die Another Day!

    But you're right, i'm always a bit sarcastic when it comes to Diamonds, some hate it, others love (or like) it.
    Even though it's my least favorite Bond film in the bunch, I too can find some merrits in there I like -{
    Better known as DutchBondFan on YouTube. My 007 movie reviews: Recapping 007
    YouTube channel Support my channel on Patreon Twitter Facebook fanpage
  • superadosuperado Regent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,651MI6 Agent
    What happened to Hunt w/OHMSS that led to DAF, was IMO the first, major clash between creative integrity and commercial interests. Sure, that tension was there from the beginning, but the progression of the series' over-the-top qualities was relatively smooth-going up to the radically altered YOLT. However, the back-to-basics approach to OHMSS was a shock to the system and DAF was the response.

    This tension has always been cyclical, sometimes having creative shifts take place within a resident Bond's set of movies as it happened with Roger Moore and Daniel Craig, while entire tenures are responses to those preceding them, like how Tim Dalton's toned-down Bonds were in response to Roger Moore's later Bonds.

    I will always root for the purists and visionaries like Peter Hunt, but sadly, the series wouldn't likely survive if that approach were kept constant.
    "...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
  • Gassy ManGassy Man USAPosts: 2,972MI6 Agent
    It's interesting that George Lazenby usually bears the brunt of criticism for OHMSS's perceived lack of success, but Hunt's directing style shares at least some of the blame. One could argue he was ahead of his time in some ways, but his ultra-sped up fight sequences and quick zooms and his filming Lazenby from odd and oblique angles was a departure from previous Bond films.

    A few years later, such would become more common, but in 1969, it was still unusual. I think the answer as to why he wasn't asked back to direct was reflected in his later films, which oddly are more conventionally directed but were mostly box office failures or unremarkable.

    I like OHMSS very much, and it's in my Top 5 Bond films, but I'm not sure I would be praising it so if it weren't a Bond film and adapted from the novel.
  • ChriscoopChriscoop Belize Posts: 10,449MI6 Agent
    Surely you they just pick the right person for the appropriate time? The formula can't remain the same through the ages....can it?
    It was either that.....or the priesthood
  • Gassy ManGassy Man USAPosts: 2,972MI6 Agent
    It depends on what you wish to accomplish. One of the reasons the films in the 1960s were so popular is that they set the standard for action fare and to the degree they spawned a series of imitators. Sure, they borrowed from other films, too, but they enhanced them. In more recent years, they follow the trends, and in the case of OHMSS, it was more of an art and film misfire.
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 36,053Chief of Staff
    Gassy Man wrote:
    In more recent years, they follow the trends

    To quote from our man, "Successfully, too". In financial terms, anyway, if not always artistically (although they've had their moments).
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent
    Many have said how even the early Bonds owe a lot to "North by Northwest" ? So
    I think many "borrow" ideas. The secret being which "ideas"to borrow ? :D
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • Gassy ManGassy Man USAPosts: 2,972MI6 Agent
    Barbel wrote:
    Gassy Man wrote:
    In more recent years, they follow the trends

    To quote from our man, "Successfully, too". In financial terms, anyway, if not always artistically (although they've had their moments).
    Sure, they make money. They're a brand now, and even a lousy Bond film makes money.
  • Gassy ManGassy Man USAPosts: 2,972MI6 Agent
    Many have said how even the early Bonds owe a lot to "North by Northwest" ? So
    I think many "borrow" ideas. The secret being which "ideas"to borrow ? :D
    Of course, as well as any number of pulp stories and even films like The Scarlet Pimpernel and The Prisoner of Zenda -- but the difference lies in to what degree they maintain elements of the genre formula versus how they innovate. The early Bonds did several things that made them stand distinct from the competition:

    1) An overtall leading man who was not exactly conventionally handsome for the day but who set a new standard for what the leading man was to look like.

    2) Brutal, often sadistic violence -- and an antihero lead who seemed to enjoy it.

    3) Overt sexuality, sometimes played for laughs.

    4) Over violence, sometimes played for laughs.

    5) Sumptuous production values and a sense of globe-trotting grandness.

    These were improvements over what existed at the time and had before. The Bond approach and aesthetic, as well as the cinematography and music, set the films apart.

    In more recent years, the Bond films have followed the contemporary film trends, starting with the notion of a prequel in the first place -- they've obviously borrowed from the Batman films and the Bourne films, too. They don't seem so cutting edge anymore, though they remain profitable mostly by riding the coattails of other films that set the standard.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent
    You do have a point, you can see the influences in many of the Bonds. Luckily
    Bond, tends to put his own spin on these ideas.
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • philpogphilpog Posts: 51MI6 Agent
    edited November 2017
    I've been reading Bronson's Loose Again, Paul Talbot's excellent guide to Charles Bronson's late-period films, and ran across some very interesting comments from actress Jan Gan Boyd, who appeared in the Peter Hunt/Bronson film ASSASSINATION.

