Edge of Darkness

Dir: Martin Campbell

2010

***

What a strange and varied portfolio of films Martin Campbell has under his belt. I've not always been a fan of his films but to my surprise and delight, Edge of Darkness turned out to be quite the entertaining thriller and just the sort of thing I hoped it would be. It was interesting to see Campbell revisiting and remaking his 1980's BBC miniseries into a film, I'm guessing it had been something of an ambition of his since 1985, although it's a very different kind of thriller. The original is more of a noir and a little bit slow in places while the 2010 film is action packed and is reminiscent of Mel Gibson's earlier films. I confess, I didn't want a political noir, I wanted a gun-shooting Gibson action film and that is exactly what I got. A career ambition or a lazy sell-out, I'm not sure and I don't really care in this instance, I was entertained throughout. Maybe it went to his head somewhat as the Green Lantern was an odd and rather terrible follow up decision by the director. Mel Gibson is brilliant in the lead role and Ray Winstone is also rather good in his supporting role. The beginning of the film totally took me by surprise and I was thrilled throughout. I think this film is somewhat overlooked, it is way above average for the genre, especially of the time, although it was still average in many respects. Think what you will of Mel Gibson but his performance here was a real return to form and something I took great enjoyment from.

GoldenEye
Dir: Martin Campbell
1995
***
GoldenEye, the seventeenth Bond film in the series, reignited the franchise in a big way in 1995, six years after Timothy Dalton's Licence to Kill. GoldenEye is the first Bond film that wasn't adapted from an Ian Flemming story nor was it named after any of his work. GoldenEye was however the name of Flemming's Jamaican estate, named after an Operation he was involved with when working for British Navel intelligence during the Second World War. GoldenEye was a altogether glossy return for the worlds favorite spy but I have always felt that it came at a cost. Product placement was always a part of the franchise, indeed Aston Marton had done very well out their partnership with the series, but it had never been as obvious, and dare I say, tacky. GoldenEye is regarded by fans as one of the best and commercially it was the most successful of the series at the time but I never really thought that it lives up to its reputation. Pierce Brosnan finally got his chance as 007 after Dalton left and he was free of his contract with Remington Steele, although Mel Gibson and Liam Neeson were both offered the part before him but both passed on the role. Brosnan didn't so much create his own version of the character, instead he picked elements from each of the former actor's takes on the role. He had the confidence, with a slight vulnerability that Connery had, the sexism of Moore and the anger of Dalton. He also over-did that eyebrow thing people do when imitating the character. Imitation is the key word with GoldenEye. Brosnan did eventually become Bond in later films but here it is an act of an act. The film itself suffers from the same problem. The grand sets look like grand sets rather than authentic places, some in particular look as polystyrene as they are. By 1995 the cold war was over, it was time for a change of story for 007, the possibilities being endless and yet the theme once again included Soviet wrong doing and Russian bad guys with lots of cheap looking communist props. Sean Bean has a huge fan following, and apologies to them for my next comment, but I've always seen him as the go-to bad guy in British films when you don't have a particularly big budget. His Alec Trevelyan (or 006) is a fairly uninteresting Bond villain with a very predictable and unconvincing back story that was screaming out for some kind of gimmick. Shirley Bassey was hired three times to sing a Bond film (Goldfinger, Diamonds are Forever, Moonraker) and each of those films was a gamble in some respects. After Goldfinger's success she became somewhat of a lucky charm when they needed her and I can't help but think they had her in mind when hiring Tina Turner, her voice being similar. The theme song is crating and again, sounds like imitation rather than the real thing. I believe many of these issues were teething problems that came from Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson who both took over producing duties after Albert Broccoli stepped down after his health deteriorated. Cubby Broccoli is credited with a 'Presented by' title and sadly this was the last Bond film he'd see, dying just seven months after the films release. It is also a mystery to me how Martin Campbell got the director job based on his rather dubious catalog of work, John Woo passed on the opportunity and although I think he would have done a better job, I think they were still looking at all the wrong people. This passing of the baton could have been smoother, I acknowledge that I'm in the minority in thinking it's second rate Bond but there is also a lot I like about it. Both Izabella Scorupco and Famke Janssen's characters represent the death of the Bond girl, in the best possible way that is. Both are great characters of substance and neither are there to be simply looked at or saved. Robbie Coltrane and Alan Cumming provide entertaining light relief among the seriousness of the story but neither performance goes too far, it comes close with Cumming's to be fair but both deliver just the right level of comic relief the film needed.Needed for a popcorn munching blockbuster that is, to be fair that is what Bond always was in a way although this time it really was on a higher level. The best thing about GoldenEye was the casting of Judi Dench as the new M which was undoubtedly inspired by the appointment of Stella Rimington as head of MI5 in 1992. This was essentially the only real step forward into the 90's that Bond took, as sad as that is looking back at it. For me it was The Living Daylights rather than GoldenEye that really saw the reinvention of Bond, GoldenEye was just bigger and more brash and people had missed the character after his six year absence. There was something missing here for me, Bond's essence wasn't quite right and the franchise hadn't moved with the times enough. The Playstation game on the other hand was a totally different matter but then isn't it sad when a game based on a film ends up being far more entertaining than the film itself.

