Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

*** Official QUANTUM OF SOLACE Discussion Thread


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

#21 of 131 Tarkin The Ewok

Tarkin The Ewok

    Supporting Actor

  • 654 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 15 2004

Posted November 15 2008 - 10:47 AM

I was sorely disappointed with this movie. I agree with almost everything Colin is saying in this thread, and I have a more detailed review in the Track the Films You Watch 2008 thread. In a nutshell: this is the first Bond film that I won't be buying because it has nothing worth revisiting at all.

By the way, was the person who did the title sequences for Goldeneye through Casino Royale unavailable for Quantum of Solace? His work was excellent, bringing the Maurice Binder feel into a more modern-styled Bond film. Why did the creative people go with MK12 for this one?

#22 of 131 Robert James Clark

Robert James Clark

    Second Unit

  • 352 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2001

Posted November 15 2008 - 11:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarkin The Ewok
I was sorely disappointed with this movie. I agree with almost everything Colin is saying in this thread, and I have a more detailed review in the Track the Films You Watch 2008 thread. In a nutshell: this is the first Bond film that I won't be buying because it has nothing worth revisiting at all.

By the way, was the person who did the title sequences for Goldeneye through Casino Royale unavailable for Quantum of Solace? His work was excellent, bringing the Maurice Binder feel into a more modern-styled Bond film. Why did the creative people go with MK12 for this one?

On one of the last days of XM radio's Cinemagic channel before it's hiatus, director Marc Forster said he liked the work of MK12 and wanted a different look for this film than the previous Bond films...

#23 of 131 Dale MA

Dale MA

    Supporting Actor

  • 942 posts
  • Join Date: May 22 2004

Posted November 15 2008 - 11:11 AM

I felt the gunbarrel at the end of the film was symbolic of Bonds journey, usually it marks the beginning of a Bond movie, without the classic "opening gunbarrel" it solidifies Quantum of Solace as a continuation of Casino Royale - this is not a new Bond movie, but a continuation of Casino Royale.

The gunbarrel at the end of the film means that the two part Vesper arc is now complete and Bond has become the Bond we all know and love.

#24 of 131 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator

  • 24,121 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted November 15 2008 - 02:21 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale MA
I felt the gunbarrel at the end of the film was symbolic of Bonds journey, usually it marks the beginning of a Bond movie, without the classic "opening gunbarrel" it solidifies Quantum of Solace as a continuation of Casino Royale - this is not a new Bond movie, but a continuation of Casino Royale.

The gunbarrel at the end of the film means that the two part Vesper arc is now complete and Bond has become the Bond we all know and love.
There you go, that's my take on it too.






Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#25 of 131 Richard--W

Richard--W

    Producer

  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2004

Posted November 15 2008 - 04:53 PM

Roger Ebert weighs in:

Quantum of Solace :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews

I agree with him generally in that I sorely miss some of the traditions of the series, like the gun barrel at the opening, the 007 theme, and other little things that are important but don't take much time, as well as the internal things relating to plot and character. The series desperately needs a good writer.

#26 of 131 Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer

  • 14,035 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted November 15 2008 - 05:12 PM

I was really glad to see it at the end of the film, because I really missed it at the beginning.

IMO, the first twenty minutes, though action-packed, are the weakest in the film. The apartment that Bond killed M's traitorous bodyguard in looked identical to the Italian apartment in one of the Borne movies. Once Bond got to Haiti, it began to feel more like a Bond film.

Olga Kurylenko was terrific as the main Bond girl. After Christmas Jones and Jinx, Green (Eva, not Dominic) and Kurylenko are a nice return to the more adult femmes. Gemma Arterton made her mark with the brief few scenes she was granted. Having Kurylenko's burn victim trapped in an inferno was that classic Bond sense of humor, and gave Bond a chance to save her in the way he couldn't save Vesper. That parallel is what gave the conclusion its weight, since the water subplot -- while more substantial than most recent Bond plots -- was utterly insignifcant.

The best part of the film, though, was the international politics playing out around Bond. Instead of having Judi Dench's M simply be a constant nag, we got to see the bureaucratic hoops she has to jump through to cover his ass and defend his actions. I got the impression this time that Bond and M respect each other, which isn't the impression I've gotten since Bernard Lee passed away.

