Martin Campbell: Edge of Darkness
Tags: james bond, Martin Campbell, Edge of Darkness, Mel Gibson, Quantum of Solace
One of the most reliable Hollywood directors working today is also one of the most modest. New Zealand-born Martin Campbell has been quietly plugging away at the big-budget filmmaking game for decades, churning out a steady stream of high-octane dramas like the mountain climbing thriller Vertical Limit and the Angelina Jolie-starring Beyond Borders as well as Sony’s two rebranded Zorro films starring Antonio Banderas and Catherine Zeta-Jones. His primary affiliation, however, is with a certain British spy who sports a license to kill. After Timothy Dalton’s underwhelming two-film stint as James Bond in the late 80s, which resulted in a six year hiatus for the character, Campbell was brought in to retool the series with a new actor, Pierce Brosnan, and a new, 90s sensibility; the result was Golden Eye, a box-office smash and critical success.
Ten years later, when the Brosnan series began to peter out, it was no surprise that the Bond producers turned to Campbell once again to helm a total series reboot. Campbell’s second Bond film, Casino Royale, is considered among the best in the forty eight year-old franchise’s history and its runaway success pushed Campbell to the forefront of journeyman directors. After next tinkering with the idea of remaking Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds, Campbell solidified two new projects: the mega-budget superhero film The Green Lantern, which is filming now, and an adaptation of the British crime series Edge of Darkness, with Mel Gibson in the role of a Boston detective seeking vengeance for his murdered daughter. Campbell recently called up SuicideGirls to talk about working with Mad Mel and action cinema today.
Ryan Stewart: Looks like you can’t escape the James Bond news cycle. It’s heating up again right now, just as you’re going out to do press for this film.
Martin Campbell: [laughs] I know, I just read something about Sam Mendes doing the next one. People do ask me about it still, during interviews and things like that, but I guess the cycle always goes on with Bond, doesn’t it?
RS:
Have the Broccolis done justice to your vision of the series reboot, you think? Everyone considers Casino Royale to be near the top of the Bond canon.
MC:
Well, look, I don’t really know what my vision was, I just simply did it the way I felt it should be done. I was very disappointed by Quantum of Solace, but to be honest I’m sure it was a very difficult thing to follow, Casino Royale. That one had an emotional story, and it was also the origin story, so there was a lot to work with. Any subsequent film is, of course, not going to have that, and the new characters that were introduced couldn’t really hope to have a meaningful sort of relationship with Bond after what happened to him in Casino Royale, you know? So, in fairness, they did sort of have their hands tied.
RS:
I’m sure you had a lot of options after Casino Royale’s release, since it did so well. What made you choose as your next project a film with an element of controversy, namely the Mel Gibson tirade? Were you hesitant at all about working with him?
MC:
No, absolutely not. We did talk about it, obviously. Of course we did, but we just very quickly dismissed it. We were actually crossing our fingers that we would get Mel, simply because he was the best actor for the part. What it says in the film’s press notes is absolutely true, that there was no one else ever considered for the part.
RS:
Would you say you’re pretty adept at dealing with actors who have demons?
MC:
Well, I like to work very closely with actors both during rehearsal and on the set, and I’ve yet to meet an actor who doesn’t have demons. I mean, really, there’s no doubt about that. I think every actor I’ve ever worked with has demons, and if they didn’t they wouldn’t be actors. But I can say that in Mel’s case there was no sign of it on the set. He was very professional, he was always there right on time, and once we would start with the day’s shooting he never even left the set, which I found extraordinary. He would just wait there in his chair until it was time to get on with it. I could honestly put my hand on my heart and say it was one of the best working experiences I’ve ever had. Also, we did rehearse, we did plenty of rehearsal. William Monahan and I worked together with him on the script, and he was just locked into it from day one. He was right there with us.
RS:
There’s an interesting shot at the beginning of the film where the camera fixes on Mel from behind, with his rapidly thinning hair sort of on display for us to notice. I take it he’s not one for vanity about his looks these days?
MC:
Absolutely not. Not Mel, let me tell you. In fact, he almost wanted that, you know? He had no reservations at all about wanting to be that man, that character. There really is no vanity in Mel, I can tell you that.
RS:
It struck me as being kind of self-deprecating. There’s another scene where Mel is captured by the bad guys and taken to an abandoned factory, where he’s strapped down as if he’s going to be tortured – and then he just gets loose and walks away. Was that an inside joke, because Mel loves being tortured in his movies?
MC:
[laughs] No! I don’t think that ever, ever came across our minds. It’s very nice of you to offer that up, but I’d have to say no is the answer to that question!
RS:
Mel certainly identifies more as a director than as an actor these days. Was he pretty comfortable with taking off his director’s cap this time around, or was he eager to be involved behind the scenes as well?
MC:
No, he actually came up to me once we started shooting, after he had accepted the role, and said “Look, I’m just the actor here, nothing more. I’m not directing, I’m not producing, I’m just the actor.” And that was how he remained throughout the whole shoot.
