107 replies to this topic

[dinovelvet]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

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

It's got nothing to do with Casino Royale. Campbell is one of those directors whose films are only as good as their scripts and their actors, and in the case of CR, the lead actor and the screenwriter are better.

[luciusgore]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

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

It's got nothing to do with Casino Royale. Campbell is one of those directors whose films are only as good as their scripts and their actors, and in the case of CR, the lead actor and the screenwriter are better.

The screenwriters of "Legend of Zorro" also wrote "Mission Impossible 3," so we'll see this summer whether the problems with LOZ were their fault, or Campbell's.

[Harmsway]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

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

It's got nothing to do with Casino Royale. Campbell is one of those directors whose films are only as good as their scripts and their actors, and in the case of CR, the lead actor and the screenwriter are better.

The screenwriters of "Legend of Zorro" also wrote "Mission Impossible 3," so we'll see this summer whether the problems with LOZ were their fault, or Campbell's.

Doesn't necessarily follow. Screenwriters can write a bad film and then write a good one - if they turn out a good film in M:I3, it has no bearing on who was to blame in LOZ.

[Agent 76]

User Rating in www.imdb.com: 6.5/10

[Marquis]

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.

Hate to play the pedantic card, but your analogy isn't the best considering The Frighteners did rather well with the critics and was one of the contributing factors to Jackson getting the LOTR gig!

http://www.rottentom.../m/frighteners/

[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.

Hate to play the pedantic card, but your analogy isn't the best considering The Frighteners did rather well with the critics and was one of the contributing factors to Jackson getting the LOTR gig!

http://www.rottentom.../m/frighteners/

No. First off, there's hardly any reviews there (the film came out before the website was established). Go back and look at some real reviews when the film was actually released. Overall it had lukewarm or bad reviews. Siskel and Ebert for instance gave it 2 thumbs down. And from what I recall, Jackson got the gig because he 1) pushed for it like no other and 2) Heavenly Creatures - not the Frighteners.

[luciusgore]

I would be less concerned if LOZ had, say, a 50 percent positive rating. Not good, still "rotten" by Rotten Tomatoes standards. But a 30 percent basically says the movie SUCKS. Of the five films opening this Friday, LOZ has the LOWEST rating on Rotten Tomatoes, even lower than "Saw II," which is a horror sequel!

I'm all for giving Campbell the benefit of the doubt, but when his latest movie is ranking below "Saw II," I do see some cause for alarm.

[Qwerty]

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

Exactly.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

Zorro isn't doing well with critics?? God....I hope Casino Royale tanks because of this, that'll teach that Martin Campbell....


Seriously, I don't see this as too much of an issue. They can't all be winners...let's just hope he saved up his best work for Bond.

[Athena007]

My review of Zorro can be found on my web-site (click on "my reviews" on the menu). I saw the film at the Cast & Crew screening. Though I really don't think this was Martin Campbell's fault.

Athena reviews The Legend of Zorro (2005): 2 Stars out of 5

This movie should have been called 'The Legend of Elena de la Vega". Though even she started to become dull. The only character which I found engaging was Armand (Rufus Sewell of 'Dark City' fame), he was the only character who wasn't some mold of Zorro world people. Speaking of the people in Zorro world, why the hell do they even need Zorro in the first place? They all seem perfectly capable of kick butt on their own without him. There were numerous major historical inaccuracies in this film as well as lame attempts at humor and horrendous 80's special effects. Zorro is one sad sight this time around, he should have listened to Elena and retired.

[Agent 76]

Maybe they will call it "The Sinking of Zorro" .

[Qwerty]

Maybe they will call it "The Sinking of Zorro" .

Pretty much seemed to be the theme of the review I read in the paper today. 1 1/2 out of 4 stars.

[Marquis]

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.

Hate to play the pedantic card, but your analogy isn't the best considering The Frighteners did rather well with the critics and was one of the contributing factors to Jackson getting the LOTR gig!

http://www.rottentom.../m/frighteners/

No. First off, there's hardly any reviews there (the film came out before the website was established). Go back and look at some real reviews when the film was actually released. Overall it had lukewarm or bad reviews. Siskel and Ebert for instance gave it 2 thumbs down. And from what I recall, Jackson got the gig because he 1) pushed for it like no other and 2) Heavenly Creatures - not the Frighteners.

