Sam Mendes - good or bad?

245678

Comments

  • Mendes Will only be directing the Main Unit, which is mostly the main actors in dramatic dialogue scenes. No doubt the film will look beautiful. As for the Action, Look to the SECOND unit Director and stunt team.
  • Posts: 11,425
    When they announded Forster for QoS I immediately thought of the Kite Runner and particularly the last bit where the central character returns to Afghanistan in later life. I thought, 'yeah', this could work. Perhaps I was wrong on that front.

    Any way, with Mendes I struggle to find anything in his earlier work that suggests he is right for Bond. I don't think Road to Perdition (from what I remember) was all that great.

    I remain optimistic however, because I think Mendes is an intelligent guy and is going to have given this whole movie a lot of thought.



  • Posts: 1,492
    Give the man a chance. I hate it when people make up their minds about things eight months before the film comes out.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    People are forgetting that the foundation to any movie is a script. The issue with QoS more than anything was having a questionable script to work from, so in essense the movie was already off to a poor start. Say what you want about Forster's artistic approac in directing the movie but more than anything, what hurt QoS the most was a dodgy script.
    SF on the other hand doesn't have the limitations that QoS fundamentally suffered from. I don't care what Mendes' relationship is with some if the cast, if the script was lame the likes if Fiennrs and Bardem wouldn't be attached. So, comparing Mendes to Forster is a waste of time IMO because the main concern and the difference between QoS and SF needs to be looked at firstly at a fundimemtal level and that is the quality of the script.
  • Posts: 11,425
    I was just intrigued by what others thought about Mendes. I think he's a good director and I've enjoyed several of his films but it struck me that there wasn't much in his previous movies to suggest that he was right for Bond. I don't doubt that the movie is going to be of a decent standard and certainly better than Bonds 17-20. I guess I found it odd that many people are raving about Mendes and yet his track-record does not suggest he is an action/thriller director, or that his recent films have been very popular.

    With QoS I believe DC pushed for an 'art house' director. They ended up with Forster and yet the end result for many people was less successful than CR, which was directed by the hack-like Cambell. As I've said before, most of the best loved Bonds were actually directed by hacks.

    In a sense there are less opportunities for these kinds of directors today. In the 50s, 60s and 70s TV was awash with action/adventure/spy series, like the Saint and Avengers, and they were still churning out World War 2 movies. These series (I think) gave directors the chance to develop action/adventure directing experience outside of feature films. Also, back then you probably also still just about had the 'B movie' tradition alive and well. These days I get the impression directors make fewer films and have less opportunity to learn, and make mistakes on the job. Hence there are fewer of those cheap and cheerful hacks around - experienced, technically proficient directors who are not too precious about their material but know how to construct an entertaining couple of hours of screen entertainment.

    I guess Spooks might be a modern day equivalent. I've never watched it, so could not say if the directing style would suit a Bond movie.
  • Posts: 1,492
    Sorry but you are not going to get another Lewis Gilbert again or a Guy Hamilton or a Terence Young. Those directors have gone and not coming back.

    Martin Campbell was good but it not going to come back as he has made his dosh and reputation.

    They are making different kind of films with a different kind of Bond. More thriller like, more cerebral, more edgy, more meaty. We may not have ninjas absailing down a volcano ever again. You might have to come to terms with that.

    My problem is that you are writing it off before you have seen it. So when you do see it and publish your views why should I give them any credence?

    I didnt like the Brosnan era but I went into each one with an open mind. Hoping for something better then the last one.
  • Posts: 11,189
    ^^

    Aww. There go my chances of seeing the castle of death - complete with ninjas who can't feel being kicked in the balls ;)
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited February 2012 Posts: 13,350
    jwxbulldog wrote:
    forster wouldhave made a great bond film if he had a script and a second unit director not named dan "bourne" bradley".

    Yet he also did the action for the latest Mission: Impossible and that was great. So I'll blame EON, Forster and the editors for that.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,686
    Revolutionary Road masterpiece

    It's a kitchen sink drama.

  • edited February 2012 Posts: 11,425
    actonsteve wrote:
    Sorry but you are not going to get another Lewis Gilbert again or a Guy Hamilton or a Terence Young. Those directors have gone and not coming back.

    Martin Campbell was good but it not going to come back as he has made his dosh and reputation.

    They are making different kind of films with a different kind of Bond. More thriller like, more cerebral, more edgy, more meaty. We may not have ninjas absailing down a volcano ever again. You might have to come to terms with that.

    My problem is that you are writing it off before you have seen it. So when you do see it and publish your views why should I give them any credence?

    I didnt like the Brosnan era but I went into each one with an open mind. Hoping for something better then the last one.

    I generally agree with u but because you are making so many assumptions about what I think, on this occassion I disagee with you!

