*** Official QUANTUM OF SOLACE Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Edwin-S]

Reviews and views of this film seem to be generally negative. I'm going to see this on the twentieth. It looks like I'm going to be glad that I didn't have to pay for the tickets.

 

[Raul Marquez]

Zack,

I couldn't have worded it better. Agree with you on all counts!

Hopefully the producers of the Bond films are lurking around and will pay attention to these remarks for the next one.

Take care,

Raul

 

[paul_austin]

I'm not going to trash it, the problem is Casino Royale was a major high point and it hard to live up to that. I need to see it again, I refuse to just dismiss it as so many have. The only negative thing I have to say I've said...and that was the theme song....ouch. In my mind now the worst Bond song is in a dead heat for the first time ever....Ah-ha has held the title for over 20 years..."If there was a man" by the Pretenders should have been the title song then....travesty....a travesty.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Today, I talked to a few people that watched it over the weekend and they seem to enjoy it a lot more than serious Bond fans.

 

[Edwin-S]

A couple of more days and I will be able to gather my own impression of it. I noted, in the review thread, that you have seen it and liked it. Are you a big Bond fan or more along the lines of the people you talked to?

The Bond franchise seems to bring out diametrically opposing opinions. Some of the biggest complaints about the franchise, over the last few years, has been the over reliance on gadgets, cliched villains, cliched situations and tired standard Bond lines and behaviour.

Broccoli throws all of that stuff out the window and now the complaints seem to be that it's not a Bond film because it is missing the exact elements that everyone was originally complaining about. Seems kind of funny to me.

Also, the complaints about lack of character building in Bond movies brings a smile to my face. Personally, I think if people are looking for character studies or building then a Bond film is the last place you look. None of the Bond films could ever be called deep when it comes to character development. To me, Bond has only ever been about drinking Martinis, bedding babes and kicking ass on over-the-top villains, all while looking good doing it.

I hope I'm not disappointed in this film. Personally, I would like to see Bond being a little more relevant to today's time. Less gadgets, grittier, and less lovey dovey than he was in Casino Royale. I liked CR well enough but I thought the character was too "sensitive". Some of the lines spilling out of his mouth in the Sanitarium scene just made me roll my eyes. They were lines that I could never envision ever coming from the lips of Bond.

My one big complaint about new Bond flicks is the ever expanding role of Dench's "M". To me, M was there for one reason: assign the mission and then get lost, not act as Bond's den mother.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Edwin,
I've been watching James Bond films in movie theaters since 1962. I started to lose my love for the series when Roger Moore came aboard because I didn't think he was right for the role. He was suave enough, but without enough physicality to make Bond threatening when he needed to be. When Dalton and Brosnan took over, some of the films were okay to me and a few were just awful, but they suffered the same problem as Moore, not enough physicality to them. Now, I think Craig is back to the Connery "Bond" I loved in my youth and he is even more vicious and threatening in his Bond characterization in a world that is not kinder nor gentler than the Bond films of the 1960s.

I agree with you about some of the other things that amuse you about certain comments in regard to lack of character development and less gadgets. Anyhow, whatever floats their boat. This latest film isn't among the best Bond films, but it's far from being one of the worse ones.





Crawdaddy

 

[Dale MA]

I had an interesting lecture at University this morning.

John Dyer the Educational Officer for the BBFC came in to talk about the BBFC and there practices, he was a great guy and he said that Quantum of Solace was first submitted to the BBFC in a slightly 'harder' cut then what appeared in cinemas, apparently the BBFC gave this cut the all clear but the Bond producers had to actually trim the film down to appease the people in control of American Classification - unfortunately it was this trimmed down cut that was released in both the U.S. and U.K.

Just found it interesting, hopefully we'll see the 'harder' cut on DVD & BD.

 

[Andy Sheets]

The problem is that there's a happy medium that's not being achieved. By all means, ditch the gadgets, stupid one-liners, lazy adherence to formula, etc., but don't go so far in the other direction that you lose the basic fantasy appeal of the character.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Yup. Some people think the anti-QoS people want super-silly, campy Bond, but that's not true. The majority of us loved CR and would've been happy with a film that worked in a similar vein. While more hard-edged than usual, at least the Bond of CR was recognizable as Bond.

This guy in Qos? They may call him Bond, but he doesn't FEEL like Bond. It's not that tough to make a tougher Bond who still retains some of the series' classic traits. QoS is just anonymous...

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Yup again. I sure didn't expect QoS to revert to over-the-top Bond, but I expected it to continue the character's growth from CR. We should've gotten MORE of a classic Bond feel here, not LESS... :frowning:

 

[Holadem]

If you allow for the possibility that there is room between the two extremes, then it's not that strange, and even less funny.

This is one dour Bond. More than any one element, perhaps the most glaring omission is Bond as a conduit to a vicarious guy fantasy. We should want to be him, but I certainly don't. I suppose it's an inevitable consequence of going with "CR2: The grieving" as the second flick, rather than something else altogether. Whether it's necessary is up for debate, but it is what we have.

Still, I had fun.

--
H

 

[Ken Chan]

I didn't have a problem with Bond the character, and I can still see the appeal of being him. Obviously, he has some bad days -- getting his balls scratched in CR being a prime example -- but overall, a very capable guy (i.e. assassin), exciting high-class life, beautiful locales, and Gemma Atherton ain't bad either.