As much as the world becoming more dangerous is a terrible thing for reality, it's proving to be a great thing for Bond. He has enemies again, in a world where the major powers are slicing up an ever-shrinking pie.

#27 of 131 Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer

  • 11,042 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted November 15 2008 - 06:48 PM

Two things I liked, the jump between shots of Mr. White being interrogated and the horse race and the sequence when Bond infiltrates the Quantum organization's meeting at the concert/performance arena where he has to eliminate the threats as he escapes cut with the stage performance. Nice touch.

Sorry to see Mathis go.

I agree the running and jumping chase on roof tops was a direct rip from the last Jason Bourne film.

The story was hard to follow and some of the dialogue was difficult to understand. I worked with English colleagues and I have no difficulty with Britain's English, but Craig tends to mumble.

I agree with the Ebert review too. If the Broccoli's are so intend on going in a new direction, why not follow the style and qualities of the character and situations in the books.

I got the Goldfinger reference. Was there a second reference to another film?

#28 of 131 Shad R

Shad R

    Supporting Actor

  • 537 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2001

Posted November 15 2008 - 07:30 PM

Also, why is the writer/director so damn fascinated with making us watch Judi Dench getting ready for bed in every scene she's in?
Judi Dench is a great actress, but I don't need to see her in a bathrobe, running a shower or putting on skin wrinkle cream.

#29 of 131 Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer

  • 14,035 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted November 16 2008 - 03:41 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shad R
Also, why is the writer/director so damn fascinated with making us watch Judi Dench getting ready for bed in every scene she's in?
Judi Dench is a great actress, but I don't need to see her in a bathrobe, running a shower or putting on skin wrinkle cream.
It's because: a) it shows us that M's work never ceases and b) they know there's an online obsession with figuring out exactly who her husband is.

#30 of 131 Tim Glover

Tim Glover

    Lead Actor

  • 7,616 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 12 1999
  • Real Name:Tim Glover

Posted November 16 2008 - 04:00 AM

Really disappointed in QoS. Especially having loved Casino Royale and that is a film that has the rare quality of improving with each viewing. Perhaps this one might improve?

Like many here, we had too many action sequences in the first 30 minutes that had no heart in them. It's one thing to have serious action but we need STORY and a little characterization to buy into. If we care a little about stuff, then those action moments-whether great or silly, hold more weight.

I will say Quantum improved in the final 45 minutes or so but it just never felt even. Disjointed throughout.

After the critical and fan VERY positive responses to Casino Royale & the way they re-started the franchise, this entry is a rather big letdown.

Everything was going for them. Bummer.

Not all was bad though. Loved the opera sequence? That was the film's highlight.

I too would've loved more of Mathis. Actually, his character was more interesting than anyone elses.

Not too much positive to recall really and that is such a shame for a film that was among the most anticipated around here this year.

Big, big letdown.

#31 of 131 Joe Karlosi

Joe Karlosi

    Producer

  • 5,994 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 05 2003

Posted November 16 2008 - 04:04 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale MA
[color=black]
[color=black]The gunbarrel at the end of the film means that the two part Vesper arc is now complete and Bond has become the Bond we all know and love

I hope you're right, but I also got that feeling at the very end of CASINO ROYALE when Bond did his famous "Bond ... James Bond" routine.

#32 of 131 Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter

  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted November 16 2008 - 06:55 AM

BTW, does anyone know what kind of plane that was that shot down Bond and Bond chick?
"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#33 of 131 Peter Raber

Peter Raber

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 115 posts
  • Join Date: May 29 2005

Posted November 16 2008 - 11:44 AM

I couldn't disagree more with the anti-sentiment for this movie. I thought this film was excellent. A more than solid follow-up to Casino Royale.

I was not let down at all. I thought the action scenes were well-timed, fast paced and full of emotion. The rooftop chase might have been a tad too long and did give me the feel that Bond just did this at the beginning of Casino Royale, but I got over that pretty quick. Personally, I thought that car chase scene at the beginning was great, albeit a tad unbelievable, but that's what you expect in a James Bond movie.