    And since we're making big assumptions, aren't you the guy who really liked Madonna in DUD?
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 12,837
    actonsteve wrote:
    Sorry but you are not going to get another Lewis Gilbert again or a Guy Hamilton or a Terence Young. Those directors have gone and not coming back.

    Martin Campbell was good but it not going to come back as he has made his dosh and reputation.

    They are making different kind of films with a different kind of Bond. More thriller like, more cerebral, more edgy, more meaty. We may not have ninjas absailing down a volcano ever again. You might have to come to terms with that.

    My problem is that you are writing it off before you have seen it. So when you do see it and publish your views why should I give them any credence?

    I didnt like the Brosnan era but I went into each one with an open mind. Hoping for something better then the last one.

    Thats the thing, its stuff like this that made it a bond film. Thats where QOS went wrong, it lost the whole bond feeling. CR was ok because it was a reboot and it still feels a bit like a bond film. LTK proved that you can be dark and gritty, but still have gadgets, a gunbarrel, Q, and hell there's even ninjas.
  • actonsteve wrote:
    Give the man a chance. I hate it when people make up their minds about things eight months before the film comes out.

    I agree, but I think it goes both ways, as alot of people have decided that it'll be awesome 8 months before release.

    I'm just not getting my hopes up. I'm not saying anything is bad or good until I've seen the film.

    As for mendes, I'd heard of him but haven't seen anything of his before.
  • Posts: 11,425
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    I don't see how people can think a skilled director cant make a good movie.

    There's no DOUBT Mendes is skilled on some level, giving the acclaim he has. He may not be what was expected for Bond, but if the film is anything like FRWL his background will only add to the film.

    No one is saying he is incapable, just that he was a less than obvious choice. However, here's hoping it works out.
  • Posts: 1,492
    actonsteve wrote:
    Give the man a chance. I hate it when people make up their minds about things eight months before the film comes out.

    I agree, but I think it goes both ways, as alot of people have decided that it'll be awesome 8 months before release.

    .

    No one is saying that. They are saying go into the film with an open mind. Don't write it off eight months before release because you don't like the choice of director.

    Also, this is the way the Bonds are going to be under Craig. He is not going to do an invisible car or space station battle kind of film.

    They are going to be more thriller like, they are going to be more edgy. What Bond elements they have are going to be given a new spin (ie vodka martini? Do I look like I give a damn?) because they have passed into cliche. And, to be frank, during the Moore and Brosnan era became stale. They became an expression of tick-boxing.

    Both the producers and Craig ae trying to do something new. Keeping it fresh.

  • Posts: 11,425
    That's fine as long there remains a core sense that it's a Bond movie and not an inferior Bourne film. I think QoS felt more like a proper Bond movie than any film since TLD. Let's hope Mendes completes the restoration of the series to its rightful place - beautiful production design, some good set piece dialogue, humour and high tension.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    I'll wait until i see Skyfall before i have a comment on sam.
    Forster really stuffed up his bond movie.
  • Posts: 1,052
    I'm not sure an action specialist is really neccesary, I'm sure Mendes is more than capable of pulling it off, he's a classy director and could be just right for a classy film series such as Bond.
  • actonsteve wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    Give the man a chance. I hate it when people make up their minds about things eight months before the film comes out.

    I agree, but I think it goes both ways, as alot of people have decided that it'll be awesome 8 months before release.

    .

    No one is saying that. They are saying go into the film with an open mind. Don't write it off eight months before release because you don't like the choice of director.

    Also, this is the way the Bonds are going to be under Craig. He is not going to do an invisible car or space station battle kind of film.

    They are going to be more thriller like, they are going to be more edgy. What Bond elements they have are going to be given a new spin (ie vodka martini? Do I look like I give a damn?) because they have passed into cliche. And, to be frank, during the Moore and Brosnan era became stale. They became an expression of tick-boxing.

    Both the producers and Craig ae trying to do something new. Keeping it fresh.

    I know, but they can still keep some classic elements. Mendes and craig are saying the film will feel like a 60s bond film, and those had gadgets. There's a middle ground between the invisible car and not being bond at all. And if you read some posts people have said its going to be awesome, and it might be. But it might be bad, I'm not getting my hopes up or writing the fil of. I've never actually seen anything of mendes's before but he says he's a fan, so it looks promising.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    We could have another Apted (character) on our hands, or another Forster (style). Or perhaps a combination of the two.