Even though it may have received the much maligned '2 thumbs down' from Siskel & Ebert, there's more actual evidence (as opposed to anecdotal) to suggest The Frighteners, whilst not considered a classic by any stretch, was still quite well received by the majority of critics. Also, im sure that i read a comment from the head of New Line praising Jackson's previous work including The Frighteners, but as i can't find the quote, i might have to file that one under 'anecdotal' also.

Putting the critical merits (or lack thereof) of The Frighteners to one side, i still find your analogy to be somewhat wide of the mark. People aren't concerned that Campbell might not be up to CR because of some low budget flick he did earlier in his career and nor is Casino Royale the middle installment of a trilogy being filmed back-to-back by Martin Campbell. People are worried because his very latest directorial work is getting distinctly poor reviews!

However, silly analogy aside, i do get the point you were trying to make - just because the latest Zorro flick isn't getting great reviews, doesn't mean CR will be poor. Campbell has had a couple of hits in his career and hopefully he can shake off this run of bad form and be back at the top of his game for Bond 21.

Edited by Marquis, 27 October 2005 - 05:50 AM.

[luciusgore]

Although it does not mean CR will suck, it is definitely not a good sign. It's a bad sign. Add to that, the fact that Wilson and Babs supposedly saw it and were ecstatic about how good it supposedly was. Turns out, Legend of Zorro bites the big one.

[dinovelvet]

Although it does not mean CR will suck, it is definitely not a good sign. It's a bad sign. Add to that, the fact that Wilson and Babs supposedly saw it and were ecstatic about how good it supposedly was. Turns out, Legend of Zorro bites the big one.

This quote from rottentomatoes was particularly intriguing :

"Imagine paying to see a James Bond movie and watching countless scenes of Moneypenny and Q and you

[Qwerty]

Although it does not mean CR will suck, it is definitely not a good sign. It's a bad sign.

I'm not worrying too much. Campbell has proven to me he's a good director.

[Agent007.5]

I think if Zorro is a complete disaster at the box office (which it's like it will) than I think Sony will definity have some serious problems letting him continue on CR. If it doesn't make it's money back within the first 2 or 3 weeks than I expect Campbell to be let go from the film and a new director will be brought it (maybe Chris Nolan- one could only hope)

[Harmsway]

I think if Zorro is a complete disaster at the box office (which it's like it will) than I think Sony will definity have some serious problems letting him continue on CR. If it doesn't make it's money back within the first 2 or 3 weeks than I expect Campbell to be let go from the film and a new director will be brought it (maybe Chris Nolan- one could only hope)

Doubt that. I think Campbell's a sure deal at this point, regardless of Zorro's success or failure.

[SeanValen00V]

There's nothing much different to the way TND was directed and GE was directed, Roger Spottiswood could do Casino well.

Although I liked Goldeneye, the thing that made it a good movie was basically it was originally written with Tim Dalton in mind, it had his spirit in it, Martin Campbell did decent directing in it, but so did John Glen in TLD, yet people thought LTK didn't have the same directing vision on it, or was it the script/style of the film, john glen directed so many bond films with different directions/mood/style/violence, he pretty much proved how producer driven the bond films are.

There's tones of better directors then martin campbell, if you wanna know why most brosnan films had a new director, it was probabley due to keep costs low, and controling those directors as much as possible, Campbell did one film, producers probabley just like him as they do palvis and wade, their writers, doesn't mean quality is guranteed, the 100 million budget has gotta work for audiences, lets see how the supporting cast goes, and did Campbell want Daniel Craig as Bond, Campbell may have lucked out with Brosnan, but Craig, who knows, it seemed a producer casting decision, not a directors one. Personally I think they are all bonkers, and should of done a world wide vote, Hugh Jackman and Pierce Brosnan would of come out on top.

[Harmsway]

Although I liked Goldeneye, the thing that made it a good movie was basically it was originally written with Tim Dalton in mind, it had his spirit in it, Martin Campbell did decent directing in it, but so did John Glen in TLD, yet people thought LTK didn't have the same directing vision on it, or was it the script/style of the film, john glen directed so many bond films with different directions/mood/style/violence, he pretty much proved how producer driven the bond films are.

Personally, I felt Brosnan was out of his element there in a Dalton-styled film (and BTW, on a side note, Michael France's original draft, which REALLY had Dalton in mind was MUCH better). His "hard-edged" stuff doesn't work and isn't really convincing.

