CR & QOS Should they of had the Same Director ?

ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,696MI6 Agent
Just wondering what the thoughts where on These Two films. For the First time two Bonds where going to be linked, one story leading to the next. When decicing on a director should Eon of made it part of the contract that Both films had to be made by the same director and Basic crew.
I'm not saying Campbell was better than Forster , or getting in to the old argument about QOS. Just on a cinematic point. I think it would of helped the look of the two movies if they had of had the same hand directing them. I'd love to read other views.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."

Comments

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 9,027MI6 Agent
    Well, Campbell was asked back but didn't want to do it, he never does, he was asked back after GE too. Cynically I'd suggest that he likes the idea of rebooting Bond, but leaves others to pick up the pieces.

    I'm not mad about Campbell but wasn't crazy about Forster either, no idea why they brought him in really, I think the favourable critical reception went to the producers' heads. So on balance, Campbell would have been good to have back, I agree. But I think he's good at skirting around Bond and his issues, harder to do with a follow-up.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,696MI6 Agent
    Some good points NP, I alwasy regarded Cambell as a slightly better J Glenn, If that makes sense :)) a solid workman like director. and I think if the reports are to be believed that Forster was asked back. But my point was from the get go, I think the producers should of gone with a director with the understanding it was a two picture gig. As they'd never done it before and it would of given the two movies more continuity, visually at least.
    I'm not talking about the shaky camera work etc as I've Bitched about that long enough. simply a visual style and pace that would of flowed from one story to the next, then with the next Bond movie get a new director in as it would be a stand alone Movie.
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • JohnNintendoNerdJohnNintendoNerd Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPosts: 48MI6 Agent
    Some good points NP, I alwasy regarded Cambell as a slightly better J Glenn, If that makes sense :)) a solid workman like director. and I think if the reports are to be believed that Forster was asked back. But my point was from the get go, I think the producers should of gone with a director with the understanding it was a two picture gig. As they'd never done it before and it would of given the two movies more continuity, visually at least.
    I'm not talking about the shaky camera work etc as I've Bitched about that long enough. simply a visual style and pace that would of flowed from one story to the next, then with the next Bond movie get a new director in as it would be a stand alone Movie.


    The problem was Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson have never signed Martin Campbell to a two-film contract.....Ever. They just went with Campbell on a one film at a time process which was the wrong thing to do. Broccoli and Wilson should've sat down with Campbell and made him sign a two-film contract and said, "This is the one and only proviso of you directing Casino Royale, if you do it you gotta come back for the sequel because these two Bond films are really one giant movie. And the story needs to be told by the same director. Also if you don't come back we'll sue you for breach of contract."

    On a side note I think if Christopher Nolan had directed Casino Royale and Bond 22, the overall story would've made more sense.....And considering that Inception took some inspiration from Ian Fleming, I hope Chris Nolan could direct Bond 24 or some other future Bond project.
    "Your orders were to shoot that sniper!"

    "Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That woman didn't know one end of a rifle from the other. Go ahead, tell M. what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it."
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,696MI6 Agent
    I agree JohnNintendoNerd, They should of pinned Cambell (Or what ever Director ) down to a Two picture deal, even make Both Films Back to Back as others Have done.
    Much as I enjoy Christopher Nolan's movies I don't like the new Eon practice of finding Big name Directors for the Films. Next we could see the Directors Name above the title e.g.
    James Cameron's Quantum of Solace or Danny Boyle's Moonraker . :#
    As I feel it will become more important to get on screen what the director wants rather than what Fleming wrote or at least in the spirit of what Fleming wrote.
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • DJ007DJ007 United StatesPosts: 174MI6 Agent
    Yes
  • LexiLexi LondonPosts: 2,973MI6 Agent
    No - I don't think they needed the same director.

