›

Martin Campbell on doing more Bond...

MrSpyMrSpy
edited May 2011 in Bond Movies Posts: 116
"I’ve had enough of Bond. [laughs] I’ve done it twice."

http://collider.com/martin-campbell-interview-green-lantern/91005/

...damn!

Comments

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,722
    Well he's going to be 74 for Bond 24... Way too old to direct a huge production like James Bond.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Ha, I'd like him to come back. He seems to genuinely know how to direct not only Bond films but action films in general. Although EoD wasn't that great.
  • ShorelineShoreline
    edited May 2011 Posts: 251
    Agreed. The man has directed some of my favourite Bond films! He added a real British edge to his Bond films. As "big" as they were, they were also very energised and focussed, not to mention, clearly Brosnan and Craigs best entries....so far. When I watch QOS I always ask myself...what happened? How did it get to this....from that? (CR)
    It has much to do with Campbell being so bloody good at what he does. He could make them forever more and I`d be happy.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Exactly, even Campbell thought QoS was below-par.
  • ShorelineShoreline
    Posts: 251
    I enjoy it, for it is Bond, but yes, it is a bit of a stinker, relatively. I went to see it with about 8 friends who were casual Bond fans, but big film buffs. They thought it to be really poor. That`s it`s problem. It almost trys to be art house, but then remembers its Bourne, I mean Bond. Fails at everything it sets out to be for me. Campbell would never have let this happen, as he gets what Bond does, and isn`t worried about being credible. Art house and credible belong nowhere near Bond.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    credible belong nowhere near Bond.
    I tend to disagree. I find it important that the Bond films stick with a minimal credibility and in fact, turning the table on what Shoreline said with good intention, I would argue that QoS fails in delivering just that. Some of the choices the characters in QoS make, for example, aren't credible. I'm not implying that GE and CR are free from incredible moments, but the way I see it they are much rather isolated instances where the laws of physics (the plane diving in GE) or ballistics (Mollaka's empty gun error in CR) are defied or even violated. These tiny 'flaws' I can easily accept, however, mostly because the rest of the film in both cases works just fine. I'm biased, I admit, since I really like what Campbell did for Bond - it's one of those things no debate here on MI6 has ever been able to get me away from. I'm a Campbellist if you like, and a fierce one at that. So perhaps I'm being too apologetic, unable to see the mistakes which I so heavily emphasize in QoS. If so, we can talk. ;;)

    As for Campbell's "two and no more" comment on the Bonds, I'm not a tat surprised. Twice has the man been given the daunting (yet in a way also comfortable) task of introducing a new Bond to a new audience, modernising the franchise by following the trends yet at the same time establishing a few new ones on the side as well. Twice has this man seen his efforts flushed down the toilet by inapt successors who decided the best way to go was to trim down the good stuff and go into wild action flick mode, thriving on the previous film's success. This, and his age, convince me that Campbell made the correct choice. Plus, why risk a disappointing third film when you can stick to two masterfully made films (IMHO of course)?
  • ShorelineShoreline
    Posts: 251
    Masterfully made indeed! You can count me in as a "Campbellist", I like that! I suppose what I was trying to say is that QOS failed at what it tried to be in my opinion. Campbells films are direct hits in the fact they are clearly Bond films (whatever that is!) and not embarrased to be so. Something that I feel Mark Foster indeed felt, when he took on Bond. Anyway, wrong thread, isn`t it? 8-X
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    credible belong nowhere near Bond.
    This, and his age, convince me that Campbell made the correct choice. Plus, why risk a disappointing third film when you can stick to two masterfully made films (IMHO of course)?
    That is a very good point Darth. Why jepordise a practically perfect record? I suppose I just feel safe with Campbell. As I said above he seems to know what he is doing and what makes a Bond film work - much like Terence Young.

    Anyway, I suppose its better in the long run to go out on a high. Campbell has expressed strong positive feelings about Sam Mendes (I suppose he would :p ).
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    Well, that was the be expected. I don't think you can really do more than 2 or 3 Bond films anyway without losing some steam along the way.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2011 Posts: 15,722
    Guys... Campbell isn't young you know. He's going to be 74 by the time Bond 24 starts shooting. That is a tad too old for directing a huge world-wide production that is a James Bond film.
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497


    Anyway, I suppose its better in the long run to go out on a high. Campbell has expressed strong positive feelings about Sam Mendes (I suppose he would :p ).
    Right, time to move on. He has an indeliable stamp on the Bond legacy. It's a pity he couldn't do more post GE and CR. But such is life and as DC007 states, he's probably closing in on his directorial career given his age. Hey, it would be great to have Guy Hamilton, Lewis Gilbert or even heck, John Glen come back to do one more too. But they've had their time in the Bond history and by the time B24 or B25 comes around so will Campbell. What Campbell leaves is an excellent blueprint for what a modern Bond film can be for future directors to look to though. So bottom's up to one of the finest director's of the series.

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Here here JB!!

    Will Campbell really be 74 by B24 though? He was born in 1944 so that will make him 68 by 2012. Assuming B24 comes out 2 years later that will make him 70.
  • MrSpyMrSpy
    Posts: 116
    Hey, he did Zorro 2, so who knows?
    The question was asked of him at the tail end of the last day of a 100 day shoot!
    I'm sure the man was tired & had other things on his mind...
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited May 2011 Posts: 13,356
    Here here JB!!

