Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Martin Campbell - what a transformation


31 replies to this topic

#1 dinovelvet

dinovelvet

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8038 posts
  • Location:Jupiter and beyond the infinite

Posted 18 November 2006 - 10:49 AM

Y'know, I am quite freaking amazed that CR was directed by the same person who did GE. The two films are at complete opposite ends of the spectrum, I find GE to be dull, poorly-paced, with too much filler material (all the Natalya in the bunker scenes), and at best, competently directed.

CR on the other hand has some amazingly stylish sequences (the rawness of the black & white opening sequence, the trippy poison martini scene), runs at a brisk pace despite being 2.5 hours long, and is full of genuine tension and genuine emotion.

Its as if they were directed by completely different people. Amazing!

#2 I Like Sharks

I Like Sharks

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 291 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 11:28 AM

I agree. I read in a review I think that the previous Bond film Casino Royale most resembles is Goldeneye which hit me as strange as their very different.

I suppose they are 2 of the darker, more violent films and meant to be more personal stories for the Bond character but even so Casino Royale goes much further in these areas than GE did and thinks outside the box of what you expect from a Bond film

I really hope Martin Campbell does Bond 22 because I think he's done a superb job on CR

#3 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 11:40 AM

Heres hoping Campbell can do Bond 22

#4 whitesox

whitesox

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 206 posts
  • Location:Paris, France

Posted 18 November 2006 - 12:37 PM

I completely agree about Campbell. CR is very cleverly directed. I really hope Campbell'll do Bond 22.

#5 bonds_walther

bonds_walther

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 419 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 02:02 PM

I think Campbell should do all three of Craig's films. He knows how to work with Craig and how far to push the Bond formula in Bond 22/23.

I don't think Bond 22 will be back to the style of a Goldneye or a Living Daylights, but there will definately be more of what we are used to.

#6 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 02:24 PM

Y'know, I am quite freaking amazed that CR was directed by the same person who did GE. The two films are at complete opposite ends of the spectrum, I find GE to be dull, poorly-paced, with too much filler material (all the Natalya in the bunker scenes), and at best, competently directed.

CR on the other hand has some amazingly stylish sequences (the rawness of the black & white opening sequence, the trippy poison martini scene), runs at a brisk pace despite being 2.5 hours long, and is full of genuine tension and genuine emotion.

Its as if they were directed by completely different people. Amazing!


I don't think GOLDENEYE lacks style by any means, but, yes, I was surprised to find that CASINO ROYALE wasn't more similar to GOLDENEYE in look and feel. You could easily believe that it was directed by LAYER CAKE's Matthew Vaughn rather than Campbell.

Still, DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER bears no particular hallmarks of being the work of the same man who directed GOLDFINGER, and it's nothing short of astounding that John Glen was behind both OCTOPUSSY and LICENCE TO KILL.

I guess Campbell will now go down in history as the director who pulled off not one but two amazing comebacks for the Bond series. :)

#7 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 02:28 PM

Indeed. Two stunning introductions for Bond, when it was all on the line. I wonder if he could pull of a Bond film into his tenture for the first time.

#8 RivenWinner

RivenWinner

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 256 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 05:05 PM

Casino Royale is hands down Campbell's best film to date. No doubt about it about, he did an excellent job with this film.

Goldeneye
Mask of Zorro
Vertical Limit (shudders)
Legened of Zorro
Casino Royale

These are his major films, and it's obvious that CS is by far his best effort so far. cheers!

#9 mccartney007

mccartney007

    Commander RNR

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3406 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 November 2006 - 07:07 PM

I have to say that I was very, very impressed with Martin Campbell's directing style for this film. I'd love for him to come back again and again if he keeps this up.

#10 SecretAgent007

SecretAgent007

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 660 posts
  • Location:Central Pennsylvania

Posted 18 November 2006 - 09:42 PM

I think that is what has been lacking in the past few films. They really need to try and keep Campbell for a few films in a row. Especially if 22 is going to address the key events that are left un-resolved in CR.

The question is, can they get him to come back. Anyone know the reasons why he wouldn't do TND? It's not like his movies since GE have lit the screen on fire.

Edited by SecretAgent007, 18 November 2006 - 09:43 PM.


#11 blueman

blueman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2219 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 10:10 PM

Campbell did what I wanted--he got out of the way. He also did a lot more than that, he brought some nice moments to life.