    In fact, I think it added to the evolution of who Bond was becoming - a different chapter so to speak. So a different director produced a different style of film.... which worked well IMO :D

    There was enough continuity in the characters involved..... including the omission of Q and M, and this was enough to bring the films together - even if the cinematography and style of film were as different as they were.

    Now Bond 23 is following on from QoS - or so it's being said - and I'm looking forward to the next instalment - and in turn, the more experienced Bond - and so another chapter.

    If you had the same director throughout - the contrast wouldn't have been so stark - and that, for me, is one of the strongest traits of the movies. Running in parallel to the contrasting emotions Bond was feeling.
    She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
  • JohnNintendoNerdJohnNintendoNerd Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPosts: 48MI6 Agent
    Lexi wrote:
    No - I don't think they needed the same director.

    In fact, I think it added to the evolution of who Bond was becoming - a different chapter so to speak. So a different director produced a different style of film.... which worked well IMO :D

    There was enough continuity in the characters involved..... including the omission of Q and M, and this was enough to bring the films together - even if the cinematography and style of film were as different as they were.

    Now Bond 23 is following on from QoS - or so it's being said - and I'm looking forward to the next instalment - and in turn, the more experienced Bond - and so another chapter.

    If you had the same director throughout - the contrast wouldn't have been so stark - and that, for me, is one of the strongest traits of the movies. Running in parallel to the contrasting emotions Bond was feeling.


    Have you ever seen Martin Campbell's Zorro movies? The Legend of Zorro was so radically different from The Mask of Zorro that it was almost like a reboot of some sort....Pretty much nothing from Campbell's previous Zorro film carried over into the sequel. And by "nothing," I mean story elements. Such as character traits, that made the older film more interesting.
    "Your orders were to shoot that sniper!"

    "Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That woman didn't know one end of a rifle from the other. Go ahead, tell M. what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it."
  • LexiLexi LondonPosts: 2,973MI6 Agent
    Have you ever seen Martin Campbell's Zorro movies? The Legend of Zorro was so radically different from The Mask of Zorro that it was almost like a reboot of some sort....Pretty much nothing from Campbell's previous Zorro film carried over into the sequel. And by "nothing," I mean story elements. Such as character traits, that made the older film more interesting.

    Nope - I've seen the Mask of Zorro, but not any others.

    I am sure that the same director could have given us different movies - but it would have been more 'forced' so to speak....and in that - perhaps missing subtleties which marry the two Bond films in a whisper thin way.

    The airplane scene for one - would the same director have been able to pull off that so effortlessly, without it seeming contrived? Not sure - but I guess I'm just answering the question in the title.... not trying to say that I am right ;) :))
    She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
  • JohnNintendoNerdJohnNintendoNerd Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPosts: 48MI6 Agent
    Lexi wrote:
    Have you ever seen Martin Campbell's Zorro movies?

    Nope - I've seen the Mask of Zorro.


    If you do see The Legend of Zorro sometime in the near future be prepared for a sequel that's practically nothing like the original and I mean that in both a good and bad way.

    Also do they still have Blockbuster Video rental stores in jolly old England? Because here in America, Blockbuster is slowly but surely being driven out of business by Net Flicks and the Red Box. And maybe even by ITunes too.
    "Your orders were to shoot that sniper!"

    "Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That woman didn't know one end of a rifle from the other. Go ahead, tell M. what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it."
  • LexiLexi LondonPosts: 2,973MI6 Agent
    .....interesting! Okay, noted.

    And yep - we still have Blockbuster - but they are slowly going - I think so many people have on demand movies now on their TV's that rental places are slowly going....

    However, I've found my library rents movies (about 2 weeks behind Blockbuster) and they are much cheaper - and you get them for a week :o

    Much prefer to put £'s into a local institution rather than a corporate entity :))
    She's worth whatever chaos she brings to the table and you know it. ~ Mark Anthony
  • JohnNintendoNerdJohnNintendoNerd Lake Elmo, MinnesotaPosts: 48MI6 Agent
    Lexi wrote:
    Much prefer to put £'s into a local institution rather than a corporate entity :))

    Well, that's what nearly everybody did back in the 1960's whenever they saw Bond in theaters. And it's only because there's nothing quite like watching a movie in the theater. Watching it at home just isn't the same.
    "Your orders were to shoot that sniper!"

