107 replies to this topic

[luciusgore]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

http://www.rottentom...egend_of_zorro/

[Alessandra]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

http://www.rottentom...egend_of_zorro/

lol ok the reviews are just a tad negative.
but it doesn't mean Casino Royale will be bad as well?
It's a completely different thing, no?
I do hope the movie at least is good.. and since Campbell did a very good job with Goldeneye, I'm hopeful he'll repeat the performance.

[Tarl_Cabot]

[Marquis]

I see EmpireOnline have given it 3/5:

"Sometimes sequels go wrong because some of the key principles who made the first film work are unwilling to return for another go-around, giving rise to limp outings like Son Of The Mask, Speed 2: Cruise Control or xXx: State Of The Union. Sometimes, everyone signs up again but the fizz has gone and you get mild disappointments like Men In Black II and Ghostbusters II. The Legend Of Zorro is squarely in the second camp, which should keep it off the year

Edited by Marquis, 26 October 2005 - 04:13 PM.

[Mister Asterix]

Seems they take the worst part of any review. The one fellow they quote as saying:

[quote]Note to Zorro: Your sword has a pointy tip. Use it. [/quote]

gave the movie three and a half stars and also said:

[quote]The Legend of Zorro is not the nearly perfectly done movie that its predecessor was, but it

[tonymascia1]

Rottentomatoes.com is usually an excellent indicator of a movie's value.

Let's give it another 48 hours, as more reviews are accumulated. That said, a 22% "fresh" rating is very, very "rotten" indeed...

[Stratus]

Wait till you get about 20-30 reviews before really judging (from my experience).

I get this feeling Batman Begins might influence its score, Zorro did inspire Batman after all. With the recent DVD release, that won't help much at all either.

Edited by Stratus, 26 October 2005 - 04:07 PM.

[tonymascia1]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

http://www.rottentom...egend_of_zorro/

lol ok the reviews are just a tad negative.
but it doesn't mean Casino Royale will be bad as well?
It's a completely different thing, no?
I do hope the movie at least is good.. and since Campbell did a very good job with Goldeneye, I'm hopeful he'll repeat the performance.

You're right, Ale. One can't automatically assume what will happen with Casino Royale because of the Zorro sequel.

Let's hope and pray that Martin Campbell doesn't suffer from Guy Hamilton Disease (first Bond film far and away his best)...

[Alessandra]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

http://www.rottentom...egend_of_zorro/

lol ok the reviews are just a tad negative.
but it doesn't mean Casino Royale will be bad as well?
It's a completely different thing, no?
I do hope the movie at least is good.. and since Campbell did a very good job with Goldeneye, I'm hopeful he'll repeat the performance.

You're right, Ale. One can't automatically assume what will happen with Casino Royale because of the Zorro sequel.

Let's hope and pray that Martin Campbell doesn't suffer from Guy Hamilton Disease (first Bond film far and away his best)...

Ahh Tony, you're back!
well yes let's hope and pray, because if he does have the disease.... we're definitely toast!! lol
I haven't seen this Zorro movie yet, I've seen commercials around, it's being released tomorrow here. I will check it out. Although the reviews are a bit SCARY let's say? lol ;P
Heck, maybe I'll just enjoy watching Banderas

[zencat]

I've seen it and I thought it was just fine. Not as good as the first, but a good sequel.

[Alessandra]

I've seen it and I thought it was just fine. Not as good as the first, but a good sequel.

ah ok then. did you read those reviews? as I said, doesn't at all mean the same fate awaits Casino Royale, but many were pretty bad!
the fact you found it ok makes me side more on my "he did well in Goldeneye, will do well again" initial thought

[SecretAgentFan]

First of all: Rotten Tomatoes is only using some quotes of a review. If you read the whole review you

[Marquis]

I've seen it and I thought it was just fine. Not as good as the first, but a good sequel.

No disrespect Zen but i hope that CR is somewhat better than just 'fine'.

[zencat]

I've seen it and I thought it was just fine. Not as good as the first, but a good sequel.

ah ok then. did you read those reviews? as I said, doesn't at all mean the same fate awaits Casino Royale, but many were pretty bad!
the fact you found it ok makes me side more on my "he did well in Goldeneye, will do well again" initial thought

I never read reviews.

Like I said, the movie is fine. What flaws it has has nothing to do with the direction, photography, and editing, all of which superb (and all three of these men are headed to Casino). As with most movies today, the writing sucks. And I don't blame the writers. I'm sure there was a great Zorro script there at one time. It's just that in the modern studio machine scripts are pissed on my so many "creatives" that in the end you get something that is superficial, overwrought, inelegant ,confusing, claptrap.