    "I was going to do a James Bond film with [Hunt]. They were about to film A VIEW TO A KILL. He had a part written in there for me. I took promo pictures. The costumers put me in this red, rubber dress. And then he got sick, and then they turned it over [to John Glen]."

    This is the first time I've seen anything about Hunt being the original director on AVTAK, though I don't doubt Boyd's comments.
  • HigginsHiggins GermanyPosts: 16,618MI6 Agent
    Gassy Man wrote:
    Sure, they make money. They're a brand now, and even a lousy Bond film makes money.

    QED! TLD and LTK :D
    President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.

    Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
  • superadosuperado Regent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,651MI6 Agent
    edited November 2017
    philpog wrote:
    I've been reading Bronson's Loose Again, Paul Talbot's excellent guide to Charles Bronson's late-period films, and ran across some very interesting comments from actress Charlotte Chong, who appeared in the Peter Hunt/Bronson film ASSASSINATION.

    "I was going to do a James Bond film with [Hunt]. They were about to film A VIEW TO A KILL. He had a part written in there for me. I took promo pictures. The costumers put me in this red, rubber dress. And then he got sick, and then they turned it over [to John Glen]."

    This is the first time I've seen anything about Hunt being the original director on AVTAK, though I don't doubt Chong's comments.

    Never heard that one before either, thank you for sharing. That is quite a minor but sharp tremor in the Bond world if that really did happen, as interviews go because sometimes, people's recollections can be shoddy, and it's possible they verbalized one thing (AVTAK) when they had something else in mind. I would love to know more about it as surely, there would possibly be other "unearthed" sources out there.

    The implications are remarkable. If Peter Hunt was indeed tapped for AVTAK, it would indicate another case of the producers wanting to change course again in tone for the sake of variety, wanting to counter OP of all things (!) perhaps for the much debated "excesses" (clowns, gorilla suit, the tiger, the tarzan yell and the female acrobats), and grounding the next movie with the sensibilities of OHMSS?
    "...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 36,053Chief of Staff
    I'm inclined to doubt this. Glen was certainly involved in pre-production for AVTAK, while Hunt was busy shooting a TV series and a film at this point.

    1983: OP released. The Bond team (Broccoli, Wilson, Glen, Maibaum) begin work on the next one (script, location scouting, etc) shortly afterwards*.

    1984: Peter Hunt directs a TV series The Last Days Of Pompeii. Glen works on AVTAK.

    1985: Hunt directs a film, Wild Geese II. AVTAK is finished and released. The Bond team (Broccoli, Wilson, Glen, Maibaum) begin work on the next one (script, location scouting, etc) shortly afterwards.


    1987: Hunt's film Assassination released. TLD released


    * That's how to do it!
  • lueth2048lueth2048 Posts: 120MI6 Agent
    Recently I read something from John Cork that DAF was the first Bond film that was essentially controlled by the studio and that EON had much less creative control than they did in the 1960s. Maybe this is why Guy Hamilton was brought back in. I think it's well accepted that DAF was planned to be made in the mold of GF and they wanted GFs director. OHMSS has always looked like the most arthouse Bond film (only really approached by SP) and I'd guess that the studio didn't want DAF going down that road.
  • heartbroken_mr_draxheartbroken_mr_drax New Zealand Posts: 2,073MI6 Agent
    lueth2048 wrote:
    (only really approached by SP)

    ?:)
    1. TWINE 2. FYEO 3. MR 4. TLD 5. TSWLM 6. OHMSS 7. DN 8. OP 9. AVTAK 10. TMWTGG 11. QoS 12. GE 13. CR 14. TB 15. FRWL 16. TND 17. LTK 18. GF 19. SF 20. LaLD 21. YOLT 22. NTTD 23. DAD 24. DAF. 25. SP

    "Better make that two."
  • lueth2048lueth2048 Posts: 120MI6 Agent
    lueth2048 wrote:
    (only really approached by SP)

    ?:)

    When I saw SP at the theater I thought that it looked like the most arthouse Bond film since OHMSS.
  • clublosclublos Jacksonville, FLPosts: 193MI6 Agent
    lueth2048 wrote:
    lueth2048 wrote:
    (only really approached by SP)

    ?:)

    When I saw SP at the theater I thought that it looked like the most arthouse Bond film since OHMSS.

    By "arthouse" do you mean dropped on a urine-covered bathroom floor? Because I'd agree...
  • Dirty PunkerDirty Punker ...Your Eyes Only, darling."Posts: 2,587MI6 Agent
    lueth2048 wrote:
    (only really approached by SP)

    ?:)
    It was smooth and really let you take in Bond's surroundings.
    I think it may qualify on a good day as an "art" film.
    a reasonable rate of return
  • lueth2048lueth2048 Posts: 120MI6 Agent
    clublos wrote:
    lueth2048 wrote:

    ?:)

    When I saw SP at the theater I thought that it looked like the most arthouse Bond film since OHMSS.

    By "arthouse" do you mean dropped on a urine-covered bathroom floor? Because I'd agree...

    No, that's not what I meant.
  • caractacus pottscaractacus potts Orbital communicator, level 10Posts: 3,907MI6 Agent
    lueth2048 wrote:
    When I saw SP at the theater I thought that it looked like the most arthouse Bond film since OHMSS.
    I think they've been arty-ing it up since Craig took over.
    The poetry reading in Skyfall was the most conspicuous example, but the same film also had that highly stylised fight scene sillhoutted against the flashing city lights.
    And the previous film had the big fight scene at the opera house (!) fragment into smaller and smaller edits until the most violent acts were almost subliminal. Like it didn't want to be an action film, it wished to comment cleverly and tastefully on action film conventions.
    And Casino Royale itself, the scenes in the casino were given almost Masterpiece Theatre style reverence with all the polished wood and obsequious servants. (seriously, read up on the abandoned Ben Hecht script, we coulda had brothel fights, this story shoulda been sordid!)

    The last two films have been directed by a genuine, award winning art film director, who apparently doesn't understand how thrillers are structured. There are art film directors who do know, Tarantino or the Coen Brothers for example (and I know most of you guys like Nolan), they shoulda hired one of them. But this American Beauty fellow I don't think gets it. One or two beautiful images, and a plot that doesn't add up.

    I think they went for a radical change after Brosnan. Brosnan's films played to the popular expectations of a popcorn thriller, then they fired him and with Craig started taking it all a lot more seriously, and aiming the films at audiences who ordinarily might not see such common entertainment.
    And we know Barbara is branching out, she just released Film Stars Don't Die in Liverpool, and I think she has more like that in the works.
  • RevelatorRevelator Posts: 555MI6 Agent
    edited May 2018
    Gassy Man wrote:
    It's interesting that George Lazenby usually bears the brunt of criticism for OHMSS's perceived lack of success, but Hunt's directing style shares at least some of the blame. One could argue he was ahead of his time in some ways, but his ultra-sped up fight sequences and quick zooms and his filming Lazenby from odd and oblique angles was a departure from previous Bond films.

    I don't think this was a factor. None of the reviews I've come across complain about the editing or fast motion (which was used in earlier Bonds anyway), though several did praise Hunt's direction. Furthermore, the late 1960s were a time of artistic experimentation even in mainstream cinema--look at the editing in The Wild Bunch, which was released the same year and a great success. OHMSS was hardly avant-garde cinema.
    I think the answer as to why he wasn't asked back to direct was reflected in his later films, which oddly are more conventionally directed but were mostly box office failures or unremarkable.

    That only applies to the tail end of Hunt's career. Let's not forget that he directed two big-budget successful features with Roger Moore (Gold and Shout at the Devil). Furthermore, Broccoli had considered asking Hunt back to direct For Your Eyes Only.

    An interview (https://web.archive.org/web/19981206131445/http://www.retrovisionmag.com/jamesbond.htm) with Hunt gives more information on his lack of further involvement with Bond:

    "At the end of that film [OHMSS], they didn't know what they were going to do, whereas prior to that we had gone on, and on and on. But the team sort of broke up and went on to other things. Then Broccoli asked me to come back for Diamonds Are Forever, but at that time he and Saltzman were fighting and I was involved with something else. I told them that if they moved the production date I might be able to, but they couldn't and so they went with Guy Hamilton...Then, again, Cubby asked me when I was doing Death Hunt [1981], and I couldn't. So each time he came to me, I couldn't do it for one reason or another, although I would have liked to, therefore the cycle broke, as it were...If Lazenby had done Diamonds, then I may have done it, as well as the next two, and I wouldn't have done anything else and whilst I've often been disappointed about things I wanted to do that never came off, I've done some films that I'm awfully proud of which are out of the Bond idiom, away from the protected society of Broccoli and Saltzman and all that. It was very protective for me, and very nice and good, but I was able to go off and make my own films, like Gold and Shout at the Devil, both starring Roger Moore, which I'm proud of and which were very different from Bond."
Sign In or Register to comment.