    "Stuff my orders! I only kill professionals. That woman didn't know one end of a rifle from the other. Go ahead, tell M. what you want. If he fires me, I'll thank him for it."
  • Gassy ManGassy Man USAPosts: 2,685MI6 Agent
    I'm not a huge fan of Martin Campbell and think Goldeneye is way overrated but do think he did a great job with Casino Royale, on the order of his work with the first Zorro film. If he'd returned for Quantum of Solace, I suspect we would have had a movie with better character development and for that I would have welcomed him to replace Forster.
  • JimmyBond0129JimmyBond0129 United States Posts: 263MI6 Agent
    edited February 2011
    Yes! Because imagine if somebody else had directed the Batman Begins sequel....It wouldn't have been The Dark Knight if that had had happened.
    "I admire your courage, Miss?..." "Trench, Sylvia Trench."

    "I admire your luck, Mister?..." "Bond, James Bond."
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 9,027MI6 Agent
    It's worth noting that there was nothing to suggest that QoS would be a follow-on from CR at the time, they could have done something very different. Only the massive success of CR persuaded them to start the next one 10 minutes after, surely. Had people said, hey Craig is great as Bond but the story sucks then QoS (or whatever it would have been called) would have been very different.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • welshboy78welshboy78 Posts: 9,851MI6 Agent
    It's worth noting that there was nothing to suggest that QoS would be a follow-on from CR at the time, they could have done something very different. Only the massive success of CR persuaded them to start the next one 10 minutes after, surely. Had people said, hey Craig is great as Bond but the story sucks then QoS (or whatever it would have been called) would have been very different.

    Interesting thought! I guess they could have finished CR just the way it ended and we assumed he killed White etc and that was basically it! I sought of wish they had done that actually and started afresh.

    I hope the new Bond is not a 3rd installment or if it is then I hope it is some huge super villain at the head of Quantum but with less ref to the previous films so it at least feels like a new adventure!!
    Instagram - bondclothes007
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 9,027MI6 Agent
    Of course, how things turned out they really could have had QoS as a coda for CR, released a year and a half after, but then people would have said, hey, see what happens when you rush things, as with TMWTGG.

    Or, and I think I've mentioned this, have it as two storylines, first half dispensing of White and rest of it, then a new story lasting an hour or so.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • SilentSpySilentSpy Private Exotic AreaPosts: 750MI6 Agent
    Just wondering what the thoughts where on These Two films. For the First time two Bonds where going to be linked, one story leading to the next. When decicing on a director should Eon of made it part of the contract that Both films had to be made by the same director and Basic crew.
    I'm not saying Campbell was better than Forster , or getting in to the old argument about QOS. Just on a cinematic point. I think it would of helped the look of the two movies if they had of had the same hand directing them. I'd love to read other views.

    Dr. No and From Russia with Love are pretty much sequels. I really didn't like the whole "first time" sequel marketing stuff they were pulling with Quantum. Plus, Casino and Quantum really don't feel the same like a lot of true sequels.

    Anyway, even if they had Campbell directing Quantum, he probably wouldn't have been able to save the movie. The fault was with the story and forgetting the strengths of Casino Royale.
    "Better late than never."
  • Richard--WRichard--W USAPosts: 200MI6 Agent
    CR & QOS Should they of had the Same Director ?

    Campbell and Foster should have switched films.
    Foster should have directed CASINO ROYALE.
    Campbell should have directed QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
    They'd both be better films.
    The success and acceptance of CASINO ROYALE has more to do with the story by Ian Fleming than with Campbell's direction. Frankly, I don't think his direction is that good.