What bothered me about QoS is primarily this: while the action scenes were in the Bourne style, a choice I don't necessarily disagree with, they just didn't work very well. The opening car chase wasn't big enough; the ending hotel sequence wasn't big enough. Maybe "big" is not the right word -- they just weren't that interesting. The boat chase was blah. I can't put my finger on what they could have done better, but I've definitely seen better.

They also had several things happen off-screen. While I sort of appreciated them skipping over the "boring parts" and it kind of forced you to pay attention, because the action set pieces weren't working, I felt I wasn't getting my money's worth. It's like they weren't really trying.

One thing I liked: during the ridiculous computer graphics, Bond spelled out Greene's name. He started, "G R double-E," and the computer followed along "GRW" and then switched to "GREE". Nice touch.

 

[Edwin-S]

I've noted the responses to my post. I'll have to reserve judgement until Thursday, since that is when I will be seeing it.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

I Agree I rewatched Casino Royale over the last few days, and while it still had the edginess, it still had the undercurrent of a Bond Film, the Poker Game Confrontation, the Airport chase, the poisoning Scene, and the music supported all these scenes. QOS just does not have the same feel.

 

[Chris Atkins]

Was anyone else besides me having Die Another Day-Ice Palace flashbacks during the climactic scene in the desert hotel?

 

[Dale MA]

Yes, the two scenes feel similiar, I noticed that too Chris. Fortunately I think the hotel climax was far superior than the very silly ending of DAD.

 

[Tony J Case]

Moonraker and View to a Kill are probably sleeping better at night now that QoS is out. Bad James Bond film? Hell, it was a bad generic action film!

The sinister plot of Greene's underground water theft could not be less dramatic if it tried. Bond accidentally stumbles across this underground lake, mumbles something about explosives and damming while we get some poor, thirst Bolivian children lining up to get water from kind of cistern. And all the Whos down in Whoville went boo hoo hoo.

The hell?

The Old School Bond, would have had a bombastic, over the top villain with a massive underground lair in the belly of a volcano staffed with armed guards in orange jumpsuits and a big guy with some kind of physical deformity. This facility would have been some kind of massive pumping station that slowly siphons off the world's water and stores it in massive tanks so our mastermind could blackmail the free world. And Bond would infiltrate the facility with a team of ninja or commandos, rappelling into the underground lair and blowing up all manner of shit in a really huge gun fight.

No - we get a wuss installing a puppet dictator and then extorting him so that Greene's oginization runs the water monopoly before Bond stumbles into things and blows up the super-flammable hotel which appears to be built out of hydrogen.

The other big problem with the movie? Bond is a thug. Ok, in the first one, it was Bond learning to be Bond, the start of his career - fine, I get that. But he's continued to be nothing more than an uncouth goon who's only slightly better than the people he's fighting.

I like my dapper secret agent in a unwrinkled tux with laser cufflinks and a martini in one hand (and a woman in a bikini on the other arm). I like my thinly disguised sexual innuendo female names. I liked my huge side-of-beef henchmen with weird teeth. I like it when the stakes are high, the world hangs in the balance while the evil mastermind orbits the planet in his death ray satellite, gloating.

And the song - oh god, don't get me started. Lulu, you are now no longer the worst singer in a Bond film. Come back Maurice Binder, all is forgiven. Speaking of music, where the hell is the Bond theme?!? Come on, we need that back STAT. It's like the Jaws theme - when the Bond theme kicks in with the massive horn blasts, you know some shit is about to go down.

But the biggest sin? Crap action scenes! I will pay HUGE money to hollywood if they just knock off the "We dont have actors that know how to fight, so we'll just zoom in real tight and shake the camera around a whole bunch instead" shit. What - did the director just strap the camera to the back of an epileptic wolverine in a room full of mannequins?

Sigh. . . .


***EDIT***
Oh - and where the hell are the stunts?!? Bond has always been known for bigger than life stunts where real stunt men do real things that make you go "DAMN!" Where's the guy skiiing off the cliff? Where's the guy bungie jumping off the dam? Where's the car doing the 360 corkscrew jump? Where's the record breaking 70 foot speedboat jump over a cop car? Where's the guy leaping from back to back, using aligators as stepping stones?

 

[RobertR]

Damn, that was an entertaining post, Tony. The way you turn some phrases had me laughing out loud.

 

[Henry Gale]

Guess I'm easier to entertain than many of you.
Liked the opening "girl in sand" sequence, was happy to hear Jack White, and liked the movie.
Enjoyed the nod to Goldfinger with Field's demise.
Of course I'll always prefer the original, "Manon of the Spring".

 

[Richard--W]

I agree with one critic who wrote "the producers threw the baby out with the bathwater." Except I think the criticism applied more to Casino Royale. Quantum of Solace lacks much of the style and accoutrements that fans expect and enjoy. Some really bad decisions, like the absence of the James Bond theme, putting the gun barrel opening in the wrong place, the wretched title sequence and risible title song, get this film off to a bad start. Add to that the absence of Q and Miss Moneypenny back at the office, and the constant intrusions of an editorializing M, make the film a very dour experience. I think audiences in general and Bond fans in particular would be a lot more receptive to the noir approach and artful direction if the producers had put those familiar traditions into the service of the story. And then recut the action so that the average audience can tell what's going down and feel an emotional connection.

Quantum of Solace is the first time the series has made any progress since On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Most people didn't know how to respond to that film, either, in 1969, but gradually it became the most highly regardrd entry of series. I think people will learn to appreciate Quantum of Solace after they get used to it on home video. Also, it is the only noir in the series, and in my opinion, all the Bond films coming in the years ahead should be hair-raising noirs.