[Alessandra]

I've seen it and I thought it was just fine. Not as good as the first, but a good sequel.

ah ok then. did you read those reviews? as I said, doesn't at all mean the same fate awaits Casino Royale, but many were pretty bad!
the fact you found it ok makes me side more on my "he did well in Goldeneye, will do well again" initial thought

I never read reviews.

Like I said, the movie is fine. What flaws it has has nothing to do with the direction, photography, and editing, all of which superb (and all three of these men are headed to Casino). As with most movies today, the writing sucks. And I don't blame the writers. I'm sure there was a great Zorro script there at one time. It's just that in the modern studio machine scripts are pissed on my so many "creatives" that in the end you get something that is superficial, overwrought, inelegant ,confusing claptrap.

too true!
I do read reviews... but I NEVER agree!! lol

[luciusgore]

I've seen it and I thought it was just fine. Not as good as the first, but a good sequel.

ah ok then. did you read those reviews? as I said, doesn't at all mean the same fate awaits Casino Royale, but many were pretty bad!
the fact you found it ok makes me side more on my "he did well in Goldeneye, will do well again" initial thought

I never read reviews.

Like I said, the movie is fine. What flaws it has has nothing to do with the direction, photography, and editing, all of which superb (and all three of these men are headed to Casino). As with most movies today, the writing sucks. And I don't blame the writers. I'm sure there was a great Zorro script there at one time. It's just that in the modern studio machine scripts are pissed on my so many "creatives" that in the end you get something that is superficial, overwrought, inelegant ,confusing, claptrap.

It may be that Eon will PREVENT Sony from screwing up Casino Royale. It seems like Sony is screwing up every and any film it can right now. I suppose they are forced to keep their paws off of Spiderman 3 as well, as Sam Raimi is master of that franchise and it's doubtful they would cross him.

[Mister Asterix]

It may be that Eon will PREVENT Sony from screwing up Casino Royale. It seems like Sony is screwing up every and any film it can right now. I suppose they are forced to keep their paws off of Spiderman 3 as well, as Sam Raimi is master of that franchise and it's doubtful they would cross him.

This is how it should go:

Sony Exec: You know Michael I had this idea for

[Alessandra]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' date='26 October 2005 - 17:44'][quote name='luciusgore' date='26 October 2005 - 11:39']It may be that Eon will PREVENT Sony from screwing up Casino Royale. It seems like Sony is screwing up every and any film it can right now. I suppose they are forced to keep their paws off of Spiderman 3 as well, as Sam Raimi is master of that franchise and it's doubtful they would cross him.

[/quote]

This is how it should go:

Sony Exec: You know Michael I had this idea for

[Kalel577]

I don't have much confidence in Campbell as a director. His pacing is plodding, and the engagement of character plot elements are more due to actors chemistry rather than actual direction. If it weren't for the obvious camaraderie between Anthony Hopkins and Antonio Banderas, "Mask of Zorro" would not have been as enjoyable to watch, and that's more a credit to the actors than the director.

[Kara Milovy]

I don't think it bodes poorly for CR at all. Even Hitchcock made The Paradine Case. Most good directors have a few turkeys on their resumes. Campbell's not a genius auteur, but Bond doesn't need that.

[luciusgore]

I don't think it bodes poorly for CR at all. Even Hitchcock made The Paradine Case. Most good directors have a few turkeys on their resumes. Campbell's not a genius auteur, but Bond doesn't need that.

Well Campbell has more than just a few turkeys. Goldeneye and the original Zorro were good, then things went downhill from there. GE and Zorro1 both had the involvement on Jon Calley, who is no longer part of Sony or MGM. Campbell could have also improved the Zorro 2 script. He obviously didn't. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Of the last four Bond directors, he's clearly the best all around. All the rest made substandard fare afterward, with DAD's director even making XXX: State of the Union. What a disaster. But with a new actor that wasn't very well-received, CASINO ROYALE is going to have to be GREAT, not good, and certainly not average.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Let's hope the script is up to par and Cambell will deliver...a Zorro sequel didn't really promise "Casablanca" did it?

[Harmsway]

I don't think it bodes poorly for CR at all. Even Hitchcock made The Paradine Case. Most good directors have a few turkeys on their resumes. Campbell's not a genius auteur, but Bond doesn't need that.