    Let Marc Foster direct CASINO ROYALE; he'd bring out the subtext and the virtues from the novel, whereas Martin Campbell is adept at deconstructing them. I dislike how Campbell twisted the internal subtext of CASINO ROYALE into meaning the opposite of what Fleming intended, and I dislike how he perverted the character of James Bond. I don't believe Marc Foster would have done that. Give Foster a better story -- like the one Ian Fleming wrote -- and he'd make a better Bond film. In fact, for all its flaws (and they are many and inexcusable), QUANTUM OF SOLACE is full of dramatic and visual touches that are true to Fleming and to the originating films of the series. It's almost a film noir. The novel is certainly an espionage noir.

    If Campbell had directed QUANTUM OF SOLACE he'd have made a bad script better by making it infinitely more exciting.
    The top 7 Bond films: 1) Dr No. 2) From Russia With Love. 3) Thunderball. 4) On Her Majesty's Secret Service. 5) For Your Eyes Only. 6) The Living Daylights. 7) Licence to Kill.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,696MI6 Agent
    I think you have a very good point, Richard-W. Given that QOS was an action movie Campbell probably would of done a beter job where as CR was more Character/story driven so might of suited Marc Foster better.
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • Richard--WRichard--W USAPosts: 200MI6 Agent
    edited April 2011
    Thank you, Thunderpussy.

    The "official" version of CASINO ROYALE is one of the most disappointing films in my long movie-going life. A devastating disappointment. An objectionable disappointment. It is hard to forgive EON for turning James Bond into an uncouth idiot who needs to be followed around the globe and constantly scolded by his M. Many Bond fans overlook the offense because the action is good and Fleming's framework is more or less present, but not me.

    No one connected with CASINO ROYALE demonstrated the slightest feel for the book. Campbell ushered in the "Stop! Or My M. Will Shoot!" trilogy (with apologies to Estelle Getty and Stallone). It never should have happened.
    The top 7 Bond films: 1) Dr No. 2) From Russia With Love. 3) Thunderball. 4) On Her Majesty's Secret Service. 5) For Your Eyes Only. 6) The Living Daylights. 7) Licence to Kill.
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 25,129Chief of Staff
    Richard--W wrote:
    It is hard to forgive EON for turning James Bond into an uncouth idiot who needs to be followed around the globe and constantly scolded by his M. Many Bond fans overlook the offense because the action is good and Fleming's framework is more or less present, but not me.

    No...many fans obviously enjoyed this film....and as for Bond being "an uncouth idiot who needs to be followed around the globe and constantly scolded by M"....really ? So none of the other Bond's had M turn up as they were on assignment and tell them to get on with the job ? I think you could do with re-watching the other films and see just how many times that does happen....

    And as for your last couple of lines.... 8-)
    YNWA 96
  • LoeffelholzLoeffelholz The United States, With LovePosts: 8,853Quartermasters
    Sir Miles wrote:
    Richard--W wrote:
    It is hard to forgive EON for turning James Bond into an uncouth idiot who needs to be followed around the globe and constantly scolded by his M. Many Bond fans overlook the offense because the action is good and Fleming's framework is more or less present, but not me.

    No...many fans obviously enjoyed this film....and as for Bond being "an uncouth idiot who needs to be followed around the globe and constantly scolded by M"....really ? So none of the other Bond's had M turn up as they were on assignment and tell them to get on with the job ? I think you could do with re-watching the other films and see just how many times that does happen....

    And as for your last couple of lines.... 8-)

    I'm with you, Sir Miles. I rather enjoyed CR, actually---there was no ripoff of an 70-year old fire engine ladder bit (AVTAK), for which the Keystone Cops could have legitimately sued ;)

    It's funny: years on, the CR/Craig/QoS polarization is profound. I guess it's like diamonds...it's forever :))
    "Blood & Ashes"...AVAILABLE on Amazon.co.uk: Get 'Jaded': Blood & Ashes: The Debut Oscar Jade Thriller
    "I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
    "Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
  • bluemanblueman PDXPosts: 1,667MI6 Agent
    Interesting comments.