And Bond was more than emotional when he needed to be. The scene with Mathis when he was holding him at his end, and again when he was holding Camille as she was becoming paralyzed in the inferno felt full of emotion to me, not to mention his saving her which started the ensuing boat chase. If he was such a cold calculating bastard he wouldn't have bothered, because moments before she had just tried to shoot him. Or when he sees Agent Fields covered in oil and what he does to the agents after but then goes to M to say Fields didn't deserve that and it was Greene's doing. Obviously, she didn't desrve that, but just the fact that Bond felt compelled to tell M that showed how emotional he was regarding that.

I didn't feel like Bond was just a killing machine at all. He had very personal reasons for doing all that he did and I thought they played out very well. He didn't HAVE to kill the Chief of Police, but just before he did he tells him "You and I had a mutual friend." That made it personal. Not something a cold calculating killing machine would bother doing. Indeed, Bond's reasoning throughout the whole movie for doing what he did was personal, even though he stated otherwise to M.

I didn't miss the gun barrel sequence at the beginning and it was a nice touch there at the end, showing us now that we have our hero as we have known him. His "origin" is complete.

I am ready to go see this again already. I could do without the Theme Song, but after a few listens (I bought the soundtrack 2 weeks before the movie opened here in the States) it is not godawful like I first thought it was. It's by no means my favorite, but it doesn't make me cringe too much anymore.

There are indeed teases throughout the movie of "THE Bond Theme."

Humor was there in the right places, and thankfully not overdone. I have long hated Bond's one-liners as most of them are so very droll. Bond shouldn't make you cringe when he speaks, but so often in the past his one-liners did just that. So I am thankful those are absent.

I also have gotten incredibly bored with all the fancy gadgets from Q Branch. The best Bond movies to me are ones where they are minimal or non-existent. Bond shouldn't have to rely on a laser watch or invisible car to get out of fixes, just his intuition and honed abilities.

I found this to be more than a worthy successor to Casino Royale and can't wait to grab this on Blu-Ray the moment it comes out.

#34 of 131 Dave Scarpa

Dave Scarpa

    Producer

  • 5,271 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 08 1999

Posted November 16 2008 - 01:16 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Jacobson
Major, major disappointment. This must be the most anonymous Bond film of all 22 - it's almost completely lacking in all the things that make Bond Bond. I fully understand the producers' desire to back away from the campiness that mars many of the Bond flicks, but c'mon - throw us a few Bond bones!

They give us nothing. We get an anomymous villain, a one-dimensional "Bond Girl", and many interchangeable action scenes. Bond movies rarely boast great plots, but this one was weaker than usual. The flick alludes to some super-duper organization - SPECTRE? - that spreads its evil all around and can infiltrate even the tightest security.

And what does the movie do with this? Nothing. Instead, it concentrates on some tool's attempts to make lots of money from overpriced water in third world countries. Yawn!

Colin, you have pretty much summed up my feelings.
They can leave out the camp. But at least add a little fun
Way too dour.



Yes, I realize that the movie's REALLY about Bond's attempts to figure out who was behind the demise of his beloved Vesper, but the filmmakers do a good job of a) making events confusing and b) never advancing that particular plot.

Instead, a grim Bond kills a lot of folks - and that's about it. No charm, no panache, absolutely nothing that signifies "Bond".

So what's the point? What differentiates Quantum from a Bourne movie or any other generic spy flick?

Answer: Monty Norman's theme, and that's it. I loved Craig in Casino Royale, but he can't do anything with the part here. Bond is so sullen and dull that he's just a zombie. He wanders through the scenes, shoots and maims, and never does anything more. There's no character depth portrayed; Bond is just a homicidal robot.

Can't the producers find a nice balance between the gritty Bond of Casino Royale and the flashier style that marked so much of the series? I think they'll need to do so or the series will flail. I can't imagine many folks are going to enjoy Quantum since it just isn't BOND.

Royale was a nice reinvention and a way to redevelop Bond. Unfortunately, Quantum squanders all the prior flick's goodwill and does nothing to advance the series. Like I mentioned, I understood the choice to start from scratch and go with a darker, less silly tone, and it really worked for Royale.