All that said, unless Bond 22 has a script at least as good as CR, I'd rather not have Campbell back. He directs to the level of whatever script he's given, is his constant. I get the feeling, it'll be very tough indeed to fashion a Bond story to equal CR, so a Matthew Vaughn-type director would be a plus.

Of course, there are worse directors out there, having Campbell back even without a CR-quality script wouldn't be the worse thing EON has done...

It's all about the writing, IMO.

#12 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 10:14 PM

Campbell did a phenomenal job here, but credit also has to go to Stuart Baird and Phil Meheux, whose work was invaluable. It's really the three of them that made the visual and cinematic aspects what they were.

#13 00Twelve

00Twelve

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7706 posts
  • Location:Kingsport, TN

Posted 18 November 2006 - 10:23 PM

Campbell did a phenomenal job here, but credit also has to go to Stuart Baird and Phil Meheux, whose work was invaluable. It's really the three of them that made the visual and cinematic aspects what they were.

I agree. But still, this was hands-down the most visually impressive Bond film to date. The PTS and dirty martini scenes were amazing. I'd love to see Campbell stretch himself some more and see what other creative things he can come up with. I'd really like to see some quirkiness, a la Soderbergh, not that I'm advocating following in someone else's steps.

#14 Yellow Pinky

Yellow Pinky

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 338 posts
  • Location:Atlanta, GA - USA

Posted 18 November 2006 - 10:28 PM

Campbell did a phenomenal job here, but credit also has to go to Stuart Baird and Phil Meheux, whose work was invaluable. It's really the three of them that made the visual and cinematic aspects what they were.


Absolutely Harmsway! Baird and Meheux are all over this film. That said, it is without a doubt the finest work that Campbell has ever done and a damn sight better than anyone has done in the series since OHMSS for my money!

I for one would really like to see Campbell return for 22 at the very least, along with Baird, Meheux (which would be a given if Campbell returns). I'd also invite Haggis back for another polish if we'd be guaranteed the same high level of intelligent dialogue and witty banter.

#15 blueman

blueman

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2219 posts

Posted 19 November 2006 - 12:19 AM

Yup, great package deal all way around. Makes for a great film. Kudos to Babs and Michael for bringing them all together for CR.

#16 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 19 November 2006 - 01:25 AM

Campbell matured as a director, and employing the classicist approach to the film is how all Bonds should be. None of that shaky nauseo-vision the bourne tripe has, but a very classy approach which puts Bond head & shoulders above other series in the genre.
Also he had some great cinematographers and other people putting more care into it than what they could have ever hoped for GE.

#17 Tarl_Cabot

Tarl_Cabot

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10505 posts
  • Location:The Galaxy of Pleasure

Posted 19 November 2006 - 03:49 AM

AICN Director snobs Harry Knowles and Moriarty praised his work so I guess he may have kicked major butt with this one...and I haven't seen it yet. :) :P

#18 Blofeld's Cat

Blofeld's Cat

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 17542 posts
  • Location:A secret hollowed out volcano in Sydney (33.79294 South, 150.93805 East)

Posted 19 November 2006 - 05:11 AM

Campbell has done two great Bond movies in a row.

#19 The Richmond Spy

The Richmond Spy

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1586 posts
  • Location:Cincinnati, Ohio USA

Posted 19 November 2006 - 05:15 AM

Well GE is one of my fav Bond films and I loved CR last night, so I won't say they are completely different in that one sucked and the other didn't...but it definitely has a different feel that I wasn't really expecting from Campbell.

Overall I think hes done a fine job as a Bond director! :)

#20 DaveBond21

DaveBond21

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 18026 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia (but from the UK)

Posted 11 January 2007 - 05:37 AM

I think it was more a case of a different time, a different decade. CR is very 2006, while Goldeneye was about bridging the gap between 1989 and 1995.

Also, as someone else pointed out, John Glen directed both AVTAK and LTK - 2 very different movies.

Alot is to do with the script, the actors, and the whole feel that the producers want to convey.

#21 DavidSomerset

DavidSomerset

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 879 posts
  • Location:Moonbase Alpha

Posted 11 January 2007 - 09:32 AM

My personal opinion was that Campbell was a hack of the first order after seeing all his earlier films. Even GE was not that great. But CR blew me away. I doubt anyone else (even the Bearded wonderberg) would have done a better job. Maybe it was Haggis's script after all that did the trick...