    I guess I'm one of the few who liked Forster's QOS, wouldn't change it.

    As for Campbell's CR, yeah a different director would've been fine with me. Campbell really Hollywooded things up but at the same time hit a couple scenes dead on (nice torture showdown). A lot of that is Haggis IMO, again does a lot right but also has a lot of content that's problematic. On balance CR does more right than wrong, but a script polish and a different director (and a different Vesper, Eva's cute and all but doesn't really carry it off IMO) would make for a better film IMHO. A Matthew Vaughn CR would've been interesting, but really the director I most wanted to see do CR: Tarantino. He understands genre better than any director working today, I think he would've hit CR out of the ballpark (also would've made the script better and cast an actual actress for Vesper, lol).

    I appreciate what Campbell did with CR, he brought Bond back to a great extent with Craig as Bond and giving so many scenes a nice goes-down-easy sheen to them eerily reminiscent of Young and Hamilton's work on the series in the 60s. Just feel it could've gone further. Oh well, at least we're on the right path again, yippee! :007)
  • ke02ewwke02eww USPosts: 2,064MI6 Agent
    I may be one of the few who liked both as they were..,though nothing is perfect ( cgi in QoS)

    I would have been happy with Campbell in QoS, but he seems destined to be Eon's "opening bat" charged only to re-launch the series after a break and a new actor...

    The third film seems to be crucial....where the actor should have stamped his Mark on the character and honed it...

    Connery maxed it with goldfinger
    Moore hit his peak with the spy who loved me...
    But brosnan struggled with a poor script and a terrible plot in twine...

    The other two didnt even see the third film...

    While the director matters clearly, for me it's about the lead, and whether he is capable of keeping even a bad vehicle on the road...


    So Craig has an opportunity to join the ranks of connery and Moore with b23, and prove he
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 25,129Chief of Staff
    ke02eww wrote:
    I may be one of the few who liked both as they were..,though nothing is perfect ( cgi in QoS)

    I would have been happy with Campbell in QoS, but he seems destined to be Eon's "opening bat" charged only to re-launch the series after a break and a new actor...

    The third film seems to be crucial....where the actor should have stamped his Mark on the character and honed it...

    Connery maxed it with goldfinger
    Moore hit his peak with the spy who loved me...
    But brosnan struggled with a poor script and a terrible plot in twine...

    The other two didnt even see the third film...

    While the director matters clearly, for me it's about the lead, and whether he is capable of keeping even a bad vehicle on the road...


    So Craig has an opportunity to join the ranks of connery and Moore with b23, and prove he


    I'm more than happy with both films too....

    There does seem to be something about the third film....and it's a real pity Dalton didn't get the opportunity...:#

    For me...it's still about the script...and possibly the 'feel' the writers get for the actor playing Bond...by the third film the writers should KNOW what the actors strengths are...and write for those...I may be one of the few who actually like TWINE....it's Brosnan's best, IMO....it doesn't 'hit' every mark, but it certainly is enjoyable....

    That's why I was happy to hear that Peter Morgan was working on Bond23...then unhappy when the film was 'shelved'....do we know if they plan to continue with that script..?...or start afresh..?...
    YNWA 96
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 9,027MI6 Agent
    A bit belated, but I understand Morgan's screenplay or synopsis - with an amazing, earthshattering premise, it is said (but I don't know what it was) - has been junked.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 25,129Chief of Staff
    A bit belated, but I understand Morgan's screenplay or synopsis - with an amazing, earthshattering premise, it is said (but I don't know what it was) - has been junked.

    That's a real shame...but not a total suprise...no doubt the bones of it will appear in time...I hope :D
    YNWA 96
Sign In or Register to comment.