    Will Campbell really be 74 by B24 though? He was born in 1944 so that will make him 68 by 2012. Assuming B24 comes out 2 years later that will make him 70.
    Some sources say he was born in 1944, where as others say it's 1940.

    Does anyone know the correct date?
  • VirageVirage
    Posts: 1,856
    NNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo

    (He was born '44 Hastings, NZ)
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited May 2011 Posts: 439
    This, and his age, convince me that Campbell made the correct choice. Plus, why risk a disappointing third film when you can stick to two masterfully made films (IMHO of course)?
    count me as a Campbellist too

    however I disagree that he made the right choice in not doing any more
    I think if you can do something well you might as well keep doing it
    the risk of disapointment is not something that should enter into the equation
    if it did we would never have had the pleasure of "The Empire Strikes Back" because they would have been too scared of not living up to "Star Wars"

    however if he doesn't feel he would enjoy doing it again and would rather try something different, then he made the right choice, because your not going to produce your best work as an artist if the project feels like a "chore"
  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    Posts: 1,092
    I'd love to see him do another but won't die of sadness if he doesn't.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    however I disagree that he made the right choice in not doing any more
    I think if you can do something well you might as well keep doing it
    We should, however, consider the man's age. Shooting a Bond film isn't such a comfortable task I think and yet I want the director to put all he's got into it. Therefore unless Campbell is still incredibly healthy and energetic, I believe it's for the best of him that I suggest he doesn't do another Bond.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    Posts: 439
    however I disagree that he made the right choice in not doing any more
    I think if you can do something well you might as well keep doing it
    We should, however, consider the man's age. Shooting a Bond film isn't such a comfortable task I think and yet I want the director to put all he's got into it. Therefore unless Campbell is still incredibly healthy and energetic, I believe it's for the best of him that I suggest he doesn't do another Bond.
    thank you doctor

    you're probably right, but then look at Alec Ferguson and Clint Eastwood

  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited May 2011 Posts: 439
    oops (where's the delete button?)

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited May 2011 Posts: 13,356
    oops (where's the delete button?)

    There isn't one. It's very annoying.

    As for Campbell on doing more Bond films as Eastwood is still directing, you've got to remember at the age of 62 he set a new record (beating the previous record set by Lewis Gilbert, who directed Moonraker at the age of 59) for oldest Bond director.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    Eastwood does earn my respect - a point well made, Seve. Seeing how he keeps busy... Hell, this man could still play Dirty Harry quite sure. Either way, if Campbell is like Eastwood, he could indeed still pull it off at the Bonds.
  • ShorelineShoreline
    Posts: 251
    It would certainly be better than letting Forster screw up again.
    Didn`t realise Campbell was that old, he has so much energie!
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    How would you give Campbell the "third direction" he needs to come back?
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <blockquote rel="Shoreline">credible belong nowhere near Bond.</blockquote>

    I tend to disagree. I find it important that the Bond films stick with a minimal credibility and in fact, turning the table on what Shoreline said with good intention, I would argue that QoS fails in delivering just that. Some of the choices the characters in QoS make, for example, aren't credible. I'm not implying that GE and CR are free from incredible moments, but the way I see it they are much rather isolated instances where the laws of physics (the plane diving in GE) or ballistics (Mollaka's empty gun error in CR) are defied or even violated. These tiny 'flaws' I can easily accept, however, mostly because the rest of the film in both cases works just fine. I'm biased, I admit, since I really like what Campbell did for Bond - it's one of those things no debate here on MI6 has ever been able to get me away from. I'm a Campbellist if you like, and a fierce one at that. So perhaps I'm being too apologetic, unable to see the mistakes which I so heavily emphasize in QoS. If so, we can talk. ;;)

    As for Campbell's "two and no more" comment on the Bonds, I'm not a tat surprised. Twice has the man been given the daunting (yet in a way also comfortable) task of introducing a new Bond to a new audience, modernising the franchise by following the trends yet at the same time establishing a few new ones on the side as well. Twice has this man seen his efforts flushed down the toilet by inapt successors who decided the best way to go was to trim down the good stuff and go into wild action flick mode, thriving on the previous film's success. This, and his age, convince me that Campbell made the correct choice. Plus, why risk a disappointing third film when you can stick to two masterfully made films (IMHO of course)?

    This made me laugh. I thought exactly the same thing about SF.
  • thelordflasheartthelordflasheart
    Posts: 1,370
    There was a thread after CR came out about how to capitalize on the new energy and high quality that it brought to the series. My number one suggestion was to a) call Campbell and ask "What will it take for you to direct the next one?" and b) whatever he says, just say yes.

    I don't know if age is a huge issue for Campbell - there are older directors working on big films and he recently did Green Lantern - but to me the fact that he could deliver such an...energetic and stylish film as CR at his age shows that it likely isn't a factor (at least artistically.

    One thing that I'd like to see in Bond 24 is more of a sense of "escapist adventure", more of a classy wish-fulfillment sense to the settings. Both GE and CR had that (although not in every scene).
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Mind you, Cambell would be what, 10 years older than when he made CR, and at that age I think that probably makes a big difference.

    I agree with you about the escapism.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    As much as i love CR and the great job he did on it? MC just probably does not need the stress of doing another one. Lets just be thankful he gave us 2 great 007 movies.
  • Goldeneye95Goldeneye95
    Posts: 546
    Martin Campbell brought life back to the James Bond franchise twice.I thought Martin did a solid job directing Goldeneye & Casino Royale. So I would like to see him come back to helm a Bond film. (Despite his age)
Sign In or Register to comment.