Well Campbell has more than just a few turkeys. Goldeneye and the original Zorro were good, then things went downhill from there. GE and Zorro1 both had the involvement on Jon Calley, who is no longer part of Sony or MGM. Campbell could have also improved the Zorro 2 script. He obviously didn't. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Of the last four Bond directors, he's clearly the best all around. All the rest made substandard fare afterward, with DAD's director even making XXX: State of the Union. What a disaster. But with a new actor that wasn't very well-received, CASINO ROYALE is going to have to be GREAT, not good, and certainly not average.

Of the last four directors, my favorite is actually Spottiswoode. The problems with Tomorrow Never Dies I attribute more the messy production than Spottiswoode's involvement. That script was being redrafted even as the film was being shot - hence a lot of things not working and having to be reworked at the last minute. Not to mention, Spottiswoode didn't even want to cast Teri Hatcher as the Bond girl (the pressure for her casting was put on by the studio).

Even with it's very poor script, Tomorrow Never Dies is fun and visually lush and has the best action sequences of Brosnan's run. I'd eagerly like to see Spottiswoode return with a better script, though I doubt he'd want to after the awful production run that was Tomorrow Never Dies.

[Harmsway]

I'm also going to add, as a vote of confidence, apparently the script for Casino Royale is darn good. Good enough to convince Craig to sign on board, even though he was very reluctant. If it's that good, it's going to be hard to mess it up.

The problems with Campbell's films are more script issues than anything else, IMO. He's fine as a director, but often has week scripts to deal with. He's capable enough when handed the right material, as it seems like he will with Casino Royale.

[Loomis]

Well Campbell has more than just a few turkeys.

Very true. But if the script is as good as "they" say, Campbell would really have to make a major effort in order to screw up CASINO ROYALE.

[luciusgore]

It's the director's responsibility to repair a script. Bryan Singer, for instance, is directing SUPERMAN RETURNS, a movie written by the same team that wrote the direct-to-video URBAN LEGENDS 3: BLOODY MARY, an awful little horror movie. Obviously, Singer is going to guide the script, or the film will tank. Hitchcock made sure his scripts were up to par. Spottiswoode, yes, had to repair TND to make it film-able.

The one thing Campbell has going for him is he made the best Bond of the past 20 years. Guy Hamilton only made garbage other than Bond. Live and Let Die was actually quite good, DAD was good. Neither were as brilliant as Goldfinger, but that is one of the greatest movies ever made.

[Marquis]

I don't think it bodes poorly for CR at all. Even Hitchcock made The Paradine Case. Most good directors have a few turkeys on their resumes. Campbell's not a genius auteur, but Bond doesn't need that.

Well Campbell has more than just a few turkeys. Goldeneye and the original Zorro were good, then things went downhill from there. GE and Zorro1 both had the involvement on Jon Calley, who is no longer part of Sony or MGM. Campbell could have also improved the Zorro 2 script. He obviously didn't. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Of the last four Bond directors, he's clearly the best all around. All the rest made substandard fare afterward, with DAD's director even making XXX: State of the Union. What a disaster. But with a new actor that wasn't very well-received, CASINO ROYALE is going to have to be GREAT, not good, and certainly not average.

Of the last four directors, my favorite is actually Spottiswoode. The problems with Tomorrow Never Dies I attribute more the messy production than Spottiswoode's involvement. That script was being redrafted even as the film was being shot - hence a lot of things not working and having to be reworked at the last minute. Not to mention, Spottiswoode didn't even want to cast Teri Hatcher as the Bond girl (the pressure for her casting was put on by the studio).

Even with it's very poor script, Tomorrow Never Dies is fun and visually lush and has the best action sequences of Brosnan's run. I'd eagerly like to see Spottiswoode return with a better script, though I doubt he'd want to after the awful production run that was Tomorrow Never Dies.

My sentiments exactly.

[K1Bond007]

I never really liked The Mask of Zorro all that much so...

I would hardly use the outcome of this film as any indication for CR. That's like saying The Two Towers might suck because Peter Jackson also directed The Frighteners (which did bad or lukewarm with the critics).... yet he was successful with Fellowship.

[crheath]

This is irrelevant to how Casino Royale will be. The Legend of Zorro was a sequel with a popular character people were used to. It's understandable that Campbell wouldn't do a good job.

Casino Royale, on the other hand, is a ..... on second thought, maybe we should be concerned.

[rnblover1971]

If this movie is truly as bad as people say it is, let me offer an alternative movie:

Zorro, The Gay Blade

It's a funny, older, obscure and underrated movie that was made with George Hamilton back in 1981.

This movie does for Zorro what Austin Powers does for James Bond and what Blazing Saddles does for westerns: offers a funny spoof on the genre.

Rent this one or put it in your Blockbuster queue!