He was much more in his niche (or potential niche) with his lighter portrayal in TND. He was in ease there and it showed that lighter was the way to go with Brosnan. DAD proved again that his strength was the lighter side of Bond.

[pieffra]

i'M JUST GOING TO SEE IT TONIGHT AT THE ITALIAN NATIONAL PREMIERE. IT SEEMS THAT CAMPBELL WILL ATTEND. TOMMORROW I WILL TELL YOU, HOW THE MOVIE AND THE GALA WILL BE...

[Mona Lovesit]

Could be a bad sign for 'Casino Royale':

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

Judging by the name of their site, it would seem that it is their job to give bad reviews.

[luciusgore]

I think if Zorro is a complete disaster at the box office (which it's like it will) than I think Sony will definity have some serious problems letting him continue on CR. If it doesn't make it's money back within the first 2 or 3 weeks than I expect Campbell to be let go from the film and a new director will be brought it (maybe Chris Nolan- one could only hope)

Given the comparisons to "Spy Kids," it may not be a complete disaster. But it does look like a very, very bad movie. Not a mediocre one, but a really, realy lame one.

[Alessandra]

i'M JUST GOING TO SEE IT TONIGHT AT THE ITALIAN NATIONAL PREMIERE. IT SEEMS THAT CAMPBELL WILL ATTEND. TOMMORROW I WILL TELL YOU, HOW THE MOVIE AND THE GALA WILL BE...

!!!!!
ma possibile che io non abbia mai completamente realizzato che c'e' un altro Italiano qua?!??!?!
now is it possible that i never fully realised there's another italian here?!?
Ciao Pieffra.
so yes, good idea, let us know!
I'm in Milan so can't attend. Will go see the movie, that yes, but no Campbell.

[Simon]

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.

Totally agree.

And he did Stop or my Mom will Shoot - which kinda makes this thread redundant as a search for pointers to what will be the result based on past performances.

[luciusgore]

Well, in defense of Campbell, the only Bond director that did make anything decent outside of the Bond franchise was Lewis Gilbert, who made "Alfie" and that sentimental flick with Michael Caine as the professor. Hamilton, Young, Hunt and Glenn made nothing else. I guess Apted made some interesting stuff on the outside, but his Bond was one of the worst too. And Tamahori made "The Edge," which was quite good.

[Bon-san]

Seems a bit self-fulfilling to title a thread "XYZ sucks?" based on a minimal sampling of reviews including such respected cinema journals as "Spirituality and Health."

[blueman]

Campbell is limited, but he seems stuck on trying to make the same movie for the last tens years or so. Maybe he finally gets it right with CR? He's had enough practice, lol.

[luciusgore]

Seems a bit self-fulfilling to title a thread "XYZ sucks?" based on a minimal sampling of reviews including such respected cinema journals as "Spirituality and Health."

RottenTomatoes.com is the most accurate reflection of the true quality of films because it compiles ALL relevant reviews and makes a rating based upon them. At least LOZ isn't the worst reviewed film of this upcoming weekend. It of course would be better if a director who had made a very well-received movie, like say Chris Nolan, was making Casino Royale. Imagine that? We can only hope for the best.

[dinovelvet]

I think if Zorro is a complete disaster at the box office (which it's like it will) than I think Sony will definity have some serious problems letting him continue on CR. If it doesn't make it's money back within the first 2 or 3 weeks than I expect Campbell to be let go from the film and a new director will be brought it (maybe Chris Nolan- one could only hope)

The industry doesn't work like that. Campbell was not hired to ensure good reviews for Zorro, and I guarantee you nobody at Sony is the least bit concerned about the reviews. Did you see what the No.1 movie was last weekend, and the reviews it got? And the week before? DOOM and THE FOG, two movies that got appalling reviews. I'd be surprised if Zorro doesn't open at No.1 this weekend, its an action movie that isn't confined to appealing to one specific demographic, and there's nothing else like it out there in the marketplace right now.
Anyway that's off the point. Zorro has absolutely nothing to do with CR. Campbell was hired because he has a relationship with EON and he delivered (not in my opinion) the best of the Brosnan era Bonds. He is already working on Casino Royale, he will not be off the project, barring an act of God.