I disagree with you. Granted, Forster knows how to inject an unusual visual style. But visual styles solely do not make a film. Campbell's talent is that he knows how to get a good performance from his players and give an action film a tight and gritty style without being heavy handed about it . . . like Greengrass or Forster.
I feel that Forster could have easily damaged QoS with his direction. The backbone of any good movie, in my opinion, is the story. And it takes a good director to know what to do with that story. Forster's disapproval of CR's slower pace nearly damaged QoS. The second film, like CR, had a pretty damn good story. But Forster's need to prove that a Bond film has to have its pace tightened at a point that leaves the movie with a 100 or 105 minute running time, nearly ruined QoS's story. Especially in the film's first half. And his attempt to come off as a second-rate Paul Greengass didn't help much. There was too much going on in QoS's plot for Forster to speed up the pace like that. It's a damn good thing that he managed to slow down when the film reached Bond's visit to Mathis in Italy, or that movie would have been completely shot, from my point of view.
I don't know if Forster was doing the usual press junket act (as most actor, directors, etc. do) or if he truly meant that. If he meant it, I find it a very unwise thing to say.
He followed the only route he could, he made it visually more distinct then others (I'm not saying that it's either good or bad since that's not my point). That's the only way he could do a less overall predictable Bond movie, taking in account how incredibly high the bar was set with CR. Tougher shoes to fill then in previous entries.
But in my opinion he extracted excellent performances from his actors (I'd argue that he's actually more capable in that field) , and was bold enough not to make Greene distinct in any way whatsoever, for example, leaving most of the job for the actor. No scars, beards, bald heads, fighting skills, etc.
My favourite Greene scene (one I mentioned in another post) was the way he looks at Leiter and that other fellow as he's about to leave in his limo. No witty remarks, no pseudo-orders, no threats.
Among many others.
I'm not sure if Campbell's usually casual directing would have made QOS just as good, better or great. But he would have a different kind of material to work with. Perhaps such casual style would have hurt QoS story, since it could never be CR.
(That said, I want neither Campbell nor Forster back. I'd probably go with the director of The International. But I'll have to wait to watch it, just a gut feeling.)
The only reason women, for instance, went to see CR more than any other Bond film was because of DC's bathing suit scenes and, especially, the scenes revolving round Vesper in the train, Vesper and Dinner Jackets, Vesper in the Shower, Vesper at Lake Como, etc...not because of the card game.
I'm not sure my Mrs and her friends and colleagues would agree. According to the poll in that inner circle, if they were going to watch a Bond movie for the actor it would have been Brosnan.
Although I got a bit tired of hearing about Craig's "broad shoulders", Craig's "intense blue eyes", etc.
I'm rather confortable with a one-pack rather than a six-pack. And it's quite practical.
Edited by Eurospy, 14 January 2009 - 09:11 PM.
