197 replies to this topic

[jamie00007]

I really dont think Forster has to cry himself to sleep over Campbell's comments. Forster's non-Bond work has rarely not been showered with praise from critics and award ceremonies. The highlight of Campbell's non Bond work is Zorro...

[Ytadel]

Wow, some people on this site are really ready to go to the mattresses at a moment's notice for whatever the status quo is, huh?

[David Schofield]

I really dont think Forster has to cry himself to sleep over Campbell's comments. Forster's non-Bond work has rarely not been showered with praise from critics and award ceremonies. The highlight of Campbell's non Bond work is Zorro...

Of course, Bond directors rarely have much else on their CV than Bond.

Terence Young, Guy Hamilton, Peter Hunt - they all had little worth remembering other than Dr No, FRWL, Goldfinger, Thunderball, OHMSS, all of which were in a different class than Forster's QOS.

As far as Campbell's non-Bond highlight, I'd venture the seminal orginal "Edge of Darkness". Perhaps you are too young to remember the impact of that's orginal broadcast?

[Zorin Industries]

From what I have heard Martin Campbell has completely lost his way too with his own remake of EDGE OF DARKNESS. I am not that interested in reading the interview but do feel that Campbell should not make such comments about a film he had nothing to do with. Marc Forster is years ahead of Campbell as a directing force. I cannot quite see Martin Campbell making THE KITE RUNNER or MONSTER'S BALL or FINDING NEVERLAND. Nor can I see Forster making NO ESCAPE.

Toys out of prams.

[Quantumofsolace007]

At least you put it in the right forum on CBN Shark...


I don't get you why Post about how campbell hates Quantum of solace What because now your opnion is justified...


Campbell is saying that because he is jealous he can't give a film as good as Quantum of Solace.


On the other hand i do agree with Him on Mendes and look foward to Bond 23.

[Dekard77]

Problem with QOS is the runtime, too much action and far less dialogue. It's a strong Bond movie. Somehow I felt that the film was more about how cold he is, which makes him better at his job.

Lewis Gilbert has a very strong eye for visuals. His Bond films certainly has a signature look.

[Safari Suit]

I cannot quite see Martin Campbell making... FINDING NEVERLAND. Nor can I see Forster making NO ESCAPE.

Regardless of whether or not it takes "more talent" to make, I'd take a fun Most Dangerous Game variation over that overblown secutity blanket of a film any day. And don't even get me started on Stranger Than Fiction!

Just to put a bit of balance here, I'd also take QOS over CR.

[Quantumofsolace007]

Ok after reading this thread versus the sheer nonesnese at mi6.co.uk this forum is filled with responsible smart minded people who can have a calm discussion without being interupted by some idiiot with the username"daltonCraig007" who belives he who shouts loudest is right.

This is much better forum and I love being here. I'd rather read a 4 page paper by Gravity about how bad the remaining fleming titles are then sit though the tourture of some of the forums at mi6.co.uk.....


Wether anyone else is happy i'm here is another topic but I'm glad to be here.

[DamnCoffee]

Campbell is saying that because he is jealous he can't give a film as good as Quantum of Solace.

He can give 2.

[Quantumofsolace007]

Campbell is saying that because he is jealous he can't give a film as good as Quantum of Solace.

He can give 2.

I loved Casino royale Don't get me wrong Goldeneye was ok..

but Quantum was just as amazing. i like the fact they don't want to use the catch phrases and rely the formula but try new things with the franchise.

I'm looking foward to bond 23.

[DamnCoffee]

They did the same with Casino Royale...

[SecretAgentFan]

Maybe we should all calm down a bit?

In the end, the statement "I felt QOS completely lost its way" is so vague that one actually cannot really know what Campbell wanted to criticize.

It can´t be the narrative arc of Bond - because that one is very clear and definitely not muddled or lost.

[HildebrandRarity]

Campbell is a complete head.

1. He didn't want to direct Q0S so why say anything negative about it.

2. He lucked into a Fleming story with Craig as an actor.

3. He had James Bond flying like a little frail Fairy in the GoldenEye pre-titles and made Pierce look like Tinkerbell as he flew into the plane.

Pathetic excuse for a director who did the ghastly Zorro 2 just before CR.

He's being an really.

No, you're the fool my friend. Just because he didn't agree with Quantum of Solace does NOT give you the right to publicly slam him. Everyone has their own opinion, and Cambpell has his. I agree with it. It's like going to someone "OH YOU DIDN'T DIRECT *INSIRT LEAST FAVORITE FILM HERE* SO YOU CAN'T HAVE AN OPINION."