#22 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 08 January 2009 - 04:34 PM

There are so many Campbell threads to pick from that would suit this comment, so I decided by picking one from the highly-respected (or so we let him believe) Dinovelvet.

I agree. I’ve spent the last couple viewings of CR trying to find “Campbellisms”. I found very few. They are:

- The freeze frame of Bond in the crouched-but-ready-to-pounce-again position after he jumps from the moving truck over the gate onto embassy grounds. A cheesy B-rate action maneuver. The camera spends too much time on Bond trying to make him look dangerous, and instead makes him look awkward. IMO. But I’m not even sure that’s isn’t more Glen than Campbell.

- The sudden and random close-up shot of the mounted video camera in the embassy struck me as something straight from Goldeneye. (Or was it the video game?) (Or was it both?) (Or is there even a difference between the two?)

- The sinking house set in Venice. Just the indoor shots. I’m not down on the sequence, but it does feel like the better parts of Goldeneye to me, particularly the reflection in the bottle trick.

But, blimey... I can hardly think of anything else! Any other moments in CR that hearken you back to less-than-stellar Campbell work in or out of Bond?

Where did the man GO? Is he in there? Where’s Waldo?

#23 tim partridge

tim partridge

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 743 posts

Posted 08 January 2009 - 04:51 PM

I adore the moment when Bond bangs into that metal roof box, shakes his head like a dog and picks himself up. That was very much the mentality of GOLDENEYE, where the hero must be putting his all in at every given moment. You can virtually hear Campbell off screen screaming "GO GO GO MOVE YOUR A***!!! WHATCA WAITING FOR????" So refreshing after watching a lazy Brosnan laughing off all of the fast and dangerous situations from DAD and TND.

Does anyone else feel that the dirty Martini scene was straight out of Peter Hunt/Terence Young territory? The way it was shot and cut reminded me of the steamer sequence from THUNDERBALL more than anything I can think of from recent cinema.

#24 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 08 January 2009 - 05:13 PM

Does anyone else feel that the dirty Martini scene was straight out of Peter Hunt/Terence Young territory? The way it was shot and cut reminded me of the steamer sequence from THUNDERBALL more than anything I can think of from recent cinema.

"I'm afraid you've lost me completely."

:(

When does Bond order a dirty martini? What are you referring to? (Not to be stubborn, really. When he orders a Vesper? Or when he says "Do I look like..."?)

And how does it compare to the steamer sequence in TB?

#25 tim partridge

tim partridge

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 743 posts

Posted 08 January 2009 - 05:26 PM

Sorry- I meant the scene where he enters the toilets drugged. I had seen it written above as dirty Martini, confusing it with the first post's trippy poison martini. Men cannot multitask, yunno. :(

#26 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 08 January 2009 - 05:36 PM

Sorry- I meant the scene where he enters the toilets drugged. I had seen it written above as dirty Martini, confusing it with the first post's trippy poison martini. Men cannot multitask, yunno. :(

Ah. “Dirty” as in the very literal sense, then.

Forgive me, but I’m still a little lost. That psychedelic poisoning sequence reminds you of the steambox scene in TB? How?

Help one to understand…

#27 Mr. Arlington Beech

Mr. Arlington Beech

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1112 posts

Posted 08 January 2009 - 05:52 PM

- The sinking house set in Venice. Just the indoor shots. I’m not down on the sequence, but it does feel like the better parts of Goldeneye to me, particularly the reflection in the bottle trick.


That reflection remind me to GF's PTS, but in a more credible way. I mean it's more plausible a reflection on a bottle than in a girl's eyes.

#28 tim partridge

tim partridge

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 743 posts

Posted 08 January 2009 - 05:54 PM

The way it was shot with the shutter narrowed handheld with a wide lens reminded me of how Hunt and Young often had everything undercranked with frames removed for a stuttered effect. The steamer scene from TB specifically has hypnotic camera movement and framing that seems to reflecting Bond's internal experience. Classically stylised.

#29 Bucky

Bucky

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1031 posts
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 08 January 2009 - 06:22 PM

do you mean the steamer scene or the scene on the rack?

#30 tim partridge

tim partridge

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 743 posts

Posted 08 January 2009 - 06:39 PM

The one where he's trapped inside that machine at the health spa.

Sorry- confusing it with the traction machine. Dear me, I am terrible today!

Apologies to all.