Casino Royale
Dir: Martin Campbell
2006
**
Quentin Tarantino is said to have planted the seed that the first film of the Bond reboot, and the twenty-first film of the franchise, should see 007 going back to his roots somewhat, back to one of Ian Flemming's best loved novels, Casino Royale. There were a few reasons why it had never been made by Eon before but mainly it was due to the fact that it lacked the action the audience expected from a Bond film and because it had been made as an unsuccessful comedy in 1967. It's a shame really, a Sean Connery version would have been brilliant but until 2006, Casino Royale was simply Ian Flemming's best book according to fans and a failed comedy to everyone else. The franchise was desperately in need of a reboot, making a film direct from one of Flemming's books was key (or at least, having the title of one was) so MGM made a deal with Sony, who owned the rights and essentially swapped Spiderman for Bond. Pierce Brosnan was an adequate Bond, he probably could have done another but realistically he had to go, as did any other association to the horror that was Die Another Day (apart from Judi Dench of course who actually worked quite well as the link between the chapters even though this version neither preceded or succeeded any of the previous incarnations). Daniel Craig was a controversial choice, he's won most people over since 2006 although personally I'm still not sold on him, however I'm quite glad Henry Cavill wasn't cast as it would be unlikely he would have been allowed to play the Man of Steel if he had. Plus, he's young and could always be considered at a later date. They sort of went back to basics with Casino Royale but they also tried something new but for me it never really worked as well is I think it could have. I think they should have gone further, maybe even hiring Quentin Tarantino as director (although his idea of setting it in the 1950s, in Black and White, starring Brosnan sounds like a tough sell). Martin Campbell was too safe an option for this to really feel like something new. Campbell rebooted the franchise with Goldeneye to great success and so they decided to get him in to do the same again. Personally I think both films are over hyped and feel like imitations. It takes a while sometimes for an actor to get into a role, especially one as established as James Bond but like Brosnan in Goldeneye, Craig seemed like he was impersonating Bond rather than embodying him. Of all six Bonds, Craig and Brosnan are the only two that, in my opinion, haven't really established their own versions of the character. Maybe Craig has so more than Brosnan but it's not a version I like very much. It's not just Bond though, Mads Mikkelsen is an actor I love but here he acts like a Bond villain, rather than the well written villain he was playing. I think it is only Jeffrey Wright's Felix Leiter that felt fresh to me. The parkour opening was pretty good, the script is strong and it was nice to see an extended Casino scene again but everything else I found somewhat forgettable. I don't think it was the great reboot everyone says it was, however it did have a nice new sophistication about it and it did seem like Bond was finally back on track.

Green Lantern
Dir: Martin Campbell
2011
**
I have a feeling that the makers of The Green Lantern sacrificed the story for a PG-13 rating - I guess they've got to make money, but the question remains, if you're going to do something, why not do it properly? I'm a big comic fan but not so much a fan of Green Lantern. He/they would pop up in other DC publications from time to time and I would buy a few just to answer a few niggling question and to complete various series (yes, I'm a geek). I've always liked the idea of many different alien members of The Green Lantern corp and although I'm glad they featured here, they really needed more of them and more screen time. The whole film could have been an introduction to the corp only. The sequel could have been the first fight - this just felt too formulaic and too much too soon, we've seen it all before, same film different uniform. The use of the green power here is also appalling, it felt like a cartoon, which is dangerous considering the less than brilliant CGI. Also, Ryan Reynolds is in it. Need I say more?