Just learn the respect the opinion of others Hildebrand, then maybe you will get more around here, too.

You're falling into this increasingly tedious person's pointless trap; don't do it.

Don't get sucked in. As my housemaster used to observe.

My main point was he didn't want to do QOS - most likely because CR's acclaim was so high in Bond terms that he knew it was going to be a very tough act to beat.

Look at the drivel botch up job he did on the Zorro follow-up!!!

So, now that the acclaim numbers for both are fully known, he decides to take a cheap dig at Q0S.

It's like a coward kicking someone who's already been taken down - but by someone else!

It's a classless comment by a man who was directing movies that were far worse than Quantum between 1997 and 2006...and lucked into an ORIGINAL FLEMING, one with a love story and Craig (the greatest Bond actor to date) and Mr Acclaim Haggis.



Tell me, what was he doing prior to Casino Royale?

If you don't know the answer then don't bothering replying.

If you do know the answer then you know that it was garbage...worse than anything 'losing it's way'.

As per me being tedious...well, at least I have a view.

You're just sitting there and letting other people have a go.

Campbell had a go...so i'm having my go. I'm allowed.

I haven't insulted another forum member.

Campbell was gutless in not taking the Quantum gig. I'm allowed to say that.

[zencat]

I worship at the alter of Martin Campbell. He has proven with two excellent films that he understands Bond as well as any director the series has ever had.

[HildebrandRarity]

I don't worship anyone - least the man who had James Bond flying like a ing Fairy into a single prop airplane in GoldenEye pretitles. That was absolutely ghastly!

So much for 'understanding' Mr Bond! Bond as Tinkerbell, perhaps!

[DamnCoffee]

Yet again, slamming Bond films to make Quantum look far more superior, and just proof that you can't respect anyone elses opinion.

[jaguar007]

Director Lewis Gilbert also had bad words for QUANTUM OF SOLACE and stated them in front of Michael Wilson at a recent gathering, so Martin Campbell is not alone in that ring.

So the man that brought us Moonraker also thought QoS lost its way. Interesting.

[DamnCoffee]

There isn't anything wrong with that? The 70's Bond was supposed to be fun, and over the top. It suited Moore's Bond.

I think people would be more easy on Quantum of Solace , if it wasn't part of a major reboot.

[Professor Dent]

Campbell is entitled to his opinion. He had the job of introducing audiences to two new Bond actors & did a great job both times. From watching the behind the scenes stuff for Casino Royale, the job looked like it was all consuming & just became his life until it was done. Maybe he didn't come back for Quantum of Solace because he just needed a break before jumping into a new project.

[HildebrandRarity]

Yet again, slamming Bond films to make Quantum look far more superior, and just proof that you can't respect anyone elses opinion.

Listen, my friend, i'm NOT slamming another Bond film.

I'm slamming a moment - the Tinkerbell Moment - in a Bond film which Mr God Campbell directed in GoldenEye.

Can you not tell the difference?

[Harmsway]

Director Lewis Gilbert also had bad words for QUANTUM OF SOLACE and stated them in front of Michael Wilson at a recent gathering, so Martin Campbell is not alone in that ring.

What did Gilbert have to say?

[Jack Rapace]

Director Lewis Gilbert also had bad words for QUANTUM OF SOLACE and stated them in front of Michael Wilson at a recent gathering, so Martin Campbell is not alone in that ring.

Lewis Gilbert...The man who did Moonraker thinks he can criticize QoS ?

[stromberg]

This is going a bit overboard, no?
Everybody cool down a little bit, please.



That said, I'm not particularly happy with Mr Campbell's comment. Of course he's entitled to his opinion (aren't we all?), but he didn't do himself a favour with that (even tough I assume the quote was taken out of context). Regardless of his merits for the Bond franchise or wether he's right or wrong, this just doesn't look (or sound) very professional. More like someone who's trying to draw some attention onto his current project.

Look at Pierce Brosnan: he did the right thing avoiding this pitfall only recently by saying that he didn't see CR and QoS (even though there are strong indications that he did).

[Zorin Industries]

I don't worship anyone - least the man who had James Bond flying like a ing Fairy into a single prop airplane in GoldenEye pretitles. That was absolutely ghastly!

So much for 'understanding' Mr Bond! Bond as Tinkerbell, perhaps!