RS:
I know from your work that you’re very much into car chases and big practical effects, and now you’ve worked with Mel Gibson -- any talk of taking the reins on a new Lethal Weapon film?
MC:
We never talked about that. I’m sure they would try to get Mel in for another Lethal Weapon film, but I actually doubt that they’ll ever really do another one. I think he’s probably gone past that. I suppose you never know, though, right?
RS:
Those are definitely my kind of action films, though – the ones that have lots of car chases and gunfire, as opposed to CGI robots punching each other. Today’s superhero films have very little about them that’s visceral.
MC:
Oh, I agree with you, and one of the things in The Green Lantern that we’re doing is that when people get hit -- and Green Lantern gets hit in this – it hurts. In most superhero movies, they never are hurt. What you see in those movies is someone getting blasted a hundred yards into a brick wall and then they turn and shake their head and just go right back into the action. None of them ever seem to suffer because of it. That’s something where, I hope with The Green Lantern we’ll be able to make it slightly more real than it’s possibly been in some of the other superhero movies.
RS:
When you first signed onto Edge of Darkness, did you feel it incumbent upon you to go through William Monahan’s script and look for places to ramp up the action beats? I imagine it was more intimate, more small-scale before you got involved.
MC:
You know, the film gives the impression of a lot of action, but there really isn’t a lot of action. The way I wanted it to be was that half the time the action happens and the other half the action is denied, so that the action happens at the least expected times. Because that’s how it happens with action in real life, a lot of times – suddenly, something will just happen at a moment when you’re not prepared for it. It just sort of shockingly comes out of nowhere. That was sort of the principle that I applied for this. Audiences today have become conditioned to know when a big action scene is coming, you know? They’ll prepare themselves for it, and they’ve gotten used to movies having a certain rhythm to them, so they’ll know when to expect it and when not to, so I just always like to play against that.
RS:
Did you find that doing a more intimate piece like this one was in your comfort zone? No franchise pressure to worry about?
MC:
You know, I’m actually very happy doing an intimate drama. I love being able to do one every now and then. I still plan things out really carefully, and I have a very tight set. I always know what the day’s work is, and the actors do, and I’ve thought it all out. So it’s usually a pretty disciplined set, really.
RS:
Another thing I noticed is that there’s very little humor in this film, even though that’s sort of your signature of late. The Zorro films and the Bond films are all about mixing up the action with a lot of light, throwaway moments. This movie is grim!
MC:
[laughs] Well, yeah, when your daughter gets cut in half with a shotgun that doesn’t allow for an awful lot of jokes and humor! And remember that I also shot the series, Edge of Darkness, way back in the 80s, so this was definitely something that I was familiar with, and I was very familiar with the main character. I was very much on board with all of that since I’d been through it before, although we did have to change a lot of things, given that twenty-five years has elapsed between the series and the movie. You know, movies are like anything else, all sorts of different things come across your desk. For example, at the moment I’m of course doing The Green Lantern, and I’ve never done a superhero movie before, and I’ve also never been involved with what I would call a heavily digital film, but this time I am because I’ve never done it before.
It’s the same thing as when I did Vertical Limit – I did that film because I’d never climbed a mountain before, and it was just very interesting for me to actually go out and do that. With Edge of Darkness, I obviously had some familiarity from the series, but more importantly I was just interested in the emotional take on the story. It’s about grief and about loss and about corruption. It’s also about a father finding out that his daughter was involved in all sorts of goings on that he had no clue she was involved in. There were a lot of things in it that I thought made it a thinking man’s thriller, as opposed to something more straight down the line.
It’s the same thing as when I did Vertical Limit – I did that film because I’d never climbed a mountain before, and it was just very interesting for me to actually go out and do that. With Edge of Darkness, I obviously had some familiarity from the series, but more importantly I was just interested in the emotional take on the story. It’s about grief and about loss and about corruption. It’s also about a father finding out that his daughter was involved in all sorts of goings on that he had no clue she was involved in. There were a lot of things in it that I thought made it a thinking man’s thriller, as opposed to something more straight down the line.
RS:
My take on the film is that it’s about middle-aged cops and criminals not wanting to be manipulated by their respective systems anymore. They’ve involved themselves in complex skullduggery for a long time, and they’ve started to realize that no one wins in the long run.
MC:
Well, there’s a scene in the film where Mel’s character opens the door to his best friend and he already knows that his best friend is there to betray him. I don’t know if you remember this scene, but then they go to the kitchen and the guy just admits that he’s sold out. Then Mel says his thing about life and what you’re expected to do in life and what’s expected of a good cop, and that’s what sums up his character. He’s a character whose moral compass points due north and he never deviates from that. My feeling was always that once his daughter died, he somehow knew right then where he would end up at the end of this thing.
Edge of Darkness opens in theaters everywhere Friday 1/29/10.
Edge of Darkness opens in theaters everywhere Friday 1/29/10.
Featured Interviews
All interviews