    I think Mendes is hungry to have this film work, though, to rescue his film career a bit.
  • Posts: 56
    Hi all, I am new to this forum and will try to keep you updated with the Ola Rapace news that do not reach across the canal from Sweden. Concerning this thread, I have seen that there are a discussion about the similiarity between Forster and Mendes and I would also say that the two are at least in the same league when it comes to making little bit more quiet pictures ("blockbuster-arty", maybe). For me, QoS had some of the best scenes I have seen in a James Bond film. The opera-scene is magical. I also like the opening scene with the great car chase altough not its continuation in the tiresome "running-around-in-Sevilla-and-pushing-tomatoes" scene. QoS had its ups (once again, some really magnificant orchestrated work at the opera) and downs (all this running around... Saw Safehouse yesterday, the same thing there, does anyone want to see all this running around? Although, there were some good running in CR) unlike other films that have just been dull all the way through. QoS does feel rushed. An that is for me a big part of the problem. SkyFall will probabely not feel rushed. As someone has suggested previously, I have faith in the team, not only in Mendes.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited March 2012 Posts: 13,879
    Welcome to MI6, @Lofqvist :)

    The thing with the foot chase in CR was that it was fresh to Bond at that time, so featuring it directly after in QoS might've been a bit too much of the same thing too soon. I agree, the whole opera scene was excellent, especially where Bond takes the photos from above the stage. This was really one of the only moments in QoS where I was truly impressed. Back on topic, I can't say I've seen much of Mendes work, but with SF being his first action film, he'll be sure to treat it as something special.
  • Mendes is an excellent director and a first class choice for Skyfall. Nice to have his composer of choice, Thomas Newman, on board as well. I don't know how it's going to work out but I'm more optimistic about this film than I've been for a long time i.e The Living Daylights. People can whine but I strongly suspect this is going to be an excellent Bond movie.
  • Posts: 278
    Mendes is an excellent director and a first class choice for Skyfall. Nice to have his composer of choice, Thomas Newman, on board as well. I don't know how it's going to work out but I'm more optimistic about this film than I've been for a long time i.e The Living Daylights. People can whine but I strongly suspect this is going to be an excellent Bond movie.

    ....I agree with you Sir!!
    Mendes is a classy director, and has assembled a terrific crew including as you say Thomas Newman, which I feel will be a very special treat to hear a totally new sound/feel to the score!! The look of the film through the eyes of Mendes and Deakins is going to very rich and luxurious.....I hope!? :-B

    By the way....love the picture!!! Now thats one classy composer!!!! ^:)^
  • Although Sam Mendes has yet to prove himself in this genre of film, I think he will do well as he sounds like he has a deep enough understanding and respect for Bond to know how to make it work. Unlike, say, Michael Apted, another director from a non-action background, who I felt only really understood the bond films on a shallow level. I get the feeling that Mendes really gets what makes them work, under the surface. The nuts and bolts, if you like. And obviously we all know what an impressive CV he has, and what an impressive cast hes assembled.
  • edited March 2012 Posts: 2,594
    "However, from what we know, it looks like Mendes is focusing more on the characters, as if he's relying on them over the action to make the film. Which is good imo."

    If this is true, then it's a good sign but I certainly won't be getting my hopes up. I think the only film I've seen of his is American Beauty. I've only seen it once and I saw it in the cinema with my grandmother. Actually, maybe I've seen Road To Perdition. I think I may have checked this out just before or just after Craig was announced as James Bond in 05. Man, I can't believe it's been almost 7 years!

    I'd have to check out these films again to make an accurate judgement. From what I remember he is good with the drama but this means little with modern (post Dalton) Bond films as they seem to fill them with an unnecessary abundance of action and very little else except CR (2006) but that was based on a full length Fleming novel. Forster and Apted's (two drama directors) talents were far from showcased in TWINE and QOS.
  • Posts: 154
    The only thing that was missing from QoS was a more classic Bond. But , according to the storyline, it couldn't happen.it was the beginning of Bond. But, they could have maid it look a lot more like a Bond film but putting the gunbarrel in the beginning and etc. I liked the movie apart from that.
    Has far as Mendes goes, is he a good director?? Hell yeah ( i liked American Beauty) Will he make a good Bond film?? We don't know. It depends on a lot of other things.But I think he will try
  • edited March 2012 Posts: 2,594
    I would have liked QOS if the story and characters had have been fleshed out a little more and there was about 30 minutes less action. The excessive action ruined it for me. The film should have been about half an hour longer.
  • Posts: 154
    I think so too
  • something interesting is that all sam's movies have been R. skyfall will potentially be his first pg-13 movie.

    i think ..
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Bounine wrote:
    I would have liked QOS if the story and characters had have been fleshed out a little more and there was about 30 minutes less action. The excessive action ruined it for me. The film should have been about half an hour longer.
    The only characters that needed fleshing were Camille (when there was already enough), Greene, and Medrano. Everyone else was from CR and carried over, with Fields being there for some damn reason (possibly to give some skin, or for the GF homage), and Beam was there to show Felix struggling with his ideology in the CIA when he sees that they are "in bed" with Greene.
Sign In or Register to comment.