EVERY Bond film has its indulgent moments. It's hardly fair or very productive to dismiss a whole film or director because of one moment.

[Loomis]

I worship at the alter of Martin Campbell. He has proven with two excellent films that he understands Bond as well as any director the series has ever had.

To my mind, Campbell is the modern day Terence Young and arguably one of the most important figures in the history of the Bond films. He directed (DISCLAIMER: opinion coming up, and not something that I intend to present as fact) by far the best Bond film ever, and I do not buy the idea that his contribution to it was close to zero, that he is untalented or that all the good and great bits of CASINO ROYALE somehow directed themselves while Campbell slept, twiddled his thumbs, shagged his secretary or whatever.

I also vastly prefer CASINO ROYALE (and GOLDENEYE, for that matter) to QUANTUM OF SOLACE. I believe QUANTUM OF SOLACE to be crippled by a number of very serious flaws. Frankly, this film does not really "work" for me. This is only a personal response and I am not seeking to lay down the law.

[danslittlefinger]

I completely agree with the man and I feel that after CR, they did have a tough job with the Bond character.

Forster, in my mind, took a tough script yes but made it thoroughly one dimensional, painting himself (and the character) further into a corner.

At least with the next film though, things are wide open for a fresh change.

[byline]

Maybe we should all calm down a bit?

In the end, the statement "I felt QOS completely lost its way" is so vague that one actually cannot really know what Campbell wanted to criticize.

It can´t be the narrative arc of Bond - because that one is very clear and definitely not muddled or lost.

I agree. My sense was -- and this is what others have stated, so I'm not adding anything new here -- that he was saying "Quantum of Solace" lost the emotional thread started by "Casino Royale." And, to a small degree, I agree with him. But he also points out the painfully obvious, that Vesper was such a meaningful relationship for Bond, and with that having been lost in "Casino Royale," where were they to go in "Quantum of Solace"? He couldn't go into another meaningful relationship, because of course, other than Tracy, there really wasn't one. And he was still recovering from the loss of Vesper.

On initial viewing, I didn't feel that "Quantum" effectively conveyed the power of that loss. However, on subsequent viewings, I have caught so many things I didn't catch the first time around that I think it really did do its job effectively. It's just that these things were more subtly nuanced than in "Casino Royale." I still could have used a few more sustained shots in certain scenes, a bit more dialogue in others, less of a frenetic editing style in still others, but at this point I feel those are minor quibbles. The film works for me. It doesn't for others. And those are just opinions that we all have, for perfectly valid (but mostly subjective) reasons.

Look at Pierce Brosnan: he did the right thing avoiding this pitfall only recently by saying that he didn't see CR and QoS (even though there are strong indications that he did).

Looks like he followed Roger Moore's lead. Moore said as much about Timothy Dalton's films. He explained that because he didn't want to be forced into commenting on his successor, he said instead that he never watched those films. I have to wonder if that really was true, but at least it saved him from the "damned if you do/damned if you don't" conundrum.

[Genuine Felix Leiter]

When CR was on the verge of release, I remember reading an interview featuring Campbell in Empire in which he talked about his thoughts on the subsequent Brosnan films after GE and previous Bonds, in which he was very critical of Timothy Dalton and Die Another Day. At the end of the day the guy is giving his opinion, just like we do on these forums, I don't think his views are to be seen as a personal attack on Marc Foster or anything explicitly nasty, but as someone who has had a stake in reintroducing Bond once and then doing so again and rebooting the franchise to boot, I think he is entitled to have a say so in the direction of a movie series that he seems to be invested in professionally and emotionally, even if his opinion isn't one I necessarily agree with.

So, let's just calm down. It's not a personal dig or anything, he is merely critiquing a film in much the way a critic or a Forum user does.

[bribond]

The whole issue is interesting. Campbell, who, in my opinion directed his masterpiece in Casino Royale, declined to do Quantum of Solace. He freely admits he had a richer story to work with in Casino Royale. He could have done Quantum of Solace which probably would have benefited from his touch but inevitably would have been seen as a lesser work. I think the approach in Quantum of Solace was bold and there were many things about the film that worked very well but the disorienting camerawork in the action scenes and the rushed feel of the film work against what could have been a very effective plot if it had had a little more room to breathe. Campbell would likely have made it work a little better. The same plot with his touch though would not have worked as well as Casino Royale.

[mattjoes]

So, what did Gilbert say about Quantum?