But at least that flick had some connection to the usual Bond. We got the sense of James as a rough work in progress, so it would've made sense for Quantum to feature his continued development. No, he didn't need to be the fully suave and debonair Bond of most movies, but it would've been good to see him move forward in that department. Give us some clever repartee, a gadget or two - something, anything to signify that this is James Bond!

Nope - the oh so serious Quantum comes from an official No Fun Zone. Seriously, there's a reason the Bond franchise has endured for more than 45 years: people like the character and all his trappings. If the movies can't demonstrate at least some of the elements that made Bond so popular, what's the point?

Maybe I'll like Quantum more when I see it on DVD, but right now I consider it to be a pretty bad flick. I'd rather watch campy crap like Moonraker than this nonsense... Posted Image

My DVD Collection

The Megaplex

#35 of 131 paul_austin

paul_austin

    Second Unit

  • 271 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 16 2002

Posted November 16 2008 - 02:03 PM

worst title song ever....could Amy Winehouse's have been worse?
"My Hovercraft is Full of Eels"

#36 of 131 Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer

  • 10,346 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted November 17 2008 - 12:45 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Ha
I saw this Monday night. I watched Casino Royale before going to the theater and I'm glad I did. It made it easier to understand and follow.

I thought the movie was just alright. The story was pretty good, when taking into account that it continues where Casino Royale ended. But mainly, I had a problem with the quick cuts during the action sequences. I agree 100% with you, Raul. Several times I felt like I was watching a Bourne movie. That's not something you want to be thinking when you see a Bond movie. If not for that, I would have enjoyed the movie a lot more.

My main problem with the film was the action sequences, too. The quick edit cuts and tight framing made it impossible to follow the action. I hate this current trendy style, and it certainly is not very Bond-like.

We watched Casino Royale before going, too (just got the new BluRay version). It was helpful in following the plot.

#37 of 131 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator

  • 24,121 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted November 17 2008 - 02:13 AM

I still think some people are being unusually harsh on this latest Bond film, but to each his own.

It will be interesting to see if the box office receipts holds up beyond this week.




Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#38 of 131 Steve Christou

Steve Christou

    Long Member

  • 14,160 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2000
  • Real Name:Steve Christou
  • LocationLondon, England

Posted November 17 2008 - 03:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
I still think some people are being unusually harsh on this latest Bond film,

Same here, whilst not on a par with Casino Royale it was still hugely enjoyable.

After sitting thru dreck like Babylon AD, Bangkok Dangerous, Mutant Chronicles and the godawful Max Payne in recent weeks the new Bond is a gem in comparison. Looking forward to watching QoS again.

I thought the action sequences were state of the art, only difficult to follow if you're sitting in the front row or left your glasses at home. Posted Image

$300m worldwide already and it's only just opened in the US, wow! Posted Image

Dave hören... auf, wille stoppen sie Dave... stoppen sie Dave... Mein gehirn geht... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin ängstlich Dave... Guter Nachmittag. Ich bin ein HAL 9000 computer. Ich wurde funktionsfähig am HAL-Betrieb in Urbana, Illinois auf January 12 1992.


Lord of the Hubs


#39 of 131 Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter

  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted November 17 2008 - 04:10 AM

The problem is that Casino Royal was a promise of sorts. They took a risk and played with the formula in ways they had never done before and it payed off, but with the promise that in future installments the audience would get to see this Bond return to classic form-- hopefully in a more natural way (I don't think anyone wants to go back to Die Another Day bond).

Quantum of Solace not only doesn't deliver on this promise, it didn't even try. That's a hard thing to overcome because it wasn't just another weak entry into the Bond franchise--there are many of those--it actively pissed off much of its audience by taking away everything that made Bond unique and introducing nothing new.

Most of the time when a Bond flick comes around it's just another entry, good or bad. This time me and many others came out of the theater thinking "Damn, I waited two years for THAT?"
"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#40 of 131 Andy Sheets

Andy Sheets

    Screenwriter

  • 2,371 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2000

Posted November 17 2008 - 06:17 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale MA
The gunbarrel at the end of the film means that the two part Vesper arc is now complete and Bond has become the Bond we all know and love.

I think the producers are too in love with the characterization of Bond as a scruffy, blue-collar secret agent to allow this.


Back to Movies (Theatrical)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow