According to a
report recently run in the Daily Mail, Sam Mendes is "75%" sure that he will be directing the next Bond film. While that's far from a confirmed contract on his desk, it's something that isn't surprising. After all, Mendes has been talking about how he and writer John Logan "have an idea" on where to go with the next two films in the series. Ultimately talk is cheap, and time will tell whether Mendes will pay up or skip the check. What we can do, as fans and film pundits, is make a case for whether he should or shouldn't come back for Bonds 24 and 25. For the sake of this argument, and as a matter of personal preference, I'd like to make the case that Sam Mendes
should come back for the next two pictures. With that in mind, here are five really good reasons that Sam Mendes should stay onboard for at least two more Bond flicks.
5. His Balance of Story and Action is Unparalleled in the Series
There's no denying that Skyfall was the antidote to the mostly bungled hack job that was Quantum of Solace. While that picture still had its moments, it was still mostly perceived as a failure that only Die Another Day could eclipse. It took Sam Mendes' steady hand to even out the ship, and the result was a film that brought us back to the glory of Bonds past, while giving us some room to move around in the future. More importantly, it managed to be one of the only Bond films that didn't feel like a pure spy caper from the first moment. It's true there's a lot of set pieces and thrills within the film's run time, but there's also dramatic depth to be had in both Bond's resurrection as a field agent and in his conflict with M, as well as MI6 in general. Skyfall revisited themes that were central in Goldeneye: the increasingly questionable relevance of old fashioned intelligence gathering, the further decline of a nationstate as a threat to security, and the limits to one's loyalty to service and country. All three themes were explored with a similar villain in the 1995 Brosnan picture, but the difference in the 2012 Craig version is that the villain isn't a "common thief" like Trevalyan was. Silva's anti MI6 agenda comes from abandonment issues after M gives him up during her time as Hong Kong section chief. She does her job, and sacrifices her then best agent to do so. She even proves that she's not afraid to do the same to Bond in the pre-credit sequence. Silva's systematic crippling and exploitation of MI6 has nothing to do with wanting to be an effective terrorist...it's because he feels abandoned by the mother figure of his life, and is lashing out for attention. Writers Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, and John Logan all had their hands in crafting that storyline, but Sam Mendes has experience with both halves of the equation and as such is extremely effective in the way he tells the story at hand. You could watch it as a pure action film, or you can dig deeper and see how there's more to the Bond universe these days than gadgets and women. Although both of those